Poll: 80% of the deaths by children under 8 years are caused by cancer
This is bad news
This is'nt bad news
[Show Results]
 
A test...
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
22-05-2011, 02:51 AM
A test...
How do you rate the above "quote"...

Observer

Agnostic atheist
Secular humanist
Emotional rationalist
Disclaimer: Don’t mix the personal opinion above with the absolute and objective truth. Remember to think for yourself. Thank you.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-05-2011, 04:59 AM
RE: A test...
I think it's bad news but I have to see some evidence.
Maybe it was always so before we discovered cancer. Maybe it was worse before with starvation , thirst and curable disease.
If it's a cause of modern society and our industrial world creating harsh environmental conditions then we need to do something !!!

I'm guessing you're worried about your daughter ... Sad

Atheism is a religion like OFF is a TV channel !!!

Proud of my genetic relatives Big Grin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-05-2011, 05:35 AM
RE: A test...
(22-05-2011 04:59 AM)gaglamesh731 Wrote:  I think it's bad news but I have to see some evidence.
Maybe it was always so before we discovered cancer. Maybe it was worse before with starvation , thirst and curable disease.
If it's a cause of modern society and our industrial world creating harsh environmental conditions then we need to do something !!!

I'm guessing you're worried about your daughter ... Sad
Relax Gaglamesh. An explanation will follow. Thanks for the concern.

Observer

Agnostic atheist
Secular humanist
Emotional rationalist
Disclaimer: Don’t mix the personal opinion above with the absolute and objective truth. Remember to think for yourself. Thank you.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-05-2011, 06:17 AM
 
RE: A test...
This statistic does not really make sense. The number is too much to account for just cancer deaths in comparison to disease/starvation deaths. Either it's bogus or the demographic borders of the study that lead to this number were restricted to only capitalistic countries. -_-
Quote this message in a reply
22-05-2011, 08:01 AM
RE: A test...
I would never consider a poll where death is the main factor as good news...unless it started with "Newt Gingrich was..."

Evolve

Smartass
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/James_Beard2
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-05-2011, 09:39 AM
 
RE: A test...
(22-05-2011 02:51 AM)The_observer Wrote:  How do you rate the above "quote"...


I think that it may suggest that accidental and violent deaths are way down for children, and therefore that's why cancer is now the number one cause of death for children. Cancer may now be the number one killer but thoses rates are also way down. I am pretty sure that accidents and violence were peviously the major cause of childhood deaths. Something has to be number one.


Just a guess

Blue Skies
Quote this message in a reply
22-05-2011, 09:45 AM
RE: A test...
(22-05-2011 06:17 AM)Celestus87 Wrote:  This statistic does not really make sense. The number is too much to account for just cancer deaths in comparison to disease/starvation deaths. Either it's bogus or the demographic borders of the study that lead to this number were restricted to only capitalistic countries. -_-
Your right, the number does only count for the western country's. I've should have been more specific. It was a rounding as well; the more accurate number is 76,3%; The question remains however...
Bad news or not?

Observer

Agnostic atheist
Secular humanist
Emotional rationalist
Disclaimer: Don’t mix the personal opinion above with the absolute and objective truth. Remember to think for yourself. Thank you.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-05-2011, 10:10 AM
 
RE: A test...
I voted good news, just for clarification.
Quote this message in a reply
22-05-2011, 10:18 AM
RE: A test...
I voted bad news due to this statement suggesting a medical finding that is less likely to be cured. Whether it's true or not doesn't quantify if it is bad news or not, even as a lie a bad statement is bad. I choose not to look at it as good news either, as if there were any statistical increases in cancer deaths that's a slow death for a child. Though this is much better than stating that the infant mortality rate is 68% caused by the parents committing infanticide (postulation). That would definitely be considered bad I would think.

I'm not a non believer, I believe in the possibility of anything. I just don't let the actuality of something be determined by a 3rd party.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-05-2011, 10:45 AM
 
RE: A test...
(22-05-2011 10:18 AM)Lilith Pride Wrote:  I voted bad news due to this statement suggesting a medical finding that is less likely to be cured. Whether it's true or not doesn't quantify if it is bad news or not, even as a lie a bad statement is bad. I choose not to look at it as good news either, as if there were any statistical increases in cancer deaths that's a slow death for a child. Though this is much better than stating that the infant mortality rate is 68% caused by the parents committing infanticide (postulation). That would definitely be considered bad I would think.

The lowest crime rate in years along with things like mandatory seat belt and child car-seat laws have now made cancer the number one cause of death for children. Cancer deaths have not risen for children, they are in fact also way down, I think this is good news.

Hopefully someday, lightning strikes will be the number one killer of children.
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: