Can cancer be prevented? Decades of research have shown that a person’s chances of getting cancer depends on a mishmash of their genes and their environment, but also certain aspects of their lives, many of which they can control.
Today saw the publication of a landmark Cancer Research UK-funded review by Professor Max Parkin, outlining the latest evidence behind the preventable causes of UK cancers.
As our press release says, these latest calculations, based on predicted cases for 2010, show that smoking, diet, alcohol and obesity are behind more than 100,000 cancers. This is equivalent to one third of all cancers diagnosed in the UK each year.
And this figure further increases to around 134,000 when taking into account all 14 lifestyle and environmental risk factors analysed in this study.
There’s more in-depth information about the statistics on our website, and our healthy living pages explain the take-home messages from the research.
But to help make sense of the vast quantity of information contained in the 91-page report, we’ve also put together a graphic that shows the proportion of cancers that can be prevented through lifestyle changes. It’s worth spending a minute or so looking at the key to understand how to interpret the graphic (which you can download as a larger PDF version).
Information is power
Providing this type of information is categorically not about blame – every two minutes someone in the UK is diagnosed with cancer, and each of them have a unique set of circumstances that led to their cancer. There are many things that together affect a person’s chances of developing cancer – some of them can be controlled, some can’t.
Leading a healthy lifestyle is not a cast-iron guarantee against cancer. But it reduces the risk of the disease. If you think about cancer risk like a hand of cards, some people are dealt a worse hand because of their genes, some people a better one.
But in both cases, these people can do things to reduce their individual risk of cancer. So this type of information is crucial in equipping people with the information they need to stack the odds in their favour.
Such information is also crucial to guide policymakers in planning public health interventions. For instance, decades of work documenting the risks of smoking tobacco and the benefits of giving up – much of it by our scientists – has contributed to increased acceptance of tobacco as a major health hazard and led to many successful tobacco control measures.
We’re now starting to see the effects of these policies in lung cancer rates amongst UK men. But there’s more work still to do.
Bah humbug?
We’re also aware of the irony of publishing this research just before Christmas, when many of us enjoy one too many mince pies, or a few too many glasses of mulled wine. In our press release, we explain that we’re not expecting everyone to watch what they eat and limit alcohol intake during the festive season, and we don’t want people to feel guilty about indulging a bit more than usual.
Rather than focus on short-term behaviour changes, healthy living is about long-term lifestyle tweaks that can really make a difference. Regularly taking the stairs rather than using the lift, drinking a couple fewer beers or wines every week, eating a little more fruit, etc.
Incorporating a series of such healthy behaviours into your daily life can make a significant difference to your future risk of cancer.
What you need to know
Finally, below we’ve pulled together some of the important information you need to know about the 14 lifestyle and environmental risk factors analysed in this study:
- Tobacco – although the number of smokers has fallen dramatically over the last 30 years, and lung cancer rates have fallen too, UK smoking rates have stagnated over recent years at around 22 per cent. We’re doing all we can to help people quit and protect children from the influences that lead them to become smokers. That’s why we’re campaigning for plain packaging – so that young children won’t be exposed to the tobacco industry’s last marketing channel.
- Overweight – obesity and being overweight was the second biggest cause of cancer in the UK in the new study. Despite this, people are still unaware that their weight can have such a strong influence on their cancer risk. In a Cancer Research UK survey, only 3 per cent of people named obesity as something that can increase cancer risk. We’re using campaigns like Active Fat to help people understand that keeping a healthy weight can really help reduce the risk.
- Fruit and vegetables – the reason fruit and veg come out so highly in this analysis is probably that many people in the UK eat fewer than their recommended 5 portions a day. Fruit and veg are an important source of vitamins, minerals and fibre, but don’t rely on supplements to get the nutrients you need – they haven’t been shown to reduce cancer risk and, in some cases, they may be harmful.
- Alcohol – you don’t have to cut out alcohol completely to reduce the risk of cancer – the more you cut down, the more you can reduce the risk. You could try tracking your drinking for a few weeks, to see how much alcohol you really drink – many people underestimate the amount. Use our drinks tracker or download the NHS app on your iPhone or android device.
