Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by on Wednesday March 01 2017, @04:16PM   Printer-friendly
from the too-much-sitting-on-our-asses dept.

A new study finds that compared to people born around 1950, when colorectal cancer risk was lowest, those born in 1990 have double the risk of colon cancer and quadruple the risk of rectal cancer.

The study is led by American Cancer Society scientists and appears in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute. It finds colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence rates are rising in young and middle-aged adults, including people in their early 50s, with rectal cancer rates increasing particularly fast. As a result, three in ten rectal cancer diagnoses are now in patients younger than age 55.

To get a better understanding, investigators led by Rebecca Siegel, MPH of the American Cancer Society used "age-period-cohort modeling," a quantitative tool designed to disentangle factors that influence all ages, such as changes in medical practice, from factors that vary by generation, typically due to changes in behavior. They conducted a retrospective study of all patients 20 years and older diagnosed with invasive CRC from 1974 through 2013 in the nine oldest Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program registries. There were 490,305 cases included in the analysis.

The study found that after decreasing since 1974, colon cancer incidence rates increased by 1% to 2% per year from the mid-1980s through 2013 in adults ages 20 to 39. In adults 40 to 54, rates increased by 0.5% to 1% per year from the mid-1990s through 2013.

Also at The New York Times

Study: Colorectal cancer incidence patterns in the United States, 1974-2013; J Natl Cancer Inst (2017) 109(8): DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djw322


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by krishnoid on Wednesday March 01 2017, @09:52PM (3 children)

    by krishnoid (1156) on Wednesday March 01 2017, @09:52PM (#473552)

    My mistake -- it was "conscious sedation" or "twilight anesthesia", not "general anesthesia".

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 1) by purple_cobra on Wednesday March 01 2017, @10:41PM (2 children)

    by purple_cobra (1435) on Wednesday March 01 2017, @10:41PM (#473582)

    Yeah, that's the more likely option. GA isn't likely unless the surgeon wants to do an examination under anaesthetic (EUA), which generally involves a minor procedure (dilatation or multiple polypectomy are the classic ones). Sedation is for the nervous patient and knowing a reasonable amount about this procedure - plus having had an LA-only gastroscopy in the past - I'd be asking for sedation unless there was a damn good reason why I shouldn't have it. You should not be alone for 24 hours after sedation and should not make any life-changing decisions or sign any documents, but check with your anaesthetist beforehand.
    One of our patients has to come back every six weeks or so to have his anus dilated back to a normal level as some quirk of his biology means he's otherwise in serious pain, at risk of doing himself damage, etc, just from a normal bodily function. Knowing this kind of thing exists means I can't get too worked-up over my own genetic weirdness - at least I can still perform this basic function without risking injury.
    Something you might not know about having a colonoscopy is that your bowel is inflated with air while the examination is happening, so you will have some prize-winning farts during and after the procedure. You'll also have to take a bowel cleanser beforehand, basically a laxative with a turbo. Thankfully I've been spared this so far, but we tell patients not to be more than a few seconds from a toilet if they want to be safe!

    (usual caveat: I am not a doctor, so please consult one if this comment is any way relevant to you).

    • (Score: 1) by anubi on Thursday March 02 2017, @10:41AM (1 child)

      by anubi (2828) on Thursday March 02 2017, @10:41AM (#473796) Journal

      The last time I did this, I was told to take a massive dose of sodium phosphate. "Phospho-soda".

      You ain't kidding. That stuff gave me the squirts big-time.

      Sure got a big mess out of that little bottle.

      It seemed to take forever and a day to get the intestinal flora and fauna back after that go-around with the silver stallion.

      This is not something I had much pleasure in at all.

      --
      "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
      • (Score: 1) by purple_cobra on Wednesday March 08 2017, @05:51PM

        by purple_cobra (1435) on Wednesday March 08 2017, @05:51PM (#476572)

        In the UK - at least in the place I work - we use either Fleet (your Phospho-soda), Picolax or some combination thereof. I read the instructions/warnings on a bottle of Fleet and they weren't joking with that name; you'd need to be fleet indeed to get to the required place in time after taking that stuff! All I can really say is that you won't be prescribed this kind of medication for anything other than a damn good reason.