Nearly 900,000 Fewer Cancer Deaths Since 1990: Report

Jun 18, 2011 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: MedicineNet

There has been a steady drop in cancer deaths in the United States in the past two decades, two American Cancer Society reports find.

Comments
1 - 20 of 21 Comments Last updated Jun 20, 2011
First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Aimee-RN

United States

#1 Jun 18, 2011
Fantastic!! Nice to hear!!
azmac

Kykotsmovi Village, AZ

#2 Jun 18, 2011
Talk about a lie
http://www.naturalnews.com/032700_National_Ca...

The data also shows a dramatic increase in nonsmoking-related cancers, according to Epstein, including a 104 percent increase in liver cancer, an 88 percent increase in prostate cancer, a 54 percent increase in thyroid and testicular cancer, a 29 percent increase in breast cancer and a 14 percent increase in brain cancer. Epstein also notes the overall cancer mortality rates have remained unchanged and have increase by 6 percent for blacks.

It seems that the more we spend on cancer, the more cancer we get, Epstein said, because while the number of people with cancer goes up, so does the NCI budget paid for by tax payers and charity. The NCI budget has increased 25-fold, from $220 million to $4.6 billion, between 1971 and 2000.

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/032700_National_Ca...

The Great Cancer Hoax: The Brilliant Cure the FDA Tried Their Best to Shut Down...
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/ar...
Hugh Jass

Nashville, TN

#3 Jun 18, 2011
azmac wrote:
Talk about a lie
http://www.naturalnews.com/032700_National_Ca...
The data also shows a dramatic increase in nonsmoking-related cancers
If true, why would a smokers' apologist want anyone to know?

If there is an increase in cases of cancer that is NOT associated with smoking, and there is a large DEcrease in cancer generally, that means that the DEcrease is very much associated with a reduction in smoking-related cancers, which is consistent with the premise that reduction in smoking and in exposure to SHS over the last few decades is a factor.
Holy Smokes

Sea Cliff, NY

#4 Jun 18, 2011
It is a big question whether the Ameican Cancer Society is feeding us misinformation on the decrease of cander around the country. They do good things, of course, but it's not past an organization like this to be two-faced for their own good.
azmac

Kykotsmovi Village, AZ

#5 Jun 18, 2011
Hugh Jass wrote:
<quoted text>
If true, why would a smokers' apologist want anyone to know?
If there is an increase in cases of cancer that is NOT associated with smoking, and there is a large DEcrease in cancer generally, that means that the DEcrease is very much associated with a reduction in smoking-related cancers, which is consistent with the premise that reduction in smoking and in exposure to SHS over the last few decades is a factor.
Read the article there is no decrease in cancer, actually there is no decrease in any so called smoking diseases, in fact some has increased as much as 500% like asthma. You people are suckers for believing what you are told by the people who profit off bans,high taxes and drugs. The real killers you people ignore or do not believe. Could be why I am so healthy is I do not listen to lies.
azmac

Kykotsmovi Village, AZ

#6 Jun 18, 2011
Holy Smokes wrote:
It is a big question whether the Ameican Cancer Society is feeding us misinformation on the decrease of cander around the country. They do good things, of course, but it's not past an organization like this to be two-faced for their own good.
Cancer is one of the biggest money makers for doctors, hospitals and drug companies. Why would they want to find a cure. It also helps keep the population down. About 5 or 7 years ago I read where only one nickle out of every dollar goes to cancer research, must be less by now.
hugh jass

Nashville, TN

#7 Jun 19, 2011
azmac wrote:
<quoted text>
Cancer is one of the biggest money makers for doctors, hospitals and drug companies. Why would they want to find a cure. It also helps keep the population down. About 5 or 7 years ago I read where only one nickle out of every dollar goes to cancer research, must be less by now.
The author of your cited book castigates ACS for putting money into treatment rather than prevention. Promoting smoking regulation would fall in the latter category.

Your point is that ACS should be going after legislators with more zeal?

