Here is a study that suggests that many people don’t want to know their personal
cancer risk; reasons for this are given as well.
Based on our representative sample, 39% of the
population indicated that they agreed or strongly agreed that they would
"rather not know [their] chance of getting cancer."
This preference was stronger among older participants, female participants, and
participants with lower levels of education. Preferring to avoid cancer risk information was stronger among
participants who agreed with the beliefs that everything causes cancer,
that there's not much one can do to prevent cancer, and that there are too many recommendations to
follow. Finally, the preference to avoid cancer risk information was associated with lower levels
of screening for colon cancer.
Note several things here. First, in certain
populations at higher risk for cancer (older, less educated), there is an
increased prevalence of the “I rather would not know” mentality. We also see the cost of the media distorting
and exaggerating various studies that come out – some of them occasionally contradictory
– about cancer risk and health.
The constant drumbeat of scare articles about
various things that may cause cancer is not helpful. There are some well-documented
and important factors: smoking, obesity, diet, radon, certain viruses – and
these should be publicized MORE. On the other hand, the constant stream of
poorly documented speculation, often refuted by new studies, does
more harm than good. It is like the “boy who cried wolf” story, straining
credibility, and also giving the impression that since every daily activity
causes cancer, then, “what can you do?” Of course, if new cancer-causing agents
are discovered and are well-documented, then this needs to be publicized. But
ill-documented sensationalism for the sake of “page hits” is irresponsible.
Related to this is the confusion of recommendations,
which mirror in their complexity and contradictions the endless stories of new
and often esoteric causes of cancer
Then there is the attitude of “there’s not much I
can do to prevent cancer” which is in part due to recent articles claiming
that “most cancers are due to genetic bad luck.”
What
happens is that people skip over the part about screening, they skip over the
part about those cancers that are affected by environmental factors (and they
will not be aware of flaws in the interpretation of the study),
and they will shrug their shoulders, smoke that cigarette while eating a
deep-fried Twinkie and trust in their “good luck.” This is of course inconsistent
with the “everything in the environment causes cancer” idea, but then this is
the problem – extremes of opinion in one direction or another.
This
has real-life consequences, such as lower levels of colon cancer screening,
and, likely, continued bad health habits. And I believe this not only applies
to cancer, but other problems as well: obesity, diabetes, etc. Human nature is
to avoid thinking about potential bad news and to avoid hearing things that may
be unpleasant or which go against currently held beliefs or which might result
in undesired changes in habits (change in diet, exercise, etc.). Therefore, the
scientific, medical, and media communities need to be cognizant of this, and to
present to the public solidly documented and easy-to-understand pieces of
information, particularly those that concentrate on major risk factors, and
which avoid sensationalism for its own sake and large amounts of background “noise”
static obscuring the most important messages about health and cancer risk.
