You have /5 articles left.
Sign up for a free account or log in.
A historical perspective on cancer and its treatment offers invaluable insights that medical and scientific accounts alone cannot provide. While science focuses on the biological mechanisms—genetic mutations, cellular abnormalities and advancements in treatment—history contextualizes cancer within broader social, cultural and political frameworks. This perspective helps us understand how cancer has been perceived, experienced and treated across different eras, offering a more holistic view of the disease.
From a medical perspective, cancer’s etiology is typically explored through biological processes such as genetic mutations and environmental exposures. However, history helps us see how ideas about cancer’s origins have evolved, shaped by cultural beliefs and medical knowledge over time. For example, before the advent of cellular biology, cancer was often attributed to imbalances in bodily fluids or external factors like diet and air quality. Tracing these shifts shows how advances in science, such as the discovery of carcinogens and genetic links to cancer, were influenced by the social and cultural climates of their time.
Perceptions of cancer’s causes have also changed, particularly regarding environmental and lifestyle factors. Smoking, for instance, became widely associated with lung cancer in the mid-20th century, prompting public health campaigns and regulatory changes. Historical analysis shows how societal behaviors, industrialization and chemical exposures contributed to rising cancer rates, underscoring the importance of prevention alongside treatment.
Beyond its physiological effects, cancer is deeply embedded in cultural narratives. For much of the 20th century, it was considered a shameful and taboo disease, often shrouded in secrecy. The stigma surrounding cancer left many patients isolated and unwilling to speak about their diagnosis, perpetuating a public silence around the disease. A historical perspective reveals the psychological burden this stigma imposed, as cancer was often equated with a death sentence.
As Susan Sontag argued in Illness as Metaphor, cancer has long been surrounded by metaphors of war and destruction. Patients are said to “battle” cancer, doctors “fight” the disease and survivors are “victorious.” These militaristic metaphors shape public perceptions and add psychological pressure on patients to “win” their fight, which can undermine their humanity and reduce their illness to a binary outcome of success or failure. A historical lens allows us to critique how these narratives shape treatment approaches and patient experiences.
History also highlights how gender norms have influenced cancer treatment. For example, the aggressive use of radical mastectomies to treat breast cancer in the 20th century reflected patriarchal medical practices that often ignored the emotional and psychological needs of women. Breast cancer was treated primarily as a physical condition, with little consideration for the broader impact on body image and identity. Similarly, prostate cancer treatment was shaped by masculine fears around sexual function, contributing to the silence and stigma surrounding the disease. Over time, advocacy movements—particularly feminist health campaigns—challenged these norms and demanded more compassionate, patient-centered care.
A historical perspective on cancer treatment also reveals how medical and social factors intersect to shape treatment strategies. In the mid-20th century, aggressive surgeries and invasive treatments were widely accepted, with figures like William Halsted hailed as medical pioneers. However, history allows us to critique these approaches, revealing how they were influenced by a desire for heroism and aggressive cures, often at the expense of patients’ quality of life. Over time, medical advances and patient advocacy movements led to the development of less invasive treatments and a shift toward patient empowerment.
The “War on Cancer,” declared by President Nixon in 1971, marked a cultural and political turning point. This militaristic framing galvanized public support and funding but also created unrealistic expectations for a quick “cure.” The historical context of this “war” illustrates how political priorities can shape cancer research, sometimes overshadowing prevention and quality-of-life concerns.
Cancer advocacy movements, particularly around breast cancer, transformed public perceptions and drove significant advances in treatment and research. However, these campaigns also contributed to an overemphasis on detection and treatment, often neglecting broader conversations about prevention and the root causes of cancer. Historical analysis can help us critically assess the impact of these movements on public health policies, funding priorities and research efforts.
Access to cancer treatment has historically been shaped by socioeconomic disparities. Wealthier individuals often had access to cutting-edge treatments and clinical trials, while poorer populations faced limited care options. These inequities continue to persist today. A historical perspective sheds light on the structural inequalities that have shaped cancer care and highlights the need for policy changes to address these ongoing disparities.
A historical approach to cancer allows us to see how medical science and cultural narratives have co-evolved, influencing how the disease is treated, understood and feared. By examining cancer’s history, we can understand the broader forces—societal, political and cultural—that have shaped its treatment and perception. This lens reveals that the fight against cancer has always been about more than biology—it has been shaped by human fears, values and collective struggles. Understanding cancer through this historical lens can guide future public health efforts, ensure more equitable access to care and encourage more compassionate, patient-centered approaches to treatment.
Several important historical accounts of cancer have significantly expanded our understanding of the disease, highlighting its social, cultural and political dimensions alongside its biological aspects. Among the most notable are:
- The Dread Disease: Cancer and Modern American Culture by James Patterson (1987) explores the stigma and fear surrounding cancer in the early to mid-20th century. Patterson analyzes how media representations, public health campaigns and personal testimonials shaped public perceptions of cancer. He argues that the disease has often been linked to moral judgments, with societal narratives framing it as a punishment for certain behaviors, such as smoking or leading an unhealthy lifestyle.
