Re: Cancer Death Rates
- From: "Roman Bystrianyk" <rbystrianyk@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 31 Jan 2007 05:44:07 -0800
On Jan 31, 2:29 am, spamf...@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On 30 Jan 2007 09:57:05 -0800, "Roman Bystrianyk"
<rbystria...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
What might be found interesting from 1900 to 1990 the cancer mortality
rate more than tripled from approximately 60 per 100,000 to 200 per
100,000.
And what is the average age of onset of these cancers?
What are the average ages of adult deaths in these two groups?
jack
That's a very good point. I don't have those statistics at this
time. I will look into finding the death rate per age group for
cancer. If, for example, deaths in 20-30, 30-40 year olds had greatly
increased then it would be reasonable to assume that external factors
are involved in increased cancer deaths. If not, then we can be more
confident that an aging population would be more of a factor.
However, discounting child mortality in the first part of the 1900s
there hasn't been a huge gain in life expectancy as if often assumed.
For example if you reached 20 years of age in 1950 you could expect to
live to be about 71 years old and in 1998 (50 years later) about 76 -
not a massive increase at all.
http://www.healthsentinel.com/graphs.php?id=41&event=graphs_print_list_item
.
- References:
- Cancer Death Rates
- From: GMCarter
- Re: Cancer Death Rates
- From: Roman Bystrianyk
- Re: Cancer Death Rates
- From: spamfree
- Cancer Death Rates
- Prev by Date: Re: Can anyone help me with my new ADHD book?
- Next by Date: Re: Can anyone help me with my new ADHD book?
- Previous by thread: Re: Cancer Death Rates
- Next by thread: evidence and proof - low-fat diets fail and are dangerous
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|
