USN
Exposure to any one of 22 pesticides may bring heightened odds of developing prostate cancer, a new analysis suggests.
The study was conducted over decades because prostate cancer is known to grow very slowly, noted a team led by Dr. Simon John Christoph Soerensen, of Stanford University in California.
The researchers looked at U.S. data on county-level usage of 295 pesticides. They then compared those results to rates of prostate cancer in counties across the United States.
To account for the 10- to 18-year lag time between carcinogen exposure and the time it takes prostate cancers to grow, Soerensen’s group looked at pesticide-use data from 1997 through 2001.
They then compared that data to rates of prostate cancer for the years 2016 through 2020.
Altogether, 22 pesticides had associations with upped prostate cancer risk, although the study could not prove cause-and-effect. More
And they sell the myth of GMO disease resistant seed to save the world.
They’re making fricken cocktails.
Ya sure Jan,
However the joy of the jab comes with tons of magical things
Not only Myocarditis and HIV(Aids)
59 other metals thrown in.
Don’t get to close to a large magnet.
My father was a ranch hand pilot in vietnam, they sprayed Agent Orange. he wound up with prostate cancer in his 30s :/
My brother-in-law was a farmer for most of his life and was licensed to use most common agricultural chemicals and ran a side business spraying other nearby farms. He came down with prostate cancer in his early 60s and had the prostate removed because he didn’t trust the “seed” therapy. He also had severe circulatory issues in his legs. He died in 2021 from thrombosis that dislodged and went to his brain, causing a stroke. I blame the wuhan flu for it because the damned doctors were restricting visits at that time because of the crazy fear of the virus. He wasn’t feeling well for a week or so before the stroke and couldn’t get a f-in doctor appointment.
My dad died from the Pfizer double-tap, but his death certificate claimed that he died from his prostate cancer which had been under control for three decades. Proximal cause?
I wonder if there’s an additive effect the more pesticides one is exposed to or if they all have the same effect and it’s about the amount of exposure one accumulates over time.
well the stuff messes with organisms so side effects are not a big surprise I guess. remember the terrifying zika story? they are even talking about restricting travel already. and then somehow the truth leaked out, the terrifying micro andcephalia that was happening with children was not because of zika, it was because of the larvicide that the government was putting on the water supply to knock out the mosquitoes. and then, not surprisingly the zika story completely disappeared as suddenly as one can do. microencephalia, the shrunken heads :/
If you take a deep dive into epidemiology and statistical analyses, there are a lot of reasons that a study like this could be wrong. Small sample sizes, con-founders, and things I don’t pretend to even understand. For years studies showed that women with many children had a lower incidence of breast cancer than women with no children or just one. They were right in a sense, but it was how young a woman was when she had her first child that decreased the risk, not how many children she had.