What if your doctor could prescribe a choir, a garden or a men's shed?
England pays link workers to send patients to choirs and clubs. Australia invented the men's shed. What the evidence says, and what could come next.


Only 5 to 10% of cancers come from the genes we inherit. The rest start with something around us or something we do, which is where the claim that cancer is 90% preventable comes from. With what we know today, the World Health Organization puts the share we could actually prevent at 30 to 50%. The gap between those numbers is the interesting part, and it keeps shrinking.
Nobody in this article is to blame for their cancer. "Preventable" is a statement about populations and systems, never about one person. Plenty of people who did everything right still get cancer, and plenty who didn't never do.
In 2008 a team of cancer researchers reviewed decades of research and put it plainly: "Only 5–10% of all cancer cases can be attributed to genetic defects, whereas the remaining 90–95% have their roots in the environment and lifestyle" (Anand et al., 2008). Their breakdown of cancer deaths:
| Cause | Share of cancer deaths |
|---|---|
| Tobacco | 25–30% |
| Diet | up to 30–35% |
| Infections | 15–20% |
| Other: radiation, stress, inactivity, pollution | the rest |
The paper's title says it all: Cancer is a preventable disease that requires major lifestyle changes. The logic is simple. If inherited genes explain one case in ten or twenty, then most cancer starts with something outside the body's own code, and what starts outside can, in principle, be changed.
A second line of evidence backs the direction. In 2016 another team modelled lifetime cancer risk and concluded that factors inside the body contribute "only modestly (less than ~10–30% of lifetime risk)". The rest comes from outside (Wu et al., 2016). So the 90% idea isn't a fringe claim. It's what you get when you ask "what share of cancer is not written into us from birth?"
Health agencies ask a narrower question: how much could we prevent today, using only causes proven beyond doubt and interventions that already exist?
Nobody here is getting the maths wrong. They're answering different questions.
In 2015 two researchers, Cristian Tomasetti and Bert Vogelstein, published a finding that made headlines around the world. Tissues whose cells divide more often get cancer more often, and the link was strong. They wrote that most of the variation in cancer risk between tissues "is due to 'bad luck,' that is, random mutations arising during DNA replication" (Tomasetti & Vogelstein, 2015).
Headlines turned that into "most cancer is bad luck". The paper said something narrower: it compared tissues, such as bowel against brain, not people. Critics, including the team above, answered that the pattern can't separate luck from exposure (Wu et al., 2016).
In 2017 the same team returned with data from 69 countries. They estimated that copying errors cause about two-thirds of the mutations in human cancers, and they said this was "consistent with epidemiological estimates of the fraction of cancers that can be prevented" (Tomasetti et al., 2017). Both things can be true: chance plays a real part, and a large share of cancer can still be stopped.
The bad-luck research carries a kind message. People who get cancer despite never smoking, eating well and staying active didn't fail. Their cells made a copying error, as all cells do. That's also why it points to a second tool alongside prevention: finding cancer early.
Slip, Slop, Slap. In 1981 Cancer Council Victoria, funded by public donations, put an animated seagull called Sid on television singing three instructions: slip on a shirt, slop on sunscreen, slap on a hat. A generation of Australian children grew up singing it. In 2010 "seek" shade and "slide" on sunglasses were added (Wikipedia, 2026a).
The generation that grew up with Sid now has less melanoma. The rate of melanoma diagnosed by age 30 peaked in 1997 and halved by 2020, according to Australian Institute of Health and Welfare data (Wikipedia, 2026a). The rise in melanoma is now concentrated in people over 60, who spent most of their lives in the sun before the message arrived. A campaign isn't the only thing that changed in those years, but the young people who heard it are the ones whose rates fell.
A vaccine made here. Ian Frazer and Jian Zhou at the University of Queensland developed the technology behind the HPV vaccine. In 2007 Australia became the first country to fund HPV vaccination for all girls, and it added boys in 2013. Among women aged 18 to 24, the vaccine-targeted HPV types fell from 28.7% of screening samples to 6.7% (Wikipedia, 2026b). With vaccination and screening together, Australia is on track to eliminate cervical cancer as a public health problem, defined as fewer than four new cases per 100,000 women a year (Wikipedia, 2026c).
Neither story asked anyone to try harder on their own. Each made the safe choice the easy one, for everyone at once. That's what prevention at scale looks like.
Is cancer 90% preventable? In the sense that 90% isn't inherited, the research supports it. In the sense of what we can prevent tomorrow morning, the answer is about a third to a half. The gap between the two numbers is the research still to be done, and every cause found moves cancer from the "bad luck" column to the "preventable" one.
England pays link workers to send patients to choirs and clubs. Australia invented the men's shed. What the evidence says, and what could come next.

In 1972 Dutch roads killed hundreds of children a year. Parents took to the streets, and the country rebuilt its roads around them. Now 3 in 4 teens ride to school.

Half the world may be short-sighted by 2050. Trials show more time outdoors cuts new cases in children, whatever they do there.
