- Luckily, modern medicine has come a long way in treating this terrible disease, if detected early on...
If you watch the news regularly, you might get the impression that almost everything – including the products you use and habits you partake in – can cause cancer. If you eat too much red meat, that could increase your risk of stomach cancer and colon cancer. If you took Zantac for acid reflux, you might have an increased risk of several types of cancer, including intestinal cancer, esophageal cancer, bladder cancer, and liver cancer.
Why does it seem like “everything” causes cancer?
How Cancer Works
First, it’s important to understand what cancer is and how it “works” in the body. Cancer is a broad term that describes when some of your body’s cells begin to grow uncontrollably – and eventually, spread to other parts of your body.
In a typical human body, healthy cells grow and divide to multiply their numbers; when a healthy cell gets damaged or dies, it can be replaced. However, some cells that sustain damage or mutate randomly end up multiplying. These multiplied rogue cells collect together in tumors – some of which are considered cancerous, spreading to other parts of the body and/or causing damage along the way.
So why does this affect the number of substances that cause cancer?
Every time one of your cells becomes damaged or multiplies, there’s a small risk of cancer entering the equation. That’s why it’s commonly stated that, if you live long enough, eventually everyone will get cancer; your cells are constantly dividing, and every division presents a small risk of cancer, so given enough time, cancer becomes an inevitability. If you drive on the road enough, eventually you’ll get into an accident; statistically, it becomes unavoidable.
Because of this, any agent that disproportionately causes damage to cells or spurs them to multiply faster or in a chaotic way, can be considered cancerous. Some substances “cause” cancer in a direct way (like radioactive materials), but for other substances, the equation requires more finesse; for example, a substance may increase your risk of cancer by only a few percentage points, because the cell damage it produces is minimal.
Selection Bias
One of the leading authorities in cancer research is the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), which regularly issues new reports on substances and activities that may have a significant impact on cancer risk. This is the organization that issues new publications when new substances are found to be carcinogenic.
Part of the “everything causes cancer” equation is due to a bit of selection bias here. IARC typically selects substances to study based on their suspected carcinogenic nature. In other words, they don’t take samples of random substances; they only study substances that are thought to be carcinogenic. With this bias in mind, it stands to reason that many of the samples they collect end up being labeled as carcinogens.
Overly Cautious Reporting
Additionally, IARC and other reporting organizations like to err on the side of caution. In the mind of most healthcare and medical experts, it’s better to overreport on risk than underreport on it; it’s acceptable to declare a cancer risk where there isn’t one, but it’s unacceptable to avoid declaring a cancer risk that actually exists.
Media Sensationalism
You can add to this equation a dose of media sensationalism. Like it or not, news stories that cover a new cancer risk tend to be popular. Whether it’s out of morbid curiosity or an abundance of caution, typical media consumers typically click on and engage with stories that cover details on new carcinogenic compounds and new studies related to cancer risks.
In turn, news agencies and journalists are inclined to overstate the risk present in certain substances. If a highly popular product is found to increase your risk of cancer by a very small percentage, news agencies still have free license to issue a headline like “_____ Causes Cancer? What the Latest Studies Show,” incentivizing clicks and distorting public perceptions without technically lying.
Public Perceptions
Public perceptions also play a role in how we interpret cancer risk. Given enough time, we’ll likely hear conflicting information about certain substances; for example, you might hear that scientific studies show that red wine is both capable of promoting your immune system and increasing your cancer risk.
We’ll also hear about dozens, or even hundreds of new activities that marginally increase cancer risk. With this avalanche of information, some of it contradictory, it’s easy to walk away with the perception that various institutions are competing to label as many compounds and products “carcinogens” as possible.
There are a variety of factors making it seem like “everything causes cancer.” The truth is, cancer is a complex (and still poorly understood) disease, so it makes sense that our knowledge of its root causes is still evolving.