Were all gonna die of Cancer, but at least our schools are kick ass. (Brookhaven: universities, camp)

[AlexisT]

Originally Posted by Crookhaven

Wouldnt you agree that Long Island is higher than most other areas?
With the exception of the OC.

crooks

Have you actually got stats showing it is, corrected for age, ethnicity, etc? (The longer you live, the more likely you are to get cancer, regardless of lifestyle, for example.)

A lot of so-called "cancer clusters" turn out to be flukes when they're investigated. Only 5-15% of suspected cancer clusters are statistically significant. An interesting article is here: Understanding Cancer Clusters -- Thun and Sinks 54 (5): 273 -- CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians (http://caonline.amcancersoc.org/cgi/content/full/54/5/273#SEC2 - broken link)

NS-LIJ is the third largest private nonprofit hospital system in the country; it's no surprise it's LI's largest employer. It's also the 9th largest employer in NYC. Its size is more of a testament to aggressive expansion (and a location where people are more likely to spend large amounts on health care, or have insurance that will) than any carcinogens in our environment.

[I_Love_LI_but]

Originally Posted by omigawd

And how would you know if any wild animals died of cancer? Would the pack leader or the King of the Pride report this info to the CDC?

That's what I was thinking too! I suppose the only way to know would be if an animal is found dead by a zoologist or wildlife researcher and given a necroscopy (animal autopsy). That doesn't happen often unless there is some problem noticed in a wildlife population and scientists are trying to study it.

Originally Posted by omigawd

Animals do get cancer.... I don't know about wild animals, but many domestic animals do get cancer as well as other diseases that humans get.

Yes, unfortunately, I am all too aware of that. I have two pets (dog and cat) with cancer. The cat has lymphoma and is in remission. The dog has mammary cancer that spread to the lungs and I am taking her to an oncologist to see if she is a candidate for chemo.

[Crookhaven]

Originally Posted by I_Love_LI_but

That's what I was thinking too! I suppose the only way to know would be if an animal is found dead by a zoologist or wildlife researcher and given a necroscopy (animal autopsy). That doesn't happen often unless there is some problem noticed in a wildlife population and scientists are trying to study it.



Yes, unfortunately, I am all too aware of that. I have two pets (dog and cat) with cancer. The cat has lymphoma and is in remission. The dog has mammary cancer that spread to the lungs and I am taking her to an oncologist to see if she is a candidate for chemo.

Yup, I know quite a few dogs riddled with cancer near Poquott.


croooks

[OhBeeHave]

Originally Posted by I_Love_LI_but

I was discussing the high rate of cancer with someone recently and he said that if everyone ate raw foods (no cooking), there would be no cancer. His reasoning is that animals in the wild never develop cancer. That sounded a bit peculiar to me, but now that I think of it, I have never heard of wild animals dying of cancer. IF it is true that animals in the wild do not get cancer, that may not only be because their food is not cooked; there could be other reasons. Does anybody have more information on this topic?

Many animals die in the wild for a variety of reasons -- age, illness, injury, hunted, etc. Other than the obvious deaths -- deer vs auto, goose vs hunter, we have no real way of knowing what the COD was for many wild animals.

I was speaking with a man in VT about the fact that no matter where I walk in the woods, I seldom if ever find much in the way of an animal's body. He remarked that bodies don't last long; the weather and other scavengers make short work of the body.

Unless someone had the ability to conduct necropsies on all wild animals, they can not safely aver that wild animals do not die of cancer.

[CleanCutHippie]

I was told something interesting at my last job by a client. She was Jewish and told me that Jews who orginate from Eastern Europe (which most from LI do) carry a breast cancer gene.

Besdes that our environment is a huge contributor. The lawns chemichals are a big one for sure. I have an Uncle that got cancer and it does not run in our family.

Cancer is now big business. The food industry, hospitals and pharm companies all would like nothing more for us then to get cancer and they are doing a good job at it.

[AlexisT]

Not all Jews carry the gene. (There are actually 3 mutations in 2 genes, known as BRCA1 and BRCA2, which are linked to Ashkenazi Jewish women. One mutation is also linked to a greatly increased chance of ovarian cancer.) Only 8% of Ashkenazi women carry one of the BRCA mutations. Only a small number of Jewish women carry the gene, and it doesn't even explain the majority of breast cancers in Jewish women--though it does explain a large number of family-linked, early-onset cancers. If you're Ashkenazi and have multiple relatives who developed cancer before menopause, there's a good chance it's BRCA-linked, but most cancers don't fit this pattern.

BTW, if you correct for age, ethnicity, and income level, the breast cancer rate on LI is not higher than average. For reasons we don't understand, affluent white women are more likely to be diagnosed with breast cancer than poor or minority women, and age is strongly correlated with cancer regardless of other factors.

[S.I.B.]

Originally Posted by AlexisT

For reasons we don't understand, affluent white women are more likely to be diagnosed with breast cancer than poor or minority women, and age is strongly correlated with cancer regardless of other factors.

is it possible that an affluent person is simply more likely to be under the care of a physician and actually be in a position to GET a diagnosis before dying?

[Crookhaven]

Originally Posted by S.I.B.

is it possible that an affluent person is simply more likely to be under the care of a physician and actually be in a position to GET a diagnosis before dying?

EXCELLENT point.

crooks

[AlexisT]

Originally Posted by S.I.B.

is it possible that an affluent person is simply more likely to be under the care of a physician and actually be in a position to GET a diagnosis before dying?

That's certainly part of it, and if everyone were screened identically we might see the gap narrow, but it doesn't explain ethnic differences.

[omigawd]

Originally Posted by I_Love_LI_but

Yes, unfortunately, I am all too aware of that. I have two pets (dog and cat) with cancer. The cat has lymphoma and is in remission. The dog has mammary cancer that spread to the lungs and I am taking her to an oncologist to see if she is a candidate for chemo.

I'm so sorry to hear about your beloved pets I hope they'll both be better and that whatever treatments they're having work.

I know my pets are like members of the family. They're not "animals" to me... they're my babies. They greet me every morning. When I come home from work, they're at the door waiting. When I'm relaxing in my big chair, I always have one on my right, one on my left and one right behind me.

Thankfully, they've all been healthy so far. I can't imagine any of them getting a devastating disease and what they would have to go through!

My friend had a dog --- it was about 12 years old or so. Had cancer in the neck. She refi'd her house and everything to pay for his treatments. He went into remission for a while but the cancer returned and his body was just too old/tired to fight it anymore.