Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Health & Wellness

What Causes Cancer: Probably Not You

By Barbara Ehrenreich, Barbaraehrenreich.com. Posted August 7, 2007.


The perennial temptation to blame disease on sin or at least some grave moral failing just took another hit.
Advertisement

The perennial temptation to blame disease on sin or at least some grave moral failing just took another hit. A major new study shows that women on a virtuous low fat diet with an extraordinary abundance of fruits and veggies were no less likely to die of breast cancer than women who grazed more freely. Media around the world have picked up on the finding, cautioning, prudishly, that you can't beat breast cancer with cheeseburgers and beer.

Another "null result" in cancer studies -- i.e., one showing that a suspected correlation isn't there -- has received a lot less attention. In the May issue of Psychological Bulletin, James Coyne and his colleagues at the University of Pennsylvania reported that "there is no compelling evidence linking psychotherapy or support groups with survival among cancer patients." This flies in the face of the received wisdom that any sufficiently sunny-tempered person can beat cancer simply with a "positive attitude." For example, an e-zine article entitled "Breast Cancer Prevention Tips" advises:

A simple positive and optimistic attitude has been shown to reduce the risk of cancer. This will sound amazing to many people; however, it will suffice to explain that several medical studies have demonstrated the link between a positive attitude and an improved immune system. Laughter and humor has [sic] been shown to enhance the body's immunity and prevents against cancer and other diseases. You must have heard the slogan 'happy people don't fall sick'.

So far no one appears to have read Coyne's study. On June 30, a month after its publication, all-purpose guru Deepak Chopra assured Sanjay Gupta on CNN that the mind can control the body: "... You know, of course, the ... study where women who supported each other in a loving environment with breast cancer the survival doubled." Gupta, last sighted seeking to discredit Michael Moore's "Sicko" with his "fact-checking," simply nodded, although the study Chopra was referring to was discredited years before Coyne's research came out.

For the last decade or so, adherents of the new discipline of "positive psychology" have been insisting that not just cancer, but almost any health setback, can be conquered with optimism or a "positive attitude." But as Coyne and other critics point out, the science here is shaky at best. Even the theoretical lynch-pin of the supposed happy-mind-healthy-body connection -- that a positive outlook strengthens the immune system -- took a kick in the teeth two years ago when Suzanne Segerstrom at the University of Kentucky found, to her own apparent surprise, that optimism can have a negative effect on the immune system when the stressors are intense, as in the case of serious disease.

Even if veggies and smiles don't cure cancer, aren't we still entitled to blame some people for their diseases? Lack of exercise and dietary indiscretions play a role in the development of diabetes and coronary heart disease, so we indulge in self-gratifying contempt for the fat lady scarfing down Doritos. But before you rush to judgment, ask yourself: What nutritional alternatives does she have? (And, yes, I know they have "salad" at Wendy's now, but they don't offer apples on Amtrak.) As for exercise, gym memberships easily cost $500 a year, and far too many of us are forced to spend 10 hours or more a day sitting in a cubicle, a car or a bus.

In the case of breast cancer, one victim-blaming theory after has wilted under scrutiny: The "cancer personality" theory, for example, which breast cancer victim Susan Sontag took on in her 1978 book Illness as Metaphor, and now high-fat diets and negative attitudes. Something other than genetics causes it, though, and one leading candidate is the Hormone Replacement Therapy that doctors pushed on menopausal women for decades as a supposed way of preventing heart disease, Alzheimer's and wrinkles. When, in 2002, HRT was found to be correlated with breast cancer and millions of women stopped taking it, the incidence of breast cancer plunged.

Which suggests that optimism, especially about the validity of the conventional wisdom, can be hazardous. What you need is a narrow-eyed, deeply skeptical attitude.

Digg!

