Jump to content

Build Theme!

Photo

Cancer in Asia


  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic

#1 kotmj

kotmj

    Megatimer

  • Members
  • 7,674 posts
  • LocationBukit Rimau

Posted 17 August 2013 - 11:26 AM

Pfizer made a study of cancer in Asia in 2008. Good news: We are nowhere (not even close) as cancerous as the US.

 

It's mostly good news. We do quite well compared to other Asian countries, and are vastly better than the US.

 

But Singapore is significantly more cancerous than Malaysia. We both suffer from the same sorts of cancer in the same order of prevalence (for men, it's lung first, then colon & rectum, then stomach). But the rate per 100 000 of the population for each cancer is higher in SG. Since I do not smoke and am male, I am interested in the colon and stomach cancers for males only. Singaporean males have a 82% higher incidence of colon & rectum cancer than Malaysians. So the risk is almost double. With stomach cancer, Singaporean males run a 69% higher risk.

 

http://www.pfizer.co...cer_in_asia.pdf

 

Look at the numbers for India. Cancer there is rare.



#2 joonian

joonian

    Megatimer

  • Alfa once more
  • 2,134 posts
  • Location-

Posted 17 August 2013 - 11:34 PM

cancer solved. the beginnings of a solution, anyway. http://www.phillymag...ighting-cancer/



#3 kotmj

kotmj

    Megatimer

  • Members
  • 7,674 posts
  • LocationBukit Rimau

Posted 18 August 2013 - 11:07 PM

Amazing story. Almost too good to be true.



#4 joonian

joonian

    Megatimer

  • Alfa once more
  • 2,134 posts
  • Location-

Posted 19 August 2013 - 12:48 AM

choi!



#5 kotmj

kotmj

    Megatimer

  • Members
  • 7,674 posts
  • LocationBukit Rimau

Posted 20 August 2013 - 03:15 PM

I've been immersing myself in the whole American food (fad) literature, and come away with the conclusion that it's very unenlightened.

 

It's all research-based. So somebody would investgate the relationship between a food and the occurence of a particular illness. If that food is found, within the confines of that research to suppress that illness, a whole busload of American entrepreneurs will jump on it and a new "superfood" is born and suburbs full of Californian housewives will be flocking to buy it and books will be written about it, etc.

 

There is also a great deal of reductionism. You eat flaxseed for this and that nutrient, this and that berry for such and such a nutrient, and if all works well you won't die of cancer but of something else.

 

And if you look at what they are recommending, it looks like a primitive, barely edible, unevolved Chinese diet.

 

The problem with "formulating" a diet based on research is that research is so primitve and has barely scratched the surface of nutrition. Wheras humans and food are as old as the existence of the species.

 

I think a better approach is to use empirical studies. Look at heritage diets and see which results in people dying of old age instead of diet-based diseases. Then eat that diet. The results will be better than diets formulated by Americans based on research, because these heritage diets are wiser than any living person from having been stress-tested by countless generations of humans.

 

The Chinese diet before people learned to grow meat so efficiently is a good one.



#6 Zinzan

Zinzan

    Megatimer

  • Members
  • 1,478 posts

Posted 20 August 2013 - 04:42 PM

If you know the US supplement market you'd be amazed at the amount of cockamie shit they come up with. Believe it or not the regulatory for health supplement market in the US is the most relaxed in the world and unbelievably Malaysia and Singapore is one of the strictest.  



#7 kotmj

kotmj

    Megatimer

  • Members
  • 7,674 posts
  • LocationBukit Rimau

Posted 21 August 2013 - 03:23 AM

Compelling talks

 



#8 carbman

carbman

    Megatimer

  • Members
  • 347 posts
  • LocationPJ

Posted 30 August 2013 - 03:09 AM

The low stats for Malaysia and India is due to underreporting, I suspect. For Singapore, its closer to the truth. 



#9 EF Lau

EF Lau

    Smalltimer

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 67 posts

Posted 05 November 2014 - 05:17 PM

The low stats for Malaysia and India is due to underreporting, I suspect. For Singapore, its closer to the truth. 

 

That is probably a better indication than most. Although it would be interesting to see the rates at larger cities such as KL, JB and Penang. 

 

It will probably give us a better reflection of the actual rates. 

 

Regards, 

 

EF LAU



#10 MOP

MOP

    Megatimer

  • Members
  • 839 posts

Posted 06 November 2014 - 08:41 AM

Do you suffer chemtrails in Asia as we do in Europe and in Usa? Specially if living close to an airport.

I hope you are free of this spraying
ANY




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users