This is proof beyond any reasonable doubt that the most extreme of the crazy radicals are calling the shots in environmental policy. In this NYT piece, they are reporting that the ACS has rebuked a report published the President’s Cancer Panel, which blames (seriously) everything from vehicle exhaust to plastic food containers for much more cancer than had previously been attributed.
The government’s 240-page report, published online Thursday by the President’s Cancer Panel, says the proportion of cancer cases caused by environmental exposures has been “grossly underestimated.” It warns of “grievous harm” from chemicals and other hazards, and cites “a growing body of evidence linking environmental exposures to cancer.”
Children are especially vulnerable, the panel says. It urges the government to strengthen research and regulation, and advises individuals on ways to limit exposure to potential threats like pesticides, industrial chemicals, medical X-rays, vehicle exhaust, plastic food containers and too much sun.
The ACS differs:
Dr. Michael Thun, an epidemiologist from the cancer society, said in an online statement that the report was “unbalanced by its implication that pollution is the major cause of cancer,” and had presented an unproven theory — that environmentally caused cases are grossly underestimated — as if it were a fact.
I’m more than a little surprised at the directness of this statement, since NGOs in general tend to lean to the alarmist side, and also tend to play ball with the government. But what really seems to be going on is a conflict of agendas.
The cancer society estimates that about 6 percent of all cancers in the United States — 34,000 cases a year — are related to environmental causes (4 percent from occupational exposures, 2 percent from the community or other settings).
Suggesting that the risk is much higher, when there is no proof, may divert attention from things that are much bigger causes of cancer, like smoking, Dr. Thun said in an interview.
It’s doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out what’s going on under the hood. The environmentalists have taken over a health issue. They stacked this panel with extremists from the far outer limits of the green movement, with the intent of using cancer as a hook to hang their deindustrialization agenda on. And if this means diverting resources from actual real cancer prevention and treatment, that’s what they’re willing to do.
Because after all, we don’t need all those surplus humans anyway, now do we?
Update: Reuters has the same story:
Americans “bombarded” with cancer sources: report
Although most experts agree that as many as two-thirds of cancer cases are caused by lifestyle choices like smoking, poor diet and lack of exercise, the two-member panel said many avoidable cancers were also caused by pollution, radon gas from the soil and medical imaging scans.
Two-member panel???
Tags: American Cancer Society
Was Obama puffing on a fag when he reviewed this report?
Well, who could be against more regulation and research? After all, the government is very compentant and has our best interests at heart, and we can easily afford it.
/clueless left
Trial Lawyers cause cancer.
Anything in there about all those birth control hormones that get into our food and water supply? I thought not.
Doppelganger wrote:
Damned straight. And anyone who questions it is an anti-Science™ denier.
Having a pulse increases your risk of cancer.
A lot of this is recycled hysteria. Plastic containers and barbequed meat are so 1980s. I am doomed.
@ vagabond trader:
Indeed.
And exhaling fills the air with that deadly pollutant, carbon dioxide.
I suggest a government program to control pulsing and breathing.
Yes, we cancer!
Doppelganger wrote:
Now, please—let’s leave anti-gay prejudice aside for the moment, shall we?
If we are going to have the government spend money on research, we have to find a better way to avoid political contamination of science.
vagabond trader wrote:
as are we all. serious doomage.
I Support Arizona’s new Immigration Law!
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
ROFLMAO!
@ Kirly:
Can we sign multiple times,like voting in Chitown?
Why does the government care so much if I am healthy or not? Are they worried about losing a slave before her expiration date?
@ PrincessNatasha:
vagabond trader wrote:
well, if you have multiple names, zip codes, and email addresses. ie, a split personality! ha!
@ PrincessNatasha:
Good question.
With government health care costs, they don’t want you to get sick. But think about it. Since everyone sooner or later gets a deadly illness, why not sooner?
It’s like the nonsense about smoking supposedly costing the govt money in treating heart disease and cancer. Get a clue. NON-smokers also get fatal diseases, but unlike smokers, they don’t have the courtesy to get them younger. And in the meantime they soak up more years of pension benefits.
So why does the govt care?
You must be right about needing a slave. Somebody has to support the whole scam.
wolfie wrote:
Yet, the government relies, increasingly, on the money it squeezes out of smokers in increased taxes.
when shed loads of people stopped smoking in the 70s and 80s the doctors thought they would see a massive reduction in lung cancer, but it kept on going up and now it’s the number one cancer in the citys of the world.
a couple of surgeons started looking for other causes in the envioment and found if you put a grath of the rise of car ownership over the rise in lung cancer they match exactly.
there are white book encinogens in petrol, half of the people dying of lung cancer have never smoked a fag in their life.
sorry about that fag bit, i know in america it means something different, lol
justin case wrote:
Faggetaboutit.
in the city you have dispach riders on pedal bikes and they wear surgical masks. at the end of the day the marks are inpregnated with black specks and if they were to enter your lungs they would stay on the lining and fizzle and start a tumor going. this is soot hydro carbons, very dangerous.
Totally OT, but cool regardless…
I am a bit of a food/ coffee snob. I frequently shop at local “organic”, “health-food”, “nature” stores, just because they carry stuff I will not normally find at a regular store. Well, Imagine my surprise when today, at Fresh Market, I was lucky enough to get to a checkout lane that had the fastest cashier… Not only that… The girl had a short-sleeved polo T-shirt on, sporting some tattoos… One of them was this… The other one was a Roman III surrounded by stars, which we know what it is about… I was like:”Cool ink, I love it!” She replied: “Ma’am, you are the first one to say anything nice about it. I had a lot of stinkeye given me because of those”. Mind you, tattooed employees are not uncommon in these stores.
I think the progs are going to have a tough time taking over medicine with their voodoo b.s.
@ buzzsawmonkey:
i got fagrophobia.
Some say worse may be eating or drinking anything that is microwaved. Nevertheless, here is a balanced look at the current scare tactics regarding Microwave machines and cancer. http://lighthousepatriotjournal.wordpress.com/2006/08/08/myth-blaster-microwave-cooking/
Hate causes cancer.
More importantly, there are other things out there that cause more deaths: Heart Disease and Stokes. When you factor out lung cancer (caused by smoking, which is a self-inflicted injury, IMHO), you quickly see that we should be focusing on other things, if we are really concerned about the longevity of our populace.
This little bit of fact doesn’t help their cause, either.
I agree with Snork: there appears to be another reason for these ‘findings’.
I know the reason. Those environmental extremists all have Progressive Mind Cancer.
@ vagabond trader:
Trader , I didn’t get a chance to reply om the last thread.
I’m glad that your family got here too.
Now back to your previously scheduled thread.
@ PrincessNatasha:
Interesting!
PrincessNatasha wrote:
Enlighten me here, if you would, please.
By the way, if you want to see the latest in Palin derangement among the artists of the mainstream media, you need look no further.
@ Fritz Katz:
Good link!
@ Et Norsk Troll:
millions of people have and will smoke their entire lives without getting lung cancer, it can never be booked as a definate encarcinogen.
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
ha ha
@ RIX:
While we are catching up with people, I’ll quickly say that I am totally on the side of the boys who wore the American flags – whether or not they were making a political point.
Carry on….
Did a little digging and this is what I found:
9 out of 10 lung cancer deaths are attributable to smoking.
In 2009, approximately 165,000 people (men & women) died of lung cancer.
Doing the math (0.9 x 165,000), you see that 148,500 people chose to terminate themselves via smoking.
Subtracting that number from the number of cancer deaths in America yeilds 410,500 (559,000 – 148,500).
Still not a small number, but 25% less!
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
3-percenters. Americans who swore they would pick up arms if the Constitution was violated.
I know that it is fashionable to ridicule government or government sponsored studies, but here’s one that we can all get down with.
Several years ago there was a research study at the University of Wisconsin at Madison. It was an in depth project to determine why children tip over on tricycles.
The finding was Ta da! they need another wheel.
Today if Ludwig did the study he would say, “It serves the little brats right, because later in life they will leave a huge carbon footprint.
in the days of the industrial revolution in the cotton mills there were men called raggers, they went around cleaning the steam driven machines with rags and their skin was exposed to the oil.
to a man every one of those men died of liver cancer.
it was the first absolute carcinogen noted by the royal college of surgeons.
3-percenters, explained. Sorry, I hope I don’t get banned for this.
justin case wrote:
I’m an engineer, justin: I only look at the numbers. How people want to portray those numbers is not overly interesting to me.
Odds & statistics speak for themselves: those who smoke have a higher statistical chance of developing lung cancer.
If you disagree, you’ll have to take it up with a mathematician. I’m neutral.
Agreed , it was a permissible political statement.
@ RIX:
That sounds like the study was done by Mr. Bean.
@ PrincessNatasha:
@ PrincessNatasha:
Thanks. I’m not always hep to the jive.
PrincessNatasha wrote:
Princess, Princess…you don’t have to worry about that any more. You’ve moved on beyond the realm of the pony tail. It’s all just a bad dream now.
