The older you are, the more likely you are to get cancer. The older you are, the more likely you are to be overweight. Therefore, it is not a surprise that many people with cancer are overweight. But aging is the common factor, not obesity.
You know, I've had cancer, serious fucking cancer and I am sick to death of this bullshit. I have a theory for you, I'll bet a million dollars that if you took a group of fat women and put them in an environment without all of the chemicals and toxins that we ingest and consider to be normal are not present you would have a significantly lower level of cancer.
Most of the awful carcinogens that are out there, not to mention lead and mercury and all of the other crap that at some point we decided were acceptable in things like mascara and shampoo, like to lodge themselves and be retained in fat cells. And unfortunately due to nature women have more fat cells and things like our breasts are almost all fat cells.
We don't even know if obesity is the cause or merely a symptom of why larger people might be dying from more or different kinds of cancer. For example, eating unhealthily can lead to excess weight - pushing cancer-fighting produce out of your diet in favor of junk food could increase your chances of cancer. But not all larger people necessarily eschew fruits and vegetables for potato chips. So is the relationship cause and effect - people who are obese because they eat unbalanced diets are more susceptible to cancer? People who are larger and who also don't exercise are more likely to get cancer? It seems like these questions aren't even touched upon.
@rixatrix: Lots of people look at how fruit and vegetable consumption and/or exercise relate to cancer. Some of these studies use obesity as a stand in for poor habits (very problematic), while others are looking at if weight alone causes health problems. I don't think any of them are designed to be the be all end all answer, but sometimes that's how they get reported.
From reading Kate's pieces, I get the impression that she doesn't believe that many obese people with poor habits could significantly reduce their weight by adapting better habits.
@clevernamehere: My intention wasn't to say that obese people with poor eating habits should reduce their weight, necessarily, but that obese people with poor eating habits may decrease their risk for cancer not by becoming magically thin, but by consuming more foods that are known to decrease the risk of cancer.
So wait: are you skeptical of the science, or of how the media is spinning the findings? Because I don't think the scientists are making a political statement about fat people.
@rckoala: I, too, am having a hard time figuring out whether Kate means to call the research design into question or the reporting about the study into question. And I'm not sure either exercise is called for. I don't detect fat shaming in what I can glean of Renehan's points. And it seems the reporting is going out of its way to put the findings in perspective.
Obese women will die of cancer, but it depends what body part is fatter. If it's the waist, then they're doomed. If it's the thighs, not so much. Obese women tend to be nicer people liked by all, and some of them are happier (if they're within a certain weight range), but some of them are not. Unless they have red hair - that totally messes up the balance because that will put them at risk for some other stuff. Also, if their middle finger is shorter than their index finger they're gay.
I may have some stats wrong here but it does sound a bit ridiculous, doesn't it? The doctors and researchers probably mean well, but sometimes it sounds like a witchhunt-type shaming activity. "You! You're going to dieeeeee...." If you want the obese people to die just say it dammit, because sometimes it sounds that way.
Lin-Z [linguist on duty] promoted this comment
Edited by femaledwightschrute at 09/24/09 1:37 PM
femaledwightschrute was starred
femaledwightschrute was unstarred
"Dr. Gail, though, had some advice, which, he said, is his personal opinion as a physician and researcher: "If you are in the pink and feeling well and getting a good amount of exercise and if your doctor is very happy with your lab values and other test results, then I am not sure there is any urgency to change your weight."
What is that sensation? Is it... is it....could it be... sanity?
@sequined: It's true; being a skinny, unrealistically-proportioned plastic doll doesn't necessarily prevent you from becoming headless at some point in your life.
Wait... I thought having lots of promiscuous, whore-y sex was the number one way young women were going to get cancer. How are they going to slut shame me NOW?
The study focused on cankle tumors and upper arm flabinomas. "Ass cancer is also a serious risk," one doctor involved in the study said. "Big, fat, lumpy ass cancer."
I think that the "obese have a lower chance of dying from cancer" statistic is a little misleading because not all cancers are the same. They vary in severity and the fact that a person with cancer is still obese speaks to the severity, duration and complications (or lack thereof) when compared to an emaciated person who currently has cancer.
