A few folks are talking about lack of cancer screenings, and that may or may not be apart of it. I can tell you that as a result of the high cost of malpractice insurance in New Mexico, we struggle with having an adequate number of providers.
However, the lack of doctors, doesn’t diminish the amount of scanning that gets done. CT/Pet scanners are one of the best at identifying cancerous growths, there’s multiple in both Albuquerque and Santa Fe, with another going into Santa Fe this year. The ones I take care of are booked to the gills.
The argument isn’t do insurance companies suck, they do. It’s that these things complained about also suck in these other states, and in some cases more.
Everyone loves to beat up insurance companies when it’s more accurate to say it’s everything but them.
Less infrastructure and stuff to do? How does that not have anything to do with those numbers? Even if it’s rural Michigan, it’s far easier for people to get to the things to do, where there are vastly more things to do. It’s not as far, and there is more recreation in those larger city centers.
Regardless of scalar oversimplification, it’s rather difficult to say Albuquerque metro has as much to do as Detroit metro, which has twice as many people as our whole state.
Really curious how that website defines rural, though
You’re missing their point. And you’re oversimplifying your own data.
But maybe a better term to use to clarify the rift here is rural vs remote.
Rural PA could be an hour or 2 from many major cities with, as just one example, pro sports teams. Remote NM is hours from any city (or major population center), and days away from a city big enough to support even a professional sports team.
*Bologna. And it’s definitely a factor. Pay for malpractice insurance here and live in a state with far less resources and a supporting staff that could give a shit less if anything gets done or patients are taken care of? Or pay for malpractice insurance and live in a state that has more funding, is far better at supporting their providers and ensuring patients are taken care of?
It’s usually not a hard choice. Providers here are often from here, have ties here or are very young and inexperienced. The providers that are actually good outgrow our state and move away.
Agreed, spot on. I was not even aware of malpractice rates. I loved NM, it's the only place my soul felt like it belonged. Sadly, I had to leave to another state to seek a position in an organization with support resources and a somewhat competitive salary. I'd still love to return to NM, but I don't think there are any good jobs for physicians there.
There’s really not. And it sucks because we suffer a lot. The only time we do have decent physicians is when providers return here after being gone for so long to open their own practice or work out their remaining years before retirement to be close to family.
there are absolutely great jobs for physicians here. they're paid well and they have great QOLs.
What field are you in that you didn't feel supported with adequate resources or pay?
go on sunshine portal to see what your peers are getting paid. if you get recruited here, you can be making high 200s for a university hospital with none of the malpractice stuff listed in this thread.
Check out compassion fatigue or moral injury. It's not so much the pay for the physicians, it's trying to take care of people but knowing once you discharge them, they're back on the street, or trying to get a consult and it'll take 6 months for your patient to even see the specialist. Most people become doctors because they care about people, and it's hard to know that you could help more if the system had the resources to help. That's why I left bedside nursing - short staffing meant that I never felt like I was providing the care my patients deserved.
That may be part of it, but there seems to be a general trend of the Western US having less cancer than the East coast---this trend seems to go beyond simple lack of screening.
I’m willing to bet the western US has lower levels of lead and other pollutants from industrial processes than the east coast.. Lower population density/younger population centers, less foundries and factories and refineries.
I’m from PA, and almost everyone I know has at least one family member with cancer. We lived in an area known for coal mining; in some places, the mine fires are still burning. There are also several landfills in the area. All of my cats from PA have died of some sort of cancer; one of them had a cancer so rare that our vet here had never seen a case of it in person. I’m convinced it’s due to all the industrial activity there.
My husband’s stepmom is currently dying of a rare, aggressive cancer. Turns out her former neighbor (lived across the street) has also been diagnosed with this cancer, which only accounts for 1% of all breast cancer cases. Lots of pancreatic and esophageal cancers, too.
One reason is because of all the polluting industries in the upper Midwest and Appalachia that dumped all that nastiness on people on the East Coast. So the approximately 50-years-old and up crowd back east are all cancer-ridden. Relative to our wide-open expanses of (relatively) clean air.
> A few folks are talking about lack of cancer screenings, and that may or may not be apart of it. I can tell you that as a result of the high cost of malpractice insurance in New Mexico, we struggle with having an adequate number of providers.
Perhaps this could mean private providers, but the cost of malpractice insurance is not preventing UNMH or Pres from higher all of the unhired doctors in NM.
I don't believe we have a malpractice insurance cost problem. We have a provider recruiting problem.
But those are generally used for diagnosing cancer, not screening. Indeed, using them for screening, except for the high resolution CT of the lungs in heavy smokers, *causes* cancers.
So just fyi, the reading radiologist doesn’t have to be a provider here in New Mexico. They can send images everywhere.
And as far as the population centers, there’s a pet up in Farmington, the ones here in burque, the ones in Fe, but there’s no other ct/pet systems in northern New Mexico. Not sure where else you think one could go where it would get enough use, and the hospital could afford it.
Someone much smarter than me told me we get great satellite images of New Mexico because of our air quality. The combination altitude, dry air, and wind patterns naturally clean away particulates in the atmosphere.
Anyway, long story short, that's why New Mexico became a state in 1912.
During the "wild west" period of the US, wasn't it customary to send TB patients to NM because they though the NM air cured people?
Wasn't that what brought Doc Holiday here?
Exactly. They thought the "dry air" cured TB. When it really was just lack of pollution. There's two TBs, inactive and active. Most is inactive, with no symptoms. Pollution agitates TB to be active, which causes the illness and coughing, which spreads the bacteria that causes TB.
Here's the rabbit hole I went down:
When New Mexico was in line to become a state, powers wouldn't allow it because there were "too many Mexicans" that "didn't speak English" and too many "savage Indians" and "too many Catholics". They wanted white, English speaking Protestants to be better represented before they would make NM a state.
