Laurianne's Hope

Saturday, February 14, 2009

Lung cancer research deserves more funding

This was published in the Buffalo News Opinion section on February 14, 2009. The name of the person who wrote it was not published.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

My father smoked heavily for decades. Six years before his death, he decided to stop, but it was too late. The lungs have no nerve endings inside, so tumors can grow undetected. There they remain painless until symptoms like a persistent cough or breathlessness present.

In my father’s case, tumors spread to his shoulders, causing him intense pain. Eventually, a doctor pinpointed the cause of his discomfort. Less than six months later, he died at the age of 59.

I find it both alarming and offensive that no more funding goes toward lung cancer research now than when my father died in 1977, despite the fact that lung cancer kills more people than breast, prostate, colon, liver, kidney and melanoma cancers combined.

Health officials know that at least 164,000 new diagnoses occur each year. The amount of funding for lung cancer research remains an abysmal $1,829 for each lung cancer death compared to more than $23,000 for breast cancer and $14,300 for prostate cancer. Early detection programs and successful treatments for those latter two cancers mean anyone having either of them stands a good chance of surviving. Only about 14 percent of those diagnosed with lung cancer will overcome it.

When a dear friend of ours suffered from lung cancer last year, we were asked, “Did he smoke?” Apparently he did years ago, but hadn’t for decades.

It bothered me to hear that question as if it were an accusation: somehow he had brought his disease on by willful carelessness. Despite the fact that lung cancer is the most common cause of cancer death in our country, the “blame the victim” mentality persists.

My father heard that attitude from health care professionals. When Dad complained of a horrible sore throat, one asked, “What do you want when you abused your body like that?” Those who ask the question of whether a lung cancer victim smoked subscribe to the myth that it is a smoker’s disease, which it is not.

More than half of patients diagnosed with this type of cancer either never smoked or quit years earlier. People who never smoked account for between 15 percent and 20 percent of lung cancers. Of those 20,000 who never smoked and yet suffer from the disease, 80 percent are women. Some of these cases might be attributed to secondhand smoke. Researchers estimate 2,000 deaths result from that exposure each year.

But besides the effects of secondhand smoke, we have a large number of sufferers for which the cause remains elusive. And that number increases, especially among men and women in their 40s. More should be done to combat this disease. More aggressive screening is needed.

Perhaps, because there are no celebrity spokespersons for lung cancer, despite celebrity deaths from it like that of Dana Reeve, lung cancer is the poor step-child of cancers. People don’t want to talk about it, but we must.

More money must be funneled to lung cancer research to stop the carnage. It is horrible to watch a loved one die of cancer, and made more painful when so little is being done to fight this particular one. No one — smoker or nonsmoker — deserves to suffer from its ravages.

Obviously, funding for anything is made more difficult by our economic morass. But finding a cause and cure for lung cancer may save money in the end and stop families from suffering along with their suffering loved ones. It is too late for our friend.

Labels: , , , , , ,


Lung Cancer AwarenessPosted by Henry (Calem's Opa) :: 3:55 PM :: 0 people are more aware
---------------------------------------

Saturday, September 22, 2007

Today September 22

Today it is 23 months ago that Laurianne left us. Since it is Saturday it is a 100 weeks ago today. We will celebrate her life today with burning a candle. There is not one day in my life I'm not thinking about her and when I see her son becoming bigger and bigger there is always a twinge of pain of her missing out of it. We will also celebrate her life and that of other people who are battling this disease and the ones who has lost their life. Today is also the day today that my brother in law and friend Hans lost his battle with lung cancer in 2001. He was only 52 and left his wife and 3 young children behind. We will remember him as well and burn a candle for him too.

Labels: , , ,


Lung Cancer AwarenessPosted by Henry (Calem's Opa) :: 2:56 PM :: 0 people are more aware
---------------------------------------

Tuesday, July 31, 2007

Don't Pass Gas

I will not pass gas in my house
I will not pass gas near my spouse
I will not pass gas in your face
Because the gas I pass is worse than mace
A silent by deadly cloud of toxic waste.

The End

What does this have to do with lung cancer awareness? Click the link and find out:

http://www.dontpassgas.org/

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Vote for Laurianne's Hope for Best Health Blog for the Blogger's Choice Awards 2006.

