Cancer is a predominantly Western disease.

[Frank]

Foreign people have much less chance to get cancer it seems, according to some studies. Alcohol, tabacco and fat turn out to be the major killers. Which are the things most foreign people, especially the Islamitic ones steer clear of.

Together with the other major Western diseases, it seems that we live much more unhealthy, but have much better healthcare.

 

[zsouthboy]

We live in a society of excess, to an extreme, even.

Unsurprising.

Live and let live, and all, though.

 

[Guden Oden]

Alcohol, tabacco and fat turn out to be the major killers.

I think you need to add grilled/fried meat, traffic/industrial pollutants, chemicals, food additives and sunlight to your list...

Anyway, we all gotta die of something.

 

[DemoCoder]

Foreign people have much less chance to get cancer it seems, according to some studies. Alcohol, tabacco and fat turn out to be the major killers. Which are the things most foreign people, especially the Islamitic ones steer clear of.

Together with the other major Western diseases, it seems that we live much more unhealthy, but have much better healthcare.

What's up with all of these posts with no sources and unscientific reasoning? The largest factor that explains differences in cancer rates is simple reporting differences in poor countries which have inadequate diagnosis and bioinformatics capability. The second largest factor simply comes from life span differences. The longer you live, the more risk you have of developing a cancer. Third, you have tobacco.

Fat? No, the proposed links between fat and cancer have been shot down time and time again. There was a huge amount of activity around the theory that fat intake was correlated with breast cancer due to the relationship with estrogen, but that was blown out of the water by several studies. There has been no difinitive link shown between fat intake and cancer, in fact, there have been studies showing that a certain level of fat intake has a protective effect.

Cancers have various proposed causes. Some are known to be viral. Some are known to be catalyzed by some carcinogens and mutagens (note: not everything carcinogenic neccessarily produces cancers) Some are known to be genetic. And some are known to be caused by immune system disorders.

There is no one cause, and there is no cause which you can strictly link to Western living (minus tobacco which isn't exactly a Western only club), not even carcinogens, because poor people often drink well water loaded with higher levels of carcinogens and mutagens than Westerners.

So this is not especially a time to feel guilty of a gluttonous lifestyle. For heart disease and diabetes risk? Yes. For cancer? It is unknown. And certainly, I'll trade a life expectency of 77-80 with adequate care to one of 60-70 in a desert hellhouse hospice.

 

[Frank]

What's up with all of these posts with no sources and unscientific reasoning? The largest factor that explains differences in cancer rates is simple reporting differences in poor countries which have inadequate diagnosis and bioinformatics capability. The second largest factor simply comes from life span differences. The longer you live, the more risk you have of developing a cancer. Third, you have tobacco.

Fat? No, the proposed links between fat and cancer have been shot down time and time again. There was a huge amount of activity around the theory that fat intake was correlated with breast cancer due to the relationship with estrogen, but that was blown out of the water by several studies. There has been no difinitive link shown between fat intake and cancer, in fact, there have been studies showing that a certain level of fat intake has a protective effect.

Cancers have various proposed causes. Some are known to be viral. Some are known to be catalyzed by some carcinogens and mutagens (note: not everything carcinogenic neccessarily produces cancers) Some are known to be genetic. And some are known to be caused by immune system disorders.

There is no one cause, and there is no cause which you can strictly link to Western living (minus tobacco which isn't exactly a Western only club), not even carcinogens, because poor people often drink well water loaded with higher levels of carcinogens and mutagens than Westerners.

So this is not especially a time to feel guilty of a gluttonous lifestyle. For heart disease and diabetes risk? Yes. For cancer? It is unknown. And certainly, I'll trade a life expectency of 77-80 with adequate care to one of 60-70 in a desert hellhouse hospice.

It was simply a local study, that went over many hospital records in the Netherlands, and did some correlations with other studies.

 

[AlNom]

It was simply a local study, that went over many hospital records in the Netherlands, and did some correlations with other studies.

Then I demand you type out the entire article!

 

[Frank]

Then I demand you type out the entire article!

It's in Dutch. But I'll see what I can do tomorrow.

 

[TheMightyPuck]

What's up with all of these posts with no sources and unscientific reasoning? ...

Me stands. Claps. I couldn't agree more. The fact is the science of cancer--and biology in general--is very complex. Human beings are mindbogglingly complicated systems of feedback loops the workings of which we are only beginning to begin to understand.

 

[Snyder]

It's in Dutch. But I'll see what I can do tomorrow.

