Doctors warn of ‘big and concerning rise' of alcohol-related cancer deaths in the US — who's been hit worst
A shocking new study finds the number of alcohol-related deaths in the US has nearly doubled in the last two decades.
This is the first study to look at long-term trends in alcohol-linked cancer deaths across the country and was led by a team from the Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, part of the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine.
But not every demographic has been hit equally.
Advertisement
4 Earlier this year, the former US Surgeon General issued an advisory cautioning Americans of the strong link between alcohol consumption and an increased risk for 'at least seven types of cancer,' including breast, colon, and liver.
maeching – stock.adobe.com
Alcohol — classified as a Group 1 carcinogen by the International Agency for Research on Cancer — is the third-leading preventable cause of cancer in the United States, after tobacco and obesity.
Earlier this year, the former US Surgeon General, calling for a warning label to be placed on alcoholic products, issued an advisory cautioning Americans of the strong link between alcohol consumption and an increased risk for 'at least seven types of cancer,' including breast, colon and liver.
In this new study published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology, researchers used data from the Global Burden of Disease database to understand how alcohol use contributes to cancer-related deaths.
Advertisement
Their research revealed that in the U.S. between 1990 and 2021, the total number of alcohol-related cancer deaths nearly doubled, from just under 12,000 deaths per year to just over 23,000.
'That's a big and concerning rise. We need to increase awareness of this link among the general population and even in the medical field,' said Sylvester hematology and oncology fellow Dr. Chinmay Jani, who led the study.
Jani noted that while there is widespread awareness about the relationship between tobacco and increased cancer risk, there is less recognition of the link between alcohol and cancer.
Advertisement
A 2024 report by the American Association for Cancer Research found that while more than 5% of all cancer cases are caused by drinking alcohol, 51% of Americans are not aware that alcohol increases cancer risk.
4 Liver, colorectal, and esophageal cancers saw the most significant increases in alcohol-related mortality.
Nadzeya – stock.adobe.com
Researchers reviewed total cancer deaths, as well as those linked to alcohol consumption: breast, liver, colorectal, throat, voice box, mouth, and esophageal cancers.
Advertisement
Jani and his team found that the cancer mortality burden was especially high in men 55 and over, whose alcohol-linked cancer mortality rose slightly more than 1% every year from 2007 to 2021.
The increase in alcohol-related cancer mortality rates is owed nearly entirely to an increase among men. In women, rates have actually slightly declined since 1990.
However, even for cancers with declining mortality rates, the proportion caused by alcohol for nearly all of them rose between 1990 and 2021, for both men and women.
Among all cancers combined, the percentage of cancer deaths due to alcohol consumption increased by nearly 50% between 1990 and 2021, meaning even if factors like improved screening and treatment are reducing cancer deaths, alcohol consumption is responsible for a larger percentage of cancer mortality than in the past.
4 There are a few ways that drinking can contribute to an increased likelihood of developing cancer.
HHS
Liver, colorectal, and esophageal cancers saw the most significant increases in alcohol-related mortality.
On a state level, Texas and the District of Columbia had the highest rates of alcohol-linked cancer mortality, while Utah had the lowest.
Advertisement
Researchers think these differences could reflect regional differences in drinking cultures, as well as socioeconomic disparity and variances in health access.
According to the Surgeon General, alcohol is responsible for 100,000 cancer cases and 20,000 cancer deaths in the country each year.
1 in 6 breast cancer cases can be attributed to alcohol.
There are a few ways that drinking can contribute to an increased likelihood of developing cancer.
Advertisement
4 Former US Surgeon General Vivek Murthy warned that alcohol causes cancer earlier this year.
Getty Images
One is acetaldehyde, a known carcinogen that the body creates when it breaks down the ethanol in alcohol. This compound damages DNA and prevents cells from repairing the damage, allowing cancerous cells to grow.
It can also impact hormones, which affect how cells grow and divide. When that goes wrong, there's room for cancer to develop. Moreover, drinking interferes with the body's ability to absorb nutrients like iron, selenium, folate, and vitamins A, B1, B6, C, D, E, and K.