I can live with that.
azmac

Kykotsmovi Village, AZ

#8 Jun 19, 2011
hugh jass wrote:
<quoted text>
The author of your cited book castigates ACS for putting money into treatment rather than prevention. Promoting smoking regulation would fall in the latter category.
Your point is that ACS should be going after legislators with more zeal?
I can live with that.
You just made my point, why would they want to kill a money maker. Not about health, about money and power.
Holy Smokes

Sea Cliff, NY

#9 Jun 19, 2011
So, some of us are agreed. The American Cancer Society is on a treadmill as far as research is concerned. Why, indeed, would hospitals, doctors and drug companies want to discover a cure and use it to relieve the poor victims of our country. Let's hope some noble legislator (if there is one around)will take up the cudgel and fight this farce that is so damaging to us.
Organic

Albany, NY

#10 Jun 19, 2011
Thanks to organic food.
hugh jass

Nashville, TN

#11 Jun 19, 2011
Holy Smokes wrote:
So, some of us are agreed. The American Cancer Society is on a treadmill as far as research is concerned. Why, indeed, would hospitals, doctors and drug companies want to discover a cure and use it to relieve the poor victims of our country. Let's hope some noble legislator (if there is one around)will take up the cudgel and fight this farce that is so damaging to us.
Don't include me in your mutual admiration society. Treating the huge number of victims--I'm a cancer survivor myself, as are several friends and family members--is huge.

There are far more costs involved in treating hundreds of thousands than there are in funding a handful of researchers. Comparing the amount of funding put into each of the two areas and implying impropriety is disinformative.
azmac

Kykotsmovi Village, AZ

#12 Jun 19, 2011
hugh jass wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't include me in your mutual admiration society. Treating the huge number of victims--I'm a cancer survivor myself, as are several friends and family members--is huge.
There are far more costs involved in treating hundreds of thousands than there are in funding a handful of researchers. Comparing the amount of funding put into each of the two areas and implying impropriety is disinformative.
Most money given to any charity today goes for management. All the money donated to 911, very little of it got to people who needed it. In fact many of the rescue workers were taken to Cuba to get medical treatment. Still many haven't had any treatment. Many have died for the lack of medical help. But someone got rich off the donations. The banks we bailed out most of the money went into their pockets or to a bank in another country. By the way we had to borrow the money from the banks to bail them out. Talk about a nice scam. It is about money and power.
Holy Smokes

Sea Cliff, NY

#13 Jun 19, 2011
Hugh Jass: Who invited you in for any conversation of this subject. Can appreciate your support since being a cancer survivor. Hope you are in complete remission or cured. But there are others of us who suspect excess spending by ACS on research and other projects thst don't go directly to cancer care. Azmac can tell us more from what he knows.
hugh jass

Nashville, TN

#14 Jun 19, 2011
Holy Smokes wrote:
Hugh Jass: Who invited you in for any conversation of this subject. Can appreciate your support since being a cancer survivor. Hope you are in complete remission or cured. But there are others of us who suspect excess spending by ACS on research and other projects thst don't go directly to cancer care. Azmac can tell us more from what he knows.
Yes, ask him to help you find the bugs in your house put there because the CIA found out you were posting on Topix.

More in line with his field of expertise. He can probably even find you a psychic blogger who can find them for you online with their skype-scope.

You seem to be complaining that not enough of the ACS focus is on treatment. This is exactly the opposite of the point made by the author AZMAC cited. HE claims that too MUCH of the ACS focus is on treatment and not enough is on prevention.

Reducing the harm done by smoking is a strong preventive step. Making any progress there requires opposing the extremely sophisticated PR/marketing power of the tobacco industry. Research goes on, and is useful, even though research isn't going to cut it when confronting the billions of dollars worth of spin-doctoring that criminal industry fields.
azmac

