(© Richard O'Donoghue - stock.adobe.com)
Cancer misinformation spreads farther and faster than accurate information on social media, through public posts, by word of mouth, and private messages. This harmful content includes claims that are not supported by current scientific consensus. Cancer treatment misinformation includes false, exaggerated, or misleading claims about cancer treatments and cures.
Treatment-related posts contain more misinformation than posts about other cancer issues. When patients receive a cancer diagnosis, they and their support network are often subjected to unsolicited advice from individuals as well as social media platforms. Research has indicated that social media posts about cancer contain between 30% to 80% misinformation.
Cancer treatment misinformation harms the psychological health of cancer patients and their supporters by escalating stress and self-doubt, and even regret for some previous decisions. Social support can be disrupted if patients abandon relationships to avoid exposure to cancer misinformation.
Patients’ physical health can be damaged by misinformation if they abandon evidence-based care for untested treatments found on social media. Evidence shows that doing so may double the risk of death.
Conversely, correcting misinformation could significantly improve survival rates, increasing them more than fivefold for some cancers.
Patients are particularly susceptible to misinformation when they are experiencing stress and despair, and when cancer recurs, advances, or is not responding to recommended treatment.
Would you recognize cancer misinformation? Test your knowledge with our fact or fiction quiz.
1. All cancer patients, even those considered cured, will eventually have a recurrence and die of their disease.
Fiction. Since the 1990s, the likelihood of dying from cancer has steadily dropped. The 5-year survival rates for breast, prostate and thyroid cancers are greater than 90%. The 5-year survival rate for all cancers combined is about 69%.
It’s important to remember that these statistics are from large numbers of people. Individual survival varies with the type of cancer, how aggressive it is, how far it has spread at the time of diagnosis, and other factors.
2. Attitude, whether positive or negative, does not affect your risk for developing or surviving cancer.
Fact. Scientific evidence does not support the idea that “attitude” affects the risk for getting or surviving cancer. If you have cancer, it’s normal to have a broad range of feelings – anger, sadness, hope, discouragement, gratitude, and others. People with a positive attitude may stay more active and maintain more social connections, which may help them to cope with cancer.
3. Turmeric, apple-cider vinegar, and lemon water can cure cancer.
Fiction. In November 2024, former cricketer-turned-politician Navjot Singh Sidhu claimed that his wife beat stage-4 cancer through dietary and lifestyle changes including these substances. He emphasized avoiding sugar and carbohydrates and practicing intermittent fasting. Sidhu received more than 2 million likes, but his claims received quick rebuttals from almost 300 oncologists (cancer specialists), urging people not to delay treatment by following unproven remedies.
4. A tumor biopsy or cancer surgery will cause cancer to spread in the body.
Fiction. The chance is extremely low that these procedures will cause cancer to spread to other parts of the body. Surgeons take extensive measures to prevent cancer cells from spreading during a biopsy or surgery. For example, if they remove tissue from more than one part of the body they use different surgical tools for each area.
5. Cell phones and power lines can cause cancer.
Fiction. Cell phones and power lines do not cause cancer. Cancer is caused by gene mutations. Cell phones emit low-frequency energy that does not damage genes.
Power lines emit electric energy which is easily shielded and weakened by walls and other objects. They also emit magnetic energy, which is a low-frequency form of radiation that does not damage genes.
From the National Cancer Institute:
6. Antiperspirants and deodorants do not cause breast cancer.
Fact. The most reliable research to date has found no evidence linking the chemicals found in these products to any changes in breast tissue. You can read more about it here.
7. I can still get cancer, even though no one in my family has had cancer.
Fact. About 39% of people will get cancer during their lifetime. Most types of cancer are caused by genetic mutations that occur with aging and exposure to toxins, such as tobacco smoke and alcohol. Other factors can influence your risk of cancer, such as diet and exercise. You can read more about cancer causes and risks in Cancer Causes and Prevention – NCI
About 5 to 10% of cancers are caused by hereditary gene mutations. These are called “hereditary cancer syndromes.” Non-hereditary cancers are called “spontaneous.”
8. Eating excessive sugar both increases your risk of developing cancer and will make an existing cancer worse.
Fiction. Although cancer cells consume more sugar than normal cells, no studies have linked eating sugar with increased cancer risk. There’s no evidence that if you stop eating sugar your cancer will shrink or disappear. A high-sugar diet can contribute to overweight and obesity, which are associated with increased risk of developing several types of cancer. You can read more about obesity and cancer here.
How to spot cancer misinformation
When you read information that sounds too good to be true, it probably is misinformation. Here are some ways to be confident that you have reliable information:
- The source is reliable, whether it’s a news organization, health system, university, non-profit, or government agency.
- The web address ends in .gov, .edu, and some .org sites.
- The information includes statements from reliable experts.
- The information agrees with other reliable sources.
The following are signs of potential misinformation. The more of these present, the more likely that it’s misinformation:
- The source is not an institution.
- The site’s motive is unclear.
- The web address ends in .net or .com
- The information is anecdotal, from people who are not experts on the topic.
- The information doesn’t agree with reliable sources and its origin is unclear.
- The information has a very emotional or alarming bias.
- The site wants you to react in a certain way.
Before using any of the information you found on websites or social media discuss it with your primary care provider or oncologist. Don’t alter your current treatments as prescribed by your healthcare team.
Yes abandoning conventional treatments might be a problem.
But if 30-80% of posts are misinformation, then 20-70% are not
And if there is one thing that is clear it is that our medical system is utterly broken and the public health system and many if not most doctors are themselves either a large source of misinformation or at the least held in the old and now useless medical paradigm that has produced very little progress in curing ailments such as cancer. There is a reason trust in the system has degraded so badly.
If you are near death, there is little to no downside in seeking alternative modes of treatment to supplement conventional treatments that are not working
The moment someone starts harping about misinformation, my take is they are not to be trusted in any way. MORE discussion is always better.
Misinformation is such a tricky word. What one person calls Misinformation is a fact to others. Consider six blind people describing an elephant. The four holding a leg, state it is like a rubbery tree, the one holding the trunk reports a large swinging rope, and the one holding the tail reports a small flexible stick. In the medical field, the four would be considered fact; there are four of them and only one for each of the others. The other two would be spreading misinformation. This is where I find this article. The medical community has decided this is fact and other statements are misinformation.
I wrote a lengthy point-by-point rebuttal to this article, then decided no one would care, so I have reduced my comments to a short story. Please know this was not meant to reflect on Dr Coleman, as she was taught to believe what she wrote. My problem is with a system that has no introspection.
The article finishes with the standard admonition, “ Don’t alter your current treatments as prescribed by your healthcare team.” I am glad I did NOT follow this advice.
I dropped out of a clinical trial for a treatment of large B-cell lymphoma when they INSISTED I take chemo with the argument that the trial drug “may have knocked it down, but did not knock it out.”
Here I am 8 Years later. Well past the five-year limit for a cure, and my oncologist told me, I am the only one who dropped out, and I am the only one alive, and not facing some terrible problem caused by the Chemo—heart failure, kidney failure, etc.
This article only parrots the propaganda everyone on the list of reliable sources provides, thus blocking access to reliable information. In short, this article is currently part of the problem, not part of the solution.
If anyone wants to take the RED pill and understand how this article is possible, please read the following:
https://www.amazon.com/Follow-Science-Sharyl-Attkisson-ebook/dp/B0CCP683RD/ref=sr_1_1