Excess alcohol intake can contribute to weight gain, and being overweight or obese has been linked with a higher risk of getting 13 types of cancer, including those in the breasts, liver, ovaries, kidneys, thyroid, and colon and rectum.
Advertisement
'We hope that our study will help educate the public on the impact of alcohol on individual cancer risk, as this is a potentially modifiable factor,' said Gilberto Lopes, M.D., Sylvester's chief of the Division of Medical Oncology and the study's senior author.
In addition to reducing or eliminating alcohol consumption, experts recommend other modifiable factors such as quitting tobacco, eating more green, leafy vegetables and whole grains, reducing or eliminating highly processed foods, maintaining a healthy body weight, and being physically active, all of which can lower cancer risk.
For those who choose to consume alcohol, the 2020-2025 Dietary Guidelines for Americans suggests limiting intake to no more than one drink per day for women and two drinks per day for men.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
The Best Time to Take Vitamin D for Maximum Absorption, According to Health Experts
Reviewed by Dietitian Sarah Pflugradt, Ph.D., RDN, CSCSIt can be challenging to meet your vitamin D needs through diet alone. It doesn't matter whether you take vitamin D in the morning or evening. Take vitamin D with a meal or snack containing fat to enhance it comes to the supplement aisle, multivitamins, omega-3s and probiotics might score the most real estate on the shelf. However, if that multi doesn't come with a dose of vitamin D, your doctor might recommend adding another pill to your routine. Known as the "sunshine vitamin," vitamin D is something most of us aren't getting enough of, and if you're wondering what time of day you should take it, we're here with the answer. Roxana Ehsani, M.S., RD, CSSD, explains that vitamin D is one of four fat-soluble vitamins (A, E and K are the others). Our bodies make vitamin D after being exposed to the sun, and we can also get it through our diet. It plays 'many important roles in our body,' adds Ehsani. These include supporting your immune system, muscle and nerve function, your body's ability to absorb calcium and more. Even though vitamin D is critical for overall health, research suggests that an estimated 25% of Americans are deficient in it. This could be because there are few food sources of vitamin D, and many people don't see sunshine during winter, live in regions with limited sunlight, and/or keep their skin covered while al fresco. The average older adult's recommended Daily Value of vitamin D is 20 micrograms, which is equal to 800 international units (IU). For reference, one egg and a 3-ounce can of tuna each have above 1 mcg, 3 ounces of sockeye salmon delivers around 12 mcg, and 3 ounces of trout offers around 14 mcg. Unless you're taking a spoonful of cod liver oil (34 mcg) or eating salmon or trout daily, it can be challenging to meet that mark through food alone, since most food sources of vitamin D offer small amounts. In the U.S., people get most of their dietary vitamin D from fortified milk, which contains around 100 IU per 8-ounce serving. But you'd need to drink a quart or more of milk daily to reach the DV—and milk consumption has been declining in recent years, a factor that some experts cite when discussing increased vitamin D deficiency. That's why many people take a vitamin D supplement. However, you want to make sure not only that you're taking the right amount but also that your body is absorbing it properly. Read along to learn when to take your vitamin D supplement and what factors you should consider. We'll cut to the chase: According to the current scientific consensus, our experts agree that it doesn't matter what time of the day you take your vitamin D supplement. Many people find it handy to take supplements in the morning before the day sweeps them away. Others like to store them in a drawer near the kitchen cleaning supplies to pop after tidying up after dinner. It shouldn't make a substantial difference in absorption rates whether you swing to one side or the other, although it's easiest to remember if you pick one time and stick with it. There are many factors to consider when taking any supplement, not just a vitamin D supplement; here's what you should keep in mind. First, several conditions can influence an individual's vitamin D levels (or needs). These include osteoporosis or osteopenia, depression, kidney or liver disease and having a family history of neurological conditions, to name a few. According to David Davidson, M.D., it's especially important for 'people with absorption issues, like inflammatory bowel disease or post-gastric bypass surgery' to work with their doctors to dial in their dose and receive personalized guidance about when to take vitamin D. Body size can also alter absorbency and dosing, so be sure to ask your doctor for an individual recommendation before you set off to shop for supplements. If you notice any nausea, constipation, noticeable appetite shifts or other adverse symptoms after taking your supplement, be sure to chat with your doctor. Regardless of why you're including a vitamin D supplement in your regimen, it's important to consider your routine. It's difficult to reap the health benefits of vitamin D if you forget to take it most of the time. Many people do well with 'habit stacking' or pairing the routine of taking vitamin D with something else they do daily on autopilot. Keep this in mind as you consider when to take your supplements. Ehsani shows how to put this into practice: 'If you always brush your teeth in the morning after breakfast, for instance, can you place your vitamin D supplements next to your toothbrush to remind you to take it each day?' As with any new medication or supplement, it's important to check with a health care professional to determine the best time for you. As a general rule, though, 'the 'best' time is what works best for you,' Ehsani says. 