This could probably one of the reasons for the majority of US-centric politics discussions here that was talked about in Natoma's thread. Many of the Europeans here likely inform themselves through media in some language other than English, which can make a discussion (where citing sources is rightfully desired) quite tedious...

 

[Blitzkrieg]

Who are "foreign ppl"? and who are not? Wouldnt it make more sense if it was ethnicity/genetically based?
A bit vague that sentence.

 

[Fodder]

Fat? No, the proposed links between fat and cancer have been shot down time and time again. There was a huge amount of activity around the theory that fat intake was correlated with breast cancer due to the relationship with estrogen, but that was blown out of the water by several studies. There has been no difinitive link shown between fat intake and cancer, in fact, there have been studies showing that a certain level of fat intake has a protective effect.

I have no journal links and certainly don't profess to be well-informed on the matter, but there's an article in today's paper regarding this. Apparently researchers from 'Harvard School of Public Health' led by 'Dr Frank Hu' have published findings in 'Annals of Internal Medicine' based on the 'Nurses Health Study II' that show people who are overweight or obese at age 18 are up to three times more likely to die within the following twelve years, with increases noted (amongst other things) in several forms of cancer (bowel, kidney, throat and stomach). Might be worth chasing down.

 

[pcchen]

I don't know what foreign people means, either.

In Taiwan, cancer has long been the major cause of death. In 2003, 27.1% deaths in Taiwan is caused by various forms of cancer, the number one casue of death. The second place is strokes (and related problems), which accounts for only 9.55% of all deaths.

 

[DemoCoder]

I have no journal links and certainly don't profess to be well-informed on the matter, but there's an article in today's paper regarding this. Apparently researchers from 'Harvard School of Public Health' led by 'Dr Frank Hu' have published findings in 'Annals of Internal Medicine' based on the 'Nurses Health Study II' that show people who are overweight or obese at age 18 are up to three times more likely to die within the following twelve years, with increases noted (amongst other things) in several forms of cancer (bowel, kidney, throat and stomach). Might be worth chasing down.

First, my question would be 3 times more likely than what? Let's say your chances of dying in the next 12 years as an 18 year old were 1 in 1 million. If you're obese, it's 3 in 1 million. Does that mean eating fat cancers cancer, or does it mean lack of exercise causes cancer? Or, does it mean, people with genetically inherited Syndrome X, which may make them more succeptible to being overweight at a young age, are more likely to have cancer or die early? And what of non-obese Atkins diet eaters? Does fat consumption cause cancer, or is it carbs? Perhaps obese people consume less fibre, and it is neither carbs nor fat, but lack of fibre. Perhaps obese people are more likely to have acid reflux, which increases throat cancer? Perhaps obese people are more likely to be depressed and depression is linked to increased risks.

There are way way too many variables to compute causation.

 

[_xxx_]

We spend our lives on the couch in front of the TV or the computer screen, eat unhealthy food, have a lack of proper physical activities etc. Eastern countries prefer healthier mixture of food, accompanied by healthier activities and lifestyle (meditation, martial arts, yoga etc.), so nothing new there. It's not in the genes.

 

[Fodder]

First, my question would be 3 times more likely than what?

Just passing on what I read. Like I said, you may like to chase down the original study, I'm sure it's markedly more verbose.

 

[KimB]

Foreign people have much less chance to get cancer it seems, according to some studies. Alcohol, tabacco and fat turn out to be the major killers. Which are the things most foreign people, especially the Islamitic ones steer clear of.

Together with the other major Western diseases, it seems that we live much more unhealthy, but have much better healthcare.

The biggest killer of US residents, by far, is heart disease. And that is vastly easier to connect to lifestyle. Why even bother to make such tenuous links to cancer?

 

[Powderkeg]

Foreign people have much less chance to get cancer it seems, according to some studies. Alcohol, tabacco and fat turn out to be the major killers. Which are the things most foreign people, especially the Islamitic ones steer clear of.

Together with the other major Western diseases, it seems that we live much more unhealthy, but have much better healthcare.

Interestingly enough Western Cultures also tend to have significantly longer average life spans.

Which means there is a good possibility that we get a higher rate of cancer simply because more of us live long enough to get it.

 

[AlNom]

It's in Dutch. But I'll see what I can do tomorrow.

I kinda meant it as a joke; please, don't work too hard on it.

 

[rwolf]

Interestingly enough Western Cultures also tend to have significantly longer average life spans.

Which means there is a good possibility that we get a higher rate of cancer simply because more of us live long enough to get it.

That was true in the generation before McDonalds.