The "Disaster" of Cancer

Credit: http://drleonardcoldwell.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/cancer_cells.jpg

     We have now covered a wide variety of disasters in our course. From weather-related, natural disasters to the disastrous natures of starvation and nuclear meltdown, calamity can be found in many places. After perusing recent articles from CNN, I think it is important that we now discuss disease.
     As horrific and exhausting of an experience as going through it (or having a loved one go through it) is, I did not previously think to catalog cancer under our conceptual understanding of disasters. This has changed for me, though, after seeing the risk-calculus we explored earlier in the semester written all over the CNN article. What journalists Tim Hume and Jen Christensen emphasize in their piece is that there are a slew of factors that increases one's risk of contracting cancer. Exposure to cigarettes, alcohol, and a poor diet is something that greatly contributes to the stark increases in persons with cancer anticipated in the coming twenty years. A spike in the longevity of populations world-wide (laregely thanks to advancements in medical technology, ironically) is another key factor of exposure to the hazard of the "cancer disaster". Vulnerability is also noted in the article. Emory University's Dr. Walter Curran is quoted as saying that a young person who does not habitually smoke and "has a good diet and a healthy lifestyle, someone with moderate alcohol consumption and who takes preventive health measures like regularly seeing a doctor and getting exercise -- their chance of cancer is significantly less than someone who for example lives in a developing country in Africa right now."
    More questions emerge as we arrive at the manageability side of the risk calculus. This, too, connects to previous discussions and readings, as Christopher Wild from the International Agency for Research on Cancer is quoted as saying "More commitment to prevention and early detection is desperately needed in order to complement improved treatments and address the alarming rise in cancer burden globally." This reflects the trend also noted in Hannigan concerning humanitarian efforts' transition from being more reactionary to more preventative.
     I want to consider whether or not we can eradicate the disparity in risk-level between countries and regions of the world. If we can, how? If more people in Africa are at risk due solely to external factors, should development efforts attempt to counteract those factors? Furthermore, while prevention being :given equal footing with disaster assistance" (Hannigan 2012) makes sense to me, there doesn't seem to be a clear-cut way to do this when dealing with increased cases of cancer. 
     I will close with words from Curran, who is credited in the article as deeming preventative measures in fighting cancer "an investment rather than a cost." Can these words be debated? Or is re-evaluating how we treat cancer both medically and socially in order?

-Anthony DeSantis (Hurricane Group)

http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/04/health/who-world-cancer-report/