Date:   1/2/2007 6:17:08 PM ( 17 y ago)
Hits:   2,993
URL:   https://www.curezone.org/forums/fm.asp?i=802585

0 of 1 (0%) readers agree with this message.  Hide votes     What is this?

You need to go back and check your figures, or at least put some new batteries in that outdated calculator of yours. Lung cancer rates for males in the U.S. has been DECLINING for the past several decades. Smoking rates for males began to decline in the 60's, but there is a several decade lag between changes in behaviour and changes in rates. Lung ccancer obviously does not develop overnight, or young people would get it. In terms of females, their smoking rates began to decline in the late 70's, so we are only now beginning to see declining lung cancer rates. To try to claim there is no link between smoking and lung cancer is absurd. How do you explain the above figures?? How do explain the differences in the amount of males vs. females getting the disease?? It couldn't be correlated to the percent of males who smoke vs. the percent of females who smoke could it?? How do you explain the fact that lung cancer was almost NONEXISTENT before cigarette smoking exploded in the early part of last century?? Coincidence eh??
Here is a link to the CDC stats for the 70's onward.

http://www.cdc.gov/cancer/lung/statistics/trends.htm

 

<< Return to the standard message view

fetched in 0.00 sec, referred by http://www.curezone.org/forums/fmp.asp?i=802585