It turns out that wealth doesn’t necessarily buy health after all.
New large-scale study Outside Finland People who do good work People who live in poverty have a higher genetic risk of cancer, especially breast and prostate cancer. These findings call into question the long-held belief that people who live in poverty have higher cancer rates.
The study assessed the risk of 19 diseases using genetic, health and socioeconomic (defined as education and occupation, not income) information from 280,000 adults over the age of 35. The researchers collected data from the Finnish Genome Project, which analyzed biobank and national registry records.
People with lower levels of education have been found to have a higher genetic susceptibility to developing rheumatoid arthritis. lung cancerdepression, alcoholism, Type 2 diabetesOn the other hand, people with higher levels of education are at higher risk of breast and prostate cancer.
The study was presented last month at the European Society of Human Genetics’ annual conference.
What’s unique about this analysis is that it focuses not only on lifestyle and environmental factors, but also on genetics.
Researchers have long Low-income people are more likely to be uninsured and have limited access to prevention, screening, and treatment services, contributing to the unequal burden of cancer.
Dr Fiona Hagenbeek said her research highlights a link between socioeconomic status, genetics and cancer incidence, but had not carried out formal research.
She hypothesized to The Washington Post that people with wealth have better access to health care, including testing, are more likely to have higher health literacy, and are less likely to engage in risky behaviors like smoking and alcohol abuse. Age is also a factor.
“The higher cancer rates among people of higher socioeconomic status may reflect that these people are not dying from other causes at a younger age and are reaching an age where they develop cancer,” Hagenbeek told The Washington Post in an email on Friday.
she, Dr. Ahn Ji-young — Professor and Associate Director of Population Sciences NYU Perlmutter Cancer Center Researchers at the New York University Grossman School of Medicine believe screening behaviors will be key in this study.
“It’s well-known that the higher your socioeconomic status, the more likely you are to get tested,” Ang told The Washington Post.
Dr. Elisa PortChief of Breast Surgery Mount Sinai Health Systemwere also curious about how participants were screened.
“Breasts and prostate [of cancer] “The more we screen, the more we look, the more we find,” Port told The Post.
The American Cancer Society estimates More than 310,000 women in the United States will be diagnosed with invasive breast cancer this year. Approximately 300,000 new cases Of prostate cancer.
New ACS Study It has been found that many cases of cancer, including tens of thousands of breast cancer cases each year, are likely preventable through lifestyle changes.
Women cannot change Her Genesfamily history, age at onset of menstruation, age at menopause, etc. countermeasure Steps she can take to lower her risk of breast cancer.
Port recommends maintaining a healthy weight and limiting alcohol consumption — abstinence is best — and points out that women taking hormone replacement therapy during menopause also have a slightly increased risk.
Testing can help detect cancer at an early stage when it’s easier to treat. The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Men ages 55 to 69 should consider getting screened for prostate cancer with a prostate-specific antigen blood test.
The USPSTF recommends Women ages 40 to 74 who are at average risk for breast cancer should have mammograms every two years. Advice from multiple experts Get screened annually to increase the chances of early detection.
In a statement accompanying her studyHagenbeek suggests that women with a higher genetic risk and higher education should undergo breast cancer screening earlier or more frequently than women with a lower genetic risk or lower education.
Meanwhile, An said, “It will be very interesting to see whether these findings can be replicated in the United States.”
