More young and middle-aged women are being diagnosed with lung cancer at a higher rate than men, and scientists are struggling to understand why, new research shows. Awareness of the disease’s effects on women is lacking, experts say, and the US government spends significantly less on its research than on similar studies in men.
“When you ask people what the number one cancer killer of women is, most will say that it’s breast cancer. It’s not. It’s lung cancer. Lung cancer is a women’s health disease, but we clearly need to educate more people about it,” said Dr. Andrea McKee, a radiation oncologist and volunteer medical spokesperson for the American Lung Association.
Have you been in a salon? Those spray products are unholy. Breathing in those things every day for years can’t be good.
Makeup and perfumes are inhaled way more by women outside of a salon too. That just can’t be good for a person.
Yeah, people are fixating on the salon, but I just meant that as an example. Many women use a lot of product at home every day. It can’t be good.
So why don’t barbers have a high cancer rate?
Hairdressers do have above average rates of cancer, amongst other elevated rates of health conditions linked to chemical exposure.
https://womensvoices.org/safe-salons/beauty-and-its-beast/
https://academic.oup.com/ije/article/38/6/1512/672312?login=false
Who says they don’t? Was there a study done on them?
Anecdotal but I’ve not seen a barbers on the level of women’s salons, and I was in the barbers yesterday.
Not an aerosol in sight. Sure sprayed me with some liquors but nothing like what women spray.
Plus women have salons for hair, nails and whatever else so more exposure.
This is completely pulling ideas out of my butt, but it’s been shown time and time again that small particulate matter is bad for lungs, and women tend to wear makeup daily for large chunks of their lives.
Could there be some subtle carcinogen effect from makeup dust which only builds up through years/decades of constant makeup use? And now that tobacco use is on the wane, that spike is only being uncovered now?
Anything with talc, has a certain percentage of asbestos in it.
Ask J&J why they’re hiding their assets to avoid paying for the baby powder that killed people for decades.
I know powdered makeup used to have talc, but none of the stuff my wife ever used had much in the way of ingredients listed on it. That needs to change, especially with regard to carcinogens and allergens.
Conjecture; natural gas stove cooking, it’s been shown to contain all sorts of awful carcinogens and many stoves are not properly vented and often still venting is not regularly used enough as education on the dangers of gas emissions has been subdued by industry for decades.
So if we go stereotypical, men gotta breath all sorts of different particles from construction sites or even the garage
Silicosis is a big disabler of men in mining and concrete work. Proper PPE can pretty much eliminate it, and has helped bring down cases in the last couple decades.
Women working with particulates and VOCs should also be taking preventative steps.
the US government spends significantly less on its research than on similar studies in men.
Typical …
The article mentions that non smokers should be screened and then links to current eligibility for screening and basically if you haven’t smoked enough you’re not eligible.
It’s probably just some sexist bias influencing the studies. I’m guessing the doctors performing the studies have reviewed cases from actors and actresses, who use a lot of makeup and hair spray, and still found a higher rate of lung cancer in women.
Maybe women are more likely to the doctor at the first sign of trouble rather than waiting until the cancer spreads leading to more diagnosisis?
Not sure why you are getting down voted. This could easily be true and where not needs to be controlled for. Controlling variables is the only way to get good science. It in no way is a dismissal of the potential problem.
I wonder if vaping is more popular with young women than other demographics.
