If detection is getting better, with emphasis on picking it up early, then it stands to reason that more younger people will be found to have cancer.
Oof, I don't know enough about the field of oncological research to confirm or deny that. I don't have the energy to research the same things they're discussing in the article, but I have a friend who studies pediatric lymphoma who mentioned that there are a lot more kids dying from it in recent times, so it would stand to reason that increase in deaths = increase in cases? I don't know if I'm drawing a false equivalency, though...
I have a friend who studies pediatric lymphoma who mentioned that there are a lot more kids dying from it in recent times, so it would stand to reason that increase in deaths = increase in cases
No that is good info. Hard end points are key with meta-analysis of data from multiple sources, I think. Death is a hard end point.
It could still be about diagnosis, perhaps some deaths in young people now attributed with cancer would have been attributed to something else in the past. But a significant enough increase in deaths would suggest other factors.
I don't know, I just think it needs to be phrased alongside the classic "more study is needed" statement. It's something that warrants looking at more closely.
Thank you for expanding on that topic! Although your reply was incredibly informative, more study is needed. Jk, I'm gonna go to sleep.
what kind of statement is this? Do you think there's loads of people running round with cancer they never know about? Does cancer have no symptoms?
Micro plastics at it again
yay
All things Switzerland!