- Unnatural History: Breast Cancer and American Society by Robert Aronowitz (2007) critiques the aggressive surgical approaches of the mid-20th century, particularly the rise and fall of radical mastectomies as the default treatment for breast cancer. Aronowitz contends that these invasive treatments reflected societal discomfort with disease and a desire for control, often at the expense of women’s quality of life. He also examines the medicalization of breast cancer, highlighting how screening technologies like mammograms contributed to overtreatment and a heightened focus on early detection, which doesn’t always lead to improved outcomes. Aronowitz reveals how cultural narratives about femininity and body image, along with feminist health activism, shaped the treatment and understanding of breast cancer at various times.
- The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of Cancer by Siddhartha Mukherjee (2010) presents cancer as a disease that has plagued humanity for millennia, with significant advances in its treatment emerging only recently. Mukherjee critiques the overly aggressive treatments of the past, acknowledging the trial-and-error nature of medical progress. He also examines the political and social dimensions of cancer research, focusing on Nixon’s War on Cancer. While this initiative raised awareness and funding for research, Mukherjee argues that it also created unrealistic expectations for a quick cure. By weaving together scientific discovery, patient stories and public policy, he demonstrates that cancer is not just a biological condition but a deeply social and historical phenomenon.
- Living With Cancer: A Historical and Global Perspective by Erica Wald and Helen King (2021) provides a comparative view of cancer treatment across different times and cultures. The authors argue that the experience of cancer has been shaped by factors such as colonialism, industrialization and access to health care. By examining how cancer outcomes vary between Western countries and developing nations, Wald and King illustrate how access to modern medicine—or its absence—can influence the trajectory of the disease.
These historical accounts underscore the complex interplay between science, culture and society in shaping our understanding and treatment of cancer. They argue that cancer cannot be fully understood through biology alone. Rather, historical narratives reveal how societal fears, gender norms, advocacy movements and political priorities have influenced both public perceptions and medical responses. These works highlight the importance of integrating scientific progress with social awareness to ensure that the human dimensions of cancer are not overlooked in the pursuit of medical cures.
Reading historical, first-person and literary accounts of cancer offers invaluable insights into the human experience of the disease that are often missing from scientific or self-help literature. While scientific accounts focus on biological mechanisms, treatments and outcomes, and self-help literature offers practical advice for coping with illness, humanistic inquiry examines the emotional, psychological, social and existential dimensions of cancer.
Cancer evokes deep dread because it symbolizes more than a physical ailment—it represents vulnerability, mortality and loss of control. Historical, literary and first-person accounts reveal this emotional landscape, capturing the fear, uncertainty and suffering that often accompany a diagnosis.
First-person accounts, like Paul Kalanithi’s When Breath Becomes Air, explore how cancer forces patients to confront mortality and reconsider their lives, goals and relationships. These reflections on living, dying and facing terminal illness offer profound insights often absent from clinical discussions.
Scientific literature tends to treat the mind and body as separate entities, but humanistic works capture the psychological effects of cancer—loneliness, grief and anxiety. By narrating the emotional roller coaster of the disease, these accounts offer a deeper understanding of how patients and families process their diagnosis.
Cancer has long been surrounded by stigma, which humanistic accounts help unravel. Sontag’s Illness as Metaphor critiques the harmful metaphors that portray cancer as an invader, punishment or moral failure, increasing patients’ isolation and guilt. Historical narratives further reveal how cancer has been hidden, feared or linked to personal failure, showing how stigma can worsen a patient’s emotional well-being in ways that biology alone cannot explain.
Many humanistic accounts also highlight the gendered dimensions of cancer. Audre Lorde’s The Cancer Journals addresses how breast cancer intersects with femininity, body image and societal expectations of women—nuances often overlooked in scientific accounts but critical to understanding patients’ experiences.
Cancer profoundly alters a person’s sense of self, especially when treatment causes visible physical changes like hair loss, mastectomies or scarring. Memoirs like Lucy Grealy’s Autobiography of a Face reveal how cancer reshapes identity and self-perception, offering intimate glimpses into the emotional toll of these transformations.
Humanistic accounts also explore the aftermath of cancer—not just survival, but the long-term psychological and emotional effects of living with its scars. These experiences of recovery and survival, often absent from scientific accounts focused on remission rates, underline the ongoing emotional challenges patients face after treatment.
Moreover, humanistic inquiry raises ethical and moral questions that scientific literature often overlooks. While medical advancements in cancer treatment have progressed, historical and literary accounts push us to consider the costs of aggressive treatment, the burden on patients and the trade-offs between prolonging life and maintaining quality of life. Works like Aronowitz’s Unnatural History expose the history of overtreatment, particularly in breast cancer, and prompt reflection on patient autonomy, informed consent and the ethics of medical decision-making.
