U.S. Women Uninformed About Lung Cancer

Lilypad

Well-Known Member
Need to know:

A new survey finds that we as American women are greatly uninformed about the threats posed by lung cancer and how it can affect them.

According to the National Lung Cancer Partnership, lung cancer affects more than 80,000 American women annually, with over 70,000 cases proving to be fatal. Thirty thousand more women die annually from lung cancer than from breast cancer, they noted.

Vital findings include:

*Only 41 percent of women know that lung cancer is the leading cancer killer in the United States.
*Only 8 percent of women understand that exposure to radon gas is the second leading cause of lung cancer. Instead, 60 percent of women share the mistaken belief that exposure to secondhand smoke is the number two cause.
*Only 36 percent of women are aware that lung cancer kills more women than breast cancer.
*Only 29 percent know that lung cancer kills more women than breast, ovarian and uterine cancers combined.
*Only 41 percent of women know that one in every 17 women will develop a lung malignancy in her lifetime.
*Only 18 percent of women know that women make up the majority of young (under age 40) lung cancer patients.
*Only 4 percent of women know that women typically do better than men following lung cancer treatment.

Another crucial subject addressed was that a quarter of all women "mistakenly believe there is a standard screening test to detect lung cancer in its early stages. Although such tests are in development, there is no clinically-approved screening test for this nation's top cancer killer".

"Lung cancer is often perceived as a man's disease, yet it affects tens of thousands of women, and we're very concerned that women seem to be in the dark when it comes to the facts about lung cancer and the significant impact lung cancer can have on their lives," said Dr. Joan Schiller, president of the National Lung Cancer Partnership.
 
I don't see how knowing these statistics serve any purpose whatsoever...:shrug:

"there is no clinically-approved screening test for this nation's top cancer killer"
 

BlackSheep

New Member
kwillia said:
I don't see how knowing these statistics serve any purpose whatsoever...:shrug:

"there is no clinically-approved screening test for this nation's top cancer killer"

I beg to differ kwillia, a lung biopsy is the most definitive diagnostic tool for cancer as well as other proven tests. And IMHO, statistics are very important-if even 1 person gets tested for the possibility of cancer than its a win-win.
Why so jaded about statistics?
 
BlackSheep said:
I beg to differ kwillia, a lung biopsy is the most definitive diagnostic tool for cancer as well as other proven tests. And IMHO, statistics are very important-if even 1 person gets tested for the possibility of cancer than its a win-win.
Why so jaded about statistics?
Because.... "there is no clinically-approved screening test for this nation's top cancer killer". You are talking about a lung biopsy which would be done only after there was reason to suspect something was wrong with the lung. A woman can get a mammogram or a pap smear as a form of screening that might indicate a potential problem before anyone knows there is one... and that is why it's great to get the word out about breast and cervical cancer screening... but tis not the case for lung cancer. A woman won't know until it's basically too late...:shrug:

What did you get out of her post that tells you any different...:confused:
 
W

Wenchy

Guest
kwillia said:
Because.... "there is no clinically-approved screening test for this nation's top cancer killer". You are talking about a lung biopsy which would be done only after there was reason to suspect something was wrong with the lung. A woman can get a mammogram or a pap smear as a form of screening that might indicate a potential problem before anyone knows there is one... and that is why it's great to get the word out about breast and cervical cancer screening... but tis not the case for lung cancer. A woman won't know until it's basically too late...:shrug:

What did you get out of her post that tells you any different...:confused:


Thank you Kwillia. :flowers:

The fact remains that those of us who choose to smoke (male or female) need to know that we will probably NOT know until the end.

I choose to remain oblivious until that point.
 
Wenchy said:
Thank you Kwillia. :flowers:

The fact remains that those of us who choose to smoke (male or female) need to know that we will probably NOT know until the end.

I choose to remain oblivious until that point.
I am not a smoker, but that does not mean I won't get lung cancer. You are a smoker and statistically run higher risk of getting lung cancer. But you are no more certain you will get it just as I am no less certain I will get it. The point is, neither of us will know we have it until we have reason to suspect we have a problem. Statistics do not excite me.
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
kwillia said:
I am not a smoker, but that does not mean I won't get lung cancer.
True. My great-grandmother died of lung cancer and not only did she never smoke a day in her life, but she was allergic to it and was never even exposed to second-hand smoke.
 
Top