Townsend Letter The Examiner of Alternative Medicine
Alternative Medicine Conference Calendar
Check recent tables of contents

From the Townsend Letter
November 2011

The US Cancer Program and Specific Types of Cancers, 1975–2007: A Failure (Part 3)
by Anthony D. Apostolides, PhD, and Ipatia K. Apostolides, BA
Search this site
Share this article...

 


Part 1 and Part 2 are online.

Introduction
In a recent article in this journal, we assessed the US cancer program by analyzing the incidence and mortality rates of all cancers combined.1 This study uses the same framework of analysis to assess 24 specific types of cancer over 1975–2007, divided in three parts. Part 1 and Part 2 of the study assessed cancers in alphabetical order, from bladder cancer to non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. These were published in previous issues of the Townsend Letter.2 Part 3 of the study, presented in this issue, assesses the remaining seven cancers: oral cavity and pharynx, ovary, pancreas, prostate, stomach, testis, and thyroid.

Data
The data were primarily obtained from the SEER-9 (Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results) database of the National Cancer Institute (NCI). SEER-9 provides data from nine geographic areas: Connecticut, Hawaii, Iowa, Utah, New Mexico, Detroit, Atlanta, Seattle, and San Francisco. This geographic group constitutes approximately 10% of the US population. The US cancer mortality data are obtained by NCI from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and are incorporated into the SEER database. Data on the US population were obtained from the US Bureau of the Census, Statistical Abstract of the United States. SEER provides both incidence and mortality rates of cancers in age-adjusted form (to remove the effects of age on cancer incidence and mortality). Those data are calculated numbers of incidence and mortality by holding constant the age distribution of the US population to that of a given year (presently, the year is 2000). Thus, an incidence rate of 20 for a particular cancer means that 20 people per 100,000 population were expected to have been diagnosed with that cancer if the population of the US was the same as in year 2000. Consequently, an increase in the incidence rate indicates a real increase in cancer cases/cancer impact.3 The same applies to the mortality rates. The incidence rates are also adjusted by SEER for delays in the reporting of cancer cases.

Analysis
The statistics used for the analysis are presented in chart form. For each cancer, during the analysis period (1975–2007), we calculated the following charts: (1) the incidence rate – to include the overall rate, rates for males and females, and rates for age groups for cancers of the same gender; (2) the number of Americans afflicted with the cancer; (3) the mortality rate – to include overall rate, rates for males and females, and rates for age groups for cancers of the same gender; and (4) the number of Americans who died from that cancer.

With regard to assessing the program of the NCI in preventing cancer, the criteria used were the incidence rate and the number of Americans afflicted by a cancer. A constant or increasing incidence rate over time, along with increased numbers of those afflicted, indicates a failure of the NCI program in the prevention of a cancer. If the incidence rate declines but the number of people afflicted increases, the prevention program is also deemed to be a failure. A declining incidence rate, along with a declining number of those diagnosed with a cancer, indicates success in the prevention of that cancer.

The number of Americans afflicted by a cancer in a particular year is derived by multiplying the incidence rate of that cancer by the ratio of the population of the US in that year per 100,000.  The result of this calculation shows the impact of the cancer on the population of the US as it changes/increases over time.  Therefore, the calculation provides a more comprehensive impact of cancer than the incidence rate.  The same applies to the mortality rate and the number of deaths from a cancer.

With regard to assessing the treatment side of the NCI program, the criteria used were the mortality rate and the numbers of Americans who died from a cancer. A constant or increasing mortality rate of a cancer over time, along with increased number of deaths from that cancer, indicates a failure of the NCI program in the treatment of that cancer. If the mortality rate declines over time but the number of deaths increases, the program for the treatment of that cancer is also shown to be a failure. If the mortality rate declines and the number of deaths also decline, this indicates success in the treatment of a cancer.

The assessment is based on a long time period (1975–2007), which provides results that are more comprehensive and, thus, more reliable than those based on shorter time periods. This time period allows for the measurement of the impact of both fast-growing (such as lung cancer) and slow-growing cancers (such as thyroid cancer).

Cancer of the Oral Cavity and Pharynx (Invasive)
Oral cancers typically result from damaged squamous cells that cover the surfaces of the mouth, tongue, and lips. These squamous cancer cells break away and enter blood vessels or lymph vessels, then branch into other parts of the body. The incidence rate of oral and pharyngeal cancer declined over the period of analysis, as observed in Chart 1. In 1975, the overall incidence rate was 13.2 (per 100,000), and by 2007 it had dropped to 10.6. With regard to gender, the incidence rate of the males was three times higher than that of the females. In 1975, the rate of the males was 21.2, and for the females 7.1; by 2007, the rate for the males had fallen to 15.6 and for the females to 6.2.

However, the decline in the incidence rate was not enough to offset the effect of the country's population growth over time. Consequently, the number of Americans afflicted by this cancer rose over the analysis period, from 28,503 in 1975 to 31,861 – observed in Chart 2. The total number of Americans afflicted with this cancer during the period of analysis summed to 1 million. These data indicate that the US program to prevent oral cancer was a failure. Although the incidence rate decreased, the number of Americans afflicted with that cancer rose over the period of analysis.

The overall mortality rate of cancer of the oral cavity declined over the analysis period, as shown in Chart 3. In 1975, the overall mortality rate was 4.3 (per 100,000), and by 2007 it had decreased to 2.5. With regard to gender, the mortality rate of the males in 1975 was much higher, at 6.9, than that of the females, at 2.3. By 2007, the rate of the males had declined to 3.9 while that of the females had decreased to 1.4. The gap in the mortality rate between the males and females had narrowed by 2007, but the rate of the males was still substantially higher than that of the females.

The declining overall mortality rate of oral cancer was accompanied by a decrease in the number of Americans who lost their lives to that cancer, from 1975 to 2007, as shown in Chart 4. In 1975, 9287 people died from oral cancer and by 2007, that number had declined to 7603. The total number of American who died from oral cancer during the period of analysis was 271,948. The ratio of those who died from this cancer to those who were afflicted with the cancer indicates that on average, 28% of Americans who contract this cancer die from it.

Cancer of the Ovary (Invasive)
The overall incidence rate of ovarian cancer declined over the analysis period, from 16.3 in 1975 to 13 in 2007. (Chart 5) However, a very negative characteristic of ovarian cancer is the large magnitude by which the incidence rate of the "65 plus" age group of women exceeds the rate of the "under 65" age group. In 1975, the incidence rate of the older women was 48.9, which equates to an incredible 322% higher rate as compared with the younger women at 11.6. The rate for the older group continued to rise to 57.7 in the early 1990s; subsequently it declined to 46.4 in 2007, whereas the younger group's rate steadily declined throughout the whole period to reach 8.1 in 2007.

However, the decline in the overall incidence rate of ovarian cancer over time was not large enough to offset the effect of the country's population increase; consequently, the number of women afflicted by ovarian cancer increased over the period of analysis. This is observed in Chart 6. In 1975, the number of women afflicted with ovarian cancer was 35,247 and by 2001 the number had reached 41,649. After 2001, the number of diagnoses declined slightly to reach 39,132 in 2007. That number was still markedly higher than in 1975. During the 1975–2007 period, a total of 1.3 million women were diagnosed with ovarian cancer.

The overall mortality rate of ovarian cancer declined over the analysis period (Chart 7). In 1975, that rate was 9.8, and it hovered around 9 for over two decades before declining in the last few years of the analysis period to reach 8.2 in 2007. The situation was much worse for the "over 65" age group of women. They had a much higher mortality rate than the younger women and also suffered an increasing mortality rate over time. In 1975, the mortality rate of the older women was 37.6 while that of the younger women was 5.8. By 2007, the mortality rate of the "65 plus" age group had risen to 42.9, an incredible 1241% higher than the 3.2 rate of the "under 65" group. This resulted in a widening gap between the two age groups.

The number of women who lost their lives to ovarian cancer increased over the period of analysis, as shown in Chart 8. This is similar to what was observed for the overall mortality rate. The number of women who died from this cancer was 21,252 in 1975, and by 2007, that number had risen to 24,801. The number of women who died from that cancer during the 1975–2007 totaled 770,398. This indicates that on average, 61% of the women diagnosed with ovarian cancer die from their cancer – a dismal statistic. Based on the mortality rates, the majority of these women are from the "65 plus" age group.

