Cancer & the Polio Hoax

The notion that the RATE of cancer deaths in this country tripled solely because Americans are living longer is dispelled by conflicting cancer data from around the world which proves that the polio vaccine is the root problem.  Swedish men live 3.6 years longer than American men but have a cancer mortality rate 13% lower, while Danish men have a cancer mortality rate 37% higher than Amerian men but almost the exact same life expectancy.  Israel, Singapore, Chile, and Cuba have longer life expectancies than ours, but have cancer rates almost half of ours. Panama, Paraguay, and South Korea have life expectancies equivalant to ours, but   have cancer rates which are one fifth of ours.  Lithuania, Poland, Russia, Estonia, and Hungary have considerably higher cancer rates than us, but have life expectancies which are up to ten years shorter than ours.

Even so, it's still possible that both:

1. Longer life expectancy exposes more people to the risk of cancer mortality and increases the cancer mortality rate.

2. High cancer rates decrease life expectancy

Hungarian men have a relatively short life expectancy (66.5 years) but one of the highest rates of cancer (351.5 per 100,000 population).  If longer life expectancy were the only cause of high cancer rates, then Hungary would have to have a much longer life expectancy than they do.  Mexican men have a 2.1 year longer life expectancy than them (68.6), and a cancer rate almost 1/8th of Hungary's (46.1), and it appears in this example that the major factor in Hungary's shorter life expectancy is a high cancer rate that accounts for 31.9% of their deaths.  Another significant difference between these two countries is Mexico's 2.3 times greater death rate than Hungary (25 per 1,000 population vs. 11).  If these death rates were to remain fixed, then Hungary would have a 2.3 times longer life expectancy than Mexico (90.9 years versus 40).  It is thus estimated when all factors are taken into account that Mexico's death rate will decrease 42% to 14.5 at the same time that Hungary's increases by 36% to 15.

Cancer accounts for only 1.84% of Mexico's deaths, so a cure for cancer would hardly affect Mexico while it would have the potential to increase Hungary's calculated life expectancy by 46.9%, from 90.9 to 133.5 years (if all else remained fixed).  If Hungary merely had a cancer rate equivalent to Mexico, then Hungary would have (351.5 - 46.1 = 305.4) x 10.5 million people = 32,067 fewer cancer deaths per year.  The mass innoculation with Salk and Sabin vaccines, which saved at most 1,000 children from polio then, costs Hungary 32 times as many lives lost to cancer now.  It's not nice to fool with God.

Hungary's accelerating cancer rate alone is enough to predict that their death rate will increase 36% over the next few decades, but it's obvious that cancer can play no role in the predicted 42% decrease in Mexico's death rate.  The fact that 2.45% of Mexico's population dies of all causes besides cancer suggests that a serious reduction in these other causes is anticipated.

Compared to China, our life expectancy is 6.7% longer (72.9 versus 68.3), and our death rate is 14.3% lower (14 vs. 16), but our cancer rate is 4.8 times higher (221.3 per 100,000 population vs. 46).  If we had a cancer rate equivalent to China's, and if all else remained equal, we would have   (221.3 - 46 = 175.3) x 284 million = 497,852 fewer cancer deaths per year, which would increase the life expectancy of American men by 12.5%, from 72.9 to 82 years.  Is it possible to expect to increase life expectancy by that much?  This is equivalent to the life expectancy of men in Andorra who never participated in the mass innoculation for polio, and for women in most industrialized nations (Israel, Singapore, Malta, Hong Kong, Iceland, Japan, Germany, Canada, Greece, Spain, Austria, Switzerland, UK, Italy, France, to name a few), so certainly it's possible.

Panama is proof that long life expectancy does not always result in a high cancer mortality rate, or coversely that it's possible to have a long life expectancy at the same time that you have a low cancer mortality rate.  Our life expectancy is similar to Panama's but our cancer mortality rate is 5.8 times higher.  If all else remained flat and if we had a cancer mortality rate similar to theirs, we would have a 13.1% longer life expectancy, 82.4 vs. 72.9 years.

LONGER LIFE EXPECTANCIES DON'T INCREASE CANCER DEATHS

Tthe correlation between life expectancies and cancer mortality rates has an r-squared of 0.0012, which is almost a random distribution [read: there is little to no correlation cancereurope.xls ]

156,345 or 29% of all 382,988 cancer deaths in the US in 1996 were those under age 65 http://www.cdc.gov/nchswww/data/nvsr47_9.pdf , which means that the percentage of Americans under the age of 65 who die of cancer today is equivalent to the total percentage of Americans of all ages who died in 1900.  It's impossible that our increased life expectancy caused the increase in the mortality rate of those under age 65, and it's not responsible for more than 10-20% of the increase for those over age 65.

While feminists appear to be completely fixated by breast cancer, they completely ignore that men have a 3 to 6 times higher premature mortality rate than women in almost every other category.  While women have a 12% higher cancer morality rate than men, men have a 3.4 times higher unintentional injury rate, a 2.5 times higher heart disease mortality rate, a 5.7 times higher HIV infection rate, and a 3 times higher homicide rate, than women.  This fixation on breast cancer prevents any meaningful debate on the root causes of the high cancer rate in the US, and in the world.

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/huscht95.pdf  

Copyright @ 2010 by Fathers' Manifesto & Christian Party