4/20/2021 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly cancer. A person's genetic background is an important factor in colon cancer risk. Among first-degree relatives of colon-cancer patients, the lifetime risk of developing colon cancer is 18%. Even though family history of colon cancer is an important risk factor, majority (80%) of colon cancers occur sporadically in patients with no family history of it. Approximately 20% of cancers are associated with a family history of colon cancer. And 5% of colon cancers are due to hereditary colon cancer syndromes. Hereditary colon cancer syndromes are disorders where affected family members have inherited cancer-causing genetic defects from one or both of the parents. In the case of Villamater, it is manifest that the interplay of age, hereditary, and dietary factors contributed to the development of colon cancer. By the time he signed his employment contract on June 4, 2002, he was already 58 years old, having been born on October 5, 1943, an age at which the incidence of colon cancer is more likely. He had a familial history of colon cancer, with a brother who succumbed to death and an uncle who underwent surgery for the same illness. Both the Labor Arbiter and the [National Labor Relations Commission] found his illness to be compensable for permanent and total disability, because they found that his dietary provisions while at sea increased his risk of contracting colon cancer because he had no choice of what to eat on board except those provided on the vessels and these consisted mainly of high-fat, high-cholesterol, and low-fiber foods.[99] (Emphasis supplied) In the more recent cases, this Court has repeatedly emphasized that the working conditions and dietary provisions aggravate and increase a seafarer's risk of colon cancer.[100] While there are other causes that may have contributed to the illness, such as genetics and the overall health of the seafarer, this Court recognized that the poor working conditions while on board aggravated, at the very least, the risk of contracting the illness. In this case, Castillon himself pointed out that he was given poor dietary provisions such as canned goods, which are high in fat and cholesterol while he was on board respondents' vessel.[101] This allegation was never disputed by respondents. While respondents made a general claim that there is a prevailing dietary standard for seafarers, they failed to prove their compliance to this standard. Further, they never specifically denied that Castillon was only provided canned and fatty foods, that he worked for more than eight (8) hours a day, and that he was exposed to oil and fumes. In his Dissenting Opinion, Justice Alexander Gesmundo points out that there is no substantial evidence to prove that Castillon's illness was work-related, considering that: (1) his cancer was already critical at the time he was employed, and thus, it could not be ruled that his condition "developed or progressed" while he was on board the vessel; [102] (2) his claim that his cancer was aggravated by his diet and living conditions is merely speculative;[103] and (3) the pre-employment medical examination could not have detected an asymptomatic illness, because the medical examination is only https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/66406 14/35