Wellness Exchange: Health Discussions
Cancer Crisis: 130,000 Missed Cases During Pandemic Lockdowns
(upbeat music) - Welcome to "Listen To." This is Ted. The news was published on Monday, October 14th. Joining us today are Eric and Kate. Let's dive into our roundtable discussion on a concerning trend. Nearly 130,000 cancer cases were missed during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 and 2021. Eric, Kate, what are your initial thoughts on this alarming statistic? - Well, Ted, I've got to say, this is a real doozy. We're talking about a catastrophic failure of our healthcare system here, those lockdowns and disruptions to healthcare services. They've clearly had devastating consequences. I mean, we're staring down the barrel of a potential surge in late-stage cancers that could have been caught earlier. It's like we've loaded a cancer time bomb and set it ticking. - Hang on a sec, Eric. While the numbers are definitely concerning, we can't just ignore the context. These measures were necessary to protect people from COVID-19. The healthcare system was stretched to its limits and tough choices had to be made. It's easy to Monday morning quarterback, but at the time, saving lives from the immediate threat was the priority. - Let's break this down a bit. What exactly led to this significant drop in cancer diagnoses? - Ted, it's a perfect storm of factors. First off, screening centers closed during lockdowns. Then we had severe staffing shortages and get this 9.4 million screening tests that should have happened just didn't. It's a textbook example of how knee-jerk reactions can have unintended consequences. We were so focused on one threat that we completely dropped the ball on another. - That's an oversimplification, Eric. You're conveniently ignoring- - Oh, come on, Kate. Fear-mongering played a huge role. - Let me finish, Eric. - Let's not. - People were scared to death of catching COVID at medical facilities. A 2021 study showed 57% of folks skipped appointments out of fear of catching the virus. That's not knee-jerk. - Fine. Fear played a part, but let's not gloss over the fact that 40% of people flat out admitted to missing medical appointments during the pandemic. That's not just fear. That's a massive disruption to routine care. We're talking about nearly half of all patients here. - Look, it's easy to criticize in hindsight, but at the time, flattening the COVID curve was crucial. Even Dr. Pat Basu from the Cancer Treatment Centers of America called this a shadow curve, a ticking time bomb flying under the radar. The medical community was aware of the trade-offs, but they had to prioritize. - Interesting points from both of you. Now, how did this impact different types of cancers? - Well, Ted, the biggest drops were seen in lung, prostate, and skin cancers. And here's a kicker. Men had a larger decrease in diagnoses, as did people in counties with low poverty rates and high education levels. It's like the pandemic through our entire healthcare system for a loop, affecting even those who typically have better access to care. - That's true, Eric. But it's crucial to note that by 2021, cancer diagnosis rates had nearly rebounded to normal projections. The medical community recognized the issue and took action to address it. It wasn't like they just sat on their hands once they realized what was happening. - Sure, but the damage was already done. We're talking about 127, 931 missed cases in 2020. - But efforts were made to rectify the situation. Organizations like the American College of Surgeons and the American Cancer Society provided support to 748 local cancer clinics to boost their screening programs. We can't just ignore the steps he was involved. - Let's look at this issue in a broader historical context. Can you think of any similar events in the past where health screenings were disrupted on such a large scale? - Absolutely, Ted. The Spanish flu pandemic of 1918-1920 provides a striking parallel. During that time, healthcare systems were completely overwhelmed and many routine medical services, including what passed for cancer screenings back then, were disrupted. It's a sobering reminder that history often rhymes, if not repeats. - That's a bit of a stretch, Eric. Medical knowledge and cancer screening capabilities were far less advanced a century ago. A more relevant-- - The Spanish flu example is entirely relevant, Kate. It shows how pandemics can have far-reaching consequences beyond the immediate health crisis. In 1918, an estimated 50 million people died worldwide and healthcare systems-- - But cancer screening, as we know it today, didn't exist then. After Katrina, however, there was a documented decrease in cancer screenings and diagnoses in affected areas. For instance, mammography rates in New Orleans dropped by 80% in the months following the hurricane. That's a much more-- - How do these historical events inform our understanding of the current situation? - Well, the Katrina example shows how natural disasters can disrupt healthcare services and lead to delayed diagnoses. It took years for cancer screening rates to return to pre-Katrina levels in some areas. This gives us a framework for understanding the long-term impacts of healthcare disruptions in a modern context. - While that's true, Kate, I still think the Spanish flu example is more applicable on a global scale. It demonstrates how pandemics can cause long-term health consequences that extend far beyond the immediate crisis. We're not just talking about a localized disaster here but a worldwide phenomenon. - But we've made significant advancements in medical technology and our understanding of public health since 1918. It's not a fair comparison. We have tools and knowledge now that they could-- - The point isn't about the specific medical capabilities, Kate, it's about the systemic disruption to healthcare services and the long-term consequences. After the Spanish flu, there were increases in other health issues due to the strain on the medical system we're seeing. - I see your point. But I still think more recent examples like Katrina provide better insights into how modern healthcare systems respond to crises and the specific impact on cancer screenings. - We can't just ignore a century of-- - Fair enough, but let's not discount the valuable lessons we can learn from historical pandemics, especially given the global scale of COVID-19's impact. Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it after all. - Looking ahead, how do you think this situation will unfold? Eric, what's your prediction for the coming years? - I hate to be the bearer of bad news, Ted, but I'm deeply concerned we're gonna see a surge in late stage cancer diagnoses with 130,000 missed cases. Many of these cancers will have progressed to more advanced stages, making them harder to treat and potentially leading to increased mortality rates. It's like we've given these cancers a head start in a race we can't afford to lose. - That's an overly pessimistic view, Eric. While there may be some increase in later stage diagnoses, the medical community is aware of this issue and is likely to implement more aggressive screening programs to catch up. - Aggressive screening won't turn back time, Kate. For many cancers, early detection is crucial. Take colon cancer, for example. The five-year survival rate for localized colon cancer is 90%, but it drops to 14% for distant stage disease. - You're ignoring the advances in cancer treatment, Eric. We have more effective therapies now than ever before, even for later stage cancers. - Immunotherapies and targeted treatments are changing the game. It's not all- - Let's consider another potential outcome. How might this experience change our approach to healthcare in the future? - It should be a wake-up call to prioritize essential medical services even during crises. We need better contingency plans to maintain cancer screenings and other crucial health services during emergencies. We can't afford to be caught flat-footed like this again. - I agree that we need better plans, but I think this will lead to positive changes. We might see an increase in telemedicine and at-home screening options, making it easier for people to access care even in challenging circumstances. This could be a silver lining to this whole mess. - Telemedicine is no substitute for hands-on examinations and imaging studies, Kate. We need to ensure physical access to screening facilities remains a priority. You can't detect a- - It's not about replacing in-person care, Eric. It's about supplementing it and creating more access points. This could actually lead to increased screening rates in the long run. We need to- - That's optimistic thinking, but we can't ignore the immediate challenges. We need to brace for a potential increase in cancer mortality rates in the coming years and allocate resources accordingly. Hope for the best, but prepare for the worst. - While we should be prepared, we shouldn't create unnecessary panic. The healthcare system is adaptable, and I believe we'll see innovative solutions emerge from this challenge. It's not all doom and gloom, Eric. Sometimes crises can spur positive change. - Thank you both for this insightful discussion. It's clear that the impacts of the pandemic on cancer diagnoses will be felt for years to come, but there's hope in the medical community's response and potential innovations. As always, we encourage our listeners to stay informed and proactive about their health. Until next time, this is Ted from ListenTo. Take care and stay healthy.