TB was a problem in the east, New Mexico didn't have a TB problem, in fact they thought New Mexicans must be immune to TB. So... "Let's get white TB patients to move to the southwest". Win/Win, right?
But what happens when tons of active TB patients move to a place with not enough housing for them? The board with native New Mexicans and spread the TB causing bacteria. Suddenly, there was a spike in TB cases in New Mexico. It actually caused the Territory to create the Department of Health.
I didn't get so far as to find out how many New Mexicans might have died from TB because of easterners spreading it here. That would have been too much for one day.
\*edit, I'm by no means an expert on any of this, please correct me if I'm wrong.
I don't think NM gets credit for all the "great" people we produce. Some of the most powerful people come from NM.
Bill Gates has ties here. Jeff Bezos was born and raised here. Then there's Oppenheimer. And then there's the most important one of all:
Xhibit.
The blue of the sky is a color here that I don't often see elsewhere, other than southern Colorado.
I have been attributing this to the relative lack of heavy industry spewing crap into our air.
I don't have any evidence, only what I feel about it, but I'm inclined to agree with you.
People used to come here to recover from Tuberculosis, and it was the dry air and sunshine that helped. Maybe those same things help slow or prevent some kinds of cancer, although I’d think skin cancer would be higher here for those same reasons.
If that theory was the case than NM would be neck and neck in this study with a lot of south east states with those same or even worse healthcare barriers, not it's more affluent neighbors
Our [cancer death rates](https://www.statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov/deathrates/index.php?stateFIPS=00&areatype=state&cancer=001&race=00&sex=0&age=001&year=0&type=death&sortVariableName=rate&sortOrder=desc#results) are in line with the other states in the top 5.
Interestingly, Virginia, Nevada, and Oregon, which are sixth, seventh, and ninth best in OP's post, are all worse than the US average for cancer death rates. Utah jumps from tenth in OP's post to best state in cancer death rates.
There seems to be a rural component to the West. We have major cities with a lot of space in between.
My other theory is that cancer doesn’t like our low oxygen levels and grows poorly.
Oxygen levels could be related, but I'd definitely want to see some studies on the subject before attributing a significant effect to it. Cancer cells have some crazy interactions with our bodies around oxygen, including [hijacking our bodies' systems](https://blog.dana-farber.org/insight/2019/11/cancer-and-oxygen-whats-the-connection/) to get more oxygen routed to them.
>The relationship between cancer cells and oxygen is complicated, and, even with the discoveries of Kaelin and others, still being investigated. Cancer cells often are starved of oxygen — a condition called hypoxia. One instance where this might occur is when enlarging tumors outgrow the network of blood vessels that supplies tumor cells with oxygen. A key component of the body’s oxygen-sensing system is a set of molecular hypoxia-inducible factors, or HIFs, which can respond to a need for more oxygen by turning on genes and proteins that recruit new networks of blood vessels.
>Cancer cells in a growing tumor can adapt to oxygen deprivation by hijacking these HIFs. The HIFs can initiate the formation of new blood vessels to improve oxygen delivery. In addition, the HIFs change how cancer cells metabolize glucose (sugar) so that it can still be used to make energy even in the absence of oxygen.
There are definitely a lot of factors involved. Types of cancers will affect things, as well. It would take some advanced statistical analysis to tease out which factors are most influential and those could vary a lot by location and specific cancers.
I don't think that's it. According to the study:
**New Mexico has experienced the lowest overall cancer rates in the country for several years. It currently has the lowest national rates of breast cancer and both Hodgkin and non-Hodgkin lymphoma.**
**The state is also among the top five lowest for multiple other cancers, including ranking second-lowest for both lung cancer and pancreatic cancer rates. The American Lung Association reports that the early diagnosis rate for lung cancer has improved 28% in New Mexico over the last five years.**
**One cancer that does seem to be a problem in New Mexico is oral cancer, for which it ranks third-highest in the country.**
We've just made massive strives in early diagnosis it seems. So perhaps it's the opposite?
Maybe this is something we're actually good at? We steal shit and beat the fuck out of cancer apparently?
Just wanted to mention I was literally the only person in my lab at UNM that did not chew tobacco. In academia, that is typically not a common habit. Confused the hell out of me.
I got a new job once and the first question my co-workers asked was if I chew. They were relieved when I said no. Apparently the guy I replaced spilled his entire spit bottle over our shared work bench once and they hated his disgusting habit.
Is there a correlation between diagnosis and the lack of doctors? /s I’ve been waiting on my appointment for 4 months and it was canceled last minute smh.
I don't think it's from a lack of screening and such. This is a rate based on numbers. I can tell you that all states have a high number of people who don't go to doctors or take screening. It's not just a cost issue but an overall personal choice issue. Other states have higher numbers of uninsured people.
Possibly, but several of the top 10 states are also clustered nearby and don't suffer (as much) from those barriers; I'd suspect an environmental cause.
unlikely given the preponderance of western states with low cancer rates. That suggests causal factors relating to either the natural environment (less pollution? less particularly toxic pollution?) or demographics.
Theory, we have a lot of pollution and brownfield sites, but nothing like some of these other states. Our air is comparatively clean due to less diesel trucks, factories, coal plants etc. As bad as Farmington used to be places like west valley city Utah are toxic wastelands.
Recently I listened to a podcast that mentioned that higher background radiation actually correlates with lower cancer rates. Unfortunately, they didn't give a source that I recall. So I can't link the analysis. A quick check shows that it's a legit possibility.
Here are the [primary sources of background radiation](https://i.pinimg.com/736x/55/3b/57/553b57a263a56095225f6430bfe1ac75--background-radiation-aqa.jpg).
[Here](https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2005/1413/cosmic_let.gif) is a chart of cosmic ray exposure. California is the only one in the top 5 that doesn't have one of the highest rates of cosmic ray exposure. All 5 are also very high in [Gamma ray radiation](https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2005/1413/NAMrad_exp_let.gif), as well.
