Sunday February 23, 2020

Why Cancer Rates Are Higher in Flight Attendants?

The study, published in the journal Environmental Health, included data from a survey of 5,366 US flight attendants, who were then then compared the prevalence of cancers among the general public

0
//
Cancer
Cancer Ribbon. Pixabay

Due to regular exposure to carcinogens, disrupted sleep cycles and possible chemical contaminants, flight attendants may be at a higher risk of developing several forms of cancer than others, finds a new research.

These include breast, uterine, gastrointestinal, thyroid and cervical cancer.

According to the study, flight attendants are also regularly exposed to the largest effective annual ionizing radiation dose relative to all other radiation workers because of both their exposure to and lack of protection from cosmic radiation in the plane.

Why Cancer Rates Are Higher in Flight Attendants?
Representational image.

“Our findings of higher rates of several cancers among flight attendants is striking given the low rates of overweight and smoking in our study population, which highlights the question of what can be done to minimize the adverse exposures and cancers common among cabin crew,” said Irina Mordukhovich from the Harvard University’s T.H. Chan School of Public Health.

The study, published in the journal Environmental Health, included data from a survey of 5,366 US flight attendants, who were then then compared the prevalence of cancers among the general public.

Also Read: Wireless Device to Detect Heart Dysfunction in Cancer Survivors

The results showed that flight attendants had a higher prevalence of every cancer that was examined, especially breast cancer, melanoma and non-melanoma skin cancer among females.

The findings suggest that additional efforts should be made to minimize the risk of cancer among flight attendants, including monitoring radiation dose and organising schedules to minimize radiation exposure and circadian rhythm disruption, the researchers suggested. (IANS)

Next Story

Study Finds No Link Between Fish Oil and Prostrate Cancer

While a seeming association between higher plasma omega-3 levels and the findings of severe heart disease upon initial angiogram might raise alarms that omega-3 isn't beneficial, "they did live to see a doctor and get diagnosed," Le added

0
Cancer
Cancer Ribbon. Pixabay

If you are taking Omega-3 pills or relish two-three servings of Omega-3 rich fish a week, you can continue with those, without worrying about its potential prostate cancer risk that some previous research with preliminary findings have reported in the past.

The researchers at the Intermountain Healthcare Heart Institute in Salt Lake City, Utah who continue to research the potential benefits and risks of this popular fish oil supplement — especially when it comes to prostate cancer risk and heart health — have found no link between the two.

The Intermountain research team presented two new studies about omega-3s at the “2019 American Heart Association Scientific Sessions” in Philadelphia on Sunday.

In one study, the research team identified 87 patients who were part of the Intermountain ‘INSPIRE Registry’ and had developed prostate cancer.

These patients were also tested for plasma levels of docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) and eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA), which are two common omega-3 fatty acids.

When compared to a matched control group of 149 men, the researchers found that higher omega-3 levels were not linked with elevated prostate cancer risk.

Viet T Le from Intermountain Healthcare Heart Institute said they undertook this study in light of findings from a 2013 paper from the Journal of the National Cancer Institute that suggested a possible link between higher omega-3 plasma levels and the development of prostate cancer, one that has been debated since publication.

“If I’m recommending omega-3 for my patients to save their hearts, I want to make sure I’m not putting them at risk for prostate cancer,” said Le.

Fish Oil, Pills, Diabetes
Increased consumption of omega 3 fats is widely promoted because of a common belief that it will protect against, or even reverse, conditions such as diabetes. Pixabay

“Our study found no evidence of a link between the two.”

In the second study, the researchers looked at 894 patients undergoing coronary angiography (a test that shows how blood flows through the arteries in the heart).

These patients had no prior history of heart attack or coronary artery disease, however upon their first angiogram, about 40 per cent of those patients had severe disease and about 10 per cent had three-vessel disease, Le said.

Researchers also measured patients’ plasma levels of omega-3 metabolites, including DHA and EPA. Those patients were then followed to see who had subsequent heart attack, stroke, heart failure, or who died.

Also Read: Chinese Handset Maker Vivo Refreshes its Y Series in India

They found that patients who had higher rates of omega-3 metabolites had a lower risk of those follow up adverse effects regardless of whether they had severe disease or not on their initial angiogram.

“This study is important because we looked at how omega-3 helps patients who have already developed disease, and its effects on survival – both in getting to the first angiography to be diagnosed (vs. having a heart attack or worse before even knowing they have heart disease) and thereafter,” Le elaborated.

While a seeming association between higher plasma omega-3 levels and the findings of severe heart disease upon initial angiogram might raise alarms that omega-3 isn’t beneficial, “they did live to see a doctor and get diagnosed,” Le added.

“And we saw a link between higher levels of omega-3 and their survival rate thereafter,” they wrote. (IANS)