Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


'Change your lifestyles or cancer will soar' - Chief medical officer

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 03 December 2008
CANCER rates in Scotland could soar to unprecedented rates within the next decade if people do not start leading healthier lives.
The figures were revealed in the annual report by the country's chief medical officer, Dr Harry Burns.

If trends remain unchanged, the number of cases of bowel cancer will rise by almost 50 per cent, from 3,412 a year in 2005 to an average of 5,1
16 a year during 2016-20.

Over the same period cases of prostate cancer are projected to rise from 2,420 to 3,207 – an increase of 33 per cent.

And cases of breast cancer in women are projected to rise by 22 per cent, going from 3,998 a year in 2005 to 4,886 during 2016-20.

But while deaths from bowel and breast cancer are expected to stay relatively stable, the number of people dying from prostate cancer is expected to increase from 793 in 2007 to 1,249 a year from 2015-19 – up 58 per cent.

Dr Burns warned that the figures would be the likely outcome if Scots did not take simple steps to lead healthier lifestyles, adding that to do so could save 5,000 lives.

He stressed the impact that alcohol and obesity were having on the nation's health, highlighting the fact that in some deprived areas the number of premature deaths from alcoholic liver disease is now higher than deaths from heart attacks.

Dr Burns said: "Coronary heart disease, stroke and cancer are the biggest causes of death in Scotland.

"Deaths from alcohol-related liver disease in Scotland are rising faster than almost anywhere else in the world.

"Tragically, thousands of Scots are dying from these conditions years earlier than they should."

Health experts recommend people should not smoke, should eat a healthy diet, be physically active most days, keep within the recommended limits for drinking alcohol and should never inject drugs.

Dr Burns also stressed that not all cases of cancer were "inevitable".

He said: "We are making progress in reducing some cancer deaths but, with the average age of the Scottish population increasing, the number of new cancers in Scotland is increasing year-on-year."

In his report, Dr Burns said the "most worrying trend" was the significant increase in deaths linked to alcohol.

And he warned: "Scotland must change its attitudes to this drug."

Chronic liver disease now accounts for one in 50 of all deaths in Scotland, with about 1,000 people a year dying from it.

The report said the "overwhelming majority" of these deaths were due to alcohol.

Dr Burns said: "There is enough alcohol sold each year to put every man, woman and child over the age of 16 above the recommended intake."

And the report said: "An epidemic of alcohol misuse is driving the current rise in chronic liver disease mortality. This needs to be urgently addressed."

The report also said the trends on obesity were "very worrying", stating that, while the past ten years had seen a steady fall in deaths from coronary heart disease, there was a "small increase" in mortality rates in young men between 2005 and 2006.

It stated: "Recent evidence suggests that the risk of developing heart disease is increasing in younger men aged 35-55."

Commenting on the report, the Labour health spokesman, Dr Richard Simpson, said: "We need the Scottish Government to redouble their efforts to prevent thousands of Scots dying years earlier than they should.

"I am particularly concerned that deaths from alcohol-related liver disease are rising faster in Scotland than almost anywhere else in the world.

"It is vital that the Scottish Government increase its efforts to tackle alcohol abuse."

Replying, Nicola Sturgeon, the health secretary, said: "I am passionate about giving the people of Scotland the best possible NHS, and that is why this Scottish Government has invested record sums in our NHS, despite the funding squeeze from Westminster."

Ross Finnie, the Liberal Democrats' health spokesman, said there needed to be a more preventive approach to healthcare.

Mr Finnie said: "Today's report from Scotland's chief medical officer only underlines the need to shift the emphasis on to prevention, rather than treating sickness, starting with the promotion of healthier lifestyles."





Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 02 December 2008 10:12 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
 
1

Growwild,

03/12/2008 04:11:49
A patient cured is a customer lost!

A prevention could be looking into why and how toxic metals are getting into human bodys.

Should mercury and aluminum realy be in some "vaccines", I thought these were toxic. And the way food is grown using nasty chemicals is not that good either..
2

fife runner,

03/12/2008 05:59:12
its a serious topic. mercury is not used anymore in vaccines. we all have a part to play if the NHS is to remain viable and not snowed under by those who are selfish and wnat to live their own way and expect the nanny state then to look after them. If they do not like being told how to live then they should not expect any treatment if they do not like being nannied
3

Cappo Del Monte,

03/12/2008 06:55:09
Hmm,

"Dr Burns said: "Coronary heart disease, stroke and cancer are the biggest causes of death in Scotland."

