Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Also the "spike" in cancer rates can be to the fact that we're all living longer. Much longer, than people just 20 y/o.
As for the "clusters" they have other clusters in other areas. Sayreville, Tom's River, Bayonne NJ. Also in Westchester. Where ever MSKCC is thats where the cancer is.
P.S. I thought you'd get a kick out of that Crooks.
As for cancer, cancer existed long before LIPA high tension wires, cell phones, etc and remember now that we can detect it easier more people will obviously be diagnosed.
Exactly. In my genealogy research I've come across death certificates for people who died in the late 1800s/early 1900s with the cause of death listed as "canker" or "canncer".
Also, to lay the blame on causes solely from recent (meaning within the last couple of decades) environmental causes such as bottled water, etc etc, is misleading IMHO. When I think back to the things I was exposed to (including secondhand smoke from my dad who smoked cigars and pipes as well as cigarettes) while growing up in the 1950s and 1960s, it's downright scary. People had NO idea that these things could be harmful. And that applies to medicines too (remember thalidomide?). However, there's nothing I can do NOW about what happened THEN. I can only lead the remainder of my life in a healthy way.
I honestly believe that genetics has far more influence on a person's risk of cancer than most environmental factors. For example, my dad who worked with industrial solvents and photography chemicals for over 40 years; sprayed the yard regularly with chlordane for bugs; and smoked from age 15 to age 70, died at age 77 of a heart attack; not a cancer cell in his body. Yet my best friend who never smoked, never drank, did all the recommended tests, and was a poster child for healthy living all her life, was diagnosed at age 49 with Stage 4 cancer; there was nothing they could do for her. She lived for four months.
IMHO, other than avoiding the no-brainer known risks like smoking (first- or second-hand), pesticides, etc, it comes down to what kind of hand each of us was dealt in the Great Genetic Lottery.
Exactly. In my genealogy research I've come across death certificates for people who died in the late 1800s/early 1900s with the cause of death listed as "canker" or "canncer".
Also, to lay the blame on causes solely from recent (meaning within the last couple of decades) environmental causes such as bottled water, etc etc, is misleading IMHO. When I think back to the things I was exposed to (including secondhand smoke from my dad who smoked cigars and pipes as well as cigarettes) while growing up in the 1950s and 1960s, it's downright scary. People had NO idea that these things could be harmful. And that applies to medicines too (remember thalidomide?). However, there's nothing I can do NOW about what happened THEN. I can only lead the remainder of my life in a healthy way.
I honestly believe that genetics has far more influence on a person's risk of cancer than most environmental factors. For example, my dad who worked with industrial solvents and photography chemicals for over 40 years; sprayed the yard regularly with chlordane for bugs; and smoked from age 15 to age 70, died at age 77 of a heart attack; not a cancer cell in his body. Yet my best friend who never smoked, never drank, did all the recommended tests, and was a poster child for healthy living all her life, was diagnosed at age 49 with Stage 4 cancer; there was nothing they could do for her. She lived for four months.
IMHO, other than avoiding the no-brainer known risks like smoking (first- or second-hand), pesticides, etc, it comes down to what kind of hand each of us was dealt in the Great Genetic Lottery.
Wouldnt you agree that Long Island is higher than most other areas?
With the exception of the OC.
In reference to the lawn care being responsible for cancer ; lawn care applications account for 2% of all pesticide use on Long Island.
I am in the business (a dirty word and business now), but when I have tried to change our customers idea of heading in the organic direction, people dont want it. This is because it does cost more, will take a lot longer to work and there is no instant results. We are heading more in that direction annually and I am so pleased about it. But it will take time to go 100% organic.
Now when the big box stores stop selling the pesticides to homeowners, then things may change. A homeowner puts down much more (double the rate is better eh) pesticides and weed killers on their own lawns. There is a huge reason why there is a label to be followed but many homeowners do not follow the label.
2% of all pesticide use ; thats really not much is it. So please stop blaming us. My own dh had cancer but it was due to genetics than anything.
True, the 2% isn't much, but it still has an effect, as do the people who self-apply pesticides and don't have a clue as to what they're doing (and, of course, can't be bothered to read the directions!)
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?
Animals in the wild don't drink diet pepsi, or scotch or anything other than water for that matter. Or twinkies or hormone fed beef. I doubt cooking has anything to do with it.
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.
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?
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.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
