The National Cancer Institute (NCI) estimates that in the year 2000 alone, over 563,000 Americans died of cancer. That's ten times as many people as our nation lost in a decade of fighting in Vietnam. To put it in perspective, over 1,540 people die from cancer every day, more than one a minute. Still, the government continually claims we're making progress; that a cure is just around the corner. Although the rhetoric may be hopeful, the government's official figures tell a different story. Rather than supporting assertions that a cure is imminent, they show just how hollow that claim really is.

Since 1973, the National Cancer Institute has conducted its Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program (SEER). The SEER program is described by NCI as: "… the most authoritative source of information on cancer incidence and survival in the United States." Fair enough. But what does SEER show?

According to the SEER data, between 1990 and 1997, cancer deaths from the fifteen most common forms declined eight-tenths of a percent. This might seem like tangible, albeit miniscule evidence of progress, but statistics can be deceiving. The SEER data also show that the incidence of cancer during that time also declined by an identical eight-tenths of a percent, this due largely to the drop in smoking related cancers. But the fall-off in smoking-related cancer has nothing to do with improved treatments. Rather, it is simply a reflection of the fact that fewer people smoke. But even this tells only part of the story.

When you examine the change in the mortality rates for each of the fifteen types of cancer included in the SEER statistics, the death rate for five of them -- one-third of the total -- actually increased.

What is perhaps most startling, however, is the change in cancer incidence and mortality among older Americans. Most people know that our population is aging. Indeed, by the year 2050 there will be more Americans over the age of 65 than under 18. But what they don't know is that the "age-adjusted" rate for cancer deaths among older Americans has skyrocketed. In 1950, the "age-adjusted" rate for cancer was 158 per 100,000. According to the NCI, it is now 166.9 per 100,000. That's an increase of 5.6%. And it can only get worse. Based on current cancer rates, the probability of contracting cancer is now 46.6 % for men, and 38.0% for women.

If there is a "war on cancer" we're losing, and losing badly. But why hasn't there been any progress? Why, after spending tens of billions of dollars on research is cancer still a death sentence for more than half a million Americans every year? Why is the death rate for cancer higher today than it was in 1950? Is it possible that we are concentrating all the cancer research in the wrong area? Seeking a chemical cure seems to be getting nowhere and certainly is of no benefit to anyone who has cancer or will get cancer in the near future. Is it possible that research should be focusing on nutrition not only to prevent cancer but to cure it?

CLOSE THIS WINDOW