A lot of serious academics have blogs. A lot of discussion happens in them before they go to papers.
Zachary Green
Not this fucking thread again.
Oliver Brown
Wow its literally nothing.
Jackson Gray
It's cuz we stopped dying as much from other shit. Cancer rates increase while everything else goes down pretty much. Death percent is always gonna total to 100%
Eli Price
>Death percent is always going to total to 100%
Well maybe with that attitude
Nicholas Reyes
thats a myth read OP you ignorant turd
Camden Gray
Life expectancy doesn't have much to do with us being able to treat more diseases and thus increasing the proportion of uncurable diseases as a cause of death. Even if you was able to cure cancer, it wouldn't have a dramatic effect on life expectancy because, at current values, you're more likely to die from hearth failure. Expect to see cancer being the lead cause of death by disease as we are able to cure more of them. You would see that it's no epidemic if you used absolute values of deaths caused by cancer per year (normalized to population size).
Levi Peterson
except you are wrong
from OP:
>Actually childhood rates are rising a lot faster than that.
>For example, rates have gone up 60 percent in the UK in just 16 years. Similar statistics are present in Germany.
>This is perhaps the most striking evidence that cancer rates are actually rising due to environmental factors and not just increased life expectancy.
the jews started culling us. We all knew that big pharma was injecting us with latent cancer to be activated at the whim of their kike masters.
Gabriel Bailey
no
brief rundown plox
Kevin Campbell
If cancer in animals can be caused by injecting them with cancer viruses and bacteria, it would certainly be possible to do the same with human beings! It was done in 1931, when Cornelius Rhoads, a pathologist from the Rockefeller (founder of Federal Reserve Bank and Globalist advocate) Institute for Medical Research, purposely infected human test subjects in Puerto Rico with cancer cells; 13 of them die
>were injected with live cancer cells by Chester M. Southam, >spraying several U.S. ships with various biological and chemical warfare agents, while thousands of U.S. military personnel were aboard the ships > U.S. Army released Bacillus globigii into the tunnels of the New York City Subway system
In 1971, when President Richard M. Nixon initiated the War on Cancer, the average person had a 1 in 10 risk of developing cancer in his or her lifetime. Today, that's changed – for the worse. The risk as of 2005 is 1 in 2.
this is the major cause of rapid decline in western populations
cancer is now as common as the flu, that is intentional. the existing cures for cancer are intentionally suppressed.
the great culling/poisoning orchestrated by CIA, CFR, etc has led to dramatic population declines. the genocide machine is being refueled by new immigrants to pack into the poison chambers
Alexander Price
Basically you're somewhat right. Leukemia rates have gone up but thats included in rising cancer rates. Also, I can't possibly believe those stats are accurate or 2 people in my house would have cancer right now. The rate of reports are going up because there is a higher population now so I know that the rates are going up simply based on reports. Health decisions also lead to cancer cells dividing. Working in toxic environments as well as smoking are a few things that come to mind which we all know increases your chances of getting cancer. My issue is with your stats which make no sense because we would see roughly 1/10 of the population having cancer which just isn't the case. I base that off of the numbers provided as well as the current middle age average etc etc.
Wyatt Fisher
its the risk of cancer for lifetime those stats are accurate, official stats from north america, uk, australia
the links ITT detail this
cancer rates are rising for people 50 and younger.
William Young
Second time this week - even the same made up graph!
David Bailey
When are you going to shoot up the local school?
Adrian Cook
I knew the jews were injecting people with cancer
Colton Peterson
>epidemic
Oh no! The old people are dying of cancer! How will the world go on....oh right, young people.
Michael Thomas
I always wonder what goes through people's mind who reply to the OP without having even read it. What is their motivation, do they just want to seem witty without having to put in the "effort" of actually reading and comming up with an argument or opinion about what they read?
Camden Campbell
What the red line seems to represent is the introduction of plastics into the kitchen and daily life.
