marisa Posted November 8, 2003 Share Posted November 8, 2003 I am wondering if quitting smoking in some way might "trigger" lung cancer. I have heard of so many cases where the person has quit smoking and within a few months are diagnosed with lung cancer. The same thing happened to me.. I quit and BOOM.. within a few months. What are everyone's views on this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ginnyde Posted November 8, 2003 Share Posted November 8, 2003 Wow, my husband and I both quit smoking 6/15/02. He was dx'd with LC on 9/21/02. Coincidence?????? Ginny Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ry Posted November 8, 2003 Share Posted November 8, 2003 I am sure someone with more knowledge than myself will answer your question as I recall it's been brought up before. But for your reading enjoyment I'll tell you what I think. I think your body knows when the jig is up. I think you feel deep inside that something is wrong and you know you can't go on abusing yourself any longer. So you quit and a few months later you find you have cancer. The problem is the cancer has been there much longer than just a few months. By the time you can see it you've had it awhile. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dadstimeon Posted November 8, 2003 Share Posted November 8, 2003 Hi Marisa, I read somewhere that lung cancer can go for years and sometimes decades before it is detected. That's why the late stage on a lot of us. I was told I had lung cancer for years. Not sure about quitting smoking and "trigger" lung cancer. Below is a website addressing your question. Hope this helps. Take care and God Bless. Rich http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 082308.htm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobmc Posted November 8, 2003 Share Posted November 8, 2003 Hello Marisa; welcome, Interesting comment, For me, yes, I had quit smoking because the tumor had caused pneumonia to occurr, and as Ry put it " the jig was up", I had known the smoking was killing me but did'nt have the willingness to quit. The pneumonia made that possible but the cancer was squamous type and a slow grower so most likely it was there for years. OK, so as I see it, the point is'nt that quitting triggered it , It's that smoking caused it; no coincidence for me ; a consequence; really somewhat simple as I see it; Stats say somewhere around 87% of lung cancer cases are caused by smoking. Guess, I fit right into the mainstram. I'm just kinda accepting it and moving on and when someonre asks, I say Yes, it really can happen!! God bless and be well Bobmc- NSCLC- stageIIB- left pneumonectomy- 5/2/01 " absolutely insist on enjoying life today! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RAY A Posted November 9, 2003 Share Posted November 9, 2003 I quit smoking July 1 2002 found out I had cancer July 5 2002. Later I found out that the cancer was there since 2000. (thats another story) Can you say law suit!!!!! I totaly diagree that quitting smoking causes cancer! SMOKING CAUSES CANCER Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimblanchard Posted November 9, 2003 Share Posted November 9, 2003 Marisa, I totally agree with Ray. Smoking causes cancer. I haven't heard anything about triggering cancer due to quitting. Many people quit but the cancer had been growing for sometime. Take care. Kim Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marisa Posted November 9, 2003 Author Share Posted November 9, 2003 Hi again everyone... I'm not saying that quitting smoking CAUSES cancer to occur. What I'm saying is I wonder if quitting gets the cancer that has obviously been in there for awhile "activated". I am fully aware the smoking causes cancer but wonder if the shock to the lungs at not having that cigarette perhaps gets that nasty little cell moving!! I dunno... just a thought as I have heard of so many people that have been diagnosed with lung cancer a few months or so after quitting smoking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimblanchard Posted November 9, 2003 Share Posted November 9, 2003 I have to kind of agree with Marisa, I know smoking causes cancer but I think when you quit it triggers something. I have SCLC which is very fast growing so I know I did not have it long before it was detected. If I had it for years I would have been dead a long time ago. Small cell doubles in size in 30 days so figure it out. I quit smoking 2 years before I was diagnosed and had no health problems at all, never coughed, never short of breath. I quit because I did not want to have health problems down the road, but I guess I should have never smoked if I wanted that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bart ziggie ( Greg ) Posted November 9, 2003 Share Posted November 9, 2003 Hi Marisa, Interesting post. I too have noticed a fairly large number of folks that have quit smoking just prior to a diagnosis. I realy dont know what to believe. I will look aroung for some more possible info and or stats relating to this. I have my own little theory as to what activated my cancer and put it into high gear. I had a very serious car accident on Dec. 2, 2002. I was buckled up ( thank god ) but heres the thing. The wind was instantly knocked out of me from the seat belt and the impact of the collision. I was transported to the hospital and had only minor injuries. However my chest was hurting pretty badly especially on the right side. The Drs. ordered several x-rays. They all came back negative. I was too follow up with my md in 3 to 5 days. i was off work the entire week and went to see my regular md 3 days after the accident. My chest was still hurting pretty bad on the right side. I told him this and he said it probably would be sore for quite some time. I know that from past experience, accidents are like that, you are sore all over. He gave me some muscle relaxers and i was set to go back to work mon. Well about 3 weeks went by and the right sided chest pain still remained. I decided to call and schedule an appt. with one of my old family Drs. this time. I went to see her and she immediately said my breathing was horrible and ordered a chest x-ray. I went for the x-ray and 3 days later i got the call that they had found a mass on my right lung. I should come by and pick up x-rays to go see a pulminary Dr. Long story short, thus began my journey into the world