Cancer of the Pancreas (Invasive)
The overall incidence rate of pancreatic cancer increased over 1975–2007, from 11.8 to 12.4, as shown in Chart 9. With regard to gender, the incidence rate of males was markedly higher than the rate of females, as observed for other cancers. In 1975, the rate of the males was 15.6 while that of the females was 9.1. During 2004 to 2007, the incidence rate of the males began to rise once again, and by 2007 it was 14.1, while the rate of the females had slowly increased throughout the period from 9.1 to10.9. Over time, the rate of the males declined slightly to hover around 12–13 for several years.

Again, one wonders why the incidence rate of the men was higher than the rate of the women. It is also puzzling that the incidence rate of women would go up over time (from 9 in 1975 to 11 in 2007) while the rate of the men would go down over the same time period (from 15.6 in 1975 to 14.1 in 2007). One would think that the prevention program of pancreatic cancer – if there was one – would affect both genders equally.Is there something that made women more vulnerable to getting pancreatic cancer over the period of analysis? This could be a topic for future research.

The number of Americans afflicted by pancreatic cancer also increased significantly over time, as observed in Chart 10. In 1975, the number of people diagnosed with pancreatic cancer was 25,571 and by 2007 that number jumped to 37,292. The number of Americans afflicted with this cancer during the period of analysis totaled 984,698.

The overall mortality rate of pancreatic cancer essentially stayed the same over the period of analysis, at 10.7 in 1975 and 10.8 in 2007 – as observed in Chart 11. That constant rate was the result of the men's rate declining while that of the females rose. Also, the males had a markedly higher mortality rate than women over the analysis period. In 1975, the rate of the males was 13.8 and that of the females was 8.4. The mortality rate of men declined over time to reach 12.5 in 2007; by contrast, the rate of women increased to 9.4.

The constant overall mortality rate of pancreatic cancer contributed to increases over time in the number of Americans who lost their lives to that cancer (observed in Chart 12); that number rose from 23,023 in 1975 to 32,525 in 2007. The number of Americans who died from pancreatic cancer during the analysis period totaled 899,943; this was very close to the number of people diagnosed with the disease at 984,698. The ratio of the number of deaths to those afflicted indicates that on average, 91% of the pancreatic cancer patients  die from their cancer. This is indeed a most dismal statistic, showing the failing NCI program in treating this cancer.

Cancer of the Prostate (Invasive)
Data on the incidence rate of prostate cancer, presented in Chart 13, show a big failure in the US cancer program in preventing this cancer. The overall incidence rate rose rapidly from 94 in 1975 to a high of 237 in 1992; subsequently, it declined to 171 in 2007, still much higher than in 1975. Also, a very negative feature of this cancer is the huge difference in the incidence rate between the two age groups. In 1975, the "65 plus" age group had an incredibly high incidence rate of 649.5, while the "under 65" group had an incidence rate of 14. That equates to the older group's rate being 4543% higher than that of the younger group; this is an unprecedented difference between incidence rates of two age groups within the same gender. Another negative feature is that the incidence rate of both groups rose significantly over time, with the incidence rate of the "65 plus" group reaching 905.7 in 2007, while the rate of the "under 65" age group increased to 65.

The incidence rate of the older men spiked in the early 1990s, then it declined; however, in 2007 the rate was still much higher than in 1975. The spike observed during 1991-1992 is believed to be due to PSA testing which increased the counts, according to communication with NCI staff.

In Chart 14, one notes that the number of men diagnosed with prostate cancer in 1975 was quite large, at 203,058. That number increased rapidly over time, reaching a stunning 610,000 in 1992. This was followed by a decline to 515,569 in 2007, which was still much higher than in 1975. The number of those afflicted by prostate cancer over 1975–2007 grew by a remarkable 154%.

Given the incidence rates by age groups, it is clear that the rapidly increasing number of American males stricken by prostate cancer was primarily the result of increases in the "65 plus" age group. The total number of men diagnosed with prostate cancer during the period of analysis was the highest number observed of all the cancers – an unprecedented 13 million.

The overall mortality rate of prostate cancer increased from 31 in 1975 to 39 in 1993, as shown in Chart 15. Thus, during the first 19 years of the analysis period, the US cancer program in treating this cancer was a failure. After 1993, the mortality rate began to decline; and by 2007, the rate had dropped to 23.5. Thus, after 1993, there was some success in the treatment side of this cancer. The mortality rate for the "65 plus" age group increased from 227.5 in 1975 to 292 in 1993. Subsequently, the rate declined to 173.8 in 2007. By contrast, the "under 65" age group began with a significantly lower rate at 2.5 in 1975, which declined to 1.8 in 2007.

In 1975, 66,887 men died from prostate cancer, and that number rose to 102,384 in 1993 – as observed in Chart 16. After 1993, the number of deaths declined, reaching 70,903 in 2007; that number, however, was still higher than in 1975. The number of men who died from prostate cancer during the analysis period totaled 2.8 million. This indicates that on average, 21% men diagnosed with prostate cancer will die from it. Given the mortality rates by age, these deaths were predominately from the older age group.

Cancer of the Stomach (Invasive)
The overall incidence rate of stomach cancer decreased over the analysis period, from 11.7 in 1975 to 7.1 in 2007, as shown in Chart 17. This indicates that the US cancer program was successful in the prevention side of that cancer. However, a negative feature of stomach cancer is that in 1975, the rate of males (at 17.1) was considerably higher than that of the females (7.9), and that difference was generally maintained over time. The incidence rate of both genders declined over time, and by 2007, the incidence rate of the males was 10.2, while that of the females was 4.8.

The decline in the incidence rate of stomach cancer also resulted in a decrease in the numbers of Americans afflicted by that cancer over the analysis period, as shown in Chart 18. In 1975, the number of people diagnosed with stomach cancer was 25,226 and by 2007, that number had declined to 21,512. The total number of Americans afflicted with this cancer during the analysis period was 794,935.

The overall mortality rate of stomach cancer declined, from 8.5 in 1975 to 3.6 in 2007 (Chart 19). However, when comparing the genders, one observes that the mortality rate of the males was significantly higher from the start than that of the females. In 1975, the mortality rate of the males was 12.3, substantially higher than that of the females, at 5.9. Rates for both genders dropped during the course of the period, and in 2007, the rate of the males was 5, while that of the females was 2.6.

The declining mortality rate of stomach cancer resulted in a decrease in the number of Americans who lost their lives to that cancer over time – shown in Chart 20. In 1975, that number was 18,379 and by 2007, it had dropped to 10,892. The total number of people who died from that cancer during the analysis period was 481,716. This indicates that on average, 61% of people diagnosed with stomach cancer will die from it – a dismal statistic.

Cancer of the Testis (Invasive)
Data presented in Chart 21 indicate that the overall incidence rate of testicular cancer rose over time, from 3.7 in 1975 to 5.9 in 2007. Surprisingly, the rise in the overall incidence rate was affected by increases in the rate of the "under 50" age group of men as compared with the "50 plus" group. The incidence rate of the younger men rose significantly from 4.2 in 1975 to 7.3 in 2007. By contrast, the incidence rate of the older group decreased from 2.4 in 1975 to 2.2 in 2007. That is highly unusual, since in other types of male cancers examined, as well as female cancers, it was the incidence rate of the older age group that was much higher than the rate of the younger group. One wonders as to why the younger men would have a higher incidence rate of testicular cancer than the older men, which also increased at a higher rate over time.

The rise in the overall incidence rate resulted in a significant increase in the number of men afflicted by testicular cancer, as shown in Chart 22. The number of men diagnosed with that cancer more than doubled – from 8056 in 1975 to 17,861 in 2007. The number of men afflicted with testicular cancer during 1975–2007 totaled 423,840. The majority of these cases were from men who were under 50 years of age. The data on incidence indicate that the US program to prevent testicular cancer has been a definite failure – particularly for the younger age group.

The mortality rate of testicular cancer was relatively low, as observed in Chart 23. The overall mortality rate in 1975 was 0.7 and it declined to 0.2 in 2007. Moreover, the mortality rates of both age groups were very similar and declined over time. This is one of the few cancers where a decline in the mortality rate affected both age groups in an equal manner. The declining mortality rate indicates that the US cancer program has had progress in the treatment side of this cancer.

The number of deaths from testicular cancer also declined over time, as shown in Chart 24, from 1598 in 1975 to 664 in 2007. This decline, along with the decreasing mortality rate, indicates that the US cancer program has had progress in the treatment of this cancer. The number of men who died from testicular cancer during the analysis period was 28,520.

