AS AMERICANS, CAN WE REALLY BE "SHOCKED" WHEN WE GET CANCER?
We live in a world where cancer rates continue to rise, yet the average daily lifestyle includes repeated exposure to substances that have been scientifically linked to cancer. Not opinions or theories, but established biological mechanisms supported by decades of research. Despite this, cancer is still often viewed as random or simply bad luck, which ignores a significant portion of what the evidence actually shows. Cancer is complex and influenced by genetics, environment, and behavior, but long-term exposure to known carcinogens, combined with metabolic dysfunction and chronic inflammation, clearly increases risk.
The modern American diet plays a central role in this conversation. It is heavily dominated by ultra-processed foods that are not just calorie-dense but often contain compounds classified as carcinogenic or potentially carcinogenic by organizations such as the World Health Organization and the International Agency for Research on Cancer. Processed meats, including bacon, hot dogs, deli meats, and sausages, are classified as Group 1 carcinogens, meaning there is strong evidence they cause cancer in humans, particularly colorectal cancer. The mechanisms are well established. Nitrates and nitrites used as preservatives can form N-nitroso compounds that damage DNA, and high-temperature cooking produces heterocyclic amines and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, both of which are linked to cancer development.
Beyond processed meats, ultra-processed foods now make up more than half of the average American diet. These products frequently contain additives such as BHA and BHT, which have demonstrated carcinogenic effects in animal studies, as well as artificial food dyes like Red 40, Yellow 5, and Yellow 6, which have raised safety concerns and are restricted or require warnings in parts of Europe. Emulsifiers such as polysorbate 80 and carboxymethylcellulose are being studied for their role in disrupting gut microbiota and promoting inflammation, a known contributor to cancer development. In addition, these foods are typically high in added sugars and refined carbohydrates, which contribute to obesity, insulin resistance, and chronic inflammation, all of which are strongly associated with increased cancer risk through well-established physiological pathways.
This issue becomes even more concerning when looking at children. Many foods marketed directly to kids, including cereals, snack bars, fruit snacks, and flavored beverages, are among the most heavily processed products in the food supply. These products often contain artificial dyes, high levels of added sugar, and preservatives with limited long-term human safety data. The concern is not only what is in the food, but when exposure begins. Early-life exposure to poor nutrition and environmental stressors has been linked to increased lifetime disease risk, including cancer. During developmental years, the body is more vulnerable, yet this is often when consumption of ultra-processed foods is highest, leading to decades of cumulative exposure.
Alcohol represents another major and often overlooked contributor. It is classified as a Group 1 carcinogen with strong evidence linking it to multiple cancers, including breast, liver, colorectal, esophageal, and head and neck cancers. The mechanism is well understood. Alcohol is metabolized into acetaldehyde, a toxic compound that damages DNA and interferes with the body’s ability to repair it. It also increases oxidative stress, alters hormone levels, and impairs normal cellular function. While lower consumption reduces risk, there is no level of alcohol intake that can be considered completely risk-free in relation to cancer. Despite this, alcohol remains widely accepted, heavily marketed, and rarely discussed in the context of cancer risk.
One of the most overlooked aspects of this issue is the lack of clear communication to consumers. Substances that are scientifically linked to cancer are regularly consumed without meaningful warning at the point of purchase. Alcohol, despite being a confirmed carcinogen, does not carry a clear cancer warning label in most of the United States, with current labeling focused primarily on pregnancy and general health risks. Processed meats, also classified as carcinogenic, are sold without any cancer-related warning. At the same time, ultra-processed foods containing compounds associated with cancer risk are aggressively marketed, often to children, without any requirement to communicate potential long-term risks. While not every ingredient carries the same level of evidence, the lack of transparency leaves consumers without the information needed to make fully informed decisions.
The financial side of cancer further highlights the disconnect. Cancer is one of the most expensive medical conditions in the United States, with national care costs estimated at 183 billion dollars and projected to exceed 245 billion dollars. Individual patients can face treatment costs exceeding 100,000 dollars, particularly in advanced stages of the disease. Even for those with insurance, out-of-pocket costs can be substantial, with billions of dollars paid annually by patients and survivors. Many individuals spend more than 20 percent of their income on cancer-related care, a burden that has led researchers to define the concept of financial toxicity. This reflects the reality that cancer does not only affect physical health but can also create long-term financial instability for individuals and families.