as i know it now. I firmly believe that the impact of that accident jarred them cells and got them active or something. I have discussed this with other Drs. and friends etc..... they wont agree with me but yet they wont discount it either. I was diagnosed as limited stage ( which i dont believe i was ) i think i was extensive to begin with. So at any rate its possible this accident saved my life or at least prolonged it. Sorry about this being so long of a post. Again thanks for the interesting post and thanks everyone for your replies. Regards Greg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marisa Posted November 9, 2003 Author Share Posted November 9, 2003 Hi Greg your post was very interesting.. I sometimes wonder also if perhaps "trauma" can trigger it.. (i.e. get it moving and active.. not cause it).. as your body surely must have been very traumatized from having your accident. Quitting smoking too I assume would traumatize one's body... Interesting subject... I wish I knew where I could find some statistics on it.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
berisa Posted November 9, 2003 Share Posted November 9, 2003 I had that question in my mind few months ago, but what my Daddy case is : 2.5 years ago, my Daddy had the regular body check in hospital (2000), the doctor told my Dad that his lung showed not functioning well (i don't know the exact medical term in ENGLISH) because of smoking, he told my dad if he continued smoking, he will die within few years. Then finally, my Dad started to quit smoking because of his advice and he made it. One year later after that body check, my Dad had the second regular body check, his lung shown on X-ray was perfect, fully expandable. No abnormalities shown. This check was done in Sep 2002. But, half year later, he was diagnosed with LC (he coughed with blood). My Dad quitted smoking for 1.5 years before his diagnosis. So, I just thought, is it triggered by quitting smoking? I really don't know. But I just know, things happened without any symptoms, even in 6 months time, things could be totally different. But now I think, maybe the first body check done in 2000 was the first/very initial sign, but we didn't realize or aware of that because that sign was not consistent with or equal to LC (in theory) at that moment. So now I think, quitting smoking is not the triggering element. Those LC lives in the body for years already. There may be some signs happened but we didn't realize and aware of it only. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marisa Posted November 9, 2003 Author Share Posted November 9, 2003 Hi Barisa.... Lung cancer is called "the silent killer"... mainly for the reason that there ARE no symptoms generally until it is well advanced. My lung cancer was found totally by flook. I had to have a routine xray for immigration purposes. The size was 1.4 cm.. stage 1. I had NO symptoms whatsoever. I was active, had lots of energy, could climb a steep mountain.. Actually, I felt better BEFORE surgery than I do now even tho I am three years post op. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karma1976 Posted November 10, 2003 Share Posted November 10, 2003 My dad quit YEARS before he had it. 15 years to be exactly BUT I find it interesting to say the least. Maybe people associate coughs and phlegm and other symptoms as just, i should quit smoking or it is smoking related when it may be a symptom of LC and once you quit and these symptoms you thought were just because you smoked too much that day are still there then you get yourself checked out and it is actually cancer? Just a hypothesis. what makes me mad about my dad is he had polyps on his colon a year before and they did a rather thorough CT scan and other tests...so it was odd he was dx with late stage Lung Cancer not even a year later? You figure SOMETHING would be picked up!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snowflake Posted November 10, 2003 Share Posted November 10, 2003 Okay, I'm gonna step up on my soapbox here because I totally disagree with EVERYBODY! Smoking may be A cause of lung cancer, but it is not THE cause of lung cancer! If smoking caused lung cancer, period, EVERYONE who EVER smoked would have it, and ONLY people who smoked would have it! Please, give the minority a little slack here, I feel like a man diagnosed with breast cancer! I guess Snowflake needs a time out, she's not playing well with others today.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RAY A Posted November 10, 2003 Share Posted November 10, 2003 Snowflake, your right My message was worded wrong. Actualy only about 15% of smokers get lung cancer. I couldnt imagine what the people that never smoked and get lung cancer must go through. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dadstimeon Posted November 10, 2003 Share Posted November 10, 2003 Hi Guys, Found this website http://www.cancerhelp.org.uk/help/default.asp?page=122 addressing cancer. Thought it was interesting. Check it out. People often ask me how I feel about people who have smoked for decades and never get lung cancer and yet I never smoked once in my life. I tell them it really does not matter how or why I got it and it does not make me feel any better because I did not smoke. I tell them I have the same sympathy and compassion regardless of how someone gets it and would like for all of us to be cured and survive. That's its a very complicated disease and has been around since the beginning of time. That's there is more too it and people should not paint it with a broad brush. I also tell them the real problem with lung cancer is we are being ostracized from society because of society’s ignorance. I tell them that lung cancer needs to be brought to the forefront just like any other cancer. That society needs to pull their heads out of their rear ends so we can hear it pop. I ask them why is it we should all shed tears for people who drink, gamble, take drugs, have unprotected sex and drive crazy on the roads etc. etc. but yet there is little sympathy and compassion for people with lung cancer. They say nothing. I tell them it sounds to me like society is being a hypocrite. Let’s not have anyone make us feel guilty because regardless of how or why we got lung cancer. We are all human beings and things are going to happen to us during our lifetime. If it happened (God forbid) to (lung cancer) one of them they would be whistling a different tune. I could bet my house on that one. Just my two cents. Although today it’s properly only worth one cent. Peace, take care and God Bless. Rich PS: I think all of us should be in the White House running this country. With our courage and determination we would have this country straighten out in a week. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donna G Posted November 10, 2003 Share Posted November 10, 2003 Let us also remember that lung cancer is not the only disease that smoking causes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
