|
Edited on Tue Nov-28-06 04:54 AM by Mugu
so I went out and fed the animals, cleaned the rain gutters, and started changing the oil in the truck, please forgive my slowness in responding.
We're not talking about one generation, we're talking 100 years of which the child death rate is included in the average life expectancy number and it still increased 57%. Dismiss that if you wish, but the fact remains.
“Live long enough to get cancer,” again you can mock, but the simple truth is that in the long run if something else doesn't get you, cancer will.
The data that I found and that you directed me to, only covers a short period of time say 1975-1995, and some others report the last 25 years. As you claim they do acknowledge an overall increase in the number of child cancer patients. Still the small number of victims makes it difficult to cite conclusive causes. And 20 to 25 years is a very short time to draw many meaningful conclusions as to cause with the small sample size. However, on the positive side did you notice that the mortality rate during this same period of time dropped dramatically. And much of that can all be attributed to new molecules (chemicals) that science has developed to combat these awful diseases.
I'm not unsympathetic on the topic of industrial pollution. My father is certain that he was poisoned with a compound that once was listed in the chemical dictionary, but now isn't. I was somewhat skeptical about the claim, he is getting older. But, a trip to the University of Chicago library archives proved it, in the old books it was listed, but in the new books it isn't. FOIA requests submitted to the EPA results in a response that no such chemical exists. My dad is a chemical engineer and designed the process to manufacture this chemical for his company, and the company sold it by the tank-car load to the mining industry (zinc mining I think, but I'm not sure.)
All of the men that worked with dad on the manufacturing project died shortly thereafter. Dad was the only one to be lucky enough to be under a physician's care for another aliment and during that diagnosis this condition was discovered. The doctor immediately started an aggressive drug therapy (more chemicals) to treat the condition and dad survived (only to now have dementia.)
So I have some idea of the toll that industrial toxins can cause and the resulting cover-ups. But, I also remember a few years ago a story about deformed frogs in some lake. The headlines strongly suggested that the problem was industrial pollution. But, some time later it was revealed that a naturally occurring bacteria was the real culprit. But the bacteria didn't get much press, so people could reasonably assume that pollution was the cause when it wasn't.
Regardless, my point still stands that people are living longer (dad was 78 in July,) healthier lives (he has an aortic aneurysm that is huge, but blood pressure medication has thus far prevented it from bursting) than ever before, in the majority of cases thanks to chemistry.
Regards,
Mugu
|