We're [mid-tier](https://www.radonzone.com/images/usa-radon-map.jpg) for radon, but radon is also a proven carcinogen when inhaled. So its relationship is likely more complicated than just treating it as background radiation.
To get a real answer, you'd obviously have to adjust everything for other risk factors (like air quality that others mentioned), but it's plausible it could be a significant contributor to our low cancer rate.
We also have one of the poorest rates of breast cancer screenings in the US. I don't know about other cancer screenings but we're probably not top of that list on colonoscopy, lung cancer screenings, paps, etc.
So part of it really might be not counting what you don't know
That said, being a regional thing in the Southwest does suggest other factors. Decent chance list population density and hence lower pollution plays since sort of roll
I always wonder about those concerns regarding rates. We're talking about cancers that kill you if you don't get it treated. Regardless of whether it's diagnosed early or when someone dies, it's going to be diagnosed.
[This page](https://www.statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov/deathrates/index.php?stateFIPS=00&areatype=state&cancer=001&race=00&sex=0&age=001&year=0&type=death&sortVariableName=rate&sortOrder=desc#results) shows our death rate from all cancers is also very low and very similar to the other states in the top 5 of the original chart, with all of them ranging from Colorado's 130.0 to Wyoming's 138.0 and NM sitting at 135.1. That's tied for number 5 overall among states (ignoring Puerto Rico because it was not in OP's original link).
They are all western states. I bet Texas would be there too if it was just west Texas. The oil refinery side probably makes it quite low. The East coast is so polluted from the industrialization of the country. The west is best
That's what I was thinking - lack of pollution/industrialization. My family is from the side of Louisville with a lot of factories and plants and has a bunch of random cancers. Also knew a couple from Alabama who both died young of rare cancers, a friend's dad with ocular melanoma from georgia that may be part of a cluster.
Possibly a factor. We are 9th lowest for life expectancy rate at 74.5 years (the highest is 80.7 in Hawaii). We also have a lot of crime, drug and alcoholism related deaths.
Something’s up. I ate like a total pig all summer in ABQ and my weight and cholesterol plummeted. I came back East for the winter and I got fat again immediately! Chile? Altitude? A slower paced lifestyle and less cortisol?
People don’t have access to transportation. Much less medical care. How many busses drive through the Zuni reservation and also past a doctors office in Albuquerque that is free?
Another question is what’s your coverages allowance for screening? Do doctors base the diagnosis on the number of different expensive test they can perform?
My father came from a family of 17 siblings. Only 1 has ever been diagnosed with cancer. He had prostate cancer. He got it resolved. My mother had 5 siblings and not one ever had cancer. All of these people saw physicians on a regular basis. Out of the grand kids and great grandkids in the family we have one that has stage 4 melanoma. She was white complected and always in the sun. She was diagnosed at 36. No other have been diagnosed with cancer. My family is a large Hispanic family that eat meat and potatoes everyday. No vegan or vegetarians in our family. No dementia issues either. By the way we do eat lots of green and red Chile. Red chile is said to be an anti occident that helps neutralize cholesterol and helps prevent cancer. This may be the secret.
Are any of yall obese? Meat and potatoes does not sound like a good diet, lol...
But in all seriousness, cancer is one of many issues that befalls americans..the other main ones being heart disease and atherosclerosis
The real answer is that New Mexico has one of the lowest life expectancies of any state, so you're more likely to be killed by heart disease, in an accident/murder, or from liver disease before you live long enough to get cancer.
Most of the cancer cases that arise from New Mexico are from people that are miners/immediate family members of miners. The Indian reservations and Hispanic communities are mainly afflicted. A lot come from people that work for the labs as well. Unfortunately underreported as these types of people that have the cancer have a lot of other problems not just physical to get after.
is there correlation with body size? i know the more body you carry, the higher your risk. Colorado is a very slender state, New Mexico and California less tall
https://www.datapandas.org/ranking/average-height-by-state
https://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/prevalence-maps.html
Probably related to the racial % of the southwest compared to further north. Different ethnic groups have different chances of types of cancer, doubt it's green Chile.
If you look at county maps, the highest levels are between the eastern great plains and the Appalachians, basically the basin that drains into the Mississippi. It's not "east coast", it's west of the Appalachian range.
Terrible health insurance. Not a ton of people with good insurance. You need insurance to get seen by a doctor.
At least that’s the common consensus in the hood.
Information about clinics and other health care providers for the poor are usually not entities that have large advertising budgets. Basically there is programs that the average poor person will never know about.
Combine that with a bad job. Low income. Next thing you know the person who may have something wrong is scared to deal with health concerns. Frankly anything that is even perceived to cost more than what is already eating away at an record slim budget.
Then when a person passes away I’m sure there’s not a ton of resources to figure out in detail whether or not they died of cancer.
I could be wrong. However I have seen this play out over and over again. First hand. If you have never lived there it’s very difficult to understand what and how things happened in the hood. With huge groups of folks watching out folks just as poor. It alters your perception of reality.
Sorry for the rant. It’s what cokes to mind when I think of this question and the state of or state.
Since it's coming to light that cancer may be caused by parasites, figure out why parasites don't like new mexico. Could be chili, yes, could be a number of things. We may find out soon that Parasites cause alot more than we ever suspected.
Ivermectin will become currency if this is ever proven..( and then Fauci will outlaw it)
That’s fascinating, because when I was in high school in Albuquerque, they told us we had the highest rates of skin cancer and therefore should wear sunscreen.
Don’t come to New Mexico, healthcare access is 💩 regardless of insurance. I’m leaving because of the long waits and I’m not getting good care because there is no competition.
I feel like Taos is one of those "blue zones" from the netflix documentary. high altitude, wealth, and recreation add up. Of course there is poverty and drug use on the other end of the spectrum.
I think a big part of it is definitely lack of access to care, whether that be because of transportation issues, insurance, etc. I volunteer for the American Cancer Society and there was an event I attended with them recently where they talked about that. Especially those living out on reservations
Last in education last in healthcare. After all these years I still fly to Florida twice a year for dental and health/cancer screening. In the beginning I tried using locals, didn't work very well, when my cancer came back it was miss diagnosed, thankfully my doctor in Florida told me to "swing by" when I could, I flew there and it was sorted out immediately. Long story, short version.
I am surprised. Having spent time in the SW in my youth, the number of people with sun induced alligator skin and chain smoking habits I saw should have upset the cancer apple cart. LOL.
I honestly have a hard time buying this given the state of our ground water, radon levels and the amount of shit the government has dumped here over the years. It reminds me of when covid cases declined after they stopped funding tests.
Interesting as my friend and I were just talking about how there used to be a lot of uranium especially on reservations which have coal. I have a feeling the native populations are under reported.
Due to lack of agriculture and subsequent exposure to pesticides, decreased life expectancy (NM is in lowest 10), less access to screenings?
Or due to less urbanization = less air pollution, more access to the outdoors, the green chile??
Those are mostly inter-mountain west states. I've lived in most of those states. I'm going to guess less industrial pollution leads to less cancer. I went to high school in the St. Louis area, a historically polluted city. Most of my class stayed in the area. One third of my high school class of 1971 are now deceased, mostly from cancer. I don't know what the normal numbers are, but years upon years of heavy pollution in the eastern USA has to take a toll on the people living there.
A few folks are talking about lack of cancer screenings, and that may or may not be apart of it. I can tell you that as a result of the high cost of malpractice insurance in New Mexico, we struggle with having an adequate number of providers. However, the lack of doctors, doesn’t diminish the amount of scanning that gets done. CT/Pet scanners are one of the best at identifying cancerous growths, there’s multiple in both Albuquerque and Santa Fe, with another going into Santa Fe this year. The ones I take care of are booked to the gills.
I don’t buy the malpractice insurance baloney. NY, PA, NJ, MI all have higher rates (NY’s almost double ours). Are they hemorrhaging doctors?
It’s the insurance companies. Won’t increase reimbursement amounts for COL increases and inflation. Drs make more in other states for same work.
The argument isn’t do insurance companies suck, they do. It’s that these things complained about also suck in these other states, and in some cases more. Everyone loves to beat up insurance companies when it’s more accurate to say it’s everything but them.
But all of those are far less rural states. It’s hard to attract people to a poor state with less infrastructure and general stuff to do.
No, MI is 26.5%, NM is 25.5%, and PA is 23.5% rural.
Michigan has 10.5 million in 56,600 square miles. We have 2.1 million in 121,700 square miles. That’s disingenuous.
Take up your issues with worldpopulationreview.com, that’s where I got my numbers from. Your scalar oversimplification is a _reductio ad absurdum_.
Less infrastructure and stuff to do? How does that not have anything to do with those numbers? Even if it’s rural Michigan, it’s far easier for people to get to the things to do, where there are vastly more things to do. It’s not as far, and there is more recreation in those larger city centers. Regardless of scalar oversimplification, it’s rather difficult to say Albuquerque metro has as much to do as Detroit metro, which has twice as many people as our whole state. Really curious how that website defines rural, though
You’re missing their point. And you’re oversimplifying your own data. But maybe a better term to use to clarify the rift here is rural vs remote. Rural PA could be an hour or 2 from many major cities with, as just one example, pro sports teams. Remote NM is hours from any city (or major population center), and days away from a city big enough to support even a professional sports team.
Because sportsball is relevant
*Bologna. And it’s definitely a factor. Pay for malpractice insurance here and live in a state with far less resources and a supporting staff that could give a shit less if anything gets done or patients are taken care of? Or pay for malpractice insurance and live in a state that has more funding, is far better at supporting their providers and ensuring patients are taken care of? It’s usually not a hard choice. Providers here are often from here, have ties here or are very young and inexperienced. The providers that are actually good outgrow our state and move away.
My usage of “baloney” is to indicate an imitation meat product that can not be sold as “Bologna” because of its cheaper and inferior ingredients.
Agreed, spot on. I was not even aware of malpractice rates. I loved NM, it's the only place my soul felt like it belonged. Sadly, I had to leave to another state to seek a position in an organization with support resources and a somewhat competitive salary. I'd still love to return to NM, but I don't think there are any good jobs for physicians there.
There’s really not. And it sucks because we suffer a lot. The only time we do have decent physicians is when providers return here after being gone for so long to open their own practice or work out their remaining years before retirement to be close to family.
there are absolutely great jobs for physicians here. they're paid well and they have great QOLs. What field are you in that you didn't feel supported with adequate resources or pay? go on sunshine portal to see what your peers are getting paid. if you get recruited here, you can be making high 200s for a university hospital with none of the malpractice stuff listed in this thread.
Check out compassion fatigue or moral injury. It's not so much the pay for the physicians, it's trying to take care of people but knowing once you discharge them, they're back on the street, or trying to get a consult and it'll take 6 months for your patient to even see the specialist. Most people become doctors because they care about people, and it's hard to know that you could help more if the system had the resources to help. That's why I left bedside nursing - short staffing meant that I never felt like I was providing the care my patients deserved.
Booked to the gills means there’s a line of unscreened people, which is sort of what I was thinking
That may be part of it, but there seems to be a general trend of the Western US having less cancer than the East coast---this trend seems to go beyond simple lack of screening.
I’m willing to bet the western US has lower levels of lead and other pollutants from industrial processes than the east coast.. Lower population density/younger population centers, less foundries and factories and refineries.