@schweppes: Yeah, wouldn't the different types of cancer make a big difference here? I mean, no matter what your weight is, it's not going to prevent skin cancer, yeah?
@schweppes: Not only that, but think about the effects of chemotherapy and radiation on the body. You lose a lot of weight with those--easier to bounce back if you actually have weight to be lost and aren't hovering near a breaking point.
@sciencerules: See, I think that's a different interpretation of the study than mine. I'm not saying that the study implies that the obese have a higher survival rate than the non-obese because they have extra weight to lose. I'm thinking that what it REALLY proves is that people with cancer who are still obese do not have as severe of a cancer, or treatment, or length of illness as those who have become emaciated. They compared people who already were diagnosed with cancer and at various stages in their treatment.
@schweppes: Sometimes you don't lose weight, even with a serious cancer, even with serious treatment. Some anecdata: my mom had quite serious breast cancer and went through the heaviest-duty chemo they had at the time, and she took it remarkably well - minimal throwing up, not a whole lot of appetite loss. She did not lose much weight. People's systems react differently to treatment.
Now with digestive system cancers, that's a whole other story. But for certain types of cancer and treatment, weight loss is not a given. Common, yes, but not a given.
@clairedeloony: I'm not saying it's a given, it doesn't have to occur in 100% of cases for it to be statistically significant. And a statistical significance that would affect whether you can, indeed, make the assumption that "obese people are more likely to survive cancer" a big leap. It's NOT that, among a healthy population, the obese people who happen to develop cancer have a better survival rate than non-obese people but rather, and this is a huge difference, among the sufferers of CANCER population, the obese people have a better shot of survival. Huge difference.
@clairedeloony: To your second paragraph. Exactly. My mom had (and died from) bile duct cancer, and she was obese. Her doctor, who was awesome, and kept her alive for approximately 20 months longer than she should have lived, said, "Your obesity may have made you more susceptible to cancer. But your obesity is going to make you a lot more able to withstand the chemo we're going to give you."
09/24/09
The older you are, the more likely you are to get cancer. The older you are, the more likely you are to be overweight. Therefore, it is not a surprise that many people with cancer are overweight. But aging is the common factor, not obesity.
09/24/09
Most of the awful carcinogens that are out there, not to mention lead and mercury and all of the other crap that at some point we decided were acceptable in things like mascara and shampoo, like to lodge themselves and be retained in fat cells. And unfortunately due to nature women have more fat cells and things like our breasts are almost all fat cells.
Thanks, I will get off my soapbox now.
09/24/09
09/24/09
09/24/09
I'm at the point where I just assume I am going to get it just by being alive.
09/24/09
09/24/09
09/24/09
From reading Kate's pieces, I get the impression that she doesn't believe that many obese people with poor habits could significantly reduce their weight by adapting better habits.
09/24/09
09/24/09
09/24/09
09/24/09
Obese women will die of cancer, but it depends what body part is fatter. If it's the waist, then they're doomed. If it's the thighs, not so much. Obese women tend to be nicer people liked by all, and some of them are happier (if they're within a certain weight range), but some of them are not. Unless they have red hair - that totally messes up the balance because that will put them at risk for some other stuff. Also, if their middle finger is shorter than their index finger they're gay.
I may have some stats wrong here but it does sound a bit ridiculous, doesn't it? The doctors and researchers probably mean well, but sometimes it sounds like a witchhunt-type shaming activity. "You! You're going to dieeeeee...." If you want the obese people to die just say it dammit, because sometimes it sounds that way.
09/24/09
09/24/09
What is that sensation? Is it... is it....could it be... sanity?
09/24/09
09/24/09
09/24/09
09/24/09
09/24/09
09/24/09
09/24/09
09/24/09
09/24/09
09/24/09
09/24/09
The study focused on cankle tumors and upper arm flabinomas. "Ass cancer is also a serious risk," one doctor involved in the study said. "Big, fat, lumpy ass cancer."
09/24/09
09/24/09
09/24/09
09/24/09
09/24/09
09/24/09
09/24/09
Now with digestive system cancers, that's a whole other story. But for certain types of cancer and treatment, weight loss is not a given. Common, yes, but not a given.
09/24/09
09/24/09