Colorectal cancer increasing in young people

There seems to be a worrying trend in the incidence of colorectal cancer in young people.

A population-based analysis from England indicates that the incidence of colorectal cancer is increasing rapidly in young adults. The findings, which are published in BJS (British Journal of Surgery), suggest that colorectal cancer should no longer be considered a disease of older people.

For the analysis, investigators examined information on adults who were diagnosed with colorectal cancer in England between 1974 and 2015. Of the 1,145,639 new cases of colorectal cancer diagnosed between 1974 and 2015 in adults aged over 20 years, there were 2,594 in 20–29 year olds, 11,406 among 30–39 year olds and 42,134 in 40–49 year olds.

The most sustained increase in incidence rates was seen in adults aged 20–29 years. The magnitude of increases was similar in both sexes and across income levels.

The most pronounced increases in incidence occurred in the southern regions of England.

Another article in BJS notes that young patients need more treatment to achieve similar outcomes to older patients.

The authors of the study suggest that the changes in incidence rates should be used to inform future screening policy, preventative strategies and research agendas, as well as increasing public understanding that younger people need to be aware of the symptoms of colorectal cancer.

Comments

The lion and the wildebeest

Birds flock, fish school, bees swarm, but social being is more than simply sticking together. Social groups enable specialisation and a sharing of abilities, and enhances ability, learning and creating new tricks. The more a group works together, the more effective they become as a team. Chimpanzees learn from each other how to use stones to crack nuts, or sticks to get termites. All around us we see cooperation and learning in nature. Nature is inherently creative. Pulling together becomes a rallying cry during a crisis. We have heard it throughout the coronavirus pandemic. "We are all in this together", a mantra that encourages people to adopt a common strategy. In an era of 'self-interest' and 'survival of the fittest,' and 'selfish gene', we lose sight of the obvious conclusion from the evidence all around us. Sticking together is more often the better approach. This is valid for the lion as it is also for the wildebeest. We don't

Noise pollution puts nature at risk

"I just want a bit of peace and quiet!" Let's get away from all the hustle and bustle; the sound of endless traffic on the roads, of the trains on the railway, and the planes in the sky; the incessant drone; the noise. We live in a world of man-made noise; screeching, bellowing, on-and-on in an unmelodious cacophony. This constant background noise has now become a significant health hazard. With average background levels of 60 decibels, those who live in cities are often exposed to noise over 85 decibels, enough to cause significant hearing loss over time. It causes stress, high blood pressure, headache and loss of sleep and poor health and well-being. In nature, noise has content and significance. From the roar of the lion, the laughing of a hyena, communication is essential for life; as the warning of danger, for bonding as a group or a pair, finding a mate, or for establishing a position in a hierarchy - chattering works. Staying in touch is vital to working

Ian Duncan-Smith says he wants to make those on benefits 'better people'!

By any account, the government's austerity strategy is utilitarian. It justifies its approach by the presumed potential ends. It's objective is to cut the deficit, but it has also adopted another objective which is specifically targeted. It seeks to drive people off benefits and 'back to work'. The two together are toxic to the poorest in society. Those least able to cope are the most affected by the cuts in benefits and the loss of services. It is the coupling of these two strategic aims that make their policies ethically questionable. For, by combining the two, slashing the value of benefits to make budget savings while also changing the benefits system, the highest burden falls on a specific group, those dependent on benefits. For the greater good of the majority, a minority group, those on benefits, are being sacrificed; sacrificed on the altar of austerity. And they are being sacrificed in part so that others may be spared. Utilitarian ethics considers the ba

The Thin End

Search This Blog