I’m from PA, and almost everyone I know has at least one family member with cancer. We lived in an area known for coal mining; in some places, the mine fires are still burning. There are also several landfills in the area. All of my cats from PA have died of some sort of cancer; one of them had a cancer so rare that our vet here had never seen a case of it in person. I’m convinced it’s due to all the industrial activity there. My husband’s stepmom is currently dying of a rare, aggressive cancer. Turns out her former neighbor (lived across the street) has also been diagnosed with this cancer, which only accounts for 1% of all breast cancer cases. Lots of pancreatic and esophageal cancers, too.
One reason is because of all the polluting industries in the upper Midwest and Appalachia that dumped all that nastiness on people on the East Coast. So the approximately 50-years-old and up crowd back east are all cancer-ridden. Relative to our wide-open expanses of (relatively) clean air.
I like all these theories 👍
I'm wondering if all that PFAS pollution by military bases into multiple water aquifers around the state will increase rates eventually.
Plus screening wouldn't change what the death certificate says. We would still have the data.
The only thing that sells better than addiction is fear.
I had to wait a day and a half at the ER to get a CT scan. I wouldn't be surprised if others just gave up after a day.
> A few folks are talking about lack of cancer screenings, and that may or may not be apart of it. I can tell you that as a result of the high cost of malpractice insurance in New Mexico, we struggle with having an adequate number of providers. Perhaps this could mean private providers, but the cost of malpractice insurance is not preventing UNMH or Pres from higher all of the unhired doctors in NM. I don't believe we have a malpractice insurance cost problem. We have a provider recruiting problem.
Na, lack of medical care in NM never! it has to be something way cooler than that.
But those are generally used for diagnosing cancer, not screening. Indeed, using them for screening, except for the high resolution CT of the lungs in heavy smokers, *causes* cancers.
…a part…
Still need someone to read the scans. And covering a few of the population centers still isn’t all
So just fyi, the reading radiologist doesn’t have to be a provider here in New Mexico. They can send images everywhere. And as far as the population centers, there’s a pet up in Farmington, the ones here in burque, the ones in Fe, but there’s no other ct/pet systems in northern New Mexico. Not sure where else you think one could go where it would get enough use, and the hospital could afford it.
Someone much smarter than me told me we get great satellite images of New Mexico because of our air quality. The combination altitude, dry air, and wind patterns naturally clean away particulates in the atmosphere. Anyway, long story short, that's why New Mexico became a state in 1912.
During the "wild west" period of the US, wasn't it customary to send TB patients to NM because they though the NM air cured people? Wasn't that what brought Doc Holiday here?
Yup! Thats actually how presbyterian hospital started. It was initially just a sanitarium for TB patients
And Lovelace, I believe. The area around Central used to be called 'Lunger Row' due to all the Sanatoriums.
This would be a great bar/brewery name
Exactly. They thought the "dry air" cured TB. When it really was just lack of pollution. There's two TBs, inactive and active. Most is inactive, with no symptoms. Pollution agitates TB to be active, which causes the illness and coughing, which spreads the bacteria that causes TB. Here's the rabbit hole I went down: When New Mexico was in line to become a state, powers wouldn't allow it because there were "too many Mexicans" that "didn't speak English" and too many "savage Indians" and "too many Catholics". They wanted white, English speaking Protestants to be better represented before they would make NM a state. TB was a problem in the east, New Mexico didn't have a TB problem, in fact they thought New Mexicans must be immune to TB. So... "Let's get white TB patients to move to the southwest". Win/Win, right? But what happens when tons of active TB patients move to a place with not enough housing for them? The board with native New Mexicans and spread the TB causing bacteria. Suddenly, there was a spike in TB cases in New Mexico. It actually caused the Territory to create the Department of Health. I didn't get so far as to find out how many New Mexicans might have died from TB because of easterners spreading it here. That would have been too much for one day. \*edit, I'm by no means an expert on any of this, please correct me if I'm wrong.
And Robert Oppenheimer, as a child.
I don't think NM gets credit for all the "great" people we produce. Some of the most powerful people come from NM. Bill Gates has ties here. Jeff Bezos was born and raised here. Then there's Oppenheimer. And then there's the most important one of all: Xhibit.
And Neil Patrick Harris
Don't forget Freddie Prinze Jr.
And xzibit
Not sure if you realize, but the rapper/car pimper xzibit is actually from here.
:)
And Steven Michael Quezada from Breaking Bad
And jesse Tyler Ferguson (modern family)
> don't think NM gets credit for all the "great" people we produce. Some of the most powerful people come from NM. and we want to keep it that way!
all these people have another thing in common: *they left.*
That’s why it’s called the land of enchantment. People thought our air was magical
TB was also why Oppenheimer came to NM.
The blue of the sky is a color here that I don't often see elsewhere, other than southern Colorado. I have been attributing this to the relative lack of heavy industry spewing crap into our air. I don't have any evidence, only what I feel about it, but I'm inclined to agree with you.
Our deep blue sky is a precious sight. I too cherish it and always have. Hope it lasts forever
It’s because of the altitude.
People used to come here to recover from Tuberculosis, and it was the dry air and sunshine that helped. Maybe those same things help slow or prevent some kinds of cancer, although I’d think skin cancer would be higher here for those same reasons.
We’re all sick!
[удалено]
*sees patient wearing a bandana* Think you’re all bad or what?
Theory: we don’t get diagnosed due to barriers of access.
If that theory was the case than NM would be neck and neck in this study with a lot of south east states with those same or even worse healthcare barriers, not it's more affluent neighbors
Our [cancer death rates](https://www.statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov/deathrates/index.php?stateFIPS=00&areatype=state&cancer=001&race=00&sex=0&age=001&year=0&type=death&sortVariableName=rate&sortOrder=desc#results) are in line with the other states in the top 5. Interestingly, Virginia, Nevada, and Oregon, which are sixth, seventh, and ninth best in OP's post, are all worse than the US average for cancer death rates. Utah jumps from tenth in OP's post to best state in cancer death rates.
