Choir Practice Could Lower Stress in Cancer Patients

A cancer center in the U.K. found that patients had significantly lower levels of the stress hormone cortisol after harmonizing for an hour. Christopher Intagliata reports.

Getty Images/iStockphoto/Thinkstock Images (MARS)

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This isn't your typical choir practice. And it’s not held in a traditional practice space. These singers are all dealing with cancer, theirs or a loved one’s. "There are people in our choirs who are undergoing treatment right now. There are some people who are waiting for treatment." Rosie Dow leads the choir groups at Tenovus Cancer Care, in the U.K. "We do have some terminally ill patients as well in our choirs, so people in palliative care. And then we also have people who've lost people to cancer. So carers and supporters." 

Anecdotally, chorus members have said that belting out tunes makes them feel good. But Dow and her colleagues wanted to see if that psychological effect might translate to a biological effect. So they selected five choir groups in Wales—with a total of 193 singers—and took saliva samples both before and after an hour of singing. They found that singers had significantly lower levels of the stress hormone cortisol after the session than they’d had prior to choir. Along with an increase in proteins called cytokines—which the researchers say might suggest a boost in immune activity. The results are in the journal eCancer Medical Science. [Daisy Fancourt et al, Singing modulates mood, stress, cortisol, cytokine and neuropeptide activity in cancer patients and carers]

It's still not clear whether those biochemical changes translate to any better outcome for patients. And choir practice is in addition to—not instead of—conventional treatments. "Of course we wouldn't recommend it as an alternative to chemotherapy or radiotherapy or surgery or any of the other conventional cancer treatments, but in terms of people's mental health, this might be a good complement to the treatment that they're having." 


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Next up, the researchers will conduct a follow-up study at the U.K.'s biggest cancer center to see if these biological changes hold up over the long term. After all, singing is certainly a cheap treatment. And it does no harm, either…as long as you don't wail too hard.

—Christopher Intagliata

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe