While it is true that survival rates are up dramatically with certain
forms of cancer, I agree that if one uses simply the death rate they are
doing a disservice and distorting the facts. The number that SHOULD be
used, is the incidence number.
I do believe that the incidence of certain types of cancer is down
(those two I mentioned fro example). But the incidence of many other
forms is still climbing.
Part of the problem (maybe all) of proving a connection between the
causes of cancers in humans that have been associated with pesticides in
animals is we have no control group to study. Where are you going to
find several thousand volunteers to participate in a study who have not
been exposed to most, if not all of the pesticides you want to study? So
the junk science producers who work for the chemical companies can
truthfully state that there has not been a proven connection between low
levels of pesticide exposure and cancer rates in humans. What they fail
to explain, is that there is no way to test for it because of the above.
--Dan in Sunny Puerto Rico--
To Unsubscribe: Email firstname.lastname@example.org with "unsubscribe sanet-mg".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email email@example.com with the command