Yes, it is true that it is under-recognized among non-smokers and people often take it for granted. Therefore more attention is needed in this regard. Major contributors to lung cancers in never-smokers include second-hand smoke, occupational carcinogen exposure and outdoor pollution. Globally, the use of solid fuels for indoor cooking and second-hand smoke exposure are important contributions to lung cancer in never-smokers and disproportionately affect women.
For too long having lung cancer has only been thought of as a smoking-related disease. The other side has never been considered at all. So the general perception is different, owing to lack of awareness. The scale of the lung cancer cases in recent times particularly among the non-smokers is an alarming situation and hence needs to raise awareness with clinicians and policymakers of the other risk factors including indoor and outdoor air pollution.
The air quality is the first important thing we must address, be it workplace or home or society. On a daily basis, we are getting exposure to very poor air quality and that is one of the foremost reason for lung cancers among non-smokers. By delivering on the promise of a clean air generation we can reduce the number of lung cancers among those who have never smoked.
It is also true that most people who have never smoked do not believe they are at risk and often experience long delays in diagnosis, reducing their chances of receiving curative treatment. Similarly, the stigma of smoking has been the major factor behind the lack of interest in, knowledge of and research into lung cancer. Therefore, in many ways, never-smokers who develop lung cancer are, as a result, disadvantaged.
Further, drawing attention to the contribution of underlying risk factors to lung cancer in never-smokers presents opportunities to reinforce efforts to tackle other major public health challenges. For example, the impact of passive smoking and air pollution on lung cancers adds weight to the government's ambitions to improve air quality and the public, clinicians and policymakers must all be aware of this relationship.
Well I think it is, especially since smoking isnt the only way a person can actually get lung cancer. There's a popular misconception in Nigeria that once you're a smoker you're most certainly going to end up gasping for air on your death bed because death starts following you the moment you start smoking.
People who find themselves in air polluted environments are also at risk of getting lung cancer. Prolonged exposure in environments like that can only result in a person developing lit cancer at some point in time
Because of the belief that lung cancer is a smokers thing, it's highly underrated in Nigeria, and I don't think that's going to change. People just don't believe they can get lung cancer when they don't smoke.
I hope this helps.
Continued smoking and inhalation of dust can stimulate the bronchial epithelium to induce cancer. At present, smoking is considered to be the most basic risk factor for lung cancer. There are more than 3,000 kinds of chemicals in tobacco, and multi-chain aromatic hydrocarbon compounds (such as benzopyrene) have strong carcinogenic activity.
In patients with chronic lung infections, such as tuberculosis and bronchiectasis, the bronchial epithelium may become squamous in the process of chronic infection and eventually become cancerous.
Family, genetic and congenital factors, as well as decreased immune function, metabolic and endocrine dysfunction, may also be risk factors for lung cancer.
The incidence of lung cancer in industrialized countries is high, the city is higher than the rural areas, and the factory mining area is higher than the residential area. The main reason is that the industrial and transportation developed areas, oil, coal and internal combustion engines, and the asphalt roads contain dust and benzopyrene-induced carcinogenesis. Harmful substances such as hydrocarbons are harmful to the atmosphere.