Can you guess what their prescription is to fix this?
(BBC) The globe is facing a “tidal wave” of cancer, and restrictions on alcohol and sugar need to be considered, say World Health Organization scientists.
It predicts the number of cancer cases will reach 24 million a year by 2035, but half could be prevented.
The WHO said there was now a “real need” to focus on cancer prevention by tackling smoking, obesity and drinking.
Restrictions, huh?
The WHO’s World Cancer Report 2014 said the major sources of preventable cancer included:
- Smoking
- Infections
- Alcohol
- Obesity and inactivity
- Radiation, both from the sun and medical scans
- Air pollution and other environmental factors
- Delayed parenthood, having fewer children and not breastfeeding
I’m not so sure restricting alcohol usage (interestingly, that seems to jibe with the UN’s dhimmitude towards hardcore Muslim extremism) will fly with Liberals, who tend to drink more than Conservatives (nor will it fly with Conservatives, who are into that thing called personal responsibility/freedom). The others, though, see to be a wish-list of far left ways to control people.
One of the authors, Dr. Bernard Stewart “said it was not the role of the International Agency for Research on Cancer to dictate what should be done.” But,
“In relation to alcohol, for example, we’re all aware of the acute effects, whether it’s car accidents or assaults, but there’s a burden of disease that’s not talked about because it’s simply not recognised, specifically involving cancer.
“The extent to which we modify the availability of alcohol, the labelling of alcohol, the promotion of alcohol and the price of alcohol – those things should be on the agenda.”
He said there was a similar argument to be had with sugar fuelling obesity, which in turn affected cancer risk.
So, not their job to dictate, but they’ll recommend dictating. Not that the UN needs any help in that regards.
Is cancer a threat? Sure. Could it get worse? Well, certainly with more people, and more things that can be carcinogenic, yes. Of course, the UN and WHO, along with Progressives, will push for more far left solutions.
Iatrogenesis is a leading, if not the major cause of death worldwide. When it has a cure, I will stop smoking tobacco and drinking alcohol.
It also talks now that sugar eating causes cancer. riiiiiggghhhht
So, is that sugar from my coffee? Sugar from beer? Sugar from apples? Sugar from Orange Juice? Sugar from breads?
anti-human all of them.
sounds like Teach hasn’t been getting any invites to parties lately. Loosen up a bit there come on have a beer
Mormons and the hard core Baptists hate that Alcohol something fierce
gumballs,
I will be sorry I asked, but how is fighting human cancer anti-human?
Because these “proclamations”, these “findings”, these laws for force us to eat a certain way, are nothing but controlling mechanisms. it is not and never has been about doing it for our health. if so, they’d ban sodas outright. They’d ban most fast food restaurants (or at least their food). they’d ban all fried food and the means to fry food.
This is just a mechanism for controlling that which THEY hate – the people.
gumballs,
So you’re complaining that “they” are making proclamations to control people but if they were really interested in health “they” would control people even more by banning all the things “they” proclaim are bad.
That “they” are not banning things proves how much “they” are controlling people.
You should take a break, regroup, maybe practice some yoga or breathing exercises and come back in a week or so.
My point was that they are not doing these things for our health. if it was for our health, they’d outright ban the “bad” foods. This is about control.