Cancer of the Thyroid (Invasive)
The incidence rate of thyroid cancer increased rapidly over 1975–2007 (Chart 25). In 1975, the overall incidence rate was 4.9 and by 2007, it had grown to 12.2. That is a 149% increase over the entire period, or an increase of 2.9% per year. This increase was primarily due to the rise in the rate of the women. The incidence rate of women was 6.5 in 1975, surprisingly higher than the rate of men at 3.1 By 2007, both genders experienced an increase in their rates, with the rate of the women growing to 18.5, three times that of men at 5.9.

As a result of the increasing overall incidence rate, the number of Americans afflicted by invasive thyroid cancer grew rapidly over time, from 10,475 in 1975 to 36,900 in 2007. This is seen in Chart 26. The total number of Americans diagnosed with the cancer during this time period was 567,612. These rising numbers clearly show the dismal failure of the US program in preventing thyroid cancer, particularly for women.

The overall mortality rate of thyroid cancer was relatively low in 1975, at 0.55 (per 100,000), as shown in Chart 27, and declined to 0.49 in 2007. The situation with regard to mortality of the two genders is quite different. The mortality rate of women decreased over the analysis period, from 0.69 to 0.48, representing a 30% drop, while the mortality rate of men rose 31% over the same period, from 0.39 to 0.51. One wonders why the mortality rate for men should increase over the analysis period. Since the treatment protocols would have been the same for the two genders, why was it that the men had substantially worse outcomes from that treatment than did women?

The number of Americans who died from thyroid cancer is shown in Chart 28. In 1975, 1188 Americans died from that cancer, and this number rose to 1478 in 2007. The total number of deaths during this time period was 39,937. This indicates that on average, 7% of Americans who contract thyroid cancer die from it.

Conclusions
Part 1 and Part 2 of this study evaluated 17 out of 24 cancers over 1975–2007 in alphabetical order – from bladder cancer to non-Hodgkin's lymphoma – published in previous issues of the Townsend Letter.  Part 3 analyzed the remaining seven cancers during the same period: oral cavity and pharynx, ovary, pancreas, prostate, stomach, testis, and thyroid.

Prevention
The analysis in Part 3 found a failing US/NCI program in the prevention of 6 of the 7 cancers studied as indicated by increasing (or constant) incidence rates and increasing numbers of people diagnosed with a specific cancer, or decreasing incidence rates but increasing numbers of those afflicted. These cancers are: oral cavity, ovary, pancreas, prostate, testis, and thyroid. Only 1 of the 7 cancers had declining incidence rates and declining numbers of those afflicted, showing success in the prevention side. That cancer is stomach cancer.

With respect to gender, as seen in our previous studies, the incidence rates of males were significantly higher than those of the females, and increased faster over time. This is observed for the following cancers: oral cavity and stomach. However, in pancreatic cancer, the incidence rate of women increased 20% over the analysis period while the rate of men decreased 10% over that period. One would think that the prevention program for pancreatic cancer – if there was one – would affect both genders equally. Was there something that made women more vulnerable to getting pancreatic cancer over the period of analysis? This could be a topic for future research. Also, in thyroid cancer, the females had a higher incidence rate than the males and it increased faster over time.

With respect to age, in both ovarian and prostate cancers, the older age groups had much higher incidence rates than the younger age groups. For example, in prostate cancer, the incidence rate in 1975 for the older men was 650 vs. 14 for the younger men; and in 2007, the rates for both age groups jumped, with the rate for the older men being 906 vs. 65 for the younger men. One explanation for this age effect is the cumulative exposure of the older age groups to environmental carcinogens over a longer time span than the younger age groups.  Consequently, they are much more likely to contract cancer as their immune systems have been weakened by the attacks of the carcinogens (chemicals, radiation, and other environmental toxins).

In testicular cancer, however, one observes a great exception to the age effect. The younger men had a higher incidence rate than the older men over the analysis period. Moreover, the incidence rate of the younger age group increased faster over time as compared with the older age group.

Treatment
The analysis in Part 3 found a failing US/NCI program in the treatment of 4 out of 7 cancers as indicated by rising or constant mortality rates and rising numbers of deaths, or declining mortality rates and rising numbers of deaths. These cancers are: ovary, pancreas, prostate, and thyroid.

There were 3 of 7 cancers that had decreasing mortality rates and declining numbers of deaths, suggesting that the US cancer program had success on the treatment side of these cancers. These cancers are: oral cavity, stomach, and testis.

With regard to gender, mortality rates of males were greater than those of females in the following cancers: oral cavity, pancreatic, and stomach cancers. In pancreatic cancer, however, it is puzzling that the mortality rate of women rose 12% over time while the mortality rate of men declined 9% over the same time period. One would think that the treatment program for pancreatic cancer would affect both genders in the same way.

With regard to age, in both ovarian and prostate cancers, the older age groups had tremendously higher mortality rates and these rates increased faster than those of the younger age groups. In prostate cancer, the older age group had an astounding high mortality rate of 228 in 1975, compared with the younger age group, which had a mortality rate of 2. The difference in mortality rates between the two age groups is incredible; one wonders what has been causing this huge difference. Also, in ovarian cancer, our analysis indicated that the treatment protocols approved by NCI (and FDA) for the older group were failures.

One exception to the age effect is that testicular cancer did not show an age difference in mortality rates.

Summary
The final analysis (of Parts 1–3) showed unquestionably that during 1975–2007 the US/NCI program was a failure in the prevention of 22 of the 24 cancers studied: bladder, brain, female breast in situ, female breast invasive, colon, corpus/uterus, esophagus, Hodgkin's lymphoma, kidney, leukemia, liver, lung, melanoma, mesothelioma, myeloma, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, oral cavity, ovary, pancreas, prostate, testis, and thyroid. Only 2 of the 24 cancers showed success on the prevention side: cervical and stomach cancer.

The highest numbers of cancer cases during this time period were from prostate cancer at 13 million, followed by female breast invasive cancer at 10.6 million, and lung cancer at 5.4 million. The lowest number of cancer cases was from mesothelioma at 84,000. A stunning total of 52.3 million Americans were diagnosed with cancer during 1975–2007.

The final analysis also revealed that during 1975–2007, the US/NCI program was a failure in the treatment side of 16 out of 22 cancers: bladder, brain, female breast invasive, corpus/uterus, esophagus, kidney, liver, lung, melanoma, myeloma, Non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, leukemia, ovary, pancreas, prostate, and thyroid.4 Only 6 out of 22 cancers had success on the treatment side: cervical, colon, Hodgkin's lymphoma, oral cavity, stomach, and testis. The outcomes on the prevention and treatment of all the cancers studied are summarized in Appendix Table A.

With regard to differences in genders, the men typically had higher incidence rates than the women, except for thyroid cancer. This also applies to the mortality rates.

With regard to differences in age groups within a gender, in all cancers, the older age groups had higher incidence rates than the younger age groups, with the exception of testicular cancer where the younger group had a higher incidence rate. This also applies to the mortality rates. Given that the data was age-adjusted, higher numbers for incidence rate or mortality rate for the older age groups indicate real increases of the impact of cancer on these groups. One explanation for this phenomenon is that the older people experienced cumulative exposure to environmental carcinogens over a longer time span than the younger people. Consequently, they are much more likely to contract cancer as their immune systems have been weakened by the attacks of the carcinogens (chemicals, man-made radiation, and other environmental toxins).

In this study, during 1975–2007, the highest number of deaths were caused by lung cancer at 4.6 million, followed by prostate cancer at 2.8 million, and female breast cancer (invasive) at 2.5 million. The lowest number of deaths came from testicular cancer at 29,000. A total of 18.6 million Americans died from cancer during this period.

Final Thoughts
The results of our analysis give rise to this question: Why did the US/NCI program fail in preventing and in treating various cancers during 1975–2007? With regard to the failure of the program in cancer prevention, we discovered that the US/NCI does not have a cancer prevention program.

A national cancer prevention program requires two components: 1) The discovery of carcinogens through research, and 2) The regulatory power to control/ban these carcinogens. The NCI carries out research on carcinogens, but that is not enough. Its failure in prevention is linked to the fact that it does not have the authority to regulate or ban carcinogens. In addition, it does not disseminate the cancer prevention information in a proactive/well-publicized manner directly to the public. For example, if the NCI discovers that a pesticide used by farmers is carcinogenic, they do not have the authority to ban it; they also unfortunately do not notify farmers of this so that they may stop using it. Such a system is designed to fail.