- Occupation – some people are more at risk of cancer as a result of chemicals or practices used in their occupations. But improved safety in the workplace means fewer people will be at risk now than in the past. If you’re concerned about your work environment, talk to your managers or you could contact the Health and Safety Executive.
- Sunlight and sunbeds – getting too much exposure to UV light, whether from the sun or sunbeds, is the main cause of skin cancers. And rates of malignant melanoma, the most serious form of skin cancer, are rising fast. Cancer Research UK runs SunSmart, a national skin cancer prevention campaign, to help people know what they can do to reduce the risk of sunburn and skin cancers. At the moment, we’re running ‘R UV UGLY?’, which offers sunbed users the chance to see what’s really going on in their skin. Find out more and take part on our facebook page.
- Infections – in the UK, human papillomavirus, or HPV, is behind the most cancers, followed by Helicobacter pylori, which causes stomach cancer. Girls aged 12-13 are now vaccinated against the two most common cancer-causing types of HPV, which means rates of cervical cancer should decline substantially in the near future
- Red and processed meat – red meat is any fresh, minced or frozen beef, pork, lamb or veal. And processed meat means anything that’s been preserved (apart from by freezing) – so it includes salami, bacon, ham and sausages. Eating small amounts of these meats won’t have a huge effect on cancer risk, but it’s a good idea to limit your intake to only a couple of times a week. Here’s a post from our archives about how red meat might increase the risk of bowel cancer.
- Radiation – we’re all exposed to natural background radiation all the time, from the earth and from space. And occasionally we are exposed to higher doses, such as from X-rays, radiotherapy or travelling by aeroplane.
- Fibre – eating a high-fibre diet can reduce the risk of bowel cancer – it helps speed up food passing through the digestive system, and dilutes waste food, so that cancer-causing chemicals in our food aren’t in contact with the bowel wall for so long.
- Physical activity – being active not only helps you keep a healthy weight, but also reduces cancer risk by itself. But you don’t have to slog it out in the gym for hours a day – just 30 minutes of moderate activity on 5 days a week gives you the benefit. And even small bits of activity throughout the day add up.
- Not breast feeding – breast feeding babies has been shown to reduce the risk of breast cancer – so if you’re able to, and not everyone is, it’s a good idea to try to keep it up for 6 months.
- Salt – high-salt diets can increase the risk of stomach cancer, but other factors like the common bacterial infection Helicobacter pylori and smoking also play an important role.
- Hormone replacement therapy – HRT is an effective treatment for menopausal symptoms, but it can increase the risk of cancer. If you’re considering starting or stopping HRT, it’s a good idea to talk to your doctor first.
Jess and Olly
Reference
DM Parkin (2011). The fraction of cancer attributable to lifestyle and environmental factors in the UK in 2010 British Journal of Cancer, 105 (Supplement 2)
Tags
Comments
Shell January 5, 2012
I have the biggest amount of sympathy for all cancer sufferers on here and understand and appreciate each and every one of you and your illnesses but this is just an article. Its not pointing a finger at you saying you caused your own illness! Whether you smoke, eat red meat, are exposed to mobile phones, radiation, etc, any one of us can develop cancer. What about young babies who have it? They dont smoke, etc. Treat the article as an interesting piece of self help advice and appreciate the research these guys are doing to try and help, people!!!
D Royd January 5, 2012
I just want to comment that this is an interesting graphic. The attribution of ‘blame’ in the diagnosis of cancer is irrelevant to the successful treatment of the patient. Also, having peer reviewed, published studies on the evidence of cancer cell apotosis induced via cannabis derivatives will never happen due to the wall-to-wall silence of mainstream medicine with regards to an un-patentable and therefore unprofitable natural plant.
Hidom Guo January 5, 2012
Dear Henry,
We’d like to publish this information graphics on our magazine?
How could get your assess?
Thank you in advance!
