Survival rates in cancer differ according to any type of cancer you have and the stage it is diagnosed. One of the worst statistics cancer anywhere in the world is lung cancer. Published 5-year survival for patients with lung cancer ranges from 5% to 16% at internationally. One reason that cancer survival rates so different is the fact that statistical information is not always in the public domain, and each individual study collects and interprets the data differently according to the summary of the study. In other words, each statistic of cancer is as unique as you are.

Data from the U.S. indicates a 5-year survival up to 16%, although this can not be invoked because it excludes the seventy-five percent of the population, and a statistic that does not apply to the population as a whole. To make a valid comparison of mortality rates of cancer survival rates no different from making valid statistical evidence in any other disease, the data must have been collected and analyzed in the same way. (Respiratory Medicine, Volume 100, Issue 9, Pages 1642-1646 C. Butler, K. Darragh, G. Currie, W. Anderson, Respiratory Medicine, Volume 100, Number 9, pages 1642-1646). Frightened by statistics or, worse still believing that can affect the statistics of how cancer survive or not.

Changing the Face to the survival statistics Cancer

Statistics risks reached the end of the day and your risk of getting cancer. In the United States, lung cancer statistics show that it kills more people than die from breast cancer, prostate cancer, colon cancer and cervical cancer combined. However, that is due to the fact that more than a selection of a certain age for the prostate, breast and cervical cancer.

The New England Journal of Medicine on 26 October 2006 reported that eighty percent of lung cancer deaths were potentially avoidable. Helical computed tomography (CT) has the potential to detect it at its stage 1 stage, at this stage is a curable cancer. The reason that mortality rates are so dismal is the fact that by the time more people realize that they have this cancer is too advanced to do something about it.

The initial study was conducted at New York Weill Cornell Medical Center in 1993 and expanded in an international survey of 38 institutions from 7 countries and is known as the International Early Lung Cancer Action Project (I-ELCAP).

Surgery is effective in curing this cancer is in Phase 1, after it is too late to make a big difference and the reason that cancer statistics on the survival rate is so sad is the fact that is rarely detected in stage 1.

Later studies from 1993 to 2005 in North U.S., Europe, Israel, China and Japan, 31,567 controlled high-risk asymptomatic individuals followed by repeat screenings in 27,456 of these people. 484 people were diagnosed with lung cancer, and 412 or 85% of these were Stage I. Of the 412 patients with stage I, 302 underwent surgical solutions within four weeks and within this group, the survival rate was 92%.

The survival rate of about 10 years for 484 participants with lung cancer was more than 80 per percent is the highest percentage ever recorded for survival in a cancer study. In contrast, five cups cancer survival statistics for Stage IV may be as low as 5%. Some choose not to receive treatment and all were dead within five years. All participants were at risk of lung cancer as they were all over forty years and whether they smoked or had smoked or who were exposed to known carcinogens such as asbestos, uranium, radon or beryllium, uranium or radon, or occupations that were exposed to passive smoking.

As with anything the cost-effectiveness of screening has to can be measured in the cost of treatment. That is twice as expensive to treat lung cancer in its final stages of making it to Phase 1 of treatment. The fee for a low dose CT screening is between $ 200 – $ 300. The new technology has made screening more effective, because when CT was new she could only produces thirty images now over 600 are possible.

To some extent there is resistance to screening for lung cancer because it is often not considered a disease, but as a warning or punishment. There is also little consensus on what constitutes a population at high risk, because although it is known for a century that snuff contributes cancer, not all smokers develop lung cancer. However pointers best genetics available in the future and it will be easier to predict accurately those at risk and that will make detection more likely possibility.

If you have been diagnosed with cancer or have a reoccurring cancer visit us at http://www.thewordisHOPE.com and find the hope for healing. Make a leap of faith from Cancer victim to Cancer Survivor by reading the stories of Hope and Encouragement from simple people like you that fought and believed and recovered. If you are a cancer survivor, we need your story with all the details you are willing to provide.

The Environment & Human Rights: A Struggle for Survival (part 1)