Labels: , ,


Lung Cancer AwarenessPosted by Lynda :: 8:21 PM :: 1 people are more aware
---------------------------------------

Thursday, May 31, 2007

Female Lung Cancer Deaths Up Five-Fold

Female lung cancer deaths up five-fold
DutchNews.nl
Wednesday 30 May 2007


The number of women dying of lung cancer has gone up five-fold since 1970 and they are likely to die at a younger age than men, the national statistics office CBS said on Wednesday. Last year, some 9,400 people died of lung cancer in the Netherlands, accounting for some 7% of total deaths.

Because women started smoking heavily at a later date than men, the women’s death rate is still rising, the CBS said. Among the men who die aged 60 to 70 and women who die aged 50 to 60, one in seven will be killed by lung cancer, the CBS said.

Nevertheless, men are still twice as likely to die of lung cancer than women, even though male death rates are falling.

Some 30% of the Dutch aged 12 and over smoke and a similar percentage will have stopped smoking, usually before they reach their early 40s, statistics show.

But fears that stopping smoking could lead to weight gain may be true, the statistics indicate. Ex-smokers are 1.4 times more likely to be overweight than smokers, with female ex-smokers weighing four kilos more than smokers and women who never smoked, the CBS said.

The Netherlands is still struggling to develop a policy for smoking in bars and restaurants, with health minister Ab Klink saying he wants a total ban next year. And although smoking is banned in public buildings and all workers have the right to a smoke-free environment, bar and café workers are exempt from the rules.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Vote for Laurianne's Hope for Best Health Blog for the Blogger's Choice Awards 2006.

Labels: , ,


Lung Cancer AwarenessPosted by Lynda :: 7:41 PM :: 1 people are more aware
---------------------------------------

Friday, May 11, 2007

The Glamour of Smoking

I saw a report on TMZ.com that said smoking is going to be factored into a movie rating. It it is glamorized, then a movie could earn an "R" rating.

Since TMZ.com is a gossip rag, of course, I had to search out some articles from some other sources.

I actually was a little concerned a few weeks ago, when TMZ had on their sidebar, "Check out the smokin' celebs in our photo album, Whatcha Smokin'" or something like that. I clicked on it out of curiosity. Here is a sampling:

click to enlarge

click to enlarge

click to enlarge

click to enlarge

I don't think it looks all that glamorous. But that's just my opinion. Now sometimes seems rather glamorous in movies, so keep reading to find out about how smoking is going to affect movie ratings.

MPAA adds smoking as film-rating factor
DAVID GERMAIN
Associated Press
As reported by:
Akron Beacon Journal

LOS ANGELES - Smoking will be a bigger factor in determining film ratings, the Motion Picture Association of America said Thursday, but critics said the move does not go far enough to discourage teens from taking up the habit.

MPAA Chairman Dan Glickman said his group's ratings board, which previously had considered underage smoking in assigning film ratings, now will take into account smoking by adults, as well.

That adds smoking to a list of such factors as sex, violence and language in determining the MPAA's G, PG, PG-13, R and NC-17 ratings.

Film raters will consider the pervasiveness of tobacco use, whether it glamorizes smoking and the context in which smoking appears, as in movies set in the past when smoking was more common.

Some critics of Hollywood's depictions of tobacco in films have urged that movies that show smoking be assigned an R rating, which would restrict those younger than 17 from seeing them.

"I'm glad it's finally an issue they're taking up, but what they're proposing does not go far enough and is not going to make a difference," said Kori Titus, spokeswoman for Breathe California, which opposes film images of tobacco use that might encourage young people to start smoking.

Glickman said a mandatory R rating for smoking would not "further the specific goal of providing information to parents on this issue."

Smoking in movies with a G, PG or PG-13 rating has been on the decline, and the "percentage of films that included even a fleeting glimpse of smoking" declined from 60 percent to 52 percent between July 2004 and July 2006," Glickman said.

Of those films, three-fourths received an R rating for other reasons, he said.

"That means there's not a great amount of films in the unrestricted category as it stands," said Joan Graves, who heads the ratings board. "We're not saying we're ignoring the issue. We're trying the best way possible according to what we've learned from parents to give them information about what's in a film."

Titus said smoking in films had declined in recent years but remains more prevalent than MPAA figures indicate.

Descriptions on sex, violence and language that accompany movie ratings now will include such phrases as "glamorized smoking" or "pervasive smoking," Glickman said.

If rated today, a film such as 2005's "Good Night, and Good Luck," about chain-smoking newsman Edward R. Murrow, would have carried a "pervasive smoking" tag but probably would have retained its PG rating because of its historical context in the 1950s, Graves said.

Titus said film raters should be as tough on smoking as they are on bad language to minimize the effects of on-screen smoking on children, including her own 5-year-old daughter.

"I don't want her using that language, but last time I checked, she's probably not going to die from that," Titus said. "If she starts smoking from these images she sees in movies, chances are she's probably going to die early from that."

While Titus' group wants tougher ratings restrictions, the MPAA released statements of support for its plan from John Seffrin, chief executive officer of the American Cancer Society, U.S. Sen. Joe Biden and filmmaker Rob Reiner, among others.

"By placing smoking on a par with considerations of violence and sex, the rating board has acknowledged the public-health dangers to children associated with glamorized images of a toxic and lethal addiction to tobacco," Barry Bloom, dean of the Harvard School of Public Health, said in a statement.
[end article]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Vote for Laurianne's Hope for Best Health Blog for the Blogger's Choice Awards 2006.

Labels: , , ,


Lung Cancer AwarenessPosted by Lynda (Laurianne's Sister) :: 2:04 PM :: 0 people are more aware
---------------------------------------

Tuesday, May 08, 2007

To Smoke, Or Not To Smoke

I really enjoy the few weeks of nice weather we have here in Indiana, before it gets too humid to really enjoy being outside. When my husband, Dan, and I met for lunch, it would be really nice to sit outside.

There is one thing that stops us though. The nice weather always brings out smokers. If there is a breeze, it always seems to blow in our direction. In a lot of ways, I am more sensitive to it than Dan is, and even he will say, "It's such nice weather. Too bad sitting outside would be ruined by smokers."

I remember the great debates about smoking in California, before their establishments became smoke-free. In Indiana, it seems to be different. I think Indiana has a great smoking population than California does. We also have some of the best cancer research centers. Go figure. The way many people in Indiana feel is that if they are smokers, they have the right to smoke. They should be able to do this whenever and where ever they want. I remember reading an article in the IndyStar about how family restaurants were going to be changed to non-smoking. A woman commented that it would be nice to go some place with her family where she didn't have to worry about breathing in the smokey air. A person commented back to her that they were a smoker, and if this woman didn't want to breathe smokey air, she should just stay home.

Even before this ordinance, I was a little conflicted. Dan and I went to two restaurants where we asked for non-smoking, and the hostess sat us on the border of the smoking section. My sister had just passed away at the time, so as soon as we started smelling the foul stench of cigarettes, I flagged down the hostess and told her that we needed to be moved or we wouldn't be patronizing their establishment. I would tell her how my sister died of cancer at 25 years old, and even though it wasn't because she was a smoker, it doesn't mean it couldn't have factored in. The truth is, we probably will never know what caused Laurianne to develop lung cancer.

Once again, these are just my opinions. I can tell people to stop smoking, and list all the harm that smoking does to the smoker. Ultimately, it is each individuals choice. I know this. But, I think it is only fair, though, that smokers and non-smokers show each other consideration. Maybe then, I could enjoy the nice weather.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Vote for Laurianne's Hope for Best Health Blog for the Blogger's Choice Awards 2006.

Labels: , , , , ,


Lung Cancer AwarenessPosted by Lynda :: 7:18 AM :: 1 people are more aware
---------------------------------------

Friday, April 13, 2007

Pall Malls

Yesterday, I read the Kurt Vonnegut died. I also read he was a long time fan of Pall Malls cigarettes. It got me to thinking.

The Pasadena Weekly said: Vonnegut smoked non-filter cigarettes most of his
adult life. Pall Malls to be exact, which back in Vonnegut's beginnings in the
mid-1950s had a catchy TV commercial pitch that invited consumers to try a smoke
that was “smooth and rich, and you can light either end.”

The Republican quoted a local lawyer as saying: "He always smoked Pall Malls and
drank JB with soda on the rocks," Scheinman said.