Rebekah December 13, 2011
I too am a non smoking non drinking vegetarian with an active life style who is not overweight and had an extremely low risk of cancer. I was diagnosed two years ago with breast cancer. Since then I have added to my usual diet extra cruciferous vegetables like kale, cabbage, sprouts, pak choi, broccolli and button mushrooms which protect people from breast cancer and got rid of things like sunflower oil and anything cooked in it as it contains high doses of omega 6 which feed breast cancer. Recently sunflower oil has replaced fat in so many things that I wonder if this is relevant to the rise in breast cancer.
Oh and one more thing – you can say no to treatment that has huge side effects – look at the percentage rates of a cancer return if you do take the drug and then if you don’t you may discover that like me the difference is negligable, Arimidex would only improve my chances of a cancer free future by about 3%. I chose not to become a ninety year old and have lived my life as normal as a result.
The most important thing though is to stay positive having cancer is not an automatic death sentence. However my main concern is that yes we have more effective treatments for cancer but we don’t want treatment, we want cures. Also so many cancer treatments have horrendous and unacceptable side effects. One good example is the range of hormone suppressors which work by removing oestrogen from the body. It is now the norm that if you have breast cancer you will be put on arimidex, it’s side effect is to give you the skeleton of a ninety year old complete with all the aches and pains and the brittle bones. Yes the treatments may (I say may as often they don’t work) stop your cancer coming back or going somewhere else so it won’t kill you but you’ll certainly feel like death from the side effects. Cures not treatments!
Andrea December 13, 2011
I’ve had breast cancer followd by all the different treatments. I’m still within the 5 year time frame, so am still taking the relevant medication. I’m extremely grateful for all the wonderful treatments available now. However, I would like to say that none of the 7 risk factors associated with BC apply to me, and I have never smoked either.
WandaK December 13, 2011
We have so many information about cancer. When my mother was diagnosed with lymphoma cancer she decided to get chemo. She used so many extra natural remedies that helped her. I wish that I knew about VitaminB17 which I am taking to prevent developing cancer in my body.
David December 10, 2011
And where is STRESS and emotional/psychological trauma in all this? I accept the findings as they are presented, but you have missed out a fundamental element of not only contemporary society but a crucial aspect of all human relationship problems and day to day issues that we all face. You really need much more comprehensive information than you have produced so far before you can make any claims as to what is ‘preventable’.
M. Langer December 10, 2011
Some of the results of this so-called study are downright wrong, as they are taken from already flawed data. And the largest cause of cancer is not even on the list. Time. Time is the biggest risk – as we age, our organs, and our immune system slowly become less effective. It’s a natural progress. We are not, and are not supposed to be, immortal. Why are there more people dying of cancer today than a century ago? Why has it become one of the leading causes of death? Because today, we have a much better chance of living to the old age when cancer usually becomes an issue (not saying that it cannot happen earlier, but the majority of cancer patients are, in fact, well over 60). Oh, but don’t thank your doctor for that – thank your plumber. At least 2/3 of the increase in life expectancy is not due to medicine, but to having access to clean drinking water.
James Goldsmith December 10, 2011
Six years ago, Having NEVER smoked, NEVER taken drugs, only drunk alcohol in moderation/socilally and NEVER at home and exercised by swimming and cycling, I contracted Non Hodgkins Lymphoma and live an area previously contaminated by industrial fallout and adjacent to a waste dump site. Yet I am being told to watch my weight, what I eat and make sure I exercise sufficiently. My question is, CAN WE PLEASE HAVE MORE INFORMATION ABOUT CANCERS AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTAMINATION AND THEREFORE BE ABLE MORE OBJECTIVELY TO JUDGE WHAT ACTUALLY TRIGGERS CANCERS IN OUR BODIES. WE ARE NOT BEING GIVEN THE FULL PICTURE FROM A RESEARCH POINT OF VIEW. AND THIS MAKES ME VERY ANGRY. WE ARE MADE TO FEEL THAT IF WE CATCH A CANCER THEN IT IS SOMETHING WE COULD HAVE AVOIDED IF WE HAD DONE MORE OF THE THINGS POPULAR RESEARCH ADVOCATES. THOSE WHO MAY HAVE BEEN THE REAL CULPRITS ARE SKULKING IN DARK CORNERS SOMEWHERE AND NOT BEING HELD TO ACCOUNT
bob wilson December 10, 2011
i belive the chemnoble disaster as increased the amount of all cases of cancer
Jane December 10, 2011
I was diagnosed with breast cancer last year at the age of 47. I have been a vegetarian for 35 years, never smoked, have drank small amounts of alcohol, breastfed both my children and have kept myself fit by swimming, cycling and going to the gym. I have always been a size 10- 12. There is no family history of breast cancer.
