In connection with the cause/effect issue on cancer, it should be noted that the cancer death rate has been decreasing for some time. Note the recent story from the Washington Post:

------------------------------­----

WEDNESDAY, Feb. 20 (HealthDay News) -- Good news continues to come forth from the cancer front: U.S. death rates from the disease have declined by 18.4 percent among men and by 10.5 percent among women since mortality rates first started going down in the early 1990s.

In 2008, an estimated 1,437,180 new cancers will be diagnosed, and 565,650 people will die of the disease, according to a report released Wednesday from the American Cancer Society (ACS). Death rates were at their highest for men in 1990, and for women in 1991.

Although the rate of cancer deaths decreased from 2004 to 2005, there was an increase in number of actual deaths (5,424) in 2005 compared to 2004, the report showed.

"We do not know why the declines in death rate from 2004 to 2005 slowed,compared to the previous two years," said Ahmedin Jemal, strategic director for cancer surveillance at the ACS. "But we can say that this occurred for almost all of
the major cancer sites for men and women, which include colon and rectum in both men and women, breast cancer in women, and prostate cancer in men."

"Death rates from cancer continue to decrease because of prevention, early detection and treatment," Jemal added. "These have been decreasing from the early '90s and, really, because of this decrease, over half a million deaths
from cancer have been avoided."

......

------------------------------­--------------------------

I've been skeptical of the blame-artificial-chemicals-etc line ever since reading Science under Siege by Michael Fumento in 1994.

Wait - this says nothing about the occurrence of cancers, only the cure rates. Yes, we are getting better and better at dealing with certain kinds of cancers, but we still know next to nothing about what causes cancer, and the rates of cancer are increasing. If you look at it, we pour enormous amounts of money into cancer treatment, and we are seeing great improvements, and if you have cancer, that is a wonderful thing. But most doctors that I've met have no idea at all about what causes cancer and no real interest, or at least, not much time to educate themselves. They are too busy with their patients.

Who is doing the research and studies to find the causes and nature of cancer? Some are, but most of our research is finding a cure. Disease and curing is very expensive and, of course, alarming. Better to never get cancer in the first place. Not possible? We don't know! We just don't. But we could know, should know. The chemical industry, the dairy industry, the meat industry, the mining industry, and others don't want to know. They have too big of a vested interest in not knowing. We know with absolute certainty that smoking will very likely kill you in a very unpleasant manner after a couple of decades. Some get away with it, but most will not. How long did it take to even get a warning put on the pack? How long before we got smoke free grocery stores? And cigarettes are still legal and sold everywhere. This is one example of how hard it is to deal effectively with any highly profitable product, even when there is no debate about its health effects. There are other substances in our environment that are far deadlier than tobacco that haven't been challenged because we don't have the will nor the resources to do it.

I just underwent radiation therapy for prostate cancer. It cost over $100,000. The treatment is a testament to technology, and I'm glad it is there. I am a very healthy person, yet I got this cancer. I am now extremely interested in why. Our health care system is skewed toward disease treatment and management. It is where our research money goes and is responsible for the ever increasingly huge cost of health care.

I certainly am glad to be alive, but I also am convinced everything is backwards. I was stunned by the complete lack of knowledge about diet, about environmental factors, and about other suspicions of causal factors by my otherwise very smart doctors. They are, basically, mechanics of the body. They make repairs.

If everyone around the world had the same incidence of cancers and types as we do, then we certainly couldn't be faulted for thinking it's just a human condition. However, that isn't the case. Incidence and types vary by huge margins geographically. That certainly begs the question: what is different about us or about where we live?

I believe cancer is largely preventable, as are many other diseases. Of course, we die and will die of something. But does not every one of us wonder about what is a reasonable expectation? And should we not be concerned if the kind of culture we have created is actually short changing us of that reasonable expectation?

Statistics on trends in the incidence of all types of cancer in the U.S. can be found at the Natl Institutes of Health website under SEER (Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results). By combining males and females of all races, the result is a trend of -1.7 for the period 2001-2005. NIH considers this a significant result. This is the "Joinpoint trend in SEER cancer incidence with associated APC%"

seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html­/all.html?sttfacts_page=all.ht­ml&x=14&y=16

The largest part of the decline in cancer death results from reduced tobacco product sales. This is payoff on many decades of work, as tobacco product continues to kill years, even decades, after the customer stops using it.

Fumento is neither a neutral nor unbiased source:

<link>

i would have thought that there was more cancer since the evil bush cabal got in there. i thought there were conspiring with the evil insurance and drug companies to screw everyone.

as a matter of fact, i heard that halliburton came up with a cancer machine just like the CIA came up with AIDS to purposely infect the black man.

god damnnnnn america!!!!!