Long-term cancer, etc. risks of CPAP?

We eliminated our land line in the 80's. I can't believe people still have them!
The spam calls were enough to drive me bonkers.
Now if I get one, I permanently block the number, or hit reject if it is unlisted.
Sometimes I pick up, just to "tear them a new one" --just for giggles.

Cancer - pick the right parents - genetics can make a difference.
Don't drink anything - it might be contaminated.
Don't eat anything - it might be contaminated.
Don't touch anything - it might be contaminated.
Don't breathe anything - it might be contaminated.

Other then that you are probably safe.

Clinical evidence exists that stress contributes to cancer.
--so if you have a job . . .

chunkyfrog wrote:Clinical evidence exists that stress contributes to cancer.
--so if you have a job . . .

Sorry for being skeptical but that sort of reminds me of the what I feel is BS in claiming that having a positive attitude cures cancer. I had a relative who had the most positive attitude on this earth. She still died of cancer.

49er

BlackSpinner wrote:Cancer - pick the right parents - genetics can make a difference.
Don't drink anything - it might be contaminated.
Don't eat anything - it might be contaminated.
Don't touch anything - it might be contaminated.
Don't breathe anything - it might be contaminated.

Other then that you are probably safe.

you forgot about the hazards to your eyes caused by sunlight, so don't look at anything either....

and to your ears from loud noises... so don't listen to anything.

I worked in the rubber and plastics industry for 15 years and the Pharmecutical industry for five years and exposed to asbestos and other chemicals during intervening years. You can still smell the processing when you pass those factories today and I knew people that worked on extruders and plastic injection machines for years breathing in fumes from plastics and rubbers that are far in excess of anything we are ever likely to encounter from our machines unless we set them alight. I therefore think that the risk from our machines is imperceptible. If there was a problem people working in these environments would be the first to succumb and I know of no evidence of this at any of the factories in which I worked. I may be at risk from asbestos but after 30 years fortunately there is no sign of this, I think genetics are probably everyone's biggest threat.

It seems we have thousands and thousands of people on life support and remaining there for over 20 years. They breathe in air at high pressures through plastics and in the sixties and fifties through rubber components. If their cancer rate was high then a lot of studies would have been done using their numbers. Many would have received their PHds from such statistics. Anybody see large studies of these?

Pesser wrote:It seems we have thousands and thousands of people on life support and remaining there for over 20 years. They breathe in air at high pressures through plastics and in the sixties and fifties through rubber components. If their cancer rate was high then a lot of studies would have been done using their numbers. Many would have received their PHds from such statistics. Anybody see large studies of these?

maybe they were at the bottom of the pile

Different people are sensitive/allergic to different things;
while some people can smoke for decades with no visible harm.
Some get cancer from little or no (known) exposure, while it appears "spontaneously" in others.
I believe there are many factors that have not yet been identified (and too little is being done).
There is clinical evidence that a stressful life is often a shorter life, but you are right, 49er,
much disease progresses in spite of all we can do/avoid doing.

It's not plastics, chemicals or cellphones.

The most significant risk factor is age. According to cancer researcher Robert A. Weinberg, "If we lived long enough, sooner or later we all would get cancer." Essentially all of the increase in cancer rates between prehistoric times and people who died in England between 1901 and 1905 is due to increased lifespans

A good list of risk factors is here - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epidemiolo ... sk_factors

Cereal Killer wrote:It's not plastics, chemicals or cellphones.

The most significant risk factor is age. According to cancer researcher Robert A. Weinberg, "If we lived long enough, sooner or later we all would get cancer." Essentially all of the increase in cancer rates between prehistoric times and people who died in England between 1901 and 1905 is due to increased lifespans

A good list of risk factors is here - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epidemiolo ... sk_factors

Yes because they have found evidence of cancer in Egyptian mummies.

Once you got past childhood and survived your early adulthood (and childbirth for women) your reasons for dying were the same as today - cancer, heart disease, strokes and such at a similar age.

BlackSpinner wrote:Once you got past childhood and survived your early adulthood (and childbirth for women) your reasons for dying were the same as today - cancer, heart disease, strokes and such at a similar age.

more likely to get killed in traffic though. nobody ever talks about that

palerider wrote:

BlackSpinner wrote:Once you got past childhood and survived your early adulthood (and childbirth for women) your reasons for dying were the same as today - cancer, heart disease, strokes and such at a similar age.

more likely to get killed in traffic though. nobody ever talks about that

Those bloody chariots were dangerous and those young bucks on their fast horses!!!!!

chunkyfrog wrote:Clinical evidence exists that stress contributes to cancer.
--so if you have a job . . .

Actually thats not true but widely believed nevertheless and repeated on the internet everywhere.
If one cares to read the more scholarly reviews, you will find that its not true.
What might be, is that stress can be harmful once one has cancer, but for years, many have incorrectly believed that stress can cause Breast Cancer and some even went as far as to suggest that it was the major factor for BC.

That said, like any subject, if one has an agenda and wishes to delve deep enough, they will locate the backers of a review that suggests such, that stress is cancer causing but as I stated earlier, the more scholarly researchers have long ago disregarded this theory.

What some might be thinking of is that it has been widely believed that long term stress can help to create poor health overall but never has that extended itself as far as cancer.

Yes because they have found evidence of cancer in Egyptian mummies.

Once you got past childhood and survived your early adulthood (and childbirth for women) your reasons for dying were the same as today - cancer, heart disease, strokes and such at a similar age.

This gets a little tricker from my understanding. It isn't just any cancer that has been found but I believe prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer rates have been increasing over the past few decades but rather than jumping on a bandwagon and assuming its caused by this or that, one must realize a few points, one being that at present we have an aging Boomer generation.

But more importantly my understanding if correct is that prostate cancer is definitely one that is found the older we get, almost to the point that an autopsy on elderly men in their 80s or 90s, even if they passed away from a heart attack, or something un related to Cancer, would be discovered more often than not to have traces of prostate cancer. It almost suggests that if a heart attack doesn't get you, by 105 prostate cancer might

So its not at all surprising to discover that prostate cancer, metastasized or not has been found in mummies. With what we know now, I believe it would be more surprising that it not be found, rather than found at all.