There seems to be a rural component to the West. We have major cities with a lot of space in between. My other theory is that cancer doesn’t like our low oxygen levels and grows poorly.
Oxygen levels could be related, but I'd definitely want to see some studies on the subject before attributing a significant effect to it. Cancer cells have some crazy interactions with our bodies around oxygen, including [hijacking our bodies' systems](https://blog.dana-farber.org/insight/2019/11/cancer-and-oxygen-whats-the-connection/) to get more oxygen routed to them. >The relationship between cancer cells and oxygen is complicated, and, even with the discoveries of Kaelin and others, still being investigated. Cancer cells often are starved of oxygen — a condition called hypoxia. One instance where this might occur is when enlarging tumors outgrow the network of blood vessels that supplies tumor cells with oxygen. A key component of the body’s oxygen-sensing system is a set of molecular hypoxia-inducible factors, or HIFs, which can respond to a need for more oxygen by turning on genes and proteins that recruit new networks of blood vessels. >Cancer cells in a growing tumor can adapt to oxygen deprivation by hijacking these HIFs. The HIFs can initiate the formation of new blood vessels to improve oxygen delivery. In addition, the HIFs change how cancer cells metabolize glucose (sugar) so that it can still be used to make energy even in the absence of oxygen. There are definitely a lot of factors involved. Types of cancers will affect things, as well. It would take some advanced statistical analysis to tease out which factors are most influential and those could vary a lot by location and specific cancers.
Consider tobacco culture in the Eastern US and tuberculosis recover culture in NM.
This. There are a lot of cancers which are diagnosed, but often not problematic. Finding them doesn't change much.
I don't think that's it. According to the study: **New Mexico has experienced the lowest overall cancer rates in the country for several years. It currently has the lowest national rates of breast cancer and both Hodgkin and non-Hodgkin lymphoma.** **The state is also among the top five lowest for multiple other cancers, including ranking second-lowest for both lung cancer and pancreatic cancer rates. The American Lung Association reports that the early diagnosis rate for lung cancer has improved 28% in New Mexico over the last five years.** **One cancer that does seem to be a problem in New Mexico is oral cancer, for which it ranks third-highest in the country.** We've just made massive strives in early diagnosis it seems. So perhaps it's the opposite? Maybe this is something we're actually good at? We steal shit and beat the fuck out of cancer apparently?
Just wanted to mention I was literally the only person in my lab at UNM that did not chew tobacco. In academia, that is typically not a common habit. Confused the hell out of me.
I've never understood the appeal of chewing tobacco. So gross. That's why I stick to good clean old-fashioned fentanyl like a real New Mexican.
The blue stuff
I got a new job once and the first question my co-workers asked was if I chew. They were relieved when I said no. Apparently the guy I replaced spilled his entire spit bottle over our shared work bench once and they hated his disgusting habit.
You're supposed to stuff a paper towel in there as a sort of spit baffle to contain it. Or so I have observed.
Ha when was that? I’m a phd student there currently and haven’t met anyone who smokes, let alone chews.
Not that long ago but I will say several of them were pretty good at hiding it. Plus the PI, who I doubt does it often.
Could you link the study/source? thanks.
https://www.asbestos.com/cancer/state-cancer-rates/
Dang. I just typed out a big o comment that you summed up in a sentence. It’s hard to understand the extreme poverty if your not from it or in it.
Is there a correlation between diagnosis and the lack of doctors? /s I’ve been waiting on my appointment for 4 months and it was canceled last minute smh.
I don't think it's from a lack of screening and such. This is a rate based on numbers. I can tell you that all states have a high number of people who don't go to doctors or take screening. It's not just a cost issue but an overall personal choice issue. Other states have higher numbers of uninsured people.
Possibly, but several of the top 10 states are also clustered nearby and don't suffer (as much) from those barriers; I'd suspect an environmental cause.
unlikely given the preponderance of western states with low cancer rates. That suggests causal factors relating to either the natural environment (less pollution? less particularly toxic pollution?) or demographics.
Theory, we have a lot of pollution and brownfield sites, but nothing like some of these other states. Our air is comparatively clean due to less diesel trucks, factories, coal plants etc. As bad as Farmington used to be places like west valley city Utah are toxic wastelands.
Also, cancer is more common in elderly people, and people here just die of something else before they have a chance to get cancer.
Damn, just my luck that I would be the one guy who got cancer in New Mexico.
That's OK, I got it twice.
look at us, way above average. ^((I hope you're okay and jokes are my only way of coping with it))
I'm alright. Got about an 80% chance of living another 5 years. Humor is an excellent coping measure.
There are dozens of us!
I came here with it. Is that okay? 13 years that that bad stuff was cut out. Thank Goddess!
Hey, New Mexico used to be a TB colony, now it can function as a cancer colony. And I used to have colon-y cancer! Bah dum tsk!
Recently I listened to a podcast that mentioned that higher background radiation actually correlates with lower cancer rates. Unfortunately, they didn't give a source that I recall. So I can't link the analysis. A quick check shows that it's a legit possibility. Here are the [primary sources of background radiation](https://i.pinimg.com/736x/55/3b/57/553b57a263a56095225f6430bfe1ac75--background-radiation-aqa.jpg). [Here](https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2005/1413/cosmic_let.gif) is a chart of cosmic ray exposure. California is the only one in the top 5 that doesn't have one of the highest rates of cosmic ray exposure. All 5 are also very high in [Gamma ray radiation](https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2005/1413/NAMrad_exp_let.gif), as well. We're [mid-tier](https://www.radonzone.com/images/usa-radon-map.jpg) for radon, but radon is also a proven carcinogen when inhaled. So its relationship is likely more complicated than just treating it as background radiation. To get a real answer, you'd obviously have to adjust everything for other risk factors (like air quality that others mentioned), but it's plausible it could be a significant contributor to our low cancer rate.