Beyond the individual experience, humanistic narratives reveal how cancer is shaped by broader social, political and economic factors. Patterson’s The Dread Disease reveals how access to treatment has historically been unequal, with disparities in outcomes reflecting racial and socioeconomic divides. These inequities are crucial for understanding cancer’s impact on different communities.
Humanistic narratives also emphasize the ripple effects cancer has on families and caregivers. Memoirs like When Breath Becomes Air explore how illness reshapes familial roles and relationships. The emotional toll on caregivers, their struggles with helplessness and the complexities of supporting a loved one through treatment are deeply explored in these humanistic works.
In sum, historical, literary and first-person accounts provide a vital perspective on cancer that goes beyond biological and medical explanations. These narratives illuminate the human dimensions of cancer—the psychological, social and emotional challenges that science alone cannot explain. By understanding cancer through this broader lens, we gain deeper insight into how the disease affects identity, relationships and society. These accounts remind us that treating cancer isn’t just about curing the body—it’s about understanding the mind, spirit and social context in which the disease exists.
The humanities play a vital role in helping people process, cope with and make sense of life’s tragedies—such as cancer—by providing psychological, ethical, emotional and intellectual frameworks that science alone cannot offer. While medical treatments are crucial for managing physical illness, the human experience of suffering and loss demands a deeper understanding rooted in narrative, ethics, art, history and philosophy. The humanities allow individuals to grapple with existential questions, find meaning in adversity and explore the complex emotional terrain of grief, loss and healing.
Through literature, art and philosophy, the humanities offer powerful tools for processing psychological and emotional turmoil, complementing purely clinical approaches. Storytelling—whether through memoir, fiction or poetry—helps individuals articulate the complexity of illness and tragedy. For example, works like When Breath Becomes Air or The Cancer Journals offer deeply personal insights into confronting mortality and finding meaning amid suffering. These narratives create shared spaces, helping people feel less isolated and offering models for navigating grief.
Art, music and theater provide outlets for expressing the inner life in ways words often cannot. Art therapy, for instance, helps patients externalize their emotional struggles, allowing them to process difficult emotions related to illness. Philosophy, meanwhile, offers frameworks for addressing existential questions like “Why me?” and “What is the meaning of life?” Traditions like existentialism or stoicism equip individuals to face these questions, providing a sense of purpose even in dire circumstances. Viktor Frankl’s Man’s Search for Meaning exemplifies how people can psychologically reframe suffering to find meaning.
The humanities also explore the ethical dimensions of illness and suffering, offering perspectives that science often overlooks. Medical advances raise difficult choices about treatment, end-of-life care and patient autonomy. Literature and philosophy help individuals reflect on these moral dilemmas. For example, Tolstoy’s The Death of Ivan Ilyich explores the inner struggles of confronting death and medical intervention, exposing ethical questions about the balance between prolonging life and ensuring its quality.
Historical and sociological accounts reveal how illness is shaped by social inequities, such as race, class and gender. The humanities encourage critical reflection on these inequalities and challenge societies to create more equitable healthcare systems.
Beyond ethical and emotional frameworks, the humanities cultivate empathy by helping individuals connect with others’ experiences of illness. Literary works like John Green’s The Fault in Our Stars or Christopher Hitchens’s Mortality allow readers to step into the emotional worlds of characters facing illness, fostering a deeper understanding of others’ pain. Empathy, developed through the humanities, is crucial for supporting those who suffer and for building stronger, more compassionate communities.
The arts also capture the full emotional spectrum of tragedy—anger, guilt, hope, despair and moments of joy. Poetry like Mary Oliver’s “When Death Comes” or Dylan Thomas’s “Do Not Go Gentle Into That Good Night” gives voice to these complex emotions, creating space for people to reflect on their own feelings in the face of death.
In addition, the humanities offer historical and intellectual context, showing how societies throughout time have grappled with tragedy, suffering and death. Reading historical accounts of pandemics, chronic illness or personal loss provides perspective on contemporary experiences of suffering, reminding us that resilience and adaptation are part of the human condition. Engaging with philosophical and religious traditions also helps individuals frame their experiences within broader inquiries into mortality, purpose and meaning.
Finally, the humanities foster a sense of community through shared narratives and collective experiences. Memoirs and novels about illness create a community of shared experience, offering solidarity and comfort to those feeling isolated. Public mourning rituals—such as poetry readings or memorial services—allow individuals to process grief together, connecting them to a larger human story.
While science treats the body, the humanities heal the mind and spirit, offering comfort, insight and connection. Through storytelling, art, philosophy and historical reflection, the humanities help individuals make sense of suffering, find meaning in adversity and cultivate empathy for others. They remind us that tragedy and loss are not just medical issues but deeply human experiences requiring both scientific knowledge and humanistic wisdom to endure.
