Intro : Cancer Concern Home
: About Us : News
: Links : Cancer Information : Contact
Us
Help us by buying books on cancer. Click
here.
This site is a member of WebRing.
Here .
Web site maintained, developed and sponsored by
Paul Egan in association
with Brian Watson &
Co .
Explanations for cancer illnesses
With the cancer diagnosis goes the question about the WHY?
The explanation models are variously, versatile and completely reliably participate one that on these humans fits. To be made responsible for the generation of cancer:
the life change. Too much stress, too little stress, unemployment, a too close social net, a missing social net, too much alcohol, too much tobacco, too little recovery, good social adjustment, bad social adjustment.
the nourishing habits.
personal relations and loss experiences. No pair relationship, a too close (dependent) pair relationship, the death of the life companion, frequently changing partner, unfortunate durable pair relations.
earlychildlike disturbances. That is always good, everyone has parents, who made something wrong.
charakterliche peculiarities. Depending upon investigation cancer patient is in itself turned humans with slope to depressions or in the opposite extroverted, which make excessive demands of themselves continuously and are constant there for others.
the environment. Exhaust gases, electromagnetic wave impacts, AKW's.
vocational risks. Handling krebsfoerdernden substances.
genetic influences. E.g. the transmission of the assessment is discussed to cancer of the breast.
Is called exaggerated:
if you nourish yourself healthy, smoke, do not drink, a good job with healthy stress have, in a stable, to symbiotischen partnership do not live, by cancer illnesses in the family are not preloaded, in the country beyond all harmful environmental influences live, a balanced nature are, which also always feeds and by your parents was perfectly drawn a tidy portion up of healthy egoism, then probably kriegst you no cancer.
If you nevertheless cancer kriegst, at least one of the possible causes will apply to you. If necessary you are a cancer personality - it is so contradictory defined whom that you will already recognize yourself.
I would not like to talk a risky lebensfuehrung the word - naturally it is healthier not to smoke to enjoy and healthy nourish themselves alcohol in masses. Also a personal environment, in which one feels in at home, occupation, family, dwelling or house, is surely health favorable.
As explanation for it, why the cancer gets, the other one, all are not sufficient these beginnings however.
What says the science?
It arrives drauf whom one reads or asks. Little also the art belongs to read between the lines.
First of all there are plentifully different kinds of cancer. The disease process is variation-rich even with same kinds of cancer and diagnosestaenden. There is not an answer to all kinds of cancer, neither for the question of the emergence nor for the question of the effective treatment. Accordingly the science pursues different beginnings.
I will retrieve the representation of these beginnings, only times as much: the more intensively and more seriously scientists with the question of the cancer causing are occupied, become the clearer that they do not know anything details. Genetic factors, environmental influences, risk behavior are conceivable such as a smoking + drinking, conceivablly are also psychological influences. The proof that certain factors release cancer individually or together, is still pending. At this proof all are interested: if the cancer-releasing factors are assignable, then a risk estimate became due to meeting the cancer-releasing factors from the early recognition investigation. One would know, who gets most likely cancer. However: that is not like that.
As long as there is no better cause knowledge, gladly + easily one generalizes. Thus I designate that at least, if recognized institutions write a kind of cancer to the etiology (= developing history):
"unsettled. Possibly nicotine Abusus plays a role."
For individual kinds of cancer factors of risk can be determined, by ' counting ' whether e.g. smokers are above average frequently concerned. With cancer of the lungs is that clearly to be affirmed. As long as there are no better cause clarifying, it makes for sense to turn factors of risk off if possible.
Summarized:
the knowledge about how is in the meantime quite extensively. As a tumor develops, as it grows, as it nourishes itself, some the strategies to out-cheat the immune system is to a large extent explainable.
the knowledge over the why gladly maintained, existed however either only for subranges or be based on acceptance, which are considered as probable until them disproved or proven are.
Connections between factors of risk and cancer illnesses are proven. The portion of the smokers of many years among the cancer of the lungs patients is disproportionately high. As an exclusive cause smoking cannot apply however: there is a multiple at smokers of many years, who do not get sick with cancer of the lungs. (is not called! please further-smoke!)
What have cancer patient of these explanations?
Good question. Next question.
In the most favorable case they can agree one of the explanation models and derive from it the motivation to do something for itself. Stress factors switch off, consciously + healthier nourish themselves, on the substantial things in the life concentrate to take itself more importantly whatever.
In the most unfavorable case they come to the conclusion that they do not only have to do with an fear-occupied illness, but also still even debt are. ' I would have smoked... ', not not drunk, regularly not eaten, the first symptoms interpreted, more frequently with the fist on the table gehauen correctly, differently lived etc.. That does not help not only, that can also accurately laehmen. And before the background that is still unclear, where cancer has now really its causes.
What have do we a recovering of these explanations?
Weniges is clearly useful. One can try occupational or risks due to environmental factors to go out of the way.
The remainder: the nutrition, the smoke and drinking habits, the stress factors, the personal life circumstances, the personal surrounding field, the own character, the number of drastic losses or personal disasters, earlychildlike disturbances, the cancer personality... that are simply calming pills.
I smoke, does not drink not, no human disappointments experienced, goes to stress out of the way, nourishes me healthy and sufficiently, had a lucky childhood and no close reference person lost... ME PASSING CANNOT. In particular the psychological explanation models, in addition, the avoidance of risk behavior such as a smoking, drinking, stress, have a very exculpatory and reassuring effect on non--cancer patient. One waehnt oneself on the safe side, because one can refer exactly what one has with the cancer patient as cancer-causing ' recognized ', not to itself.
Examples from our circle:
An acquaintance, to who I told walter cancer of the lungs diagnosis at the telephone, distance clock "as good that I do not smoke."
A friend of walter explained to me that walter also cancer wars had, with the many human disappointments, which he would have experienced. That has begun more than 20 years ago with XY. I noticed in 11 years never that walter drags mountains of human disappointments with itself - in the opposite, it had very many, very durable friendships and acquaintances, which got over also arguments and crises. It has human weaknesses always many more left seen as I.
For each recovering is so disturbing: there are no warranties for the fact that one remains exempted from the cancer. There are at the most probabilities. Who suspended continuously cancer-releasing substances, a clearly higher risk has to get sick with cancer. Nonsmokers have a smaller risk to get sick with cancer of the lungs but sufficient kinds of cancer remain, with which there is no correlation between smoking + illness. Life-merry glad nature are from cancer not better protected than satisfy in itself turned. And on the other hand that we become continuously older and alone thereby our cancer risk rises, it cannot be done to nothing at all.
Critical notes to the explanation models...
A healthy portion distrust is entitled to all generally applicable explanations. Cancer is very improbable a complex illness, with various manifestations - that there can be only one cause and also still for as much as possible to all cancer diseases.
Also to explanation models, which are tituliert as ' scientifically proven ', distrust is entitled. The example of the cancer personality shows drastically, how persistent a theory can hold itself, is also still scientifically supported and be nevertheless unfounded can.
Most of us are neither scientists, nor physician, still psychologist, but to think we know nevertheless. Who argues with an explanation sample and knows not quite, what he is to hold of it, should not only search, which probably applies to him - he should also look for counterarguments.
Example: Stress is harmful. Clearly. Is clear. In addition, stress can make fun. If it dissolves in success, it does not harm, then it motivates rather. Then still stress is objective is it a challenge, which one accepts there, subjectively gladly.
From the critical examination of the explanations, which are offered to one, nobody should to be held be able. The only real capacity for your life are you.