At the same time, cancer treatment represents one of the largest and fastest-growing sectors within the healthcare industry. Global spending on oncology drugs has reached hundreds of billions of dollars and continues to increase, making it one of the most significant revenue drivers in the pharmaceutical market. Individual cancer therapies generate billions of dollars annually, and oncology accounts for a substantial portion of total revenue for many major pharmaceutical companies. On the provider side, research has shown that certain cancer treatments administered in hospitals can be billed at prices significantly higher than acquisition costs, with substantial markups observed in some cases. While this does not imply that treatment decisions are driven by profit, it does confirm that cancer care operates within a system that includes significant financial incentives.
Understanding why these risks are often ignored requires looking at human behavior. People tend to underestimate risks that are familiar, legal, and widely accepted. When substances are commonly consumed, heavily marketed, and socially normalized, they do not appear dangerous, even when scientific evidence suggests otherwise. Over time, repeated exposure becomes part of daily life, and the perception of risk diminishes. This normalization plays a major role in why long-term exposure continues without awareness or concern.
Addressing this issue does not require extreme or unrealistic changes. It involves reducing exposure where possible and making more informed decisions. Prioritizing whole, minimally processed foods, limiting processed meats and ultra-processed products, understanding ingredient lists, and recognizing the risks associated with alcohol are all practical steps that can reduce overall exposure. The goal is not perfection, but awareness and consistency over time.
The science on this topic is clear. These are not hypothetical risks, but well-documented contributors to increased cancer risk when exposure is repeated over time. The real question is not whether these factors matter, but whether we are willing to acknowledge them and adjust behavior accordingly instead of continuing to treat cancer as something that appears without warning.
OPINION
It is hard not to feel frustrated when looking at the full picture. We live in a system where people are consistently exposed to foods, drinks, and substances that have known or strongly suggested links to cancer risk, often without clear education or meaningful warning at the point of consumption. At the same time, when cancer develops, individuals and families are faced with some of the highest medical costs in the country, along with long-term financial consequences that can follow them for years.
This creates a reality that feels fundamentally backwards. The same environment that allows widespread exposure to potential risk factors is also the environment where treatment becomes one of the most expensive and rapidly growing sectors in healthcare. While there are incredible advancements in cancer treatment and many professionals dedicated to saving lives, it is difficult to ignore the disconnect between prevention, education, and the financial burden placed on individuals after diagnosis.
This is not about assigning blame to a single industry or claiming a simple cause-and-effect relationship. Cancer is complex, and no one factor explains it entirely. But when clear scientific links exist between certain exposures and increased cancer risk, and those exposures remain normalized, minimally labeled, and widely marketed, it raises an important question about how prevention is prioritized compared to treatment.
At a minimum, people deserve better transparency, better education, and the ability to make informed decisions about what they are consuming long before they ever face a diagnosis. Ignoring that conversation does not make the problem go away. It only ensures that it continues.
REFERENCES
World Health Organization (WHO) – International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) Monographs
Bouvard et al., 2015 – Carcinogenicity of red and processed meat, The Lancet Oncology
World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF) & American Institute for Cancer Research (AICR) Reports
National Cancer Institute (NCI) – Diet and Cancer Risk
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) – Alcohol and Cancer
Seitz et al., 2012 – Alcohol consumption and cancer, The Lancet Oncology
Chazelas et al., 2018 – Ultra-processed foods and cancer risk, BMJ
Fiolet et al., 2018 – Ultra-processed food consumption and cancer risk, BMJ
National Cancer Institute – Financial Toxicity and Cancer Care
American Cancer Society – Cancer Facts & Figures 2025
Mariotto et al., 2020 – Cancer care costs in the United States
JAMA Network Open, 2025 – Out-of-pocket costs after cancer diagnosis
IQVIA Institute – Global Oncology Trends 2025
JAMA Internal Medicine, 2022 – Cancer therapy pricing and hospital markups
BMJ, 2025 – Provider billing margins and cancer treatment