Re: Re: Trying to Estimate Cancer Rates in Ancient Times - NYTimes.com

[Guest guest]



Bob

The other factor hat comes into play is average life span, which was much lower in earlier times.

PCa is normally, if we can use the term, a disease of the 40+ with the rates varying with age. Hence a lower number of PCa cases in older times.

What is likely is that there are environmental factors or diet that are showing up as increased numbers of men who are being diagnosed at a younger age than previously.

You make the point about other factors

One thing certain we won't get a final scientific study with all factors taken into account just by writing to this group, it might take half a dozen MSC students doing doctorates to get to something like an agreement. What really matters is identifying recent trends and getting to grips with the why and how, with peer reviewed science. This will be for coming generations, not ours to benefit from, the damage has to be done at younger ages.

Re: Trying to Estimate Cancer Rates in Ancient Times - NYTimes.comTo: ProstateCancerSupport Date: Tuesday, December 28, 2010, 10:43 AM

Kathy's posting came through with a bunch of different links in it.The one with the source of the information she posted was this one:http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/28/health/28cancer.htmlIt's a very interesting article. The evidence for and againstancient cancers appears to be ambiguous, with some scientists arguing that cancer rates were much lower in, for example, ancientEgypt, and others arguing that rates were actually about the sameafter adjusting for increasing life span in modern times.As for prostate cancer, it appears that the oldest case currentlyconfirmed was found in a Scythian burial mound dated to 2,700 yearsago.--Alan Meyerameyer2@...