However, I believe my healthy lifestyle has helped me tremendously throughtout the treatment. I was able to work throughout the chemotherapy and have continued my busy life as normal.
David Jenkin December 9, 2011
I am a personal trainer and exercise referral programme consultant (working with medical conditions). I started my own cancer exercise rehabilitation programme in September, and it has gone very, very well. In fact we have received NHS funding for four more programmes in 2012.
My point is, that during this time it has been my pleasure to meet such a cross-section of people who come to my free exercise classes. Some younger, some older, all of different levels of pre-diagnosis fitness, different ways of life etc, there has been no common factor between any of them besides of course their diagnosis.
I think the report was badly worded, it should have described how poor lifestyle decisions can increase cancer risk rather than assign causal blame for those already afflicted. Most would not argue with the former, the latter is naturally very contentious.
Finally, one of the members of my first programme told me in the warm-up how it had been on the news somewhere that ‘dark chocolate is now as good for you as going for a jog!’ Luckily they all saw it for the twaddle that it is, but I do worry about some of the research findings and their implication for miseducation
Jackie December 9, 2011
I had breast cancer grade 3 aggreseive nine years ago – I had chemo, radio and surgery. I was not overweight had had three children never smoked and rarely drank. Not sure about all these causes where people are blamed for not looking after themselves.Si nce my treatments I have gained weight whcih I never seem to lose despite doing four hours a week exercise. I have recently retired.
E Morawiecka December 9, 2011
Like many others I felt guilty enough having bowel cancer at 42 despite growing alot of our own veg, exercising, cycling.walking just the occasional drink and never smoking and actually being under weight for my height. I know this is good advice for many but it is not the reason quite alot of people, especially younger people, are diagnosed with cancer. Like many others I think there are other factors at work here. It could be in the exposure to chemicals during studying chemistry, etc during my school days, many of which are now banned as being carcinogenic, or due to stress; or due to infections which I see can be a factor. It only needs something to switch of that bit of your immune system for you to start developing cancer. The only sibling in my family not to get an early form of bowel cancer (not seen in any other generations) is the one who is an alcoholic and smokes like a chimney! She studied English while the other 3 of us studied the sciences to A’level and beyond. Perhaps the warning to school children studying sciences needs to be updated?
CLAIRE December 9, 2011
so far all i have to do is give up smoking. and hope and pray.
however i did have helicobacter which the doctors took 6 uninterested months to diagnose. it took another year for me to recover from a chronic fissure caused by the effects of helicobacter and doctors still didnt seem concerned. at no point did they explain the implications in relation to cancer and i only know because i researched on my own on the internet. i am now only 30 and still have to carefully deal with digestive problems which did not exist before. There is very little awareness even now of helicobacter and i feel that doctors {i saw many] are just not interested in such a tiny seemingly simple bug.
And yes i am still angry that i was put through so much pain and anguish for so long and now have to worry about the future consequences.
i will however give up smoking. i will i will i will!
john nicholson December 9, 2011
Life-style links to cancer is really valuable information. Might stop people being fatalistic. Hope so.
Paul Lewis December 9, 2011
Where are the references to mobile phones, electro magnetic fields, chemicals and food additives.
Also I dont see much research being done with hemp, B17, and sodium bicarbonate to name just a few.
Some people may wish to view the films run from the cure and the beutiful truth to learn how cures are suppressed if they cant be patented.
Jemma December 9, 2011
I can’t believe how many people are completely missing the point of this. Do you not understand that the idea here is to help people make healthy decisions? Anyone who immediately thinks ‘it’s your fault’ if you have cancer isn’t worth considering anyway!
