Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

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.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

In Special Coverage

Belief:
Christian Story of Jesus's Birth Is a Myth Born of Politics
Rev. Howard Bess

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
Will Our 'Green Jobs' Dollars Help a Ritzy Car Company Open a Toxic Manufacturing Plant?
Seth Sandronsky

DrugReporter:
We Can't Let Politics Keep Trumping Science on Drug Policy
Beth Schwartzapfel

Environment:
Copenhagen: Historic Failure That Will Live in Infamy
Joss Garman

Food:
Corporations (and Sarah Palin) Are Cyborgs Sent to Scuttle the Fight Against Climate Change
Rebecca Solnit

Health and Wellness:
How Real Health Reform Was Killed by Politicians Trying to Look 'Moderate'
James Ridgeway

Immigration:
Greyhound Lines Inc. Accused of Racial Profiling
Seth Hoy

Media and Technology:
Moyers, Moore and Maddow are the Most Influential Progressives
Don Hazen

Movie Mix:
James Cameron's Wizardry in 'Avatar' Movie Demands Being Witnessed on the Big Screen
Wajahat Ali

Politics:
Can We Rescue the Republic Before the Dark Politics Take Over?
Kirk Nielsen

Reproductive Justice and Gender:
Men: Invisible Allies in the Struggle for Choice
Claire Keyes

Rights and Liberties:
Have Americans Traded Freedom For Security?
Paul Craig Roberts

Sex and Relationships:
Sexy Mormons, the Joy of Vibrators and Sticking it to Puritans: 10 of Liz Langley's Best Pieces
AlterNet Staff

Take Action:
G-20 Meetings: Nothing Much Happened in the Suites, and There Was Too Much Punch in the Streets
Laura Flanders

Water:
NASA Report Highlights Need to Retire Drainage Impaired Land in California
Dan Bacher

World:
'Neocon-ing' Obama
Robert Parry

More stories by Barbara Ehrenreich

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

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!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

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

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 AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

You've chosen to turn comments off for the entire site. Would you like to turn them back on?
  • 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.

Advertisement
Advertisement