And not a few articles further down in the hootsman you get an articles stating that GP's arent doing the checks they should for heart care.

Now I know our health service is stretched to the limit
but maybe if the proper checks were carried out initially it may help.

Health experts state you should exercise most days, hmm most people atually have to work long hours to keep food on the table and their families together, unlike most health experst who make up these reports, work a 35 hour and get pain a fortune.

And according to health experts just about anything can and will kill you, they have something new every day.

Maybe dr burns and his so called experts should get their own houses in order before preaching to the public

4

drunken proffet,

Tassy 03/12/2008 07:48:49
Dr Burns, three score years and ten is not a bad span of years to enjoy your life. Now it may be that with cosmetic surgery and transplants I would be a lot prettier and live longer but it is obscene for the older guys. There becomes a time when your kids maybe look forward to you dying with dignity and lack of pain. I believe in that, it is just that I feel I should spend my money before I go.
5

Highland Mist,

03/12/2008 08:50:56
The major cause of cancer is obesity brought about by the appaling diet that we eat in the UK. The obesity pandemic is responsible for more deaths and illness than anything else and yet we are not tackling it. The government pays mere lip service to it by professing to promote healthy eating but it is NOT tackling the real problem of diet and those in the community who are eating themselves to death. Most obese people are, strangely enough, malnourished because they eat empty calories and stress their bodies to the max in the process. Result? Degenerative and terminal illness and massive expense to the NHS. Prevention may be better than cure, but right now there are a hellish amount of overweight and obese people out there who are not getting help and who are either already ill because of their weight or are rapidly heading in that direction. There are methods to resolve their food addiction - and obesity is more often than not caused by just that, but the NHS does not recognise it and does nothing to help solve it. An anorexic or bulimic will be hospitalised, but the obese are handed diet sheets and THAT does not solve the problem as most obese people KNOW that they overeat - they just can't do anything to resolve it because the problem is more psychological and caused by food addiction. IF drug addicts get help the obese should also be entitled to help as a basic human right. The lives saved would be immeasurable and the cancer, heart disease and diabetes statistics would plummet.
6

OldWife,

03/12/2008 09:09:53
Partly well said #5, crappy carb based diets account for over 90% of preventable and curable modern disease. But the modern fad of 'healthy' diet also plays it part. Also our phobia of sunlight and cholesterol is contributing to cancers, vitamin D prevents cancer yet you deprive yourselves of this vital vitamin by slapping on sunscreens and covering every square inch of skin. The fallacy of 'healthy eating' is literally killing you. Low fat, high carb, no cholesterol = disease. The more the 'experts' bleat on about low fat more veg blah blah blah, the fatter the population get. Try eating exactly the opposite and see your health improve.
7

Warden An' All, Reborn,

03/12/2008 09:30:55
Do the people of scotland really care about cancer until they get it. The answer would seem to be no for most. We laugh at our food but most do nothing about it, and even worse make excuses why they eat it. The levels of drinking and smoking are sky high, and the excuses by the same people who had just been saying the reason they eat the food they eat was down to money, are laughable.
8

ChrisC,

South West 03/12/2008 09:32:02
Should we be listening to some of these doctors when they lurch from one object of concern to the next?
We heard so much from them about the smoking ban and how it would solve so many problems with no ill-effects yet we see peoples lives devastated through the loss of their businesses and social venues and now we discover that heart attack admissions in Scotland (despite the exagerated crowing of last year) have risen to a level above those of the year before the ban.
Why not get to the root of the problem and find out why some people drink to excess. New laws and preachings are sure to exacerbate problems.
9

DeniseX,

03/12/2008 09:43:48
I thought that we were a lot healthier now, since the massive drop in the number of smokers and yet there was a big rise, this year, in the number of Acute Coronary Syndrome admissions.
10

Rob Simpson,

03/12/2008 09:49:01
#2 Are you seriously suggesting that people should be denied treatment from a service that they're forced to pay for their entire lives unless they lead a "state approved" lifestyle.

People seem to have very short memories when it comes to health. Only last year it was revealed the government recommended limits for alcohol intake were completely arbitrary and utterly without any scientific basis.