'The timing of when to take the vitamin D supplement shouldn't matter, but it should be taken with food,' Davidson says. 'Because it's a fat-soluble vitamin, food, specifically healthy fats, will help with the absorption of vitamin D.' For example, if you tend to have almond-butter toast each morning, 'consider taking it with that meal, as almond butter contains healthy fats,' Ehsani advises. Or, if you like to serve dinner with a side salad topped with a handful of walnuts and drizzled with a vinaigrette, take your vitamin D before you sit down to dig in. You could also choose to take your vitamin D with a glass of whole milk or a yogurt drink—you'll get the addition of calcium from the dairy and the vitamin D will help your body absorb the calcium. 'It may be impractical for you to take it with meals if you eat a majority of your meals away from home and can't realistically carry the vitamin D supplement with you everywhere you go,' Ehsani acknowledges. So, if that's not a realistic proposition, tell a health care professional about your schedule and when you think it might better fit, and ask for their runner-up recommendation. There are two types of vitamin D: D2 and D3. UV-grown plants, fungi and fortified foods deliver D2, while we get D3 from sunlight and animal-based ingredients. While both are important and beneficial, vitamin D3 is more bioavailable than vitamin D2. This means that your body uses vitamin D3 more efficiently, so you might need a higher dose of vitamin D2 to achieve the same effects as you might with a supplement that includes just D3. Before starting any new supplement regimen, talk to a health care professional about the best form of vitamin D for you. And if you already take a vitamin D supplement, confirm with them that you're taking the right form. Related: 7 Things You Should Look for When Buying a Supplement, According to Dietitians The best time to take a vitamin D supplement is when it fits well into your day—and when you can remember to take it. When choosing a vitamin D supplement, consider opting for vitamin D3 over D2 so your body can use it more efficiently. Additionally, Ehsani and Davidson confirm that, ideally, you should take your vitamin D supplement with a meal that contains fat to help with absorption. For instance, if you like to take vitamin D first thing in the morning, well before you typically eat breakfast, or prefer to pop your supplements just before bed, think about doing so with a handful of nuts or a spoonful of nut butter, Ehsani says. That way, you'll enjoy two wellness wins in one: better vitamin D absorption and all the health benefits of nuts. Related: 5 Supplements You Shouldn't Be Taking, According to a Dietitian Read the original article on EATINGWELL
Politico
7 hours ago
- Politico
FDA chief wary of federal recommendations for Covid-19 vaccines
Dr. Marty Makary, commissioner of the FDA, on Sunday made it clear he was dubious of previous federal recommendations on Covid-19 vaccinations and the agencies who made them. In an interview with host Margaret Brennan of CBS' 'Face the Nation,' Makary responded to repeated requests from Brennan to clarify federal guidance (or the lack thereof) with variations on the same answer. 'We believe the recommendation should be with a patient and their doctor,' he said at one point, declining to give specific advice — or specifying how doctors might be able to offer guidance in the absence from direction from the federal government. Brennan was seeking clarity from Makary in the aftermath of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s announcement that Covid-19 vaccines would no longer be recommended for healthy children and pregnant women. The CDC subsequently offered updated advice that somewhat countered what Kennedy said but also left room for interpretation. Makary there needed to be more controlled studies, so that decisions to approve vaccines would be more authoritative. The CBS host tried to get Makary to say what was lacking in the current data for such vaccines, and when that information might be available to the agency, as well as the general public. In his answers Sunday, Makary was not supportive of past guidance, criticizing the methodology of the CDC. 'We know the CDC data is contaminated with a lot of false positives from incidental positive Covid tests with routine testing of every kid that walks in the hospital,' he told Brennan. Makary also cast doubt on the CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. 'That panel has been a kangaroo court where they just rubber-stamp every single vaccine put in front of them,' he said. At the time he was nominated in November, Makary was a Johns Hopkins surgeon who was best known for his criticism of the Biden administration's response to Covid, something for which Kennedy was also known. Trump said Makary was needed because 'the FDA has lost the trust of Americans.' Makary, he said, would 'course-correct' the agency. On Sunday, when it came to discussing the shots and pregnant women, Makary was a model of consistency in his contention that the decision was a personal matter between a patient and her doctor. Brennan and Makary had this exchange: Brennan: 'It is still unclear what pregnant women now should do until they get the data that you say.' Makary: 'I'd say talk to their doctor.' Brennan: 'When do they get the data you're promising? All these controlled studies.' Makary: 'In the absence of data, they should talk to their doctor ...' Brennan: 'So no date?' Makary: "... and their doctor will use their best wisdom and judgment.'