If there is a group of cancer sufferers who have stigma attached to them, it’s those with lung cancer. I don’t think that any other group has to go through the same amount of victim blaming that they do. However, this article isn’t about that at all.
I for one find this very helpful and I’m glad that you posted it. It’s showed me I’m on the right track.
I would love to see more research done into food and whether organics can help, but having a ‘risk factor’ style graphic shows you what your priorities should be.
Prof. 'Fola Tayo December 9, 2011
Please permit me to suggest the translation of this material into other languages. The UK has suddenly become a multi-lingual society and I am sure this message will greater a greater reach if this is done.
Just a suggestion.
Thank you.
‘Fola Tayo
Frank Paterson December 9, 2011
Since my wife died from cancer 16 years ago I have donated regularly to cancer research uk and several other cancer charities. For those 16 years you have preached the same message ,presumably based on more and more research. The responses on your blog are very revealing and have led me to the conclusion that further research on the significance of nutrition will not be cost effective. You have done a good job but I’m now going to transfer my donations to a charity sponsoring research into treatments.
Kat Arney December 9, 2011
Hi Frank,
Thank you for your comment, and we are sorry to hear about your wife.
We would like to point out that research into the causes of cancer is just one part of our work. You may be interested to know that last year we spent £90 million on clinical research directly investigating more effective ways to treat cancer, and more than £70 million on developing and testing new cancer drugs.
You can read more about our research into different aspects of cancer treatment on our website:
Chemotherapy and hormone therapy research: http://info.cancerresearchuk.org/cancerandresearch/ourcurrentresearch/topic/ChemotherapyResearch/
Radiotherapy research: http://info.cancerresearchuk.org/cancerandresearch/ourcurrentresearch/topic/RadiotherapyResearch/
Drug development: http://info.cancerresearchuk.org/cancerandresearch/ourcurrentresearch/topic/drugdevelopment/
Surgery: http://info.cancerresearchuk.org/cancerandresearch/ourcurrentresearch/topic/our-research-into-surgery/
Immunotherapy: http://info.cancerresearchuk.org/cancerandresearch/ourcurrentresearch/topic/immunotherapy/
Personalised medicine: http://info.cancerresearchuk.org/cancerandresearch/ourcurrentresearch/topic/personalised-medicine-research/
Best wishes,
Kat
Science Information Manager
linda December 9, 2011
What about young children and animals who get cancer – I think it is wrong to put ‘blame’ on people’s bad lifestyle choices for causing the disease. It is probably more to do with the unseen threats to our health in the form of all the energy surrounding us from the likes of mobile phones, tv and radio waves etc.
akfilm December 9, 2011
You need to think carefully about what language you use in such reports. The word ’causes’ carries a big weight and implies blame. This ’causes’ a lot of upset, guilt, anger etc for people with cancer. Read our forums if you want to know how much damage can be done by carelessly used language. ‘Contributing factors’ perhaps? The danger is that such reports and the way they are headlined in the media feeds the ignorance of people around us without cancer and can affect our relationships with them. Not what we need at all, I can tell you. Language is a powerful tool and needs to be thought about very carefully.
Munroie December 9, 2011
Ok, so 40% is down to lifestyle factors – what is the other 60% caused by. I suspect that the chemicals in our society are a massive cause. They’re are everywhere in the house, work, gardens and in the air we breathe. Some of them are very difficult to break down in the body, causing the body to store them, and over time they turn cancerous in some people.
Rosalin December 9, 2011
I was sooo pleased to read the above comments as I now feel I am not alone in believing that this “campaign” has a hidden agenda. Like Eileen and all the others above – I drank very little alcohol…..always the “designated driver”; 5’6″ and 68.5 k. Yes,I have always held an office job and didn’t go out of my way to exercise- but did crash sessions for family celebrations, etc. Why me? Previously I have never bothered too much about the cause….just got on with the treatment and getting back to normal !!!! Now…… should I have lived my life differently….. gone on benefits instead of working hard all my life ????
Dr Pushkar February 13, 2012
The more we get closer the more it goes away from us. We are still trying to find correlations with diet, lifestyle… the fact remains ther are so many cases which remain unexplained. And the effect of preventive measures is a hit & miss.