The bottom line is this, if you follow Dr Burns' advice you *might* live longer, but it'll certainly feel longer.
11

Highland Mist,

03/12/2008 10:03:41
#6, agreed.
12

ddmc,

03/12/2008 10:08:57
aspartame is a good example of additives in food where no real long term research has been done, E numbers galore in most packaged & 'ready meals'.

Look at the ingredient list's more chemical's than food in a lot of them. Look at the sweets we feed our kids, even more E numbers.
13

salmondella,

UK 03/12/2008 11:08:13
Living a healthy life should be a normaland natural trait for every human being -its not difficult - moderation in food and alchohol and even smoking if you must. A wee bit daily exercise like walking or golf or 30 mins in the gym or exercise bike is all you need. Geez its not rocket science and we should not be so lazy or greedy. You also feel better when you are healthy so go for it!
14

zeno,

www.thinkhumanism.com 03/12/2008 11:24:29
Growwild #1: These anti-vaccine myths about toxic 'heavy metals' are usually peddled by those who have little understanding of science.
15

Decent,

03/12/2008 11:30:18
Could, if, but, projected, expected. In other words these people know f- all about f-all and are paid millions to research.

Ay and if you leave the house at 8.45am tomorrow and walk across the road you might be killed by a car. Or you might not. can I have a million pounds please?
16

Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 03/12/2008 11:34:10
Why are we (over) paying these people to tell us that, if we are alive now, we may die later on, and the cause of death may be a disease?

Yes. I know that you can prolong your life by taking sensible precautions but if you tried to follow all the conflicting advice to the letter, you would probably die of insanity before any of the physical problems got to you.
17

Decent,

03/12/2008 11:36:32
Well said Fuel Head. That rhymes haha. You're not Mario are you?
18

Captain Flint,

Edinburgh 03/12/2008 12:02:01
Petrol Head - that's just not true, is it? Sure, if you're a slavish follower of _all_ the faddish diets - the ones not based on any sound science - you'll end up not eating anything, but that's not what this report is about.

What this is saying is that if you follow a few very simple steps you can lead a much longer, healthier, more productive - and probably happier - life. And you know what? You'll probably get to spend much more time with your kids and grandkids.

But all you can do is sneer. Why am I not surprised?
19

,

03/12/2008 12:23:38
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
20

Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 03/12/2008 12:39:38
#19:

"Seriously - you don't need to be a genious to know that the old adage "nothing to excess" coupled with a "good variety" is probably the best and most easily followed advice."

Those are my sentiments exactly. At the end of the day, it's down to common sense and nothing more. You can't quantify common sense. You never have been able to and you never will be able to. Unfortunately, there is an increasing tendency to try to do so and frankly, I get sick to death of hearing about it.

If we are honest, we all have our vices but some people carry this to extremes. I am of course talking about the people who weigh 30 stone, yet continue to gorge themselves on pies, chips and diet coke whilst doing no exercise. I'm talking about the people who insist on smoking 60 fags a day when they cough their lungs up at regular intervals and have difficulty breathing. I'm talking about the bloke who doesn't eat but can be found in the pub drinking beer every single day---who is unemployed and wonders why he can't get a job.

I could go on and on. The examples I've made are not difficult to find if you look around. It's hardly as if, in this day and age, those concerned wouldn't be aware of the ill effects of their vices. However, they chose to do nothing about it and frankly, because of this, I have no sympathy for them.

The vast majority of us are however reasonably responsible and I am getting fed up with hearing what I already know being re-iterated time and time again. That's why the sarcasm.
21

Poetess50,

03/12/2008 13:22:30
In the end, EVERYONE DIES OF SOMETHING, anyway!!!!!
22

Yowser2,

Edinburgh 03/12/2008 13:36:16
If I eat fatty food, smoke ciggies and do no exercise then I'm probably gonna die a horrible early death.
22.
Stupid comment.
23

Sumlogic,

03/12/2008 13:44:56
A revenge effect of free health care?

Why should folk give two hoots about themselves or have any self-respect when they have the notion that the NHS will just patch them up again FOC.

If healthcare was not so free and easy to access people might be forced to take better care of themselves?

Many folk today are so thick they could not boil an egg never mind work out what’s healthy, and to be frank, most don’t care, judging by the huge outcry over the possibility of tightening alcohol laws.

