|
Ruth,
If migration of retirees is responsible for excess
cancer mortality, then a map of retiree migration should match the cancer map. I
kind of doubt that it will. Lots of old people move to Arizona, but cancer
incidence seems low throughout the sate.
You think the reason the cancer map looks like it
does is because of migration, John thinks its because of population density,
someone else thinks its because of diet or a combination of factors. All I'm
saying is that it is worthwhile to figure out what it is. We are looking at tens
of millions of excess cancers here.
We are at least 3 orders of magnitude larger than
what would be expected from statistical fluctuations. Therefore, something
causes the map to look like it does. It should be possible to map a causal
factor, or a mathematical function of factors, to reproduce the features of the
map. Otherwise, we have to admit to ourselves that we are pretty
clueless.
Regards,
Kai
The map is a map of cancer mortality, not incidence. While it is age-adjusted, it does not provide the fraction of deaths that are cancer deaths, and generally seems to follow both population and total mortality (e.g., Las Vegas, NV has a growing population of retirees, so the number of people who die there increases, and thus, as anticipated, cancer mortality would increase). I don't think one can draw any conclusion about the cause of cancer from such a map. Ruth Ruth Weiner, Ph. D. ruthweiner@aol.com |