Can't think of what else could have caused such a large shift, unless hydrogenated fats suddenly became a hit... Actually, McDonalds was a '50s thing, so the '60s cancer explosion seems to coincide with that.
Basically, you have to look at life in 1950 and life in 1980 and ask: what changed about the average American lifestyle?
Another question to ask is: did the non-cancer death rate go down? Is the chart representing diagnoses of cancer or deaths by cancer? Etc.
Joshua Clark
...For example, were they frying bacon and eggs with butter in 1950 and with vegetable oil in 1980?
Were people eating more oatmeal in 1950 and less in 1980?
Did barbecuing and charred steaks become more popular between those years?
Did sugar consumption go up? Did soft drinks become more affordable?
Did the population become more sedentary?
Did the number of cars (and exhaust fumes) increase between those years?
Adam Cox
How the fuck would they have diagnosed leukemia in 1880, idiot? Also, compare the rate of cancer to pathogenic disease, which will kill you much earlier in life and quicker than cancer will. >Something's gotta kill you.
Isaiah Perry
>The Jews are infecting non-white populations
>The Jews are trying to end the white race
sweating white boy in front of panic button.jpg
Robert Parker
As if the two were mutually exclusive Jews hate all goys
Andrew Thomas
The information you will learn is mostly
censored and banned in the United States
when it comes to cancer treatment, as
only pharmaceutical products approved by the FDA are allowed to treat cancer in the U.S.
Unfortunately, the pharmaceutical industry and the U.S. government has lost the war on cancer.
At the beginning of the last century, one person in twenty would get cancer. In the 1940s it was one out of every sixteen people. In the 1970s it was one person out of ten. Today one person out of two gets cancer in the course of their life.
The cancer industry is probably the most prosperous business in the United States. In 2014, there will be an estimated 1,665,540 new cancer cases diagnosed and 585,720 cancer deaths in the U.S. $6 billion of tax-payer funds are cycled through various federal agencies for cancer research, such as the National Cancer Institute (NCI). The NCI states that the medical costs of cancer care are $125 billion, with a projected 39 percent increase to $173 billion by 2020.
The simple fact is that the cancer industry employs too many people and produces too much income to allow a cure to be found. All of the current research on cancer drugs is based on the premise that the cancer market will grow, not shrink.
Why do conspiracy retards format their posts like they had mental issues? Oh wait
Jace Jenkins
I have lip cancer, but I dun did it to myself with the chew.
Parker Rodriguez
By 2050, it will be beyond 100%! Can humanity even be saved?
Tyler Bennett
>The rise is most apparent in teenagers and young adults aged between 15 and 24, where the incident rate has risen from around 10 cases in 100,000 to nearly 16. It's fucking nothing
Aiden Allen
Did you forget to take your clozapine again? Please user, be more responsible.
Dominic Butler
it's obviously the increase of vaccines given to our children. they have formaldyhyde in them!
Dylan Davis
people have less social support, eat too much meat and oil, use too much plastic, barely move, look at a screen all day, and have too much stimuli.
Of course they're gonna have cancer through the roof.
Joseph Jackson
Yes, we'll start reproducing through tumor-budding, it'll be much more efficient.
Chase Myers
the cause of the epidemic which will cull the majority of the population is intertwined with industrial toxins, pollutions, and modern western lifestyle promoted by corporations, politicians and social engineers.
it took 100 years for the authorities to acknowledge that smoking is harmful to health
it will take 1000 years for the authorities to allow minimally-invasive, effective, curative treatments with great safety profile
the epidemic is silenced. the cures are suppressed. they want you to not exist.
Brayden Bailey
C'mon m8, they've been using immunotherapy for years.
Landon Davis
Food and chemicals are the main offenders, but modern lifestyle and constant exposure to all kinds of radiation certainly contribute aswell. Informative video on the topic: youtube.com/watch?v=zpIN-8Q9Ahw&t=0s These people are the absolute worst kind of idiots, im genuinely hoping you are a disinfo agent and not a literal retard who is spouting false information based on cognitive bias.
