But funny how this thread have gone from civil argumentation to ppl using Master suppression techniques.

are you going to address my comment at all, bog?

Kasi - 1. "should our right to drink alcohol and drive be protected?" Where do you have a right to drink and drive? It is probably right next to you right to bugger little boys. You have no right to engage in dangerous behaviors.
2,. "Most cancers can be avoided" Yes. A healthy lifestyle will prevent most lifestyles. Chemo is not prevention, It is a treatment. Here is but one example. "Cancer is a man-made disease fuelled by the excesses of modern life, a study of ancient remains has found.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1320507/Cancer-purely-man-say-scientists-finding-trace-disease-Egyptian-mummies.html#ixzz3pKUknLDG
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

MF "If any man had written what BOG wrote about being "a real man" in DK, all the womans here would have eaten him raw." I find women like a real man. Not the wussified versions you seem to represent.

@BOG never quote the Daily Fail and expect anyone to trust it. It is one of the most embarrassing things in the UK and is still owned by a family that supported Hitler. Utterly revolting piece of tripe.

diplo - k What are the acceptable news sources to quote?
Is the common nature of cancer worldwide purely a man-made phenomenon? That is what some researchers now suggest.. http://www.nbcnews.com/id/39687039/ns/health-cancer/t/cancer-man-made-disease-controversial-study-claims/#.VilG836rTIU

Finally, Proof that Cancer is a Man-Made Disease http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/12/03/cancer-not-found-in-ancient-mummies-appears-to-be-recent-disease.aspx

Mercola is a great site for health.

Wait, what does cancer have to do with health?

Using mummies as a sample group is useless. It's too small to be representative of the population and most died before they would have developed any form other than skin cancer.

While some cancer types have been tied to chemicals. The rise is more likely due to people living long enough to have it detected. When most of the population dies off at earlier ages from other causes, it's rare that anyone would have checked for it.

Another shoddy research study that was poorly designed.

k. but if cancer wasn't found in ancients, doesn't that indicate cancer is a recent thing?

All the crap and chemicals people eat could cause cancer, No?

But they taste soooooo good

A good bag of funyons and a Kitkat bar washed down with a Diet Coke. Heaven

http://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancerbasics/thehistoryofcancer/the-history-of-cancer-what-is-cancer
"Our oldest description of cancer (although the word cancer was not used) was discovered in Egypt and dates back to about 3000 BC."

"Mercola is a great site for health." I looked it up, and it's run by someone with just as much credentials and shady claims as Dr. Oz.

Pro tip to anyone who gets cancer.
Get Laetrile. Don't do chemo. And then recover. I know people this has worked on.

The cancer society hates that stuff though, and there is a crap ton of propaganda against it.

you are ridiculous, i love it, makes it even funnier.
ad 1) so the government should prohibit actions that harm other people? that's not what you've said before.
ad 2) if you want to know, this is why i think you're a troll. you're not engaging in my post, you comment on a remark YOU made and that i quopte you on.

The risk of cancer increases significantly with age + life expectancy is growing over time = more cancer today than in ancient bodies.

BOG, that you even believe in there actually been a stamp called "the real man" and that you think you have it is hilarious.

You do not know anything about me, so even more hilarious that you seem so certain that I'm not just like every comment where you described your "real man" behavior.

My main source of UK news is the Guardian website. Editorially it is left-wing, so you definitely won't like some of their columnists, but the news reporting is unbiased and top-quality (they won Pulitzer for Snowden coverage). Nicknamed the Grauniad for regular typos. Interesting to watch because of its attempts to move away from traditional print platform, including establishing US and Australian editions. If you are interested in football (popular international variety) have a listen to their "Football Weekly" podcast.

Politically more your taste will be the Daily Telegraph. Good quality journalism like the Grauniad. Preferred newspaper for conservatives it is also known as the Torygraph.

In the past I would have ranked The Times with the above but it is now hidden behind a paywall.

There is also the good old BBC.

I should add a bit more on the Daily Heil. They cater to the hyper-worried: too much X causes cancer, eat more Y to avoid cancer from X, too much Y causes cancer, migrants cause cancer, the EU is the root of all evil, etc.

Diplomat61 is doing the readers of The Mail a great disservice.

The Mail is virtually unique in the UK in that its target market has primarily been female. It has been the only major newspaper with a consistently female majority readership, and like the majority of women in the UK is right leaning.

Lefties tend to get very excited over its political and cancer stories, but in truth its readership buy it chiefly for its excellent TV guide, all round (ie not football dominated) sports reporting, and its magazine style articles.

@Octavious: if women are buying the Daily Heil chiefly for it's TV guide, sport coverage and magazine style articles what do their political affiliations have to do with it? Some buyers may ignore the political content but the constant scare mongering must appeal to others, otherwise why would the editors include it?

It's cheap? They're essentially the same stories recycled over and over again, and you need to look vaguely newsy to justify calling yourself a newspaper. Only the broadsheets do real news anymore.

The tabloids pretend to write news and their customers pretend to read it. But the pretend news has to be vaguely aimed at the imagined readership otherwise the illusion breaks down.

None of which makes the Heil a good source for news.

Indeed not, but I do get a little irritated when the people who buy it are treated with contempt by the Grauniad snoberati ;)

Tough shit. If you want to buy a lifestyle magazine & TV guide, feel free to so, I have no problem with that. Pretend that it is a newspaper and expect contempt.

If you rely one 'one' source for news, you are an idiot. You need to look at many sources, research. Develop an open mind.

So BOG I am curious, where do you get your news from?

Indeed BOG. That is why the Grauniad is only my MAIN source, not my ONLY source. I also recommend The Economist and Private Eye.