Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Rob Instigator
Industrial pollution and smoking do not account for the rise in leukemia, brain cancer, colon cancer, breast cancer, bone cancer, etc. It is a factor in skin, throat, lung cancer, but humans smoked for hundreds of years before 1950. HUmans nuked the Earth 2056 times since 1943.
|
I'm not saying that nuclear testing was harmless, indeed, in Nevada and Arizona, as you've said, there are perhaps a fifty-fold increase in such cancers than should be expected on average. However, you're implying a global impact, and the data just doesn't support it. There isn't a direct correlation between all cancers and the number of nuclear tests, but I'm just not seeing how you can be so dismissive of industrial pollution, which has been a plague. The combination of this pollution with high smoking rates surely has a more significant impact because its been more far reaching. Either way, with all three in decline (nuclear testing, smoking, and pollution) in "developed" world, our cancer rates surely will be in decline, but with all the same increasing around the world, global rates should rise