Personally i cant wait for wireless 5G networks to become a norm, 24/7 exposure to microwave radiation is the thing that will finally force me to leave urban society behind and move into backwoods.
Dylan Howard
immunotherapy was considered a scam 100 years ago by American medical establishment, who succeeded in destroying Coley's Immunotherapy, which cured 100s of cancer patients
not surprisingly, you cant suppress the truth and after 100 years of failed radio/chemo, science is now revealing the true miracle of this immunotherapy containing proven immunostimulatory CpG, same with Warburg
>Coley's Immunotherapy suppressed for 100 years >Arnott's cryotherapy suppressed for 100 years >Warburg's metabolic approach suppressed for 90 years >adjuvant hyperthermia has been suppressed 100 years >invivo tumor lysate vaccine suppressed 100 years
consider the fact that cancer rates increased from 10% in 1970 to >50% in 2005, all since nixon declared war on cancer
consider the fact that cancer treatments have remained the same for 100 years using archaic radiotherapy and chemo
consider the fact that immunotherapy, cryoimmunotherapy have been around for over 100 years, but suppressed and avoided by medical establishment
consider the fact that the FDA setup red-tape and expensive phased clinical trials to delay and discourage new treatments
also it has been proven that diseases like cancer can be treated with a combination/cocktail of old common, cheap, repurposed drugs
Charles Gomez
this
>immunotherapy has been around for more than 100 years. The approach aims to boost, restore, or improve the body’s natural defenses to fight cancer.
>It was pioneered by William Bradley Coley, M.D., who used cocktails of toxic bacteria to stimulate the immune systems of his patients in 1891. Coley’s procedure, however, it took a back seat because of political interests that preferred surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy. But scientists continued to study the immune system’s response to cancer, and several drug makers showed a renewed interest in Coley’s toxins during the 1990s. In the 21st century, immunotherapy was still on the radar but many scientists shifted their attention to targeted therapies that attack very specific mutations on cancer cells.
>archaic 1800s saw the birth of mass communication as well as modern oncology.
The radio, telephone, radiation therapy, and oncological surgery were prevelant 100 years ago.
100 years later, you have, for as little as $50 anyone can purchase a handheld, portable, flat device that features high-definition color display, FM radio, internet access, telephone communication, music playback, live audio/video conferencing, streaming, recording, gaming, word processing, GPS, camera and other advanced capabilities.
100 years you have: Warburg, HIFU, cryoablation, RF ablation, photodynamic therapy, laser ablation, MWA, immunotherapy all being neglected
and just use the same rusty, old chemo/radio
Ayden Ortiz
>life expectancy instead of percentage of elder people
you're fucking retarded kys
Hudson Ortiz
modern medicine comes from a long tradition of eugenics
the technology/methods to cure cancer have been available for atleast 50 years
Nolan Adams
We get to live higher than 20 lol.
Zachary Roberts
Half of Kurdistan population could face risk of cancer in 3 years half of the Iraqi population will face the risk of cancer in 2020,” he added. rudaw.net/english/kurdistan/230620173
>cancer rates suddenly increase when we have ways of detecting cancer with medical imaging
GUH HYUH
gee wiz OP you're a fucking moron...
Xavier Clark
your ignroing the graph this blows out the standard response. also cancers are rising steadily for people under the age of 50. at least look at the picture in the (OP) and read the entire thread before posting in a thread, faggot
Nicholas Long
blow it out your ass
Grayson Sullivan
we're getting more sedentary etc it's like epidemiology man
Cameron Scott
This thread is so retarded, we've cured so many diseases that not much else can kill you beyond cancer and heart disease. You gotta die of something. Also the 1 in 2 stat is averaged for the whole population including smokers, sunbathers and fat people. if you're not any of these your risk is probably much lower. >da jews are infecting us! just delete this thread mods