Why not advocate cancer screening for healthy people?

Because healthy people doing cancer screening will hurt themselves. \x0d\ "Now many people talk about cancer discoloration, hoping for' early detection and early treatment'. Everyone goes to check, and the health check-up must bring the cancer finger check. Is this really useful? \ x0d \ x0d \ This is the speech delivered by Academician Han Qide at the 2065438+06' Medical and Humanities Summit Forum'. "I don't advocate healthy people to do cancer screening, because the mortality rate has not decreased after early cancer screening. Such screening is really meaningless." \x0d\ Some cancers were screened out, but the mortality rate did not decrease \x0d\ Here, Academician Han used authoritative surveys in many countries as an example: \x0d\ 1. Prostate cancer cases-the number of people who get cancer for half a day has actually increased! \x0d\ "There is a study in the United States. There are 76,000 patients, men aged 55-74, half of whom have prostate cancer check-ups every year, and the other half do not. After a period of time, the result was that the screening group found that prostate cancer was per 108 108, and only 97 out of every 10,000 people did not do the inspection group, which means that more patients were found after prostate screening. But after 13, there is no difference between those who died of prostate cancer and those who did not. ”\x0d\2。 Breast cancer cases-check or not has no effect on survival time! \x0d\ Give another very sensational example. 20 16 Canadian experts published a research result. They took nearly 90,000 women over 40 as samples, half of whom had mammograms every year, while the other half did not. The results showed that 666 cancer patients were found in this group in the first five years, and 524 cancer patients were found in the other group, an increase of 27%. In other words, women over 40 have a physical examination every year, which has no effect on their death from breast cancer. \x0d\3。 Lung cancer cases-there is almost no difference in mortality between screening and non-screening! \ x0d \ x0d \ There is a large sample study of 450,000 people in the United States, and the comparison of various screening methods and non-screening. The results showed that there was almost no difference in the probability of death from lung cancer between the two groups who took X-ray chest films every year and the two groups who did not have screening. In the group with high-frequency chest X-rays taken twice a year, the mortality rate of lung cancer increased. \x0d\ According to so many data, even if cancer screening is done, the survival time of people diagnosed with cancer and those who have not been screened for cancer and died of this cancer decades later are roughly the same, and the mortality rate is also the same. In other words, I understand that you have been busy for a long time and have undergone various surgical treatments, but you still failed to prolong your life. \ x0d \ x0d \ \ x0d \ "Early detection, early diagnosis and early treatment \" has really made great contributions? \x0d\ In the past two or three decades, a large number of new technologies have emerged. Genetic testing, CT and color Doppler ultrasound can "find and treat" some diseases in the early stage, but the actual effect of "double early" and the new problems it has induced are causing academic reflection. \ x0d \ x0d \ Academician Han Qide said that in recent years, the incidence of cancer in China has increased significantly. Compared with 1990 in 20 13 years, the number of new cancer cases increased by 8 1%, among which lung cancer increased from 262,000 to 594,000, an increase of more than 1 times, and breast cancer from 9.8. \ x0d \ x0d \ In the past 20 years, cancer has increased so much. The possible reason is that the life expectancy is prolonged, which leads to the corresponding increase in the probability of cancer, lifestyle change and environmental deterioration. \x0d\ Han Qide put forward another possibility: in most cases, we just found more "early cancer" and "lazy cancer" which are asymptomatic, undetectable under the original conditions, slow in progress or will not grow? \x0d\ x0d \ Some cancers really "disappear" by themselves. Academician Han Qide believes that according to a large amount of data analysis, cancer can be roughly divided into three types: \ x0d \ The first type is rapid: "You can't find it in physical examination, and once you find it, you can't save it in a very short time, such as most esophageal cancer and pancreatic cancer." \x0d\ The second type is progressive: it is from gradual expansion to death. Early examination, there is hope of cure after operation. For example, colon cancer and cervical cancer, this screening effect is better. \x0d\ The third type is self-healing: what deserves our attention most is that a considerable number of cancers develop slowly, or remain unchanged, or disappear, just as those who have had tuberculosis and hepatitis have not found it themselves. We may have to decide whether to do screening according to different situations. \x0d\\x0d\\x0d\ checked for a long time, maybe we hurt ourselves!