The analysis of cancer mortality in our study showed that the US/NCI program was also a failure in cancer treatment during 1975–2007. Since conventional methods of treatment – surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy – have not worked for most cancers, it is obvious that the treatment program should include alternative methods. However, alternative treatments faced many obstacles during 1975–2007 from the federal or state governments, including persecution of practitioners of alternative treatments by the FDA and state medical societies, as described in
Politics in Healing by D. Haley. Thus, a major obstacle to treating cancer successfully in the US is the fact that Americans do not have the freedom to choose their treatment for cancer. In addition, the health insurance companies do not pay for alternative treatments of cancer, limiting the choice even further for the cancer patient.

Given the grand failure of conventional cancer treatment used by the US/NCI program, the authors recommend that the FDA not have regulatory authority over cancer drugs or treatment. The millions of cancer patients desperate to survive this disease should be able to choose the health care provider and mode of treatment for their cancer without governmental constraints. Americans should not have to flee to other countries to receive their treatment of choice. That is a national disgrace and it is astonishing that this form of tyranny has been allowed to exist for all these years.

The grand failures on both the prevention and treatment sides call for a basic restructuring of the US/NCI cancer program. On the prevention side, the changes should include the creation of an agency that has both research capabilities and authority to regulate/ban carcinogens. The cancer program should also disseminate the information directly to the public. On the treatment side, Americans with cancer should have the freedom to choose whichever treatment they wish. Also, alternative treatments for cancer should be tested/supported by the government. The FDA should not have regulatory authority over cancer therapies. In addition, there should be a restructuring of the health insurance industry.

Ultimately, the solution lies with the American citizens. We must take responsibility for our own health, by educating ourselves, informing our politicians of the shortcomings of the existing cancer program, and demanding better prevention and treatment programs. Until that happens, Americans will remain victims of an antiquated and incompetent US/NCI cancer program.

Part 1 and Part 2 are online.

Notes
1. Apostolides AD, Apostolides IK. The US Cancer Program, 1975–2006: A Failure. Townsend Letter. Aug/Sept 2010; Part 1; October 2010; Part 2.
2. Apostolides AD, Apostolides IK. The US Cancer Program and Specific Types of Cancers, 1975–2007: A Failure. Townsend Letter. Aug/Sept 2011; Part 1; Oct 2011; Part 2.
3. The incidence rate is expressed per 100,000 population. Thus, it accounts for increases in the population of the country. If the population doubles and the number of cases of a given cancer also double, the incidence rate will stay the same. Consequently, an increase in the incidence rate indicates a real increase in cancer cases/cancer impact.
4. Although the study focused on 24 specific cancers, mortality data were not available for 2 of the 24 cancers (mesothelioma, female breast in situ).

References
Fagin D, Lavelle M., Center for Public Integrity. Toxic Deception – How the Chemical Industry Manipulates Science, Bends the Law and Endangers Your Health. Monroe, ME: Common Courage Press; 1999.
Faquet GB. The War on Cancer: An Anatomy of Failure, A Blueprint for the Future. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer; 2005.
Gofman, JW. Radiation and Human Health: A Comprehensive Investigation of the Evidence Relating Low-Level Radiation to Cancer and Other Diseases. San Francisco: Sierra Club Books; 1981.
Gould JM et al. The Enemy Within – The High Cost of Living Near Nuclear Reactors. New York: Four Walls Eight Windows; 1996.
Hailey D. Politics in Healing – The Suppression and Manipulation of American Medicine. Washington, D.C.: Potomac Valley Press; 2005.
Markowitz G, Rosner D. Deceit and Denial – The Deadly Politics of Industrial Pollution. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press; 2003.
Nader R, Abbotts J. The Menace of Atomic Energy. New York: W. W. Norton and Co.; 1977.
National Research Council, Board of Radiation Effects Research. Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation – BEIR VII PHASE 2. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press; 2006.
SEER-9 (Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results). Cancer statistics review 1975–2007 [online document]. Available at: www.seer.cancer.gov/statistics.
Sherman JD. Life's Delicate Balance – Causes and Prevention of Breast Cancer. New York: Taylor & Francis; 2000.
United States Bureau of the Census. Population. In: Statistical Abstract of the United States.
Yablokov AV, Nesterenko VB, Nesterenko AV, Sherman JD consulting editor. Chernobyl – Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment. Reprint of volume originally published by the New York Academy of Science in 2009.

