The impact of war language on the perception of cancer and its emotional treatment.

The use of war and sports metaphors in everyday language has sparked a deep debate about their impact on the perception of health, particularly in the case of cancer. This Monday, during the XVII International Seminar on Language and Journalism, the discussion focused on how this language distorts the reality of serious illnesses and creates an additional emotional burden for patients. Organized by the San Millán de la Cogolla Foundation and the Foundation for Urgent Spanish, the seminar brought together experts in linguistics and journalism to reflect on the topic. The roundtable titled "War Language Beyond Wars" highlighted the need to rethink the use of language in health contexts. Juan Ramón Lucas, Secretary General of the Sandra Ibarra Foundation for Solidarity Against Cancer, was one of the speakers who emphasized the importance of eliminating war language in relation to cancer. According to him, referring to this disease as a "battle" or patients as "warriors" is not only inaccurate but can also provoke feelings of guilt and loneliness in patients when they are unable to overcome their condition. Lucas argued that it is essential to call cancer by its name and avoid euphemisms that could lead to misunderstandings. He advocated for a more realistic approach that recognizes the harshness of the disease without embellishments or metaphors that might sugarcoat the situation. In his view, the notion that a positive attitude guarantees recovery is a fallacy that contributes to the emotional burden faced by patients. Inés Olza, a researcher in linguistics and cognition, proposed more neutral alternatives to refer to cancer, such as "the journey" or "the path." Although these expressions may seem softer, according to Olza, they offer a more personal and less confrontational perception of the illness. This linguist, who has also worked on the #ReframeCovid initiative, emphasized that using less confrontational language can help patients feel less attacked by their own condition. Laura Filardo, a linguist specializing in ideology, emphasized that language not only describes reality but also constructs it. According to her, the use of war metaphors can help better understand certain aspects of reality, but their application in the context of illness can lead to distorted perceptions that affect patients' mental health. Filardo warned about the ideological burden that euphemisms can carry, arguing that they transform the way social and political phenomena are perceived. Jesús Castañón, a professor of Spanish Language, provided an additional perspective by linking war language to the sports realm. He highlighted how sports have influenced the use of language that turns competitions into "battlefields." Castañón argued that this type of language facilitates understanding but also reinforces the idea that struggles are necessarily epic and confrontational, rather than being seen as personal and often solitary processes. The debate moderator, Almudena Martínez, General Coordinator of the San Millán Foundation, emphasized that war metaphors are common in media headlines. This not only reflects a trend in journalism but can also impact how the general public relates to health issues. The repetition of this type of language may contribute to normalizing a narrative that presents illness as a war, when in reality it is a complex experience full of nuances. The seminar serves as a crucial space to question and reflect on the language used to describe illness and suffering. As we move toward a more empathetic and realistic understanding of cancer, it becomes evident that changing the narrative is vital. The goal is not only to improve communication but also to alleviate the emotional weight that patients must bear on their path to recovery. In this context, the discussion about language reflects a broader social need: the pursuit of a more humane and less confrontational understanding of illness. Health should not be viewed as a war to be won or lost, but as a process that involves support, understanding, and, above all, communication that respects the dignity of those facing cancer. Transforming language can be the first step toward a healthier and more balanced relationship with illness.