@ Overlook:
@ RIX:
If the decisions permitting Moratorium armbands during the Vietnam War are still good—and they are—I can’t imagine any reason why wearing an American Flag on one’s clothing would not be.
If you think that you’re having a rough day, my one year old Waterdog had a worse one, he got fixed!
As one guy to another , I feel his pain, ouuuuuuuch!
I hope that he doesn’t try to kill me in my sleep for this betrayal.
snork wrote:
Why does the image of an adult “children’s book” called “Pony Tales” spring to mind?
@ PrincessNatasha:
The more things change…
RIX wrote:
You must be proud to have a dog of the same breed as that chosen by the President.
@ buzzsawmonkey:
Yup
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
Who’s afraid of the po-nee-tail…
The po-nee-tail…the po-nee-tail…
Who’s afraid of the po-nee-tail…
Not me!!!!!
wolfie wrote:
Yes, they want to do to medical research what they have done to “climate science.” Use it to gain more power and control.
snork wrote:
Worst thing is… I grew my hair out, and my ponytail is much nicer than Schmuckie’s!
@ PrincessNatasha:
Somebody send some smelling salts to the swamp, stat!
Yeah, I have to get past that. This is our second, so we had ours first.
I was walking him by the river & a woman stopped & asked me his breed.
When I told her, her face lit up & she said ‘”Just like the President”
I said “No, this dog is smarter & he’s not being held prisoner.”
She hissed at me “You must be a Republican.” & stomped away.
RIX wrote:
that idiot would cut and paste some study blaming global warming for changes in tricycle tire pressures. then say Miami will be underwater by the end of the year, so instead of tricycles, children should be taking Kayak lessons
what a dipshit he is
@ justin case:
In the early days of the industrial revolution the machines killed many workers too.
The girls who painted fluorescence on the numbers on clock-faces developed lung cancer.
Prolonged, heavy exposure to chemicals, sunshine, or government studies is bad for you.
Totally crazed.
@ Overlook:
– girls got tongue, not lung cancer.
RIX wrote:
I’m glad too. I missed the comment but I know I’m glad.
Where did your family come from?
@ snork:
I aim to misbehave…
RIX wrote:
Actually, since three points define a plane, the tricycle should be the steadiest of vehicles.
I have to assume that the children were aspiring to revive those falling-over-on-a-tricycle videos that were so popular as filler on Laugh-In.
@ RIX:
Should have said “No, because this dog won’t be smarter than his owner.”
Also, I hope Luddy the Wanker finds a direct correlation between Glowbull(shit) Wormening and my use of my Jeep. Then, I really, really wish the idiot would try to DO something about it. (I’ll post pics after I run over his
“Smart”StoooooopidCar and laugh about it).@ buzzsawmonkey:
“Actually, since three points define a plane, the tricycle should be the steadiest of vehicles.”
A plane is the biggest and steadiest tricycle invented.
@ Et Norsk Troll:
no i totally agree with you, the tar stays on the lung and causes an irritation, and if you cant clear that then you are almost doomed, thats why 60 a day smokers are almost certain to succumb to it.
but car exhaust fumes play a massive part, look at asthma in kids, thats not caused by smoking and its a lung problem.
if you took a deep breath from your car tail pipe every day for a month, you would be screwed because the crap in that is a 100 per cent fatal.
@ buzzsawmonkey:
“Actually, since three points define a plane, the tricycle should be the steadiest of vehicles.”
you mean that it shold be “at least as steady as any vehicle” since four points in a plane would be just as good. (assuming competant construction)
But when kids lean in to a turn the center of gravity shifts to a point in between the handlebars and the inside rear wheel, or beyond, causing them to fall.
And I didn’t even need a study to know that.
chickadee
63 | May 7, 2010 18:13
Grandparents from Ireland. How about you?
@ justin case:
Frankly, I’m inclined to take your side in discussions of death, simply for choice of avatar.
I just think that it was taxpayer money really well spent.
is there a timeline for when the billions are going to start to die, and what will their deaths be caused by, kentucky fried chicken overload, or just lack of water.
justin case wrote:
Actually, life is 100% fatal, since EVERYONE dies, in the end.
This just in:
The Internal Combustion Engine Is Not Dead
You mean I shouldn’t have buried ‘ol Betsy?
@ RIX:
You have a good deadpan, at least in print. I’ve got to assume you’re being sarcastic though.
@ Nikis Knight:
good one, i never thought about that untill you pointed it out.
lol a death avatar talking about death.