The Times Union said: Mr. Vonnegut died Wednesday at 84, some age for someone
who so long ago called himself an old (mildly scatological word here) with his Pall Malls.
From what I have read of Mr. Vonnegut, he seemed to have known the risks of lung cancer. It is even said that he felt his unfiltered Pall Mall cigarettes were "a classy way to commit sucide". And what does he die from? Hitting his head.

The point I am trying to make is not that you shouldn't smoke. Ultimately, that is your decision. The point that I am trying to make is that you never know what is going to do you in. Still, people want to blame lung cancer on smoking. I think more awareness is getting out there, but I have learned of so many people who have died from lung cancer, and never smoked. We need to think of these people too.

I have said it before, and I will say it again. Until we found out my sister had lung cancer, I would have been one of the people who said, "Well, you shouldn't smoke if you don't want lung cancer." I probably would not have attributed smoking to increasing breast cancer, colon cancer, prostrate cancer, any other type of cancer, but smoking increases your risk of getting those types of cancer as well.

So, how is it that a man can smoke for 70 years, and die from brain injuries, and someone in their 40's, 30's or 20's can be a non-smoker and die from lung cancer? Because other factors besides smoking can contribute to lung cancer. Other factors besides smoking can contribute to any kind of cancer.

That is why we created this blog.

Labels: , , , ,


Lung Cancer AwarenessPosted by Lynda :: 10:48 AM :: 1 people are more aware
---------------------------------------

Friday, March 30, 2007

Some Chemicals found in Secondhand Smoke

Because I signed up for Smokefree Indiana information, I recieved a guide to help quit tobacco for good. For the record, I do not smoke.

Then again, Indiana has laws that allow smoking in some places. Recently, Dan and I went to Memphis, and even though I don't remember them asking us smoking or non-smoking, the people next to us were given an ash tray and lit up. I was glad we were done with our meal.

Stopping in Effingham, IL for dinner, we were asked smoking or non-smoking by the hostess. My well trained husband said, "As far away from smoking as possible!" Even worse is when you have to walk through the smoking section to get to the non-smoking section. Dan and I had that situation happen to us once at a restaurant.

Getting back to Indiana, a recent smoking law was passed that family restaurants were not allowed to have smoking sections anymore. If there was a bar, like in Applebee's, smoking is allowed during non-family hours, which is after 10 p.m. Dan and I use to go to lunch at this place near my work. We had only gone a few times, but they had pretty good burgers and potatos done in a different way. When the new smoking law came out, they actually built a bar and did not allow anyone under the age of 21 to enter the establishment.

Dan and I went there one time afterwards, right before they were about to close. Since they were ten minutes from closing, they turned us away. The place never smelled smoky and I never noticed anyone smoking, but I told Dan that I wasn't going to patronize them anymore. Why take the risk? Do you know what is in second hand smoke. The folks at WhiteLies.TV have a list:

Some Chemicals found in Secondhand Smoke.

Polonium-210 Power in space satellites
Benzo[a]pyrene Motor vehicle exhaust
Hydrazine Rocket fuel
1,3 butadiene Found in gasoline
Benzene Found in crude oil
N-nitrosopyrrolidine Found in pesticides
Nickel Used in batteries
Aniline Used in lacquers and wood stains
2-Naphthylamine Used in dyes
4-Aminobiphenyl Rubber antioxidant
Nicotine Insecticide/addictive drug
Cresol Industrial adhesives
Pyrene A main constituent of coal tar
DDT A banned pesticide
Carbon Monoxide Car exhaust fumes
Ammonia Toilet bowl cleaner
Hydrogen Cyanide A fumigation poison
Acetone Fingernail polish remover
Methanol Rocket fuel
Formaldehyde Embalming fluid
Butane Cigarette lighter fluid
Naphalene Moth balls
Nitrobenzene Gasoline additive
Arsenic Rat poison
Cadmium Found in batteries
Toluene Industrial solvent
Isoprene Tire rubber

I prefer fresh air, thanks.

P.S. Anyone need a pocket guide to help them quit?

Labels: , , ,


Lung Cancer AwarenessPosted by Lynda (Laurianne's Sister) :: 7:58 PM :: 0 people are more aware
---------------------------------------