Its nice that we have all these distinct populations to give clues to a broader solution, but there is still nothing to emulate, no rubric to follow, just a couple things to help you feel like you’re in slightly more control than you actually are
All these rates of cancer stats per capita are based on detecting the cancer, which we are notoriously bad at. It is either by happenstance or because its too late. We don't know how fast it grows, some practically overnight, some over decades. The delta changes as well. When detection methods get more personalized and better, I think the rates will go up dramatically while also providing the biggest chance at fixing and figuring out real prevention methods.
Yes you are right nothing concrete yet but it's beginning to take shape now regarding the lifestyle and habit as the risk factors for cancer.
For more scientifically savvy research please check this recent video presentation from Dr. Leeper, Professor of Surgery and the Chief of Vascular Medicine at Stanford University. He's a cardiologist and co-founder of two biotechnology companies, 47 Inc. and Bitterroot Bio, that aim to prevent cancer and cardiovascular disease.
[1]What do cancer and heart disease have in common?
We’re still grasping at straws
Its nice that we have all these distinct populations to give clues to a broader solution, but there is still nothing to emulate, no rubric to follow, just a couple things to help you feel like you’re in slightly more control than you actually are
All these rates of cancer stats per capita are based on detecting the cancer, which we are notoriously bad at. It is either by happenstance or because its too late. We don't know how fast it grows, some practically overnight, some over decades. The delta changes as well. When detection methods get more personalized and better, I think the rates will go up dramatically while also providing the biggest chance at fixing and figuring out real prevention methods.