How long until Ludwig von Quacksalot starts calling Dr. Thune an idiot because he doesn’t fall in line with what the Chosen One’s science panel says?
@ PrincessNatasha:
thats like saying only dirty people wash.
She would have fainted. My dog looks more like a Sheepdog than a classic Waterdog, so I could have said that.
It just find it amazing though that so many people think that it is great to have a dog like Obama.
Hey, he has one like me & mine is not a prop.
PrincessNatasha wrote:
100% of all people who die drank water! 100% of all people who died, took a bath or shower at some point! Where are the studies linking bathing and death?!
Yes.
@ mfhorn:
oh i am sure some monkeys in white coats will get a goverment grant to study that sometime in the future, and find much danger in our cleansing activitys.
mfhorn wrote:
Anybody got a sock?
mfhorn wrote:
That doggone dihydrogen monoxide!! I am tellin’ ya, sumtin’ must be done!!
/ do I really have to?
mfhorn wrote:
Here’s a summary
The odds are that if you parents never had children, that you won’t either.
snork wrote:
You just threw out a challenge…
@ RIX:
Here’s a scary statistic reflecting the depravity of our times*:100% of babies are born to women who are, or have been, sexually active.
*There real ones that do so, though.
@ snork:
I do!
See, the children are scarred being raised by such women.
@ PrincessNatasha:
Hello, good 2 see you on a Friday night!
What’s the body count for this week, or did you spare us mortals of your wrath?
Nikis Knight wrote:
unless they are lesbians who get IVF
Rodan wrote:
I spared all. Learning humility and forgiveness and all that… Sucks!
@ Doppelganger:
What, you are going to make me report my margin or error & number of significant figures?
@ snork:
You can have mine.
@ PrincessNatasha:
Thank you Czarina Natasha the Great for sparing us!
Hey if you didn’t get to hear yesterday’s show it’s recorded. Also Sunday at 8:00 PM EST. is our next one.
Tonight I’m chilling here, gonna drink some Fruit Punch!
See ya. Friday night, partay!
Glass of wine with dinner & a cigar on the deck.
Parties used to be a heck of a lot more than that.
Oh well, everybody have a great weekend
See update.
snork wrote:
WTF. Two members.
WOW
If one of you guys with a sock wants to go yank some chains…
@ Nikis Knight:
That’s a tragic statistic.
Years ago, some government group or other (I don’t remember if it was a federal or state group) was recommending that holes be put in buckets, to prevent the death of kids through accidental drowning.
Kinda defeats the purpose of the bucket, no?
Rodan wrote:
I am thinking about hanging here today too, drinking some delicious red wine. I am in a bit of a dilemma…I need some “playah” advice, I will be on FaceBook.
Oh, cheese and crackers. Lautenberg ain’t the brightest bulb in the chandelier, is he?
How do you prove that something is safe? This is a good way to get water banned.
@ PrincessNatasha:
OK I’ll be there in a half hour! I have to order some food!
snork wrote:
I need to create a sock. Then, I will do the equivalent of a frat-boy mooning. I am not nice. I am not classy (not any more, at least), and I have a whole lot of fun pissing off idiots.
mfhorn wrote:
It makes it difficult to operate. How many boats have gone down because the drain plug came out?
Over on Drudge: Story of the Somali Pirates captured by the Russian Navy
Hey you are Russia, not America, you can do what you want, you could even hang these pirates, and nobody anywhere would say anything, is P.C. going full circle and parking in Russia?
PrincessNatasha wrote:
@ snork:
I hope that wasn’t just two people.
Jehu wrote:
Heck, I read that report 2 days ago. apparently, it took the Russians all of 22 minutes to actually liberate the boat. Also, I think they just let the wankers go, on the open sea, in a rubber boat. If that is the case, G-d bless the Russians, and I would personally kiss that Colonel Kuznetsov or whoever ordered and planned that op.
PaladinPhil wrote:
Read the link.
PrincessNatasha wrote:
You forgot the part about accidentally poking a hole in the rubber boat.
snork wrote:
Oops… My bad, but it would be sooo much like the Russians to do so. We are sneaky bastiches.;)
@ Jehu:
Release them 1500 miles from the nearest coast in a rowboat with no oars, a small leak, and cuts on their legs.
[...] American Cancer Society: Obama Administration Exaggerating Cancer Risks › 2.0: The Blogmocrac… [...]
[...] American Cancer Society: Obama Administration Exaggerating Cancer Risks › 2.0: The Blogmocrac… [...]
[...] American Cancer Society: Obama Administration Exaggerating Cancer Risks › 2.0: Tһе … [...]