Alcohol linked to increased risk of pancreatic cancer: Study
Alcoholic beverages, particularly beer and spirits, may increase the risk of developing pancreatic cancer, according to a new study led by the UN World Health Organization.
The research, which pooled data from nearly 2.5 million people across Asia, Australia, Europe and North America, revealed a 'modest but significant' link between alcohol consumption and pancreatic cancer risk, regardless of sex or smoking status.
'Alcohol consumption is a known carcinogen, but until now, the evidence linking it specifically to pancreatic cancer has been considered inconclusive,' said Pietro Ferrari, senior author of the study and head of the nutrition and metabolism branch at the World Health Organization International Agency for Research on Cancer.
The study revealed that each additional 10 grams of alcohol consumed per day was associated with a three percent increase in pancreatic cancer risk.
Additionally, women consuming 15-30 grams of alcohol daily, which equates to about one to two drinks, had a 12 percent higher risk. Men drinking 30-60 grams daily had a 15 percent increased risk, increasing to 36 percent for those consuming more than 60 grams.
The study confirmed alcohol as an 'independent risk factor,' even after accounting for smoking.
Ferrari emphasized that 'alcohol is often consumed in combination with tobacco,' but the elevated risk persists among non-smokers.
Pancreatic cancer, a disease that impacts digestive enzyme production and blood sugar regulation, remains one of the deadliest cancers due to late-stage diagnoses. Although it ranks 12th in global cancer incidence, it accounts for 5 percent of all cancer-related deaths, according to the WHO.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Voices: Putting cancer warnings on alcohol would help me drink less
Back in the early noughties, the indoor smoking ban led to an outcry over 'the nanny state'. The same happened when cigarette advertising was banned, and when manufacturers were required to plaster packs with images of diseased lungs. Yet over the past 40 years, according to Cancer Research, lung cancer rates in men have dropped by around 60 per cent. We may think we crave the rugged freedoms of the Marlboro Man, but given the facts, it turns out we don't actually want to die. And yet when it comes to alcohol, one of the world's biggest killers, a key driver of cancers, heart disease, strokes and obesity, there are no images of rotting livers on the chilled Sauvignon. The presentation of booze in the supermarket aisles is as benign as kitchen roll and chicken pie. It's described on restaurant menus with biblical reverence, it's advertised on TV in a hazy, golden-hour glow, and every other greetings card carries a hilarious reference to the booze-addled nature of the recipient. It is both normalised and celebrated, despite being the fifth greatest risk factor for death in the UK. Now, a group of major medical and health organisations have signed a letter to the Prime Minister calling for alcohol to carry explicit warnings that its consumption can cause cancer. The World Cancer Research Fund, which spearheaded the letter, cited 'shockingly low' public awareness that alcohol raises the risk of seven types of cancer – these being breast, bowel, stomach, head, neck, liver and mouth – and insisted that 'bold and unambiguous labelling' is urgently need to help save lives. Token efforts have long been made by the industry to toe a wavering line of responsibility – the number of units a bottle of wine contains written in a font the size of a gnat's IKEA instructions, or a glancing mention that pregnant women shouldn't drink. According to the Advertising Standards Authority, 'Lively, but responsible, social interaction or party scenes with alcohol present are allowed but…no behaviour may be adolescent or childish.' If only that diktat held true in real-life 'party scenes.' Initially, like much of Gen X and our wine-necking Boomer parents, I was resistant to the idea of cancer warnings. If I wanted to slowly kill myself in a responsible and socially acceptable manner, I felt it should be my choice to do so. But after another night of drinking slightly too much with friends, waking bathed in shame and a light prosecco sweat, I reconsidered. Women, particularly, are at risk of harm from alcohol, simply because we're smaller. If every time I picked up the wine bottle to top up my glass – over a healthy dinner! So civilised! – it reminded me that I was increasing my risk of cancer, I suspect I might put it back down. Humans like to ignore the dangers when it's something we want to do until it becomes impossible to turn a blind eye. But this time, it's not so much the consumers resisting warnings as the enormously powerful drinks industry. It's already up against Gen Z's wellbeing crusade, with a tsunami of kumbucha and kefir washing away the old-school shots and spirits from nights out. The risk of drinkers murmuring, 'Actually, I don't think I do want seven types of cancer' and switching the kettle on instead is a step too far. A spokesperson for the Portman Group, which oversees UK alcohol labelling in the UK, says: 'Whilst we do not dispute the link between alcohol and certain cancers… blanket cancer warning labels…can create unnecessary anxiety, eroding trust in health advice and alienating the very people who require support.' As an argument, this is weaker than a sixth-form debating point scribbled on the bus. Imagine the motor industry saying, 'Road signs create unnecessary anxiety. Let's not warn people that they might crash, lest we alienate drivers.' The spokesperson added that most alcohol products already include advice to limit drinking to 14 units a week, and claimed that 'most people drink within guidelines.' According to NHS Digital, however, 24 per cent of Brits drink more than this, while the charity Drinkaware has found that 32 per cent of men and 15 per cent of women regularly sink more than the recommended limit – and it is a limit, not a target. Doctors repeatedly warn that there is no safe level of alcohol consumption, and in April, the World Health Organisation advised that women should drink no alcohol at all to avoid a heightened risk of breast cancer. I'm aware that even reading this is annoying. I share the general British resentment over finger-wagging admonishments from the Fun Police. I want to say, 'You'll prise my Picpoul from my cold, dead hand.' The only thing is, I'd rather not be cold and dead – and I'm increasingly convinced that warning labels can only be a good thing. Although, of course, we must be careful how we approach this new regime. After all, we wouldn't want to alienate anybody.
Forbes
3 hours ago
- Forbes
New Study Finds Women And Young People Hit Hardest By Climate Anxiety
A young woman holds a cardboard 'No nature, no future'. (Photo by Alain Pitton/NurPhoto via Getty ... More Images) I never quite believed climate anxiety was real until about a year ago when I spoke to a couple of young people who shared that they were unsure whether they wanted to have children in the future. Their reasoning was simple and complex to shake off: who wants to bring a child into a world of droughts, floods, and other extreme weather events linked to climate change? So, when I read about the finding of the new study published in the Journal of Global Environmental Change that such anxiety particularly impacts women and young people, it stirred my curiosity. Whether one believes in climate anxiety or not, it's hard to deny that more and more young people are experiencing it. Climate anxiety responds to an uncertain future where climate change threatens long-term survival. Just a few days ago, thousands of citizens from Tuvalu—a small island nation in the Pacific facing the risk of drowning due to rising sea levels—applied for a climate-linked visa ballot to move to Australia, showcasing just how real the situation is. The reality of climate anxiety is strongly supported by academic research. The new study released this week by psychologists is not the first to report investigating the impact of climate-related anxiety. There have been many more in the past, covering many countries. For example, a survey of over 4,000 students in Germany earlier this month found that more than 40% experienced high or extreme levels of climate anxiety. Another study by Yale University found that about 64% of respondents in the US were worried about climate change. However, the new research stands out—it is the first meta-analysis, combining results from 94 studies involving 170,747 adults across 27 countries. It also underscores that women and young people are especially likely to experience climate anxiety. These studies on climate anxiety raise a key question: What are we doing about this? The growing evidence suggests the urgent need to consider the mental health aspects of climate adaptation alongside the other dimensions. They also highlight that the mental health impacts of climate change deserve to be integrated into climate and health planning more holistically. Why Addressing Climate Anxiety Is Essential to Climate Adaptation Climate adaptation isn't just about helping biodiversity and ecosystems adjust to rising temperatures, protecting jobs, housing, or migration from low-lying areas. It also means offering psychological support for people suffering from climate anxiety—whether caused by economic losses, displacement, or anxiety about the future. The American Psychological Association recommends building psychologists' capacity to help individuals cope with and adapt to climate change as a key part of its action plan for psychologists. This recommendation is critical as the number of physiologists dealing with patients who have expressed these concerns is not tiny anymore. One survey from Germany shows that 72% of psychotherapists reported having patients who raised concerns about climate change during treatment, as evidenced by a nationwide survey of 573 professionals. Breaking The Silos Between Climate And Health The intersection of climate and health—both physical and mental—is still underexplored. Understanding the climate-health nexus means examining how climate change affects health and how health systems can support climate action. This integrated understanding of climate and health calls for sustainability professionals to pay closer attention to health outcomes and for health professionals to respond to the growing pressures that climate change places on healthcare systems. The US National Academy of Medicine has begun advancing this conversation. It has started convening climate and health professionals to co-develop a roadmap for transformative action toward achieving health for all at net zero emissions. Where Do We Go From Here? It is not surprising that young people are at the forefront of climate anxiety—they are the ones who will face the long-term consequences of today's decisions. Here are two keyways forward: Managing climate action is not just about managing natural or economic resources. It's also about safeguarding people's well-being. With 1.8 billion young people under 25 in the world now, climate anxiety cannot be ignored in strategies to cope with a future of living with climate change.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Plans unveiled for NHS funding to be linked to patient feedback
NHS funding could be linked to patient feedback under new plans, with poorly performing services that "don't listen" penalised with less money. As part of the "10 Year Health Plan" to be unveiled next week, a new scheme will be trialled that will see patients asked to rate the service they received - and if they feel it should get a funding boost or not. It will be introduced first for services that have a track record of very poor performance and where there is evidence of patients "not being listened to", the government said. This will create a "powerful incentive for services to listen to feedback and improve patients' experience", it added. Sky News understands that it will not mean bonuses or pay increases for the best performing staff. NHS payment mechanisms will also be reformed to reward services that keep patients out of hospital as part of a new 'Year of Care Payments' initiative and the government's wider plan for change. Speaking to The Times, chief executive of the NHS Confederation Matthew Taylor expressed concerns about the trial. He told the newspaper: "Patient experience is determined by far more than their individual interaction with the clinician and so, unless this is very carefully designed and evaluated, there is a risk that providers could be penalised for more systemic issues, such as constraints around staffing or estates, that are beyond their immediate control to fix." He said that NHS leaders would be keen to "understand more about the proposal", because elements were "concerning". Read more from Sky News Health Secretary Wes Streeting said: "We will reward great patient care, so patient experience and clinical excellence are met with extra cash. These reforms are key to keeping people healthy and out of hospital, and to making the NHS sustainable for the long-term as part of the Plan for Change." In the raft of announcements in the 10 Year Health Plan, the government has said 201 bodies responsible for overseeing and running parts of the NHS in England will be scrapped. These include Healthwatch England, set up in 2012 to speak out on behalf of NHS and social care patients, the National Guardian's Office, created in 2015 to support NHS whistleblowers, and the Health Services Safety Investigations Body (HSSIB). Elsewhere, the new head of NHS England Sir Jim Mackey said key parts of the NHS appear "built to keep the public away because it's an inconvenience". "We've made it really hard, and we've probably all been on the end of it," he told the Daily Telegraph. "The ward clerk only works nine to five, or they're busy doing other stuff; the GP practice scrambles every morning."