The Hill
8 hours ago
- The Hill
With his new prescription drug order, Trump fixes what Biden broke
Americans have been clamoring for sensible prescription drug reform for years. With the stroke of his pen, President Donald Trump answered that call. His executive order aims to bring down drug prices while 'once again putting Americans first.' Luckily, it specifically addresses one of the serious flaws in the Biden administration's Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program — an oversight that has discouraged investment in affordable, widely used medications. This reform could deliver major savings to patients — without undermining the innovation that drives medical breakthroughs. Now it's up to Congress to finish the job. The reform in question addresses a flaw in the Medicare price-setting scheme put in place by the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act. That law gave the secretary of Health and Human Services sweeping new authority to impose price controls on certain drugs covered by Medicare. But it also drew an arbitrary line between different types of medicines by giving biologics, which are made from living organisms,13 years before price-setting kicks in, while small-molecule drugs, like pills and capsules, get just nine. That four-year gap makes no clinical or economic sense. Many of the most important drugs in history, from aspirin to statins to HIV treatments, are small-molecule medicines. Yet innovators are now steering investment away from them. According to a recent study, investment in small-molecule drugs has already dropped by 68 percent. And compared to pre-IRA levels, new small-molecule cancer drug development programs fell over 40 percent last year. President Trump's order calls for correcting this imbalance. The Republican-backed EPIC Act offers the clearest solution, aligning the treatment of small-molecule drugs with biologics by extending the price-setting window to 13 years. My hope is that this legislation will pass quickly with bipartisan support. Passing EPIC would protect innovation, preserve patient access and deliver on the president's promise to fix what the last administration got wrong. The order also directs the secretary of Labor to write new transparency rules to address some of the other significant issues affecting drug access and prices. That's a big win for patients and a critical step toward restoring fairness to the system and decreasing out-of-pocket costs for Americans. In addition to these transparency reforms, the order acknowledges the critical role of intellectual property rights in bringing new drugs to patients — and promises to optimize those protections in ways that improve access and lower drug costs. Patents and other intellectual property protections play a central role in pushing medical science forward. The previous administration's efforts to undermine these essential tools posed a direct threat to the foundations of America's innovation-driven economy. President Trump's unequivocal stance on this issue should come as welcome news to the nation's inventors and entrepreneurs — including those in the biotech sector. Equally encouraging is the executive order's treatment of the 340B Prescription Drug Program. The program was originally designed to help safety-net providers offer affordable medications to low-income patients. Yet today, less than 40 percent of hospitals that use the program are in underserved areas. During my time in Congress, I took up this issue — championing reforms to promote transparency, increase accountability and require participating hospitals to report patient's benefits. Now, emboldened by the White House, lawmakers should do the same. Altogether, this order is a blueprint for drug pricing reform that's patient-focused, pro-innovation and rooted in real-world solutions. Now, Congress can do its part, beginning with passing the EPIC Act. If they do, American patients could finally get the kind of affordable, innovative and equitable prescription drug sector they've long demanded. Larry Bucshon, MD, a cardiothoracic surgeon, served as the U.S. representative for Indiana's 8th District from 2011 to 2025.
