Shift Work Causes Cancer

[Admiral Valdemar]

Probably. Most likely.

Graveyard shift linked to cancer risk

Scientists suspect flipping body's light-dark cycle leaves workers vulnerable

updated 1:19 p.m. ET Nov. 29, 2007

LONDON - It was once scientific heresy to suggest that smoking contributed to lung cancer. Now, another idea initially dismissed as nutty is gaining acceptance: the graveyard shift might increase your cancer risk.

Next month, the International Agency for Research on Cancer, the cancer arm of the World Health Organization, will classify shift work as a "probable" carcinogen.

That will put shift work in the same category as cancer-causing agents like anabolic steroids, ultraviolet radiation, and diesel engine exhaust.

If the shift work theory proves correct, millions of people worldwide could be affected. Experts estimate that nearly 20 percent of the working population in developed countries work night shifts.

It is a surprising twist for an idea that scientists first described as "wacky," said Richard Stevens, a cancer epidemiologist and professor at the University of Connecticut Health Center. In 1987, Stevens published a paper suggesting a link between light at night and breast cancer.

Back then, he was trying to figure out why breast cancer incidence suddenly shot up starting in the 1930s in industrialized societies, where nighttime work was considered a hallmark of progress. Most scientists were bewildered by his proposal.

But in recent years, several studies have found that women working at night for many years are indeed more prone to breast cancer, and that animals who have their light-dark schedules switched grow more cancerous tumors and die quicker.

Some research has also shown that men working at night may have a higher rate of prostate cancer.

Because these studies have been done mainly in nurses and airline crews, bigger studies in different populations are needed to confirm or disprove the findings.

The idea that shift work might increase your cancer risk is still viewed with skepticism by some, but many doubters will likely be won over when IARC publishes the results of its analysis, the result of an expert panel convened in October, in the December issue of The Lancet Oncology.

The American Cancer Society said it would most likely add shift work to its list of "known and probable carcinogens" when the IARC makes its reclassification. Up to now, the society has labeled it an "uncertain, controversial or unproven effect."

Experts acknowledge the evidence is limited, but the "probable" tag means that a link between shift work and cancer is plausible.

Personally, I think work is a health risk, full stop. Outlaw occupations!

[Balrog]

There really is nothing left that won't cause cancer anymore...

[Adrian Laguna]

Living causes cancer. Did you know that 100% of people who successfully commit suicide do not die of cancer?


All joking aside. I believe that working the graveyard shift shortens your life-span, period. The human body is supposed to be sleeping for most of the night, and awake for most of the day. It's hardly a surprise that turning it around would have a deleterious effect on the body.

[Admiral Valdemar]

Anything that causes stress can lead, in part, to tumour formation. It can be chemicals, mental problems or good old radiation. There really are an unlimited number of ways to ruin your DNA, so anyone really preaching a healthy lifestyle needs to look at what they do and consider if their exercise regimen, diet and social life involve such risks, because they likely do somewhere down the line.

In this current industrialised world, carcinogens are abundant in ever greater numbers; compounds we'd never normally be introduced to are mixing with our metabolisms, altering biochemical pathways and influencing our minds. We are a generation that does not fear death at 20 from measles, a lack of vitamins causing scurvy or being overwhelmed by decaying organic matter in the street. Today, we have different threats. Our stressful work lives, the countless pharmaceuticals in the water table and foods and cosmetics we use, the inability to properly adapt to living well beyond our standard biological age.

Statistically, if you live an otherwise healthy life avoiding unnecessary exposure to unnatural chemicals and maintaining a proper diet with exercise, you can reap the benefits; malignant tumours are highly unlikely given our genetic proofreading mechanisms are so adept. But there is always the genetic factor to consider. Some people just have bad genes, and with it a curse no matter how healthy they may try to be. Nature and nurture is not a black and white fallacy, it is, as ever, shades of grey that paint the world.

Media alarmism over these "new" threats can become overbearing, especially when it's followed up by miracle "cures", be it from GSK or the quack on the high street. I pay them little heed any more, and unless you're becoming a hypochondriac, I expect most others do too.