Kykotsmovi Village, AZ

#15 Jun 19, 2011
hugh jass wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, ask him to help you find the bugs in your house put there because the CIA found out you were posting on Topix.
More in line with his field of expertise. He can probably even find you a psychic blogger who can find them for you online with their skype-scope.
You seem to be complaining that not enough of the ACS focus is on treatment. This is exactly the opposite of the point made by the author AZMAC cited. HE claims that too MUCH of the ACS focus is on treatment and not enough is on prevention.
Reducing the harm done by smoking is a strong preventive step. Making any progress there requires opposing the extremely sophisticated PR/marketing power of the tobacco industry. Research goes on, and is useful, even though research isn't going to cut it when confronting the billions of dollars worth of spin-doctoring that criminal industry fields.
Not what I am saying. Most of the money goes to management, NOT research, NOT for treatment. When you donate money to cancer research, less than a nickle goes to research, most goes into someone's pocket. Like most companies and charities today the top personal suck up the money before it ever gets to where it can do some good. They do not care if you live or die. I already gave you the article where they have found the cure for cancer. Not allowed in this country by the FDA. The FDA will not allow the cure for diabetes in this country. There is a cure for the common cold, not allowed. There is a cure for most all viruses not allowed. Most of this I knew long before the smoking bans. Now they spray heavy metals, fluoride in the water which is a poison. GM foods which have built in poison, while they are outlawing the organic foods. It is about money and power not health. We are fast becoming a dictatorship, if you watch the news Obama is ignoring the constitution and congress and doing as he pleases. Starting with Bush and now Obama we are for the first time in our history the aggressors to starting wars. He will need more of your money to finance these unconstitutional wars. Obama thinks he has found a way to get rid of our guns.
http://www.citizens4freedom.com/Articles/tabi...
Not going to happen.
hugh jass

Nashville, TN

#16 Jun 19, 2011
azmac wrote:
<quoted text>
Not what I am saying.
Regardless, it is precisely what the author whose content you linked to in support of your rant was saying.
azmac wrote:
When you donate money to cancer research, less than a nickle goes to research, most goes into someone's pocket.
When you donate money to the ACS, you are donating to fighting cancer, not cancer research. All elements are involved. If you want to fund research, contact a research university or a research hospital, or some other direct path to research.

The rest of your hysteria I will not touch.
azmac

Kykotsmovi Village, AZ

#17 Jun 20, 2011
hugh jass wrote:
<quoted text>
Regardless, it is precisely what the author whose content you linked to in support of your rant was saying.
<quoted text>
When you donate money to the ACS, you are donating to fighting cancer, not cancer research. All elements are involved. If you want to fund research, contact a research university or a research hospital, or some other direct path to research.
The rest of your hysteria I will not touch.
Again they have a cure for cancer.
When you donate you are putting your money in someone's pocket. Most of it does not go for any thing useful. Why the big boys live in million dollar homes and drive expensive cars. It is a scam that you and many others fall for. Just as you did with the unconstitutional smoking bans and taxes.

“POOR BRAINWASHED ANTISMOKER”

Since: Feb 10

Location hidden

#18 Jun 20, 2011
Hugh Jass wrote:
<quoted text>
If true, why would a smokers' apologist want anyone to know?
If there is an increase in cases of cancer that is NOT associated with smoking, and there is a large DEcrease in cancer generally, that means that the DEcrease is very much associated with a reduction in smoking-related cancers, which is consistent with the premise that reduction in smoking and in exposure to SHS over the last few decades is a factor.
Its about cancer deaths, meaning deaths of people who get cancer..period, not cause.

Along comes ACS who don't like the report that they had nothing to do with and adds its words that is all anyone is supposed to see or hear..smoking
brainwashing 101
Tracie D BABY

Bowling Green, OH

#19 Jun 20, 2011
Its me Linda B wrote:
<quoted text>
Its about cancer deaths, meaning deaths of people who get cancer..period, not cause.
Along comes ACS who don't like the report that they had nothing to do with and adds its words that is all anyone is supposed to see or hear..smoking
brainwashing 101
And who was the one that brainwashed you again?

I mean, even your own tobacco company admits that smoking their OWN PRODUCT, will shorten your life span and proabably play a key role in killing you.

Who told you smoking doesn't harm anyone? LOL. Did someone close to you die of lung cancer too???

....THIS SHOULD BE GOOOOOOD!!!!
Wrongful Death

Sea Cliff, NY

#20 Jun 20, 2011
The ACS survey is suspiciously supporting that organization's handling of funds. Let's get some question answered, that's all we're asking.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

American Cancer Society Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Did Selena Gomez go to rehab to get over Justin... (Feb '14) Jul '14 Big mike 14
Prostate cancer screening may do more harm than... (Nov '11) May '14 Miamor 2
Navy mulls banning tobacco sales on all bases, ... Mar '14 ItsAFact 3
Making strides against breast cancer (Mar '14) Mar '14 Voice of Reality 1
Always prevention than cure (Feb '14) Feb '14 hannalyH 2
American cancer society is stupido (Dec '13) Dec '13 Dillon 1
Women's health | Take steps to prevent breast c... (Oct '13) Oct '13 sammintu1985 2
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••

American Cancer Society People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••