Re: RADSAFE digest 3135

[Norman & Karen Cohen <norco@bellatlantic.net>]

Steven Dapra wrote:

> April 30
>
>         Thank you, Norm, for your reply to my posting.  (I invite you to continue
> to make postings to RADSAFE.)  You wrote (within the dashes):
> -"
>
>         I do not wish to downplay the seriousness of breast cancer (or any type of
> cancer) but to extend your reasoning, an increase of only one case over a
> 39 year period would be classified as a "huge" increase.
> ---- In some ways, yes, if one assumes that the rate should be going down. If one
> assumes an upward rate, then 'only' a one case increase would be a victory, except
> to the unfortunate

person who contracted that breast cancer -----

> .

>
>         Why is breast cancer increasing?  Improper diet -- high fat diets are a
> known risk factor for breast cancer, as are drinking alcohol, and obesity.
> Women (and men too, I'm sure) drink a lot more now than they did 30 or 40
> or 50 years ago.  It is a well-known fact that obesity is a national
> problem in both genders and all ages.  This has been reported in the
> popular press.
>

---------- Isn't there also an alarming rise in breast cancer in younger women as
well? recall
reading something about that ----------

>
>         There seems to be some discord over whether cancer rates are going down or
> up.  I have heard a local anti-nuker say publicly that cancer is increasing
> at an "exponential rate."  I realize that this characterization means
> nothing without knowing the exponent, but the obvious and intended
> implication of the speaker was that cancer rates were rising rapidly.  In
> fact, this "exponential" claim was made by the prime organizer of that
> Environmental Cancer seminar I referred to in an earlier posting.
>
>         "----- Good that sr-90 got in there. This is one of the basic points of
> the TF Project, not that radiation causes breast cancer rises by itself,
> but that it acts in synergy with these other toxins ------"
>
>         The claim of synergy between radiation and chemicals continues to crop up.
>  Is there research to buttress this?  Citations?
> -------- As usual, the "I'm no expert" disclaimer. I believe that this claim is
> basically a theory.

I'd have to ask RPHP for additional info ------


>
>         "---- I don't know where reactors would be in N Mex, unless he's including
> Los Alamos.  And it's still an increase, when one would think there would
> be a decline. -------"
>

---- Norm ------

>
>
> sjd@swcp.com
>
> ************************************************************************
> The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
> information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html

--
Coalition for Peace and Justice and the UNPLUG Salem Campaign; 321 Barr Ave., Linwood,
NJ 08221; 609-601-8537 or 609-601-8583 (8583: fax, answer machine);
norco@bellatlantic.net;  UNPLUG SALEM WEBSITE:  http://www.unplugsalem.org/  COALITION
FOR PEACE AND JUSTICE WEBSITE:  http://members.bellatlantic.net/~norco/  ICQ#
54268619; The Coalition for Peace and Justice is a chapter of Peace Action.
“We have two lives, the one we’re given, and the other one we make” (Mary Chapin
Carpenter)
“Get up, stand up, stand up for your rights...Get up, stand up, don’t give up the
fight!” (Bob Marley)



************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html