[Darth Wong]

Yes, the media can be annoying, but frankly, working conditions do need to improve. I've done shift work in the past, many years ago, and it really fucks up your life. What's more, our labour laws are so lax that nothing can really be done about it. The worst thing is that they customarily flip you back and forth every two weeks, which is not long enough for your body to adjust to the new schedule.

[Lusankya]

Yes, the media can be annoying, but frankly, working conditions do need to improve. I've done shift work in the past, many years ago, and it really fucks up your life. What's more, our labour laws are so lax that nothing can really be done about it. The worst thing is that they customarily flip you back and forth every two weeks, which is not long enough for your body to adjust to the new schedule.

That's one of the reasons that I'm handing in my resignation from my night fill job today. Not only do I get my schedule flipped around regularly, but they only call me in for the shift about 12 hours beforehand. And then I'm tired, and I sleep all day, so I end up not exercising, because I only get up at 5, so I've gained weight, and I've broken four nails in the last two shifts.

It's tedious labour as well, which in my experience completely fries your brain and gives you writer's block. That's the worst of it. I swear that that kind of work actively makes you stupid.

[Superman]

That's interesting. Some people are actually "wired" to be more active at night, and take night shift work to accommodate their cycle. I wonder if U.V. exposure therapy will become a sort of treatment for this.

[Julhelm]

Funny I should see this topic while I'm on my night shift.

I'm one of those wired for nocturnal activity, btw. I've always thought it to be some kind of old split where one group are active and hunt during the day and the other during the night, and thus genetic.

[NeoGoomba]

It seems to be a self-perpetuating cycle. I wasn't really a "night person", but after working a lot of swing shifts during college for jobs and internships, now being a night editor seems second nature. Its extremely hard for me to switch my sleep cycle to one that involves me waking up at 6am (or anytime before 9am, really), which is frustrating on weekends and vacation time when I want to actually use my free time.

[loomer]

Honestly. What doesn't give you cancer these days?

[Balrog]

Honestly. What doesn't give you cancer these days?

Puppy dogs and kittens?

Though I bet they'll find some correlation to prove that to be wrong.

[Dooey Jo]

I'm one of those wired for nocturnal activity, btw. I've always thought it to be some kind of old split where one group are active and hunt during the day and the other during the night, and thus genetic.

Humans without technology are useless for being active during the night. It's more that the body adapts to a certain cycle. If you get up late and go to bed late, that's what the body will become accustomed too. Though it's apparently harder to go the other way around once you're used to getting up late.

[K. A. Pital]

People are supposed to be sleeping on-schedule.

[Tsyroc]

I work nights and have done so for about 8½ years and one of the big problems I've found is essentially that the rest of the world doesn't work nights and never really thinks about people who do. What that means is that I probably get woken up by general noises and bs more often than someone working a regular day shift would but the big thing is switching schedules when I'm off. That switching back and forth is what puts a lot of stress on my system. It screws up my sleep patterns so I'm more likely to be sleep deprived, which leads to a higher caffeine intake which can make it harder to get decent sleep etc...

If I could work nights and only interacted with people who work nights, and lived in an area where everyone worked nights I don't think it would be any worse than working any other shift. Staying on a relatively set sleep schedule definately helps a lot if you can stick to it. I try to sleep up until it's time for me to get ready to go to work. Supposedly treating the shift you work just like any old day shift is the best way to go instead of getting up many hours before you have to go into work.

I've found that sleeping with ear plugs is very helpful in dealing with the extra noise that is normal during the daytime. I keep my phone ringers off because even people who know better will call while I'm trying to sleep. It's, "I thought maybe you'd be awake" or "I don't know when you sleep". So it's easier to just keep those things off and let people who really want to communicate to me leave a message or send me an email.

If you think you hate telemarketers wait until the fuckers call you while you are trying to sleep. Because of them not only the ringers off on my phones but the call screening on my answering machine is off as well.

[Tsyroc]

I would tend to think that a lot of health risks associate with working graveyards are because people who do so are more sleep deprived on average than the rest of the population.

Chronic sleep deprivation leads to people drinking crap (coffee, soda, energy drinks) more often plus regular meals can be sketchy working odd shifts which then leads to a poorer diet and dietary choices. Eating to try to help keep awake/alert.