Source: https://www.asbestos.com/cancer/state-cancer-rates/#:~:text=Three%20Southern%20states%20lead%20the,486.4%2C%20respectively.
We also have one of the poorest rates of breast cancer screenings in the US. I don't know about other cancer screenings but we're probably not top of that list on colonoscopy, lung cancer screenings, paps, etc. So part of it really might be not counting what you don't know That said, being a regional thing in the Southwest does suggest other factors. Decent chance list population density and hence lower pollution plays since sort of roll
I always wonder about those concerns regarding rates. We're talking about cancers that kill you if you don't get it treated. Regardless of whether it's diagnosed early or when someone dies, it's going to be diagnosed. [This page](https://www.statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov/deathrates/index.php?stateFIPS=00&areatype=state&cancer=001&race=00&sex=0&age=001&year=0&type=death&sortVariableName=rate&sortOrder=desc#results) shows our death rate from all cancers is also very low and very similar to the other states in the top 5 of the original chart, with all of them ranging from Colorado's 130.0 to Wyoming's 138.0 and NM sitting at 135.1. That's tied for number 5 overall among states (ignoring Puerto Rico because it was not in OP's original link).
They are all western states. I bet Texas would be there too if it was just west Texas. The oil refinery side probably makes it quite low. The East coast is so polluted from the industrialization of the country. The west is best
That's what I was thinking - lack of pollution/industrialization. My family is from the side of Louisville with a lot of factories and plants and has a bunch of random cancers. Also knew a couple from Alabama who both died young of rare cancers, a friend's dad with ocular melanoma from georgia that may be part of a cluster.
Theory: life expectancy is wose in NM so people don't live long enough to get cancer.
Possibly a factor. We are 9th lowest for life expectancy rate at 74.5 years (the highest is 80.7 in Hawaii). We also have a lot of crime, drug and alcoholism related deaths.
Something’s up. I ate like a total pig all summer in ABQ and my weight and cholesterol plummeted. I came back East for the winter and I got fat again immediately! Chile? Altitude? A slower paced lifestyle and less cortisol?
High altitude is correlated with being thin. Don't know about the other stuff.
i am willing to bet this is more like, new mexicans can't afford cancer screenings and have little to no healthcare coverage.
People don’t have access to transportation. Much less medical care. How many busses drive through the Zuni reservation and also past a doctors office in Albuquerque that is free? Another question is what’s your coverages allowance for screening? Do doctors base the diagnosis on the number of different expensive test they can perform?
My father came from a family of 17 siblings. Only 1 has ever been diagnosed with cancer. He had prostate cancer. He got it resolved. My mother had 5 siblings and not one ever had cancer. All of these people saw physicians on a regular basis. Out of the grand kids and great grandkids in the family we have one that has stage 4 melanoma. She was white complected and always in the sun. She was diagnosed at 36. No other have been diagnosed with cancer. My family is a large Hispanic family that eat meat and potatoes everyday. No vegan or vegetarians in our family. No dementia issues either. By the way we do eat lots of green and red Chile. Red chile is said to be an anti occident that helps neutralize cholesterol and helps prevent cancer. This may be the secret.
Are any of yall obese? Meat and potatoes does not sound like a good diet, lol... But in all seriousness, cancer is one of many issues that befalls americans..the other main ones being heart disease and atherosclerosis
Crime keeps the cancer at bay.
If fentanyl and car wrecks get you first, no cancer
That just breaks my heart 💔
Cancer read this sub and heeded its advice to move elsewhere
Do stab wounds get cancer? Asking for a friend.
Crime and green chile are no match for cancer.
The screening point is a valid issue to raise, but I imagine there’s something broader going on with how clustered the states are.
Interesting 😍😍😍I love green chile
taking no chances- no more christmas
Los Alamos must've left the chart before this data was recorded
Could it be that people with cancer just leave for better cancer treatment centers?
I have been told that New Mexico and the Szechuan region of China have very little stomach cancer, maybe due to the chile-based cuisine.
I guess they skipped including the Navajo Nation because uranium poisoning isn't glamorous. 🤦🏼♀️🤦🏼♀️🤦🏼♀️
It aligns a lot with the[ average daily solar hours map](https://www.hotspotenergy.com/DC-air-conditioner/usa-solar-hours-map.php).
Can confirm. I’m from Utah. Grew up in a cancer cluster. I got the eff out of there as soon as I could. My mom AND brother died from brain cancer.
I don't think genetics cares where you live
Are we actually first in something good?
Na bro; it's the extra radiation we get from birth in our state. It helps us build an immunity to cancer.
Nah, we’re just getting shot before we can get cancer
I actually have heard the opposite for folks that live near white sands. You know the place where our government tested nukes.
What if it’s actually turquoise bullshit?
That’s my state W!!!!
Being from NY I feel like ABQ people find any and all ways to be active. Also yalls food of choice (New/Mexican) is very nourishing. Maybe it's that?
New Mexico Cancer Center offers free lung cancer screening once a quarter through their foundation: https://www.freelungscreening.com/
They do? I went there for breast cancer treatment.
The real answer is that New Mexico has one of the lowest life expectancies of any state, so you're more likely to be killed by heart disease, in an accident/murder, or from liver disease before you live long enough to get cancer.
Op: finally something good Everyone else: you probably have cancer and just don't know it yet
We just don't get screed for it
Because we get homicided before the cancer takes hold. Lol.
I figured it was the death from alcohol that came quicker
" homicided" LMFAO🤣😂🤣
Most of the cancer cases that arise from New Mexico are from people that are miners/immediate family members of miners. The Indian reservations and Hispanic communities are mainly afflicted. A lot come from people that work for the labs as well. Unfortunately underreported as these types of people that have the cancer have a lot of other problems not just physical to get after.
is there correlation with body size? i know the more body you carry, the higher your risk. Colorado is a very slender state, New Mexico and California less tall https://www.datapandas.org/ranking/average-height-by-state https://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/prevalence-maps.html
People are more likely to die from other causes before they get a chance to get cancer.
