Lung cancer survivor: Invest in research — don't roll back access
Almost 19 years ago, I forgot to get a flu shot and I got the flu. It lingered. As a result, I got a chest X-ray, which found a problem. Eventually, more testing led to the diagnosis of lung cancer in both of my lungs. I was 41 years old and (not that it should matter) had never smoked. I am incredibly lucky. I lost approximately one-third of my lung tissue to surgery and I had six rounds of powerful chemotherapy, but I’m alive — a survivor.
Only 3 percent of all American cancer survivors are lung-cancer survivors. That is because lung cancer is peculiarly deadly, and it is rarely caught early. Lung cancer is the No. 1 cancer killer of women and men in the United States. Every five minutes a woman learns she has lung cancer, and the rate of new cases in women has almost doubled in the past 39 years. Even so, getting tested for lung cancer is not a top-of-mind cancer concern for 98 percent of women.
For not only me, but many others, early detection is critically important for successful treatment. If lung cancer is caught before it spreads, the chances of survival more than triple. But, today, only 16 percent of patients are diagnosed early, when more treatment options are available.
I recently returned from Washington, D.C., where I participated with the American Lung Association’s LUNG FORCE initiative in the second annual LUNG FORCE Advocacy Day. I met with the staffs of senators and representatives, including my own, to urge them to continue to invest in research to defeat lung cancer and to explain why high-quality, affordable health care is critically important for people with lung cancer.
Thankfully, since I was diagnosed, we’ve made some great progress in the fight against lung cancer. In 2016, Congress increased research funding at the National Institutes of Health by 5 percent. In the last two years, the FDA approved eight new therapies to treat lung cancer. We know now that low-dose CT screening of people with a history of heavy smoking saves lives. But, that life-sustaining research is at risk. President Trump’s fiscal 2018 budget proposal calls for a $6 billion, or 18 percent, reduction of funding for NIH. This drastic reduction in research funds would slow progress and delay innovation. Families facing cancer can’t wait.
Another milestone in the fight against lung cancer is that key federal health-care protections have given people access to treatments and screening. For lungcancer patients, adequate, accessible and affordable health care is a matter of life and death. I am very troubled by the American Health Care Act that the House of Representatives considered last month and by the revised act under discussion now. That legislation would move our health-care system in the wrong direction. As other advocates and I explained to Sen. Marco Rubio’s staff, our great, strong country must find a way to save the 224,000 Americans who are diagnosed each year with lung cancer. Any health-care legislation that Congress passes must both increase the number of Americans who are insured and continue to include essential health benefits, like lung-cancer screening.
Even revolutionary advances in lung-cancer treatments and screening are of no value to anyone but the wealthiest unless those advances are covered by insurance. And the best insurance is of limited value unless we push forward with research to continue to advance in the lung-cancer battle.
I am a lung-cancer advocate because I am lucky enough to still be alive and able to fight. I am tired of losing my friends and family to lung cancer. Let’s continue robust investment in cancer research at the NIH. Let’s find a way to make sure all Americans have access to quality, affordable health care. I encourage everyone to visit LUNGFORCE.org to join me in advocating for lung cancer research and affordable access to high-quality health care. At LUNGFORCE.org, you, too, can send this message to your senators and representatives in Washington. Let’s defeat lung cancer together.