[HN Gopher] Amid climbing cancer rates, Iowa health officials ey...
___________________________________________________________________
Amid climbing cancer rates, Iowa health officials eye farm
chemicals
Author : PaulHoule
Score : 17 points
Date : 2023-12-26 16:11 UTC (6 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.thenewlede.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.thenewlede.org)
| gedy wrote:
| > The state is expected to see 21,000 new cases of cancer this
| year alone, more than double the number of new cancers recorded
| for 1973, the year Iowa began keeping records, according to
| Charlton. Since 1973, the state population has grown only a
| little over 10%.
|
| I'm not "pro chemical" or anything, but screening has gotten much
| better in 50 years, other causes of death have decreased, and our
| society is aging rapidly. Chemical bugbears are probably not the
| main cause.
| mint2 wrote:
| Seems harder to under report a disease like cancer than
| conditions or diseases that exist more on a spectrum and are
| lived with.
| pixl97 wrote:
| So you're saying all those people that are getting colon cancer
| at 35-45 would have died of something else in the past, cause
| that doesn't make much sense?
| dekhn wrote:
| What they're saying is that people attribute cancer deaths to
| a cause and see increasing rates as a sign there's an
| external cause of more cancers occurring, when realistically,
| what's being measured is more likely to be increasing rates
| of detection due to more sensitive methods.
| blacksmith_tb wrote:
| I assumed they also controlled for population growth, though
| actually that's smaller than I would have expected, ~2.9M in
| 1973, ~3.2M now. I grew up next door in Nebraska, and lost my
| mother and one of her brothers to colon cancer when they were
| both still quite young (late 40s / early 50s), I think there's
| certainly some chance of agricultural runoff being implicated
| (their two siblings who left and never returned are both still
| with us...)
| John23832 wrote:
| I would then ask the question, do we see the same increase in
| cancer rates in similarly agricultural areas around the world
| (in India, China, Brazil, Germany, Russia)? The US is an
| especially "industrial" farmer though, so there may be
| differences.
| angiosperm wrote:
| Iowa, like most mostly-rural states (and many less-so), is
| unfortunately under the thumb of advocates of what they call
| "small government", which in practice means they instead favor
| government by the whims of big corporations. Big corporations, as
| a rule, favor not regulating toxic chemicals. As a direct
| consequence, regulation of toxic chemicals in the US has been
| hamstrung. Many toxins banned in Europe are still used in the US,
| just as many banned in the US are used in Mexico. Mexican cancer
| rates are worse than in the US, which are worse than in Europe.
|
| Lately, paraquat is being blamed for the rise in Parkinson's
| Disease. It might be something else. Very few industrial
| chemicals get any testing before use.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-12-26 23:02 UTC)