Anthony D. Apostolides, PhD, received a doctoral degree in economics from the University of Oxford, UK, and an MA degree from the University of Pittsburgh. He has taught on health-care economics and related fields at the university level, and carried out research in health-care economics and delivery. He was engaged in research at the UN, Economic Commission for Europe, and The Conference Board. He also worked for the State of Maryland Department of Health and for the federal government. His publications include articles in peer-reviewed journals.

Ipatia K. Apostolides, BA, has a bachelor's degree in biology from Case Western Reserve University and several years' graduate coursework. She has worked in the cancer field for over 15 years – as a laboratory manager and data manager at the Cleveland Clinic, and as data manager at the Children's Hospital Bone Marrow Transplant Center in Cincinnati. She was also supervisor in the PLCO study at Georgetown University. She has coauthored several medical articles related to cancer. article@pattyapostolides.com

Appendix Table A

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Assessment Of Specific Cancers, 1975–2007:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Failure Or Success In Prevention or Treatment

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Prevention

 

 

 

Treatment

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cancer

 

 

Failure

 

Success

 

Failure

 

Success

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bladder

 

 

×

 

 

 

×

 

 

Brain

 

 

×

 

 

 

×

 

 

Female breast, in situ

 

×

 

 

 

 

 

 

Female breast, invasive

 

×

 

 

 

×

 

 

Cervical

 

 

 

 

×

 

 

 

×

Colon

 

 

×

 

 

 

 

 

×

Corpus/Uterus

 

 

×

 

 

 

×

 

 

Esophagus

 

 

×

 

 

 

×

 

 

Hodgkin's lymphoma

 

×

 

 

 

 

 

×

Kidney

 

 

×

 

 

 

×

 

 

Leukemia

 

 

×

 

 

 

×

 

 

Liver

 

 

×

 

 

 

×

 

 

Lung

 

 

×

 

 

 

×

 

 

Melanoma

 

 

×

 

 

 

×

 

 

Mesothelioma

 

 

×

 

 

 

 

 

 

Myeloma

 

 

×

 

 

 

×

 

 

Non-Hodgkin's lymphoma

 

x

 

 

 

×

 

 

Oral cavity

 

 

×

 

 

 

 

 

×

Ovary

 

 

×

 

 

 

×

 

 

Pancreas

 

 

×

 

 

 

×

 

 

Prostate

 

 

×

 

 

 

×

 

 

Stomach

 

 

 

 

×

 

 

 

×

Testis

 

 

×

 

 

 

 

 

×

Thyroid

 

 

×

 

 

 

×

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No. of Cancers with Failure

 

22

 

 

 

16

 

 

No. of Cancers with Success

 

 

 

2

 

 

 

6

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Percentage of Failure

 

92%

 

 

 

73%

 

 

Percentage of Success

 

 

 

8%

 

 

 

27%

Note: For Prevention, Failure = increasing incidence rate and increasing number of people afflicted with a cancer, or decreasing incidence rate and increasing number of people afflicted with a cancer; Success = decreasing incidence rate and decreasing number of people afflicted with a cancer. For Treatment, Failure = increasing mortality rate and increasing number of people who died from a cancer, or decreasing mortality rate and increasing number of people who died from a cancer; Success = decreasing mortality rate and decreasing number of people who died from a cancer.

 

 

 

Consult your doctor before using any of the treatments found within this site.

Subscriptions are available for Townsend Letter, the Examiner of Alternative Medicine magazine, which is published 10 times each year.

Search our pre-2001 archives for further information. Older issues of the printed magazine are also indexed for your convenience.
1983-2001 indices ; recent indices

Once you find the magazines you'd like to order, please use our convenient form, e-mail subscriptions@townsendletter.com, or call 360.385.6021 (PST).

Who are we? | New articles | Featured topics |
Tables of contents
| Subscriptions | Contact us | Links | Classifieds | Advertise | Alternative Medicine Conference Calendar | Search site | Archives |
EDTA Chelation Therapy | Home

© 1983-2011 Townsend Letter for Doctors & Patients
All rights reserved.
Website by Sandy Hershelman Designs
December 9, 2011

Order back issues
Advertise with TLDP!

Visit our pre-2001 archives