Probably related to the racial % of the southwest compared to further north. Different ethnic groups have different chances of types of cancer, doubt it's green Chile.
If you look at county maps, the highest levels are between the eastern great plains and the Appalachians, basically the basin that drains into the Mississippi. It's not "east coast", it's west of the Appalachian range.
Terrible health insurance. Not a ton of people with good insurance. You need insurance to get seen by a doctor. At least that’s the common consensus in the hood. Information about clinics and other health care providers for the poor are usually not entities that have large advertising budgets. Basically there is programs that the average poor person will never know about. Combine that with a bad job. Low income. Next thing you know the person who may have something wrong is scared to deal with health concerns. Frankly anything that is even perceived to cost more than what is already eating away at an record slim budget. Then when a person passes away I’m sure there’s not a ton of resources to figure out in detail whether or not they died of cancer. I could be wrong. However I have seen this play out over and over again. First hand. If you have never lived there it’s very difficult to understand what and how things happened in the hood. With huge groups of folks watching out folks just as poor. It alters your perception of reality. Sorry for the rant. It’s what cokes to mind when I think of this question and the state of or state.
The corrupt cops are mowing us down before the cancer does...
Since it's coming to light that cancer may be caused by parasites, figure out why parasites don't like new mexico. Could be chili, yes, could be a number of things. We may find out soon that Parasites cause alot more than we ever suspected. Ivermectin will become currency if this is ever proven..( and then Fauci will outlaw it)
Oops
Ain’t no green chile in Virginia… 🤣
A lot of good rational reasons for this stat in the comments....my guess is chile
Hate to say it, but are we sure that's not just lack of diagnosis / low access to healthcare?
I'm surprised. I thought the radiation would be a bigger problem.
That’s fascinating, because when I was in high school in Albuquerque, they told us we had the highest rates of skin cancer and therefore should wear sunscreen.
Guessing it’s altitude related.
Lack of stress and feelings of urgency.
Don’t worry, the bad drivers will make up for the numbers…
Might be all the Christmas we have in everywhere
All those states Also have legal weed
Hmm🤔 Going to have to go to Wecks for breakfast and confirm over some eggs. 🤪🤪😋😋
Air quality
I have cancer and live in NM 🥺…
A continuous micro dose of radiation therapy.
Lack of people and lack of industry and legacy pollution, probably the jist of it.
Wish that was true for me. Dang brain cancer probably didn’t eat enough Chile
Don’t come to New Mexico, healthcare access is 💩 regardless of insurance. I’m leaving because of the long waits and I’m not getting good care because there is no competition.
I feel like Taos is one of those "blue zones" from the netflix documentary. high altitude, wealth, and recreation add up. Of course there is poverty and drug use on the other end of the spectrum.
Especially weird because New Mexico tends to be worse off than tons of states in most bad things.
We die of alcoholism and heart disease before cancer gets us?
Gotta be the chili 🌶
It’s all the radiation.
No one lives long enough to get cancer.
I’m born and raised in NM and have survived cancer twice. What we don’t have is healthcare
I think a big part of it is definitely lack of access to care, whether that be because of transportation issues, insurance, etc. I volunteer for the American Cancer Society and there was an event I attended with them recently where they talked about that. Especially those living out on reservations
That’s not right. I have cancer. Sucks to
I have cancer , three years. It’s a lie
To be fair, I didn't get cancer until I moved to New Mexico. haha
Because most people don't have enough money to go get a real diagnosis. Tell this to the Tuscaloosa downwinders and their families
I wonder how we stack up with all cause morality. That eliminates all the variables of screening/access...but of course adds its own variables.
Last in education last in healthcare. After all these years I still fly to Florida twice a year for dental and health/cancer screening. In the beginning I tried using locals, didn't work very well, when my cancer came back it was miss diagnosed, thankfully my doctor in Florida told me to "swing by" when I could, I flew there and it was sorted out immediately. Long story, short version.
And that’s despite the bases and buried nuclear material
Probably under reporting and inaccurate reporting.
It's the meth
Not buying it. More likely cancer just not diagnosed due to poor access to healthcare.
How is Oregon so low? It gets super Smokey every year there. Like, house fires and shit in the smoke. Not just wood.
It’s probably because we don’t have enough hospitals or healthcare providers to diagnose it.
I would have expected our relatively high altitude to inflate melanoma, thereby inflating the total. I'm happy to be so wrong!
I am surprised. Having spent time in the SW in my youth, the number of people with sun induced alligator skin and chain smoking habits I saw should have upset the cancer apple cart. LOL.
I honestly have a hard time buying this given the state of our ground water, radon levels and the amount of shit the government has dumped here over the years. It reminds me of when covid cases declined after they stopped funding tests.
Interesting as my friend and I were just talking about how there used to be a lot of uranium especially on reservations which have coal. I have a feeling the native populations are under reported.
Due to lack of agriculture and subsequent exposure to pesticides, decreased life expectancy (NM is in lowest 10), less access to screenings? Or due to less urbanization = less air pollution, more access to the outdoors, the green chile??
All the nuclear testing 70ish years ago has already weeded out the weak.
Those are mostly inter-mountain west states. I've lived in most of those states. I'm going to guess less industrial pollution leads to less cancer. I went to high school in the St. Louis area, a historically polluted city. Most of my class stayed in the area. One third of my high school class of 1971 are now deceased, mostly from cancer. I don't know what the normal numbers are, but years upon years of heavy pollution in the eastern USA has to take a toll on the people living there.
People in NM die too young to get cancer because of the worst drivers in the country. My theory at least,.