See more stories tagged with: cancer prevention, positive attitude, disease, cancer

Barbara Ehrenreich is the author of thirteen books, including the New York Times bestseller Nickel and Dimed. A frequent contributor to the New York Times, Harpers, and the Progressive, she is a contributing writer to Time magazine. She lives in Florida.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Health and Wellness! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Good article, interesting facts, great criticism of conventional wisdom...
Posted by: SavageDissension on Aug 7, 2007 4:50 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
But it struck me as unnecessarily vicious and skeptical. While I certainly understand a degree of frustration at having trusted conventional wisdom and having it backfire (I, for one, despise it), but it could have been a bit more conversationally done without looking to be so abrasive.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Spot-on criticism
Posted by: elizaperson on Aug 9, 2007 9:41 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Cancer is such a devastating set of diseases, so it is understandable that everyone tries to figure out simple non-medical silver bullets to treat it. Ehrenreich is right on in this article - if people could think themselves out of being sick THEY WOULD. The only thing that the "self-help" approach to cancer treatment encourages is blaming the victim for their own illness. Needless to say that this is worse than useless, it's incredibly hurtful. Her tone in this article is completely appropriate for the seriousness of the subject matter. We should all be supporting cancer patients and encouraging them to think positively WHILE we treat the cancer and look for a solid medical cure. Right on Barbara!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

grangersmith
Posted by: grangersmith on Aug 10, 2007 12:50 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I don't see this as being too harsh, the writer is actually just flipping it to make a point...Seriously having a positive attitude helps but that doesn't cause or stop disease...people really need to use common sense, I agree with the writer...I have known people who are positive, happy, people who don't smoke drink take drugs, eat organically, and very very healthy in all ways, including excersize and mind...who died of cancer...or strokes or heart attacks...One thing about life, is that one is sure to die some day, some people push it by their behavior and some don't do anything except being at the wrong place at the wrong time...But as humans we tend to be so damn judgmental, we want reasons and answers, we are afraid, so we tend to blame others for their problems, be it health or financial. Some how if we blame and finger point, this makes us better, feel better and become better than the ones who we blame...Oh What a life, Oh what a life.....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

kmck
Posted by: kmck on Aug 14, 2007 5:43 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The rise in breast cancer probably had more to do with the number of mammograms being performed than who was taking HRT....
Besides, the Womens Healthcare Initiative was only based on Premarin.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hmm
Posted by: juanita83 on Aug 14, 2007 7:20 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
For me this article simply succeeds in strengthening the fact that the reasons behind illness are anything but simple. What works for one doesn't necessarily work for another, and what ails one does not necessarily ail another. We live in a complex environment with all kinds of factors (some of which we have little understanding of) potentially contributing to a particular state, yet we continue to isolate single causes and single solutions and then discard them when a few studies fail to prove the hypothesis. Sure, this is how science needs to work, but we have to add common sense to the mix as well. If a theory isn't proven in a world we don't completely understand, we should say "we haven't been able to prove that... yet" instead of rubbishing it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What a crazy concept....
Posted by: Puffin on Aug 15, 2007 6:30 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The concept here must be wrong...the whole world knows that cancer is caused by people. If smokers, for example, were eliminated, all cancers, heart disease, asthma and lung disease would disappear. If everybody were thin, our health insurance problem would be solved. And if you are a thin person and don't smoke, you are a vastly superior human being who will live forever. All fat people and smokers should be beaten with sticks. What's Ehrenreich trying to do, spoil everyone's fun?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Umm...about that
Posted by: blondesprite on Aug 29, 2007 4:45 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"As for exercise, gym memberships easily cost $500 a year" while the corn fed (ethanol) gold rush and the witch hunt for illegal immigrants drives healthy food prices hrough the roof...
" and far too many of us are forced to spend 10 hours or more a day sitting in a cubicle, a car or a bus." ..while breathing the exhaust fumes.
Think about those lab rats forced to live in tiny cages, fed man made designer drugs and food containing hormones while drinking contaminated water . Not one whit of difference, from my viewpoint, between us and the rats.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]