Lagos — Recently, the National Consultative Committee on Cancer in Nigeria (NCCC) revealed that Nigeria lacks qualified personnel and equipment to manage the treatment of cancer even as reports filtered in that about 100,000 new cases of cancer are diagnosed annually nationwide. Chairman, of the Consultative Committee, Prof. Abayomi Durosinmi-Etti, has continuously bemoaned the state of cancer treatment in the country, stating that at the existing rate of population growth, only one radiotherapy machine is available to about 20 million Nigerians.

Clinical services for cancer are grossly inadequate and poorly distributed. There are only a handful of functioning radiotherapy equipment; access to radio therapy is seriously limited by high cost; latest diagnostic methods are not widely available; scope for multidisciplinary cancer care is limited even as the average cancer patient presents with advanced disease, and physicians have limited access to treatments that offer the prospect of prolonged survival.

It is therefore no surprise that every year, cancer continues to kill more Nigerians than HIV& AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria combined, yet only a little more than passing attention is committed to the management and control of the cancer menace.

In this report, Sola Ogundipe & Chioma Obinna, take a bird's eyeview of the current scenario and future prospects for cancer management in the country. They observe that, with a not too solid National Cancer Control Programme, coupled with the apparent lack of accessibility, non-availability and unaffordability of treatment initiatives, low capacity for management of cancer ailments, and the already precarious national health indices, cancer will continue to remain loose in Nigeria, unleashing the full potential of its deluge of ill health in unmitigated proportions upon the hapless populace.

On CNN's May 27, 2008 edition of Larry King Live, the show featured the topic on "Cell Phones: Are They Dangerous?" Among those who spoke were Dr. Keith Black, Head of Neurosurgery at Cedars-Sinai Hospital in Los Angeles with Sanjay Gupta, a neurosurgeon and CNN's chief medical correspondent. The debate was on the risk of cell phone use and development of cancer.

"There's a significant correlation between the side that one uses [a] cell phone on and the side that you develop the brain tumour on," Black had stressed three years ago. But taking an opposing view was Howard Frumkin of Emory University and more recently the Centers for Diseases Control (CDC). "This is a very low probability kind of a thing approaching zero probability," Frumkin said, "There's no evidence to support the idea that brain tumour resulted from cell phone use."

So, at the end of the day, there was a stalemate.

But the question remains. Are mobile phones more dangerous than smoking as cancer-causing agents? An expert put it like this: "Admittedly, sources of electromagnetic fields, such as equipment using electricity, television, radio, computers, mobile telephones, microwave ovens as well as radars and equipment used in industry have seen an unprecedented increase, but the carcinogenicity of these fields is not clear." But research also notes that the hazard posed to the general population by cell phone use can only be determined on the basis of extrapolation using mathematical models. In other words, there is no way of concretely measuring to what extent cell phone use or environmental pollution is responsible for the increased cancer rates within the general population.

The average Nigerian smoking as cancer-causing agents? An expert put it like this: "Admittedly, sources of electromagnetic fields, such as equipment using electricity, television, radio, computers, mobile telephones, microwave ovens as well as radars and equipment used in industry have seen an unprecedented increase, but the carcinogenicity of these fields is not clear." But research also notes that the hazard posed to the general population by cell phone use can only be determined on the basis of extrapolation using mathematical models. In other words, there is no way of concretely measuring to what extent cell phone use or environmental pollution is responsible for the increased cancer rates within the general population.

The average Nigerian would probably be indifferent to this debate. Rather, he or she would be more interested in unraveling what is behind the surge in cancer-related deaths in recent times.

Initially, it was thought some key cancer rates were flat or declining, but on further study it turned out they're going up. A significant proportion of cases (depending on cancer type) don't get reported promptly to the cancer data registry-in fact, it can take anywhere from 4 to 17 years following initial diagnosis before most (99-plus per cent) cancers are counted. The missing cases can make early trend reports misleadingly rosy.

Notwithstanding, there are few disputes that rates for many common cancers are on the way up; or cancer incidence rises rapidly with age between 40 and 80; or that environmental factors, including lifestyle choices such as diet, are the chief drivers behind the climb, accounting for anywhere from 65 to 90 per cent of human cancer. One thing is clear though: female breast cancer rates are up, prostate cancer rates are up. The bottom line is that too many persons are dying too soon from the ravages of cancer. This is the immediate worry and the list of casualities is quite long.

Dr. Beko Ransome-Kuti, died at 65 from lung cancer. Before he passed on, Yemi Tella, erstwhile Under-17 World Golden eaglets' Coach, was diagnosed with cancer of the lungs. Afro-reggae musician and crusader, Evangelist Sunny Okosuns, recently died of colon cancer at the age of 61. Even human rights activist and Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Chief Gani Fawehimi, was recently diagnosed with cancer of the lungs.

Worse still, countless Nigerian women are being felled by breast cancer and cervical cancer, just as the hundreds of men are succumbing to prostate and colon cancers. In most quarters, the blame is being placed on food, personal health habits, water pollution, lack of medical care, and other factors. But, a few observers have queried whether anyone has looked at the possibility of lead being one of the causes.

A general argument is this: As the Chinese face criticism for their use of lead in toys and other products, who is to say that the reason their women are plagued with breast and cervical cancer isn't the result of the lead that they are using in the products that we use here in Nigeria? Cancer is no stranger in this country either. So, are we ingesting the same type of toxic metal that the Chinese are ingesting? Almost everything we use are made in China. A look at most consumer items at disposal today tells the story. "Look at your dinner or lunch plate. Check your car, ballpen, cell phone, bedding, carpets, clothing, toys, electronics, food, etc. It's amazing that we all haven't already died of toxic poisoning. What about the environment? Is cancer increasing because we've destroyed the environment? For years we've heard about the chemicals and emissions that have dire implications for health. We have heard of breast cancer rising sharply. We also hear cancer is increasing because we now live long enough to get it, thanks to modern medicine's success against illnesses that used to kill people at an earlier age.

What's the story? Is cancer really more common, and if so, why?" More questions than answers. The truth really, according to experts is that it would take a Nobel prize to figure out answers to all these posers.

Vanguard Features gathered that although the environment may be polluted by a range of toxic organic compounds that may accumulate in the body's fatty tissue, in most cases, these compounds are only recognized as a carcinogenic hazard to humans when small clusters of people have been heavily subjected to either occupational exposures or exposures resulting from industrial breakdowns or malfunctions.