New study: Those who Take Sleeping Pills have Higher Rates of Cancer Diagnosis

[+ FreshFluff]

So I was talking to my doctor yesterday, and he told me that a new study in the British Medical Journal shows a correlation between taking sleeping pills (Ambien, Sonata, Lunesta, anti-histamines, and others) and cancer diagnosis. The study didn't have any explanation about any possible mechanism of causality

 

http://www.latimes.com/health/boostershots/la-heb-sleep-aids-cancer-death-20120228,0,2382260.story

 

I was alarmed, but also suspicious about whether sleeping meds actually cause cancer: First, it's long been suspected that there's some relationship between cancer occurrence and stress, which itself is to insomnia. Second, the correlation began to show up at prescribed doses of 18 pills per year. That means they likely consumed even less. That again points to stress-related causal explanation. Third, all these meds have different active ingredients. If antihistamines, which are used in allergy meds, caused cancer, that should have been discovered long ago. And of course, why didn't the New England Journal of Medicine accept this?

 

My doctor countered by saying that artificially enhancing sleep may lower melatonin levels, which may be linked to cancer.

 

Are any of you taking sleep medications? If so, does this study alarm you? It would be interesting to hear from Unicorn and any other doctors, too.

[josephga]

I take 2 benadryl every night since the age of 16 sometimes tylenol pm. I can't sleep unless I do. I did have cancer in late 2002 but never thought of a connection

[+ nycman]

Oh my GOD and we have living PROOF right here in our forum!??!?!

 

Why oh WHY didn't the Journal of Hypochondriacs accept this!?!!?!?!

 

Really?

[bigvalboy]

My doctor just told me about a long term study that was just completed. They found that people who used sleeping pills on a regular basis had a shorter life span. He told me to use sleeping pills only when it was absolutely necessary.

[+ FreshFluff]

Why oh WHY didn't the Journal of Hypochondriacs accept this!?!!?!?!

 

My point was this: A study with such sweeping results would usually have been submitted to NEJM or another top journal first. The fact that it wasn't, or that it wasn't accepted at such a journal, may mean that the NEJM didn't "buy" the results, usually because of flaws in the methodology.

 

Joe, sorry to hear about your having had cancer. So little is known about the causes of cancer (other than smoking-->lung) that it's hard them trace any person's cancer to one source.

 

My doctor just told me about a long term study that was just completed. They found that people who used sleeping pills on a regular basis had a shorter life span.

 

Same study. The problem with this conclusion is that they counted all types of mortality: disease, accidents, and so on.

[josephga]

I seriously doubt there was any link to my cancer. I had colon cancer I suffered from issues since I was a child and was later diagnosed With IBS by the time I was 14 years old.

[+ nycman]

To quote Joe Jackson...

 

"everything gives you cancer,

there's no cure, there's no answer,

everything gives you cancer"

[raulgmanzo]

"Hypnotics' association with mortality or cancer: a matched cohort study" in the Brittish Medical Journal?

Seems an interesting but limited study with lots of data massaging for confounding factors. But it should encourage more very important work to be done.

 

...My doctor countered by saying that artificially enhancing sleep may lower melatonin levels, which may be linked to cancer.

That seems very reasonable even if just one of many things going on.

 

..Are any of you taking sleep medications? If so, does this study alarm you? It would be interesting to hear from Unicorn and any other doctors, too.

I avoid taking any sleep medication continuously or for any length of time over a day or two every other month or so. Sometimes I take a little melatonin as a sleep aid or an attempt to adjust my body's clock to fit in a little better with those around me.

 

The thing most alarming thing is how much there is probably yet to be discovered about the endocrine system and its role in sleep and health.

[+ nycman]

So I was talking to my doctor yesterday, and he told me that a new study in the British Medical Journal...

 

Actually, I think the study was published in "BMJ Open" the online (and only around since 2011) retarded little brother of the legendary British Medical Journal (BMJ).

 

You are correct that this isn't NEJM material....for that matter it isn't BMJ material either.

