fastyacht
Super Anarchist
- 12,928
- 2,600
A long time ago I read a study that showed that tea with milk was less likely to cause esophageal cancer. Because of tannic acid being neutralized. Another study showed that Americans tend to get skin cnacer on left arms while Brits get it on the right (Ok maybe it was Australians? sun in England? haha).At one stage coffee was on the IARC list as probably causing cancer. I notice that is has been down graded to only possible now. I blame Big Coffee for that. Corruption and lobby groups must be involved. I mean how would California survive without coffee.
The science behind the IARC (WHO) lists, which most other list are being based off, is they give no indication on the levels of exposure which cause the cancer: do you need 1 milligram of exposure or do you need to take a bath in it once a week for several years for cancer to occur. They are heavily criticized within the scientific community for this by several major national science bodies and by other research groups within WHO, their own parent organisation. DDT is listed as probable carcinogenic but i think most DDT related deaths were actually related to the toxicity of the poison and net effects on the body and not proven to be directly linked to DDT related cancer.
Problem is I remember this stuff but who knows where it came from or how good the science was.
We all end up bathed in a variety of good indifferent great shitty bullshit science and unless we actively chase it all down and follow up (sometimes for years ) we end up misinformed in some way.
Feynman wrote about how bad science tends to beget more bad science. It becomes a preferred reference and so gains credibility. Like a cancer really. How coincidental.