Malignant Tumors: General Q&A [Discussion on cancer risk factors]

granitefalcon26 said:2. For certain types of carcinoma, both chemotherapy and surgery might be perfectly fine.

Regarding that colon cancer we were discussing—in that case, would both chemo and surgery be considered standard?

Peter Taylor3 said:I've got two questions that have been burning a hole in my mind for a long time now...
How does cancer—take colon cancer, for example—just strike out of nowhere in someone who’s young, doesn't touch a cigarette, stays away from booze, eats clean, and hits the gym like a pro? It makes absolutely no sense!
If someone is battling a tumor or cancer, can their lab results—things like a complete blood count or ESR levels—actually look completely normal? Look, I’ve seen this play out far too many times, and it’s infuriating how much people rely on a single piece of paper to tell them they're "fine." To answer your question directly: Yes. Absolutely. It is entirely possible for a patient to be dealing with a malignancy while their blood work looks like a textbook definition of health. Don't let anyone give you a false sense of security just because the numbers aren't red-flagging. A standard CBC or an inflammation marker like sedimentation can stay within the "normal" range even when something serious is brewing under the surface. Cancer isn't always polite enough to show up in your blood counts right away. Sometimes the body compensates, or the specific type of growth hasn't disrupted those particular levels yet. It’s maddening. You go to the doctor, you get a report that says everything is perfect, and yet you *know* something is wrong. If you're seeing "normal" results but the symptoms are screaming otherwise, don't let some overworked clinician brush you off. Numbers are just data points; they aren't the whole story. If the intuition is there, keep pushing. Don't let a "clean" lab report silence what your body is telling you.
Look, this isn't even about me personally, but I’m genuinely curious...

Peter Taylor3 said:Regarding colorectal cancer—is colonoscopy really the gold standard here? Is it actually reliable?

When it comes to younger people, the health of the large intestine isn't exactly a shining example of wellness. Honestly, it’s usually just a reflection of how much they've already aged their system through sheer lifestyle choices. It's pretty pathetic, really.
A CBC can show microcytic anemia, and SE levels might be elevated.

We were just talking about smoking and lung cancer a little while ago.

Does anyone know anything about the link between lung cancer and specific job environments? For instance, what about people working in labs? I'm thinking about things like breathing in organic solvent vapors. Is there any way for them to stay healthy and dodge lung cancer altogether?

So, I guess... can you actually get cancer from using a computer?
I'm a bit worried because I've been on my PC for about six months now, usually spending maybe 5 to 7 hours a day on it.

Sam Roberts8 said:Is it actually possible to get cancer from using a computer?
I'm getting a bit paranoid because I've been spending about 5 to 7 hours a day glued to my PC for the last six months.

Look, sitting hunched over a computer or staring at a TV from sunrise to sunset, combined with stuffing your face with junk food and basically zero physical activity—that is a one-way ticket to health problems. You're looking at a massive increase in cancer risk, not to mention setting yourself up for a heart attack or a stroke.

I mean, it doesn't even hurt me, and I'm getting used to life without it anyway, so I won't be getting it back xD
Thanks for the reply 🙂

Sam Roberts8 said:Honestly, I don't feel any pain at all right now, and since I'm finally breaking the habit, I suppose I won't be getting my hands on it again anyway.
Thanks for the response. 🙂

Cancer doesn't actually cause pain, at least not initially; I suppose any discomfort usually only starts cropping up once it reaches those later stages.
You might already be carrying it, though you probably haven't actually felt the impact yet. And if you do, I suppose one has to wonder what those people sitting in front of a computer screen for eight hours a day are even supposed to do about it.

Get away from there; I know certain cancer symptoms can be easily overlooked.
I don't have any of those symptoms, though.
The only thing is some chest pain, but I've had that for about four years now.
I guess I have this lingering fear, so maybe it would be better to get a quick checkup, but I really don't think I have anything.
The only other thing is that my head hurts a little when I sit at the computer, but I've cut my screen time down to just two or three hours a day lately.🙂
What do you guys think?
Also, I'm 16.

Sam Roberts8 said:So, what's everyone's take on this?
By the way, I've been at this for 16 years.

Get outside, ride a bike, play some hoops, go out and hunt for some action. 🙂

I started 🙂
From June through early August, I was on my computer for about five to seven hours a day, though I guess I did spend up to ten hours on it a couple of times.
Now I'm feeling pretty anxious about it, so I suppose you guys might know if I should go see a doctor for a checkup?
Also, there are people I know who are constantly on their computers for eight hours at a time.

Sam Roberts8 said:Well, I did start 🙂
From June through the beginning of August, I was sitting at my computer for about five to seven hours a day, and I suppose there were a couple of occasions where I ended up glued to the screen for ten hours straight—though that only happened twice, I think.
Now I’m gripped by this intense anxiety, so I guess I should ask: do you think I really need to go get checked out?
And then there are people I know who are constantly on their computers for eight hours a day without a second thought.

I honestly can't quite fathom why you've developed such an overwhelming fear regarding cancer.
Based strictly on what you've described—just the amount of time spent at a computer—it seems highly unlikely that you would have developed cancer from that alone.

Oh, thanks 🙂
I was usually getting about 5 to 8 hours a night, which felt okay 🙂
I guess I might have gone a little over occasionally, but I never really hit more than 9 or 10 hours 🙂
Man, that’s such a huge weight off my shoulders 😂
THANK YOU 🙂

Sam Roberts8 said:Well, thanks 🙂
I was basically clocking in from 5 to 8 every single day, so, yeah, great 🙂
I suppose I might have gone a bit overboard on occasion, though I don't think I ever exceeded 9 or 10 hours 🙂
Honestly, it feels like a massive weight has been lifted off my shoulders 😂
THANK YOU 🙂

Alright, now stop making fun of me and maybe find something else to talk about, like video games or whatever

I was reading somewhere that cancer cells basically go into overdrive
when you're loading up on sugar, white flour, and meat.

Regarding the sugar part, does that rule apply to honey too?

Thanks

Amanda Lee31 said:I read somewhere that cancer cells multiply faster
when you load up on sugar, white flour, and meat.

Regarding the sugar part, does that apply to honey too?

Thanks

Yes. Tumors are basically glucose addicts, pulling in massive amounts of it, and honey is essentially pure glucose. It’s actually why, when doctors use a PET scan to spot a tumor, they inject a radioactive isotope dissolved in glucose. The areas where a tumor is lurking will suck up that glucose way more aggressively than healthy tissue, which makes that specific spot light up on the scan.
That doesn't mean someone fighting cancer should try to completely starve their body of glucose. Without it, your brain won't function, and frankly, neither will the rest of your body.

I don't get this at all:

So, according to this, first responders are developing cancer just because they showed up to help out at a demolition site? Give me a break. What specific toxic components are used in construction that supposedly release enough poison during a building collapse to cause that?

Roger Sanders said:I don't get this part:

So, the first responders got cancer just because they showed up to help at the site where buildings collapsed? What kind of toxic construction materials are we talking about that get released like that during a demolition?

It’s not about what the towers were built from. It’s about the planes slamming into them with full fuel tanks. I highly doubt breathing in burning kerosene fumes and those vapors is doing wonders for anyone's health. Plus, those buildings were packed with everything from office supplies to cleaning chemicals—all of it was burning right there.

Nothing seems weird or confusing to me here, especially when you look at people dealing with respiratory issues or those who ended up with lung or throat cancer.

I'm pretty sure there was quite a bit of asbestos used in those towers.

There are already two threads about radon over on Natural Science, so I won’t bore you with a long intro:

I am honestly "fascinated" by how absolutely nobody I talk to has any clue what radon even is. It’s pretty eye-opening. Because of that, I felt like I should try to spread some awareness here. Honestly, this topic belongs in the Health section since it hits right where it counts. I’m not going to dump a bunch of extra links on you—just Google "radon" or "radon + lung cancer" and everything you need will pop up immediately.

To keep it brief: we're talking about a radioactive noble gas (atomic mass is 222, compared to uranium being 235 or 238, for context) that seeps out of the ground and loves to settle in residential buildings. High concentrations can cause lung cancer, which makes radon the second leading cause of lung cancer in the general population. In fact, for non-smokers, it's actually the number one cause. Those guys drinking whiskey might be onto something regarding "bed placement," but it isn't because of some mythical radiation—it's the very real radiation from radon and its decay products. Since its half-life is less than four days, its decay products—which are also radioactive—get inhaled like "dust." If I remember correctly, the end product of that decay chain is lead.

Think back to what you learned in school, what you heard on the news, or read in the papers... If your answer is "nothing," then you're exactly what the statistics predict.

You can find more details in those two links above.

Since I see everyone is debating Paw Paw-im, I figured I’d jump in and offer something to this community—both for those fighting this and their families—by suggesting some specific terms for you all to look up:
1. Mebendazole cancer
2. Cimetidine cancer

Also, you can find Vitamin C 500g at health food stores for pretty cheap—you just mix it with baking soda to create sodium ascorbate...

Just a heads-up, this info is strictly for research purposes—I'm definitely not claiming anyone can be cured by this...