 

They didn't prove causation of any kind. They merely noted an association. It's far from earth shattering and it's doubtful that it's of any real importance.

[Samai139]

A couple of thilngs not really related to the original question, since I never take sleeping pills or antihistamines to induce sleep--either I'm very lucky or have lead the kind of life where sleep eventually comes. At any rate:

Referring to one of the posts above---smoking causing lung cancer. Recently heard a discussion of lung cancer and one of the MDs related that only 15% of smokers get lung cancer. Not sure if this is accurate, but if it is, it certainly puts a different light on causality of at least one form of cancer---seems there are many, even in lung cancer?

The other point: isn't the Lancet the publication of the British Medical Society? I seem to remember this name from somewhere. Of course I can Goggle it and will as soon as I post this---go figure, I should have done it before writing.

Final thought: our scientific minds and culture are trained to find/see correlations in all kinds of places. Sometimes they are meaningful, other times not so much. Perhaps this is one of those studies which we should treat with nothing more than passing interest.

 

Just Goggled "Lancet" and their first listing says that Lancet is "the world's leading medical journal, especially on oncology."

[+ FreshFluff]

Samai, "A causes B" doesn't mean that if A occurs, B will also occur. It only means that the incidence of A (e.g. smoking), in and of itself, causes an increase in the occurrence of B (cancer).

 

And there are definitely other causes of lung cancer besides smoking, though not all of them are clear yet.

[Samai139]

FreshFluff---yes, I was careless in my post using the oft-repeated phrase "Smoking causes cancer" and yet I suspect that the more precise and wordier phrase "Cigarette smoking increases your chances for developing lung cancer," will not get as much usage. I was surprised that such a small percentage of smokers (15) develop lung cancer and also glad that I was not aware of that percentage when I quit smoking 30+ years ago.

I haven't bought a packet of cigarettes since then, so I wonder what phrases do they print on the labels to try and deter smoking these days? Heard recently that a new campaign against smoking was imminent---very graphic. I know here in New York State there are several ads which show children suffering from asthma attacks and connecting that with second-hand smoke in the home.

[gallahadesquire]

Actually, I think the study was published in "BMJ Open" the online (and only around since 2011) retarded little brother of the legendary British Medical Journal (BMJ).

 

You are correct that this isn't NEJM material....for that matter it isn't BMJ material either.

 

They didn't prove causation of any kind. They merely noted an association. It's far from earth shattering and it's doubtful that it's of any real importance.

 

Yes, BMJ is essentially equivalent to NEJM or Annals of medicine (not archive). And skip ANYTHING in JAMA.

I didn't know of BMJ open - the key here is "Peer-reviewed".

[+ FreshFluff]

Yes, when I saw the "Open" part of the journal title, I lost some faith on the results. That usually means the study went through at least a couple of rejections before it landed there.

 

But the fact that they didn't find a causal mechanism doesn't mean that there isn't one. If anyone has read the article, did they have any other personal data (e.g. profession) that they could plug into a regression to control for stress levels, which are the major alternative explanation? I'm assuming they controlled for age and gender, at least.

[trilingual]

For what it's worth, my neurologist has been recommending using melatonin to improve and regulate my sleep. He says it's possible to take quite a bit (like 3 3mg tablets) before bedtime without causing any problems, as it's a natural substance our bodies produce. It's another of those substances that we begin to produce less of as we age, so it's OK to begin supplementing it as get older. Talk to your own physician about it if you're having sleep problems. It's probably a much safer alternative than the sleeping pills that are being prescribed these days.

 

Also, if you're having trouble sleeping, consider whether you're being exposed to too much blue light. There have been several recent studies (and articles in the NY Times and other publications) explaining that exposure to blue light suppresses melatonin production and causes sleeplessness. The newer non-incandescent light bulbs produce more blue light than their older predecessors, but television and computer screens are particularly big offenders, apparently. If you're on your computer for hours before going to bed it's very likely to affect your ability to fall asleep quickly. You might want to switch your computer time to earlier in the day and avoid it (or watching TV) for at least an hour before going to bed.