Why is cancer rate so high in Maine? (Union, Hope: luxury, closing)

[elston]

I was doing a little google research on the risks of tanning beds; since Sen. Snowe has introduced legislation to repeal the tax on them to promote business interests. It turns out that Maine already is way above the national average in melanoma incidence.....it seems to be similar to tobacco a known carcinogen.

"New Cases of Melanoma. The rate of new melanoma diagnoses—responsible for 75% of all skin cancer deaths—was 25% higher in Maine than the national average from 2001-2005 and was the 10 highest in the U.S. An estimated 410 state residents were diagnosed with melanoma in 2008. http://www.epa.gov/sunwise/doc/me_facts_print.pdf

[BillSPrestonEsquire]

I'm surprised no one mentioned the paper industry....really nasty polluters

[Submariner]

Originally Posted by BillSPrestonEsquire

I'm surprised no one mentioned the paper industry....really nasty polluters

Are the pollutants of the paper industry specifically linked to the specific cancers that are seen in Maine?

Or is it off-topic?

[BillSPrestonEsquire]

I don't know, it was just a guess. There isn't really any other major polluter in the state that I can think of off the top of my head

[mafriz]

Originally Posted by Zymer

I think you're right about that. Having a higher ratio of older folks could skew the numbers.

Breast and uterine cancer in women, and prostate cancer in men generally tend to be discovered later in life, and the rate increases with age. 1 in 4 women develop uterine cancer, typically discovered about the time of menopause.

I just compiled graphs for ages under 50, and 50+, based on stats for all cancers from 1992 to 2008.

The under 50 age group shows incident rates of about 92-97 per 100,000 people, while the 50+ age group shows incident rates of about 1400-1500 per 100,000.

Fast Stats

This is what I was thinking...I know I have read in many other threads that the population of younger folks is low from many moving out of state. Plus, it seems Maine is a "retirement" state, so many are moving in from other states. It seems to me if numbers were crunched with consideration to this data; the stats would most likely even out to a norm.

[animalcrazy]

My DH read an article about cancer clusters that are mainly in towns bordering along Maine and other states. It was suggested that it may be in relation to the lack of variety in the gene pool. When animals are bred for specific traits it can introduce a variety of illness, I guess we humans are not much different. Yet another reason Mainers should welcome more young people from away.

[Zymer]

Originally Posted by animalcrazy

My DH read an article about cancer clusters that are mainly in towns bordering along Maine and other states. It was suggested that it may be in relation to the lack of variety in the gene pool. When animals are bred for specific traits it can introduce a variety of illness, I guess we humans are not much different. Yet another reason Mainers should welcome more young people from away.

May be some truth to that. Mouse breeders who supply researchers must be always on guard against undesirable evolution and mutation of the lines.

'Normal' cells respond to external growth and death signals. The cells have receptors that respond to chemical signals to grow and replicate, as well as receptors that respond to chemical signals that tell them it is time to die ('programmed cell death' AKA apoptosis).

'Cancer' cells are cells which have evolved the ability to manufacture the chemicals that signal growth and replication on their own, and to favor receptors for those chemicals in preference to the receptors for apoptosis. In other words, they have eliminated the 'shut-off switch' that is present in 'normal' cells, and cease to respond to the external signal to die. They become autonomous, creating their own signals to grow and replicate with no 'off' switch. This is, ultimately, an evolution which is *not* beneficial to their survival, as they consume more and more of the body's resources in their mad rush to grow and replicate, until the host dies because the cancer cells are consuming the bulk of the resources.

I think that this is one of the reasons that uterine cancer in women is so prevalent- the lining of the uterus is shed and re-grown on a fairly frequent basis, which presents many more opportunities for this mal-evolution to occur.

[Zarathu]

Always look at at what the statistics really mean. What kinds of cancers are higher? People use statistics to cover a variety of things.

Where is the cancer rate higher? Why is the cancer rate higher? ETC. Don't just naturally assume that its some horrible environment factor when it may be something else altogether. Also look at the source of the statistics. People use statistics to serve some purpose.

[cebdark]

Originally Posted by Zarathu

People use statistics to serve some purpose.

Yes, and in the case of cancer statistics, usually to delude themselves into thinking that they can live forever in some magical place completely unscathed by any disease.

Good luck with that I say.

[bangorme]

I've always thought that there were three causes for the high cancer rates in Maine (other than smoking and drinking... which we do a lot of):
1) Most of our rivers are/ or were used as sewers for towns and industry. Many of us get our drinking water from these rivers.
2) Agricultural chemical use that has worked its way into almost every well in the state (to some level).
3) Coal fired electricity generators in the Midwest that have be dumping crap on us for decades. This stuff kills our trees and fish, and can't be helping us any.