"Armstrong to blame for his own cancer"

[Darryl Webster]

there are large geographical disparities in the incidence of various cancers but there are no societies in which it is 'unheard of' and no relation to 'naturalistic' societies - that's just a myth...

To be more accurite there are societies ( as apposed to nations) were some of the major cancer types afflicting much of the developed world are virtually unheard of but rather than get into the semantics heres a list of cancer death rates from many major countries around the world.
By understanding why theres such large disparity there is much to learn.

http://rex.nci.nih.gov/NCI_Pub_Interface/raterisk/rates39.html

 

[mastersracer]

To be more accurite there are societies ( as apposed to nations) were some of the major cancer types afflicting much of the developed world are virtually unheard of but rather than get into the semantics heres a list of cancer death rates from many major countries around the world.
By understanding why theres such large disparity there is much to learn.

http://rex.nci.nih.gov/NCI_Pub_Interface/raterisk/rates39.html

There are many cancers that are much higher in the developing world than the developed world, e.g., cervical, liver. Statistics that are aggregates of all cancer types is not revealing - regional statistics need to distinguish among cancer types:
http://caonline.amcancersoc.org/cgi/reprint/49/1/33.pdf

 

[bianchigirl]

The disparity in cervical cancer levels is almost certainly linked to the fact that women in the developed world menstruate something like 4 times as much as women in the third world - the root of all cancer being cell fivision. And those rates for cervical cancer were much lower when women had children younger, had more children, breast fed (basically anything that suppressed menstruation)

 

[python]

The disparity in cervical cancer levels is almost certainly linked to the fact that women in the developed world menstruate something like 4 times as much as women in the third world - the root of all cancer being cell fivision. And those rates for cervical cancer were much lower when women had children younger, had more children, breast fed (basically anything that suppressed menstruation)

interesting observations, biachigirl. thanks.

 

[rata de sentina]

The disparity in cervical cancer levels is almost certainly linked to the fact that women in the developed world menstruate something like 4 times as much as women in the third world - the root of all cancer being cell fivision. And those rates for cervical cancer were much lower when women had children younger, had more children, breast fed (basically anything that suppressed menstruation)

This is bollox. Age standardised cervical cancer rates are highest in the third world. Menstruation doesn't rank very highly as a risk factor for cervical cancer for fairly obvious biological reasons. Maybe you ought to try out your hypothesis on endometrial cancer. Also please don't use the phrase "almost certainly" without somekind of incontrovertible evidence.

 

[rata de sentina]

Can't believe I double posted... hangs head.. I blame the nannyist forum software for trying to emasculate discussion.