Earlier quoted context omitted.
I dont know. But in Europe preventive checks are highly recommended (and covered).
Where in Europe?
Germany, Sweden, Poland, probably most of EU.
Most types of cancer not due to “bad luck” [pdf]
71–73 of 73 posts
Re: Most types of cancer not due to “bad luck” [pdf]
#72I'm pretty confused by the term 'luck' in these papers. Surely 'random mutation' is exactly how cancer propagates in all cases? Risk factors coexist with 'luck'. The chance of suffering a cancerous mutation is like rolling a dice, and risk factors are the equivalent of the number of dice being rolled. It's not a question of 'OR', it's a question of 'AND'. E.g.: You're a smoker who develops lung cancer: you are 'unluc…
The question is: would the random mutation have occurred and have resulted in cancer anyway for most of those engaging in 'risky' behavior?
Suppose only breast cancer (in women), prostate cancer (in men) and lung cancer (in both genders) existed. Suppose further that breast and prostate cancer account for 60% of all cancers and that smoking doubles the chance of lung cancer, but doesn't influence the chances for breast or prostate cancer.
For any individual cancer patient, the chance that they were 'unlucky' would be much larger than the chance that their behavior was relevant to their cancer. This is true even for those that smoke. Especially for those that get breast or prostate cancer, but even for lung cancer it would be 50/50.
Re: Most types of cancer not due to “bad luck” [pdf]
#73Earlier quoted context omitted.
>It's ok to eat cholesterol now, right? The position of "science" has been to eat a balanced meal and exercise for as long as I can remember. You won't see a medical journal recommending fad diets. Steve covers this fairly well in the article I linked. But still, public outreach could be greatly improved. It's unfortunate that many public doctors or educators on the subject are shills like Dr. Oz.
You could start by providing the links to the science! Why should I trust what you're saying? There's always someone on the Internet making claims. People debate have raging debates and few people actually provide real data.
Fair enough. :) Though in my case, showing where something "doesn't exist" isn't the most possible. But there's plenty out there on recommending balanced meals and exercise.