Just look at folk smoking and drinking themselves into an early grave! But maybe they know something we don’t…Pensions, the way its going you wont get one, so maybe its better to just live fast and die younger!

Fine by me, just don’t ‘moan’ when you do, especially if you are overweight, smoke and drink tons of booze…when Cancer or a heart attack comes…expect it, don’t act surprised!! What did you think was going to happen!
24

fife runner,

03/12/2008 14:05:02
#10 so what would you do to save the NHS from imploding as it tries to help thsoe who have made themselves ill and cost billions. Just because one pays tax does not mean they do not have resposibilties to others who may die because someone who has become obese (cancers, heart disease, joint probs, type 2 diabetes) taken to much alcohol ( cancers, heart disease, liver disease) ( and we all know when we have taken too much so talking of not knowing when you have over indulged is a bit daft its common sense) requires treatment. I could go on about smoking but we all know how altruistic smokers are keeping the NHS going through the goodness of their hearts because they like to pay extra tax. Although all the extra cash cannot buy doctors etc as not all can become doctors so the extra smokers pay cannot gaurantee treatment
25

It's life but not as we know it,

The Oort Clouds 03/12/2008 15:00:25
Every week the advice changes. Like Private Eye said in the latest edition: "Drink or don't pregnant women warned".
26

Hugh Roscombe,

03/12/2008 15:50:55
"Many folk today are so thick they could not boil an egg"

Cholesterol.
27

cool yer boots,

East Lothian 03/12/2008 15:52:25
My local council leisure pool serves up a feast of pies, beans and chips to the healthy lot that make the effort to go swimming at the weekend. It never fails to astound me.
28

It's life but not as we know it,

The Oort Clouds 03/12/2008 17:49:45
Funny we can't comment on a red faced drunk from Glasgow who slurred his words and shook his hands while reading a statement today.
29

Growwild,

03/12/2008 18:36:50
14.. Zeno if you class aluminium has a heavy metal then you don't seem to know much..

I never stated anything "anti-vaccine" either so maybe you need help with your reading too.. I'd advise you to go and educate yourself on toxic metals along with food production and big pharma please, then I might have a discussion with you..
30

The real dracula,

03/12/2008 19:20:10
Many of you are very accurate with your comments.

Its about time people realised that the person who is responsible for their health is THEM.

There is plenty health education out there , use it.

Its not up to the NHS to patch up the results of an unhealthy lifestyle.

If you smoke 50 cigs a week you probably will at the very least end up with chronic obstructive airway disease , the NHS will treat you but you did it to yourself.

Same if you drink to excess , eat to excess ,,,,,you are responsible.

Noones saying be a saint but if you do things to excess you have a price to pay
31

The real dracula,

03/12/2008 19:20:44
I meant 50 cigs a day
32

Mr A Roy,

03/12/2008 20:17:23
I see once again this newspaper is refusing to release the figures for this year on admissions for heart attack victims, but since those figures are up more than 7% AFTER the smoking ban. When do the public get to hear the truth ?
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=C5XBhL6qC2o
33

Bill Mac,

edinburgh 03/12/2008 21:00:35
I agree with most of the postings.

Those folks who choose an excessive lifestyle of bad food, alcohol, tobacco, drugs etc usually carry little or no responsibility for themselves or indeed anything so long as they can do what they like. They survive on the basic mental premise that if anything goes wrong, someone will fix it for them. They should NOT be encouraged to flaunt the very expensive services we are all struggling to pay for these days.

22 - Nothing to say? Don't waste the space.
34

zeno,

www.thinkhumanism.com 03/12/2008 23:25:14
Growwild: I put 'heavy metals' in inverted quotes because many of the anti-vaccine people I've talked to seem to want to class aluminium as a heavy metal and use the term pejoratively.

I took it from your comment ("Should mercury and aluminum realy be in some "vaccines", I thought these were toxic") that you were anti vaccines because this is a common statement made by those who seem to think that all vaccines are inherently toxic to everybody. They also seem to be the only ones who use the phrase 'big pharma', again, pejoratively. If you're not one of those, then I apologise for making a wrong assumption.

Of course, just because aluminium is toxic in sufficient quantities does not mean that the aluminium compounds used in minute quantities in vaccines are.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.