Search

Abstract Background Many untrue statements about cancer prevention and risks are circulating. The objective of this study was to assess Canadians’ awareness of known cancer risk factors and cancer myths (untruths or statements that are not completely true), and to explore how awareness may vary by sociodemographic and cognitive factors. Methods Cancer myths were identified by conducting scans of published, grey literature, and social media. Intuitive-analytic thinking disposition scores included were actively open- and close-minded thinking, as well as preference for intuitive and effortful thinking. A survey was administered online to participants aged 18 years and older through Prolific. Results were summarized descriptively and analyzed using chi-square tests, as well as Spearman rank and Pearson correlations. Results Responses from 734 Canadians were received. Participants were better at identifying known cancer risk factors (70% of known risks) compared to cancer myths (49%). Bivariate analyses showed differential awareness of known cancer risk factors (p 90% correctly identified), but recognition of other known risk factors was poor (as low as 23% for low vegetable and fruit intake). Mythical cancer risk factors with high support were consuming additives (61%), feeling stressed (52%), and consuming artificial sweeteners (49%). High uncertainty of causation was observed for glyphosate (66% neither agreed or disagreed). For factors that reduce cancer risk, reasonable awareness was observed for HPV vaccination (60%), but there was a high prevalence in cancer myths, particularly that consuming antioxidants (65%) and organic foods (45%) are protective, and some uncertainty whether drinking red wine (41%), consuming vitamins (32%), and smoking cannabis (30%) reduces cancer risk. Conclusions While Canadians were able to identify tobacco-related cancer risk factors, many myths were believed and numerous risk factors were not recognized. Cancer myths can be harmful in themselves and can detract the public’s attention from and action on established risk factors.

Introduction Certain popular ideas about how cancer starts and spreads, though scientifically wrong, can seem to make sense, especially when those ideas are rooted in old theories. The present study was conducted to assess the prevalence of myths and misconceptions among caregivers of patients with cancer. Materials and methods A hospital-based survey in a tertiary teaching hospital in a sub-Himalayan region of North India was conducted where caregivers (aged 18-70 years) were administered questionaries containing 10 close-ended questions. The study was conducted in small batches of 20-25 participants. The questionnaire was analyzed, and a healthcare worker discussed it with the participants and clarified their myths. Results A total of 400 participants were included in the study. The median age of the participants was 45 years (IQR 35-59). The majority of the participants were males (85%, n=340). The prevalent myths among the caregivers were the following: (a) cancer is always very painful (45.5%), (b) the cause of cancers is some sin/harm done to others (26%), (c) cancer results from some form of injuries (22.8%), and (d) cancer spreads from one person to another (20.8%). Over 90% of the participants (347/378) informed that post-survey counselling was effective in ameliorating their myths. Conclusion The present study highlights the widespread cancer myths and misconceptions among the caregivers of patients with cancer. Therefore, the need of the hour is to eliminate them to avoid any unnecessary treatment delays and strengthen the emotional and social support system for patients with cancer., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright © 2023, Kaul et al.)

Abstract Background Literature on population awareness about actual causes of cancer is growing but comparatively little is known about the prevalence of people's belief concerning mythical causes of cancer. This study aimed to estimate the prevalence of these beliefs and their association with socio-demographic characteristics and health behaviours. Methods A survey containing validated measures of beliefs about actual and mythical cancer causes and health behaviours (smoking, alcohol consumption, physical activity, fruit and vegetable consumption, overweight) was administered to a representative English population sample (N = 1330). Results Awareness of actual causes of cancer (52% accurately identified; 95% confidence interval [CI] 51–54) was greater than awareness of mythical cancer causes (36% accurately identified; 95% CI 34–37; P < 0.01). The most commonly endorsed mythical cancer causes were exposure to stress (43%; 95% CI 40–45), food additives (42%; 95% CI 39–44) and non-ionizing electromagnetic frequencies (35%; 95% CI 33–38). In adjusted analysis, greater awareness of actual and mythical cancer causes was independently associated with younger age, higher social grade, being white and having post-16 qualifications. Awareness of actual but not mythical cancer causes was associated with not smoking and eating sufficient fruit and vegetables. Conclusions Awareness of actual and mythical cancer causes is poor in the general population. Only knowledge of established risk factors is associated with adherence to behavioural recommendations for reducing cancer risk. Highlights • Approximately half of known lifestyle-related risk factors were not recognised by the general public in England. • Belief in mythical risk factors was common, particularly stress, food additives and electromagnetic frequencies. • Knowledge of actual but not mythical cancers causes was associated with health-protective behaviours. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The media are an important source of health information that can help people make their own medical decisions. However, medical news can also transmit biases produced by different factors, such as the previously held beliefs of journalists. This study identifies which cancer myths are more popular among future journalists and whether their beliefs are related to their chosen source of health information. Methods: A survey was conducted among journalism undergraduates (N = 249) to determine which cancer myths existed and how widespread they were. The survey included a list with different sources of health information and eight questions regarding cancer‐related myths. Results: The most extensive myths among the undergraduate respondents were that sweeteners (40.2%) and cell phones (48.2%) produce cancer and that a patient's good or bad attitude can determine the outcome of such an illness (52.2%). Respondents who relied on their family and friends as a source of health information were more prone to believe in cancer myths. Conclusion: This research focuses on future journalists as a group of special interest for improving knowledge about cancer. Future campaigns to debunk cancer misconceptions should pay attention to the role played by family and friends as agents of health information transmittance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: We aimed to develop a reliable and valid measure to assess public beliefs in mythical causes of cancer: the Cancer Awareness Measure-MYthical Causes Scale (CAM-MYCS)., Design and Setting: Cancer myth items were generated from a literature review, social media and interviews (n=16). The CAM-MYCS was prepared by reducing items using (a) an online sample (n=527) with exploratory factor analysis and (b) cancer experts with Delhpi methodology (n=13). To assess test-retest reliability and sensitivity to change, students (n=91) completed the CAM-MYCS at baseline and 1 week after exposure to information on lifestyle-related cancer causes or control information. Construct validity was tested by comparing CAM-MYCS scores between cancer experts (n=25) and students (n=91). Factor structure and internal reliability were investigated in a national sample (n=1993)., Results: Out of 42 items generated, 12 were retained based on factor loadings, prevalence of endorsement and expert consensus. CAM-MYCS scores improved (fewer myths endorsed) among students exposed to information on cancer causes compared with the control group (p<0.001) and showed high test-retest reliability (r=0.90, p<0.001). Cancer experts reported higher CAM-MYCS scores (fewer myths endorsed) than students (p<0.001). The factor structure of the CAM-MYCS was confirmed in the national sample and internal reliability was high (α=0.86). Inclusion of the CAM-MYCS alongside items assessing knowledge of actual cancer causes did not affect responses., Conclusions: The CAM-MYCS tool is a reliable and valid tool assessing beliefs in mythical causes of cancer, and it can be used alongside items assessing known causes of cancer., Competing Interests: Competing interests: LS has received honoraria for talks, an unrestricted research grant and travel expenses to attend meetings and workshops by pharmaceutical companies that make smoking cessation products (Pfizer, Johnson&Johnson) and has acted as paid reviewer for grant awarding bodies and as a paid consultant for health care companies. Other research has been funded by the government, a community-interested company (National Centre for Smoking Cessation) and charitable sources. SS is an academic advisor for LUTO., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2018. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)