berisa Posted November 11, 2003 Share Posted November 11, 2003 Recently, I tell myself that everyone will die, this is a matter of sooner or later and a matter of HOW and WHAT causes death. No one could avoid death. The hardest thing for me, for family or caregivers, for friends, is not willing to lose them in the rest of our life in earth. I always want to keep all my loved ones with me. I really wish there is no pain, no war, no disease, no death, no tears in earth. God, please hear my prayer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mirrell Posted November 11, 2003 Share Posted November 11, 2003 Dr.Bernie Siegal believes that most cancers or serious illnesses are caused by some kind of trauma that compromises the immune system. Perhaps for some, quitting smoking causes trauma or stress, which compromises the immune system, and hence activates the cancer. Just a thought, if you believe what Dr.Siegal believes about traumatic experiences and the start of life threatening diseases. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eileen Posted November 11, 2003 Share Posted November 11, 2003 Hi Marisa I think several months ago, we had this discussion because it looked like there was a slight increase in people that quit smoking vs. those that continue to smoke---I wondered why also? do a search under my name and you can read the posts and the theories regards Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snowflake Posted November 11, 2003 Share Posted November 11, 2003 I guess it doesn't really matter HOW anyone got the disease for those of us already here. Warning labels are all over cigarettes now, heart disease, lung cancer, emphysema, low birth weight, lighter wallet (okay, I added that one myself)... I don't think that people just starting to smoke really care about the warnings, let alone someone older being in their face with "look what happened to me". If only about 15% of smokers get lung cancer, OBVIOUSLY, they will be in the "healthy" majority.... As was mentioned by another non-smoker, it's not as if people refrain from sex ("protected" or otherwise) because they MIGHT pick up an STD or worse, people are stupid. If something hasn't DIRECTLY influenced their life (for example, a very dear loved one suffering through this disease), there's the feeling of being a superhero, that 'that won't happen to me'. Can't say I've stopped all "risky" behavior or that I never engaged in any - I just didn't smoke....guess I felt I was virtually bullet-proof, too. Sooooo...I guess my point is not to pine for the "What if I had never started smoking?" and let the guilt wear you down. For some of us that NEVER smoked, smoking is not the issue. No guarantee that if you had never smoked you wouldn't be here, ya know? The view's the same for this show from the smoking and non-smoking sections....don't buy into the guilt, it ain't worth the added stress! Love ya all, Becky Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SandyS Posted November 12, 2003 Share Posted November 12, 2003 Marissa - Sorry I'm late on this one - but I questioned the same thing about a year ago - as I myself also had JUST quit 3 months prior to being diagnosed with SCLC, which grows so rapidly there's no way it had been there before that. I felt that the "healing" they describe your lungs going thru upon quitting, growing new tissue had to get carried away and "spark" the cancer to grow. I even questioned where Zyban might fit into this equation, because myself as well as others on the board had used it to quit. Of course, I couldn't find anything to back me up on this hypothesis - but it seemed like a really bad trend in what I was seeing. But then the way my doctor explained it to me, makes sense - and pulls in those non-smokers - in that he says it can be a very hereditary thing, and it doesn't matter what KIND of cancer your ancestors may have had (my dad died of skin cancer at the ripe old age of 26). Doctor said that you are PREDISPOSED to get SOME form of cancer if there's been any in your family. And the part(s) of your body that are most abused are most likely to be where it will show up - and unfortunately, just breathing on our planet can be very unhealthy! And of course smoking increases it even more. They actually said to me that had this not happened, they probably would have seen me within one to two years with SOME form of cancer, whether it be breast, skin, ovarian - this WAS going to happen to me in one form or another. Just a little more food for thought - and PLEASE don't spend one SECOND of your time blaming yourself.... Hugs and prayers, SandyS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JudyB Posted November 13, 2003 Share Posted November 13, 2003 Here's my story: Stopped smoking Mar. 15, 2001, diagnosed Oct 17, 2001 (had a relapse for a few weeks Sep-Oct 01). I remember wearing the patch while having chemo and radiation. I don't know of any relative that had cancer of any kind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teresag Posted November 14, 2003 Share Posted November 14, 2003 Two hypotheses on the matter: 1) Maybe some smokers are feeling a bit bad, and that is an incentive to quit. And then, in some, it turns out the cancer was contributing to their not feeling so well. 2) Cigarette smoke paralyzes the cilia, the little hairlike projections that help move along mucus in the lungs. This is why people sometimes get a cough AFTER they quit smoking; the cilia "wake up" and realize they've been lax. Maybe the coughing causes the person to visit their dr., and the diagnostics are done "just in case," and the cancer is found. I'm not saying this is the case for anyone in particular, just a couple of possibilities. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.