If you don't take food with you then what's open in the middle of the night? The hospital I work at doesn't even keep its cafeteria open more than a couple of hours of my shift. From 0100-0530 all that's available is vending machine crap. Eat enough of that and it probably ups a person's chances at getting cancer.

[Fire Fly]

My own hypothesis (until I actually read the paper that is to come out): I don't think being sleep deprived goes to the heart of the issue. I think that reversing your circadian cycle is causing a lot of stress on your body, resulting in hormonal imbalances, resulting in improper gene expression, leading to unregulated cell growth.

[Admiral Valdemar]

Trends indicate people are working on average longer every year, with more erratic sleeping patterns. We still don't fully understand sleep and I imagine the way our Circadian rhythms operate is still full of mystery. Stress, as I say, is a leading factor in illness today. There is far too much emphasis on meeting deadlines, keeping in the black and pushing further ahead to continue this perpetual growth. Humans can do only so much, and as the department I'm in is finding out, it comes at a cost. What is a person's well being when weighed against a £12M contract from a client?

Given we are facing a coming depression (we're already technically in recession), there may be a rethink about work ethics. The three day week may become a permanent reality and people will not strive to work to breaking point to buy more things they don't need. Consumerism is the ultimate religion and solely responsible for all the ills we see really impacting on the planet today.

[NeoGoomba]

One things for sure, it will be refreshing when my only task for the day is waking up in time to dodge the mutants hunting for my gas and protein pills. I'll be able to catch up on my zzzz's.

[Justforfun000]

Is it possible that cancer is simply unavoidable and you will inevitably end up with it at some point in your lifetime if you live long enough?

I kind of wonder if it's simply a by-product of life itself. It's no mystery that after a certain age we lose our youth and start into Senescence. Maybe cancer is simply a natural consequence of cellular imperfection that catches up to you when your body loses it's vigor.

Obviously there are exceptions considering children can get cancer too, but I'm thinking more of the developing kinds you are statistically at risk for as you age.

[Spin Echo]

Is it possible that cancer is simply unavoidable and you will inevitably end up with it at some point in your lifetime if you live long enough?

I kind of wonder if it's simply a by-product of life itself. It's no mystery that after a certain age we lose our youth and start into Senescence. Maybe cancer is simply a natural consequence of cellular imperfection that catches up to you when your body loses it's vigor.

Obviously there are exceptions considering children can get cancer too, but I'm thinking more of the developing kinds you are statistically at risk for as you age.

Pretty much. If you live long enough, it's almost certain you'll get some form of cancer, though it may not be what does you in in the end. Most men over 80 will have prostate cancer, though more likely something else will kill them.

[Admiral Valdemar]

If you copy enough code for enough time, even a near perfect copy mechanism will turn up enough flaws to overwhelm any proofreading. It's not unlike computer code -- fidelity is key -- so if your copy degrades even by 0.00001% every cell division, that can lead to problems.

Cancer is simply the manifestation of a cell that broke and couldn't initiate adequate repair protocols nor apoptosis. It is an un-dead, flawed machine that wants to make more of itself like any primeval organism.

Of course, we could probably find ways to get around this since there are bacteria and macroscale species that can take thousands of times the lethal radiation dose we could deal with, roll around in whatever muta-, carcino-, tetragenic substance you care to throw at it or live a whole lifetime without suffering dementia and still come out on top. If we knew more about how to implement such things and the public accepted "playing god/Frankenstein" then such mortal setbacks may be eliminated.

The last thing this planet needs is more humans or more humans that are immortal.

[Darth Wong]

You know, I understand how people can get fatigued after hearing so many warnings about health risks and cancer. But the fact is that if a certain activity elevates your cancer risk, it's just another way of saying that it's bad for you. "Bad" activities reduce your health and shorten your life. So it's good for us to confirm through study that disruption of sleep cycles is bad for you, or that breathing in tobacco fumes is bad for you, or that eating a shitload of red meat every week is bad for you. At least you know where the threats are coming from.

The fact that nothing can make you live forever doesn't mean you should throw health concerns to the winds.

[Flagg]

I'm not shocked by this. I always felt like shit after working more than a few graveyard shifts.