"Drink blamed for oral cancer rise"

More top quality blamestorming.

According to the BBC report: "Numbers of cancers of the lip, mouth, tongue and throat in this age group have risen by 26% in the past decade."

Then a statement: "Alcohol consumption has doubled since the 1950s", so somehow there's a link here - which is apparently a direct link and the most significant link according to the headline. Let's see? How does this work? Oh, yes, So alcohol consumption is double what it was sixty years ago and this has a direct effect on the last ten years of cancer stats.

Oh, no, wait, it might also be "the most likely culprit alongside smoking".

Oh, no, wait, there may also be a dietry link: "Other risk factors that may be involved include a diet low in fruit and vegetables".

Oh, wait, it may also be related to the "sexually transmitted human papillomavirus (HPV), which also causes cervical cancer." I thought we were talking about mouth cancer here?

It sounds like someone has no idea what's going on here and is just clutching at straws.

The there is an emphatic statement "Tobacco is, by far, the main risk factor for oral cancer". That's funny, I thought it was "Drink". I'm confused now.


Disclaimer: The sections that follow are wildly speculative and are based on a sneaky suspicion. I have no evidence to support these assertions at this point in time. I will, however, be doing some research on it to see if I can uncover the truth for myself (and for you loyal reader).

Let's open up this little can of worms and look at what someone is NOT saying:

Did anyone think of all those chemicals they use in the new white filings the dentists love to use. Anyone heard of carcinogens? I'm trying to do some research on exactly what chemistry goes into these polymer dental filings and when I've got it I will include it here. My frustration is that good quality information is only available at a cost - like this Elsevier article on "Evaluation of the carcinogenic risks to humans associated with surgical implants and other foreign bodies." With section (4) referring to dental materials.

Let me explain why I think there is a problem.

I was at the dentist last year and was persuaded to buy dental insurance to help cover the astronomically high costs of private dental care. The dentist went out of their way to explain that the policy also included cover for mouth cancer. It sounded like someone who was trying to cover their tracks by making sure I was aware of the kind of things that were covered. These are risks. What they didn't say was that their work might incur those risks. Then while they were working they used a mouth wrap that reminded me of what a female condom must be like to use. It covered the inside of my mouth and only exposed the one tooth that was being worked on. I was lying there thinking this is paranoid behaviour. Maybe not.

So let's go down the rabbit hole of behavior driven by economic incentives (i.e. more profit):

Anyone heard the story that those silver filings were bad for us and needed to come out to be replaced with "new technology" white filings. Funny how those white ones don't last so long and need to be replaced more often. This means we go to the dentist more often with rework. My silver (amalgam's) were fine. They never gave me any headaches, which was the one reason I heard one dentist use. That's quite sneaky - everyone gets headaches from time to time. So blame the filings - that way they can come out and be replaced by the "new technology". More work. More pay. It's new technology, it must be better - surely? I'm not convinced. I'm watching this trend with great interest.

I wonder whether an entire profession has ever been sued for malpractice? Oh, no, wait - it's like the banks. We can't live without them. So when it all comes out in the wash a swift apology and a change in practice may be all that is required. Once again someone will get away with economic murder.

Dentist to patient: "I'm terribly sorry that you have mouth cancer, and that you can't afford a new house. Too bad your profession didn't find a way to swindle the masses into believing that they had to have lots of rework done. Actually I think it's quite clever that we get so much work each time we change the group-think on which technology is good and which is bad. Would you like to rent my fourth house? I'll let you have it at a discounted rate because you are such a loyal customer of mine."