On Jul 12, 2:17*am, "Edward Dolan" wrote:
"JimmyMac" wrote in message

...
On Jul 10, 12:51 pm, "Edward Dolan" wrote:
[...]

I will repeat what I have already hinted at before. The science on what
causes prostate cancer is not solidly grounded.
On what do you base this assertion? *It would be more appropriate to

state that there is there is still much yet to learn about the causes
and even the biology of the disease.

It is mostly speculation
based on very thin slivers of research.
Your statement is itself speculation. *Much research has been done,

but progress has been slow due it part to the complexity of the
disease itself.

It is not just the complexity of the disease, but the complexity of the
human organism and his culture.

Well, yes the biological complexity of the host and the cellular
complexity of the disease itself both make research a cuanting
task.

Scientific studies are not able to take into
account all the variables. They are usually controlled for only a few
variables, neglecting hundreds of other variables which may or may not have
a bearing. Junk science reigns supreme in the area of diet and health.

For instance, is wine good for one's health? Is coffee good for one's
health? Who the hell knows? The research studies are all over the place and
contradict themselves. The reason for this is because the science itself is
flawed. That is because it is being done by academic types who are
nincompoops! What I know for sure based on my own experience is that too
much wine and too much coffee make me feel bad. However in small amounts,
they probably do no harm. Most foods are like wine and coffee. I have never
understood gourmets and food faddists.

I would not base what I eat on those
speculations. Entire cultures based solely on meat and dairy products do
not seem to have particularly high rates of prostate cancer.
Saying something does not make it so. *Yours is merely an expression

of an opinion stated as though it were fact and an opinion I might add
for which you offered no substantiation to support your contention.
This is an all too common practice that you employ when debating an
issue. *Granted, many complex and interrelated factors contribute to
contracting prostate cancer and a Western diet consisting of
consumption of meat, eggs and dairy products is one of those
contributing factors. *I just looked up the mortality incidence data
and wealthier, more developed countries (Northern and Western Europe,
North America, New Zealand and Australia) have the highest rates.
Southern Europe fairs better than Western and Northern Europe. *This
is likely due to the heart/cancer healthy Mediterranean diet. *Asian
countries fair the best. *Their diet is much different that the
typical Western diet.

Have you checked the incidence of prostate cancer among Eskimos?

Yes and thi\eir is a rather unique meat diet not to be confused with
consumption of beef and chick the is predominant in Western diets, but
their diets are changins and so is the rates of cancer right along
with it. I'd suggets tyou go back an re-do you research. Begin here,
for starters...

http://www.cancermonthly.com/iNP/view.asp?ID=228
http://www.theiflife.com/the-inuit-p...ase-and-cancer


Their
traditional diet was almost exclusively based on meat. Various pastoral
peoples of East Africa fall into the same category.

Eat a variety of foods in moderation is still the best and most sensible
regimen.
This is generally a good rule of thumb provide the variety does not

consist of foods known to be causally linked to disease or foods known
to advance a disease one already has.

It is difficult to say what foods do that.

Well know it isn't actually, but I have delved into this much more
deeply than you have. I till have three more books yet to read a DVD
to view regarding this very topic. I don't want to waste too much
more of my time bringing you up to speed when you can do that on your
own.

Jim

--
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota