On Cancer, Part 1: Causes

[Update: COANews has posted a three-part series that illuminates the epidemic of cancer we face.]
• The Rise in Cancer -- ...
• The Rise in Cancer -- ...
• Chemical Hygiene
[New Update: Here is a review of investigative journalist Mark Shapiro's new book, "Exposed: The Toxic Chemistry of Everyday Products." Note that many of the chemicals found in US products are banned in the European Union. Some manufacturers are running dual assembly lines for the same product - safe for Europe, toxic for America.]
www.alternet.or...
The Huffington Post reports that 80-90% of childhood cancers are due to environmental toxins:
www.alternet.or...
_________________
Part I of a 2-part series about cancer.
For further reading:
www.virusmyth.n...
www.projectcens...
www.truthout.or...
cancerresourcec...
www.nytimes.com...
Bomber2z found a terrific link to a site that will quickly provide you with information about your local county's toxins and comparative toxic ranking.
www.scorecard.o...
Some will argue that the price of living in an industrial society is massive exposure to toxins, and that it is a necessary trade-off for our survival and standard of living. I consider that argument to be disingenuous. To paraphrase a popular TV show from the '70's, "we have the technology." We can operate an industrial society safely if we exert ourselves. The sole reason we are not exerting ourselves is special interests are preventing it.
Sen. Barack Obama talks of the damaging "cynicism" of the ruling elite in the US. That's a euphemism. The right word is "corruption."
On-topic comments or response videos are welcome.

[@losetogain]

Thank you for this video Urgelt. I lost my father to cancer so this information was of great interest to me.

[@spiritbear26]

Great down to earth insights Urgelt...been great listening and thinking about your views and reflections...

[@deemortiz]

You are very educational. Thank you.

[@kenrg]

Very well researched, reasoned, and clearly presented. I hope it manages to reach enough people to make a difference. Thank you.

[@Urgelt]

Numb is a very apt word, Robin. I agree. Thank you for your thoughtful comment.

[@JR1070]

Thank you very much for the informative video. Very well done.

[@Urgelt]

Thank you, Lloyd. As always, I am grateful for your eloquent and kindly support.

[@Urgelt]

And thank you, Michelle, for understanding.

[@gfoote32]

Thank you. Keep putting the word out.

[@Urgelt]

Thank you, your encouragement is very welcome, Sodiraq.

[@Urgelt]

Thank you, Sleestack.

[@Urgelt]

Thanks, Dave, much appreciated.

[@Urgelt]

Exactly, Maraljan, good advice. I spoke to a lot of that in the blog companion to Part II.

[@Urgelt]

Thank you, Robtran.

[@zepman13579]

Thanks for the video Urgelt. I have always been interested in cancer and you just taught me something new today.

[@Urgelt]

Thank you, CCCbasment.

[@Urgelt]

Glad you stopped by, Kate. I'll look forward to talking to you and seeing your videos.

[@Urgelt]

Thank you for your thoughts, Knothy.

[@Urgelt]

Thanks, Carlos.

[@Urgelt]

Amazingly well put, my friend. Thank you.

[@Urgelt]

Thank you, Kopkitty, it's very nice to hear from you, too. Hope Brazilian summer is pleasant! :-)

[@Urgelt]

That's an excellent point, David. Thank you for making it.

[@Urgelt]

I'm glad you found it so.

[@Urgelt]

Thank you, Sheryl, for your support and love. If we can love strangers, nothing is impossible.

[@Urgelt]

Thank you.

[@Urgelt]

Thanks, Sam, glad you enjoyed it.

[@Urgelt]

I would not choose your wording, Richard, but I'm sympathetic to the underlying principle you are expressing.

[@aaanne80]

Great to see you back here, Urgelt. Hope all is well. Very informative video, looking forward to part 2.

[@Urgelt]

Thanks, I'll try to do that.

[@Methadone4Life]

I must see more of your vids. Good job.

[@Urgelt]

Thank you, AS. Peace.

[@Urgelt]

Thank you, WP.

[@kennywrites]

Very interesting video and it's great to have you back! I think market-driven changes can help too. People already know about, and ask for organic food. As a result, its availability is growing. There are non-toxic products out there too but people aren't as aware of them. I've seen natural textile products made of hemp, but hemp growers ironically are hassled by government OVER-regulation! In any case, information is the key, thanks for giving us good information, as always!

[@Urgelt]

Thanks, Mat, I'm glad you found it so.

[@Urgelt]

I think so too, Drpaprika. Thank you for your comment.

[@Urgelt]

Thank you, Cheryl, I'll try to do that. Thank you for your comment.

[@Urgelt]

Well said, Brandi.

[@Urgelt]

Most welcome, Erik, and thank you for the work you've done on health and fitness for KZbin. Education is not the largest use of KZbin, but with posters like you, we're making some meaningful inroads.

[@Urgelt]

I'm glad you do, Boris, thank you.

[@freedomtou]

The world needs more intelligent brave men like Urgelt, thank you sir for taking the time to share your knowlege. I always am on my laptop, Is that harmful and cancerous too?

[@Timeticker]

Hi Urgelt, this is the first time I see any of your videos, and I must say that I am really impressed at what you do. A few months ago my sister died of breast-cancer. She was only 36 years old. I really don't know what it is but I feel a lot better after watching your video. I want to thank you for that.

[@Darren1111]

good point. thanks

[@Urgelt]

Thank you, Ghostpos. I will hope that improving awareness within our little community will be a small step in the right direction.

[@Daveyolous]

nice video Urgelt.. Very informing!!

[@Urgelt]

Thanks, Deemortiz.

[@Urgelt]

Thank you, Ddstar, always glad to see you here.

[@ddstar]

Good to see you again urgelt, very informing once again.

[@Urgelt]

Agreed, it's surprising we do as well as we do. Thanks for commenting.

[@Urgelt]

That's great to hear, Zepman.

[@Urgelt]

Thank you for your enthusiasm, Solorguy. I do have an LV account (just got one yesterday), but I haven't decided whether to post over there yet. I'll decide soonish, I think.

[@buttledge]

great video!

[@Urgelt]

Thanks, Ahippi.

[@NitroFil]

That was excellent Urgelt. Thank you. This video should be featured.

[@trevormillin506]

Hey Urgelt, I've been enjoying listening to your videos lately even though they were uploaded almost a decade ago. You have a calming way of speaking, it's quite relaxing to be honest. I just had a question regarding your views on regulating food manufacture using government policy. Could it be possible to control the rates of cancer with education, and not legislative force? I ask this because I am anxious when I think about a government that is controlling of what goes in our food. I support what you are saying and I agree that there is an economic underpinning behind the whole political response to cancer. I guess my point is this: Humans should be free agents that should have the right to decide what they want to consume and what they don't want. This is why I am skeptical about some forms of regulation. I think that laws won't be as effective as informing someone about the carcinogenic nature of our modern society. If people's attitudes are as informed as yours, then I'd expect them to avoid cancerous foods by freedom of choice, not by law. But then again, I can see how state support would help such a cause. I do realize that what I have written is a bunch of confusing ideas. But I hope you can grasp the main concept of my thought. Thanks for the cool video.

[@Urgelt]

It's an interesting question. Here's how I think about it: I don't believe Americans have ready access to the kind of information that will help them to make informed decisions, nor do they reliably possess the skills to use that information intelligently. Elaborating: first, they have to contend with advertising, whose purpose is to sell what manufacturers have to sell, not to promote American health. Our information environment is literally swamped by advertising. Second, though high-quality information is available on the internet, most people do not have the skills to discover it while discarding the overwhelming bulk of marketing-oriented information and pseudoscience. Third, mainstream media prefers to lend weight to manufacturers' messages, because they're also advertisers. Scientists don't advertise on mainstream media. Fourth, education certainly can help prepare consumers to make smarter choices. But education is by its nature uneven; those with more wealth can afford more of it, while the quality of education available to the poor is also poor. A fifth point to consider: absent regulation, there will be no requirement at all for manufacturers to inform consumers about what is in their products. Labeling regulations make sure that at least *some* useful information is provided. Absent regulation, manufacturers can make health claims about their products that are unsupported by anything other than a marketer's desire to sell the products. Government is really the only force that can prevent lying for profit. And a sixth point to think about: science does not have all of the answers. There are large gaps in knowledge; uncertainties abound. If you knew all that science knows about cancer and went to great lengths to act on your knowledge, you'd still be unable to reduce your risk to zero. Libertarians believe that a completely unregulated market will result in the best possible outcomes. It's an article of faith; there has never been any proof that the idea holds even a shred of merit. To the contrary, in those cases where markets were left unregulated, monopolism and abuses are in every case evident. The flip side of that coin is corrupt government, which regulates so as to benefit political donors. Corruption doesn't yield good outcomes for consumers, either. I think the problem is too large and too pervasive for any simple ideological answer. More education is always good, but it won't by itself eliminate lies or guide consumers infallibly to scientifically-valid information. The way forward is to tackle it from every direction: reducing corruption in Government where we can, advancing education where we can, improving labeling requirements and safety regulations where we can. I realize this answer isn't satisfying; it's going to come up short in some ways. But no other answer is likely to be superior to it. Thanks for dropping by for conversation!

[@trevormillin506]

Thanks for your swift response. I disagree with your views on the free-market though. Government regulation through tax is a use of compulsive force that I don't support. And monopolism would be economically modulated by free-market competition. But that's a conversation for another day. Keep up the good work Urgelt and thanks for the video.

[@Urgelt]

Aw, I'm sorry, Brandi. That's a terrible thing to go through, both for him and for his family. The fact that millions of others are going through the same thing is not any consolation.

[@Urgelt]

Agreed, and the need is great. Part II just lists suggestions for reducing risk of cancer, and will invite viewers to contribute their own ideas.

[@Urgelt]

Most welcome, Tim, and thank you for your comments.

[@Urgelt]

Thanks, Anne. It'll be coming soon.

[@Urgelt]

I am sorry for your loss, Dustin, and sorry for all the sadness and loss which cancer unnecessarily inflicts upon us.

[@Urgelt]

Gary, it's as possible to overstate the case as easily as to understate it. I'm choosing language I hope acknowledges the problem without hyping it.

[@Urgelt]

I couldn't agree more, Snoot501. Thank you for your comment.

[@ms.rushnugent6477]

You are like the saviour for wealth , thanks for taking the time to share your knowledge with us

[@Urgelt]

I'm glad you enjoyed the video... but don't take it as authoritative, okay? My aim in making it was to stimulate conversation and to consider possibilities. On this subject, I would call my words 'opinion' rather than 'knowledge.' I'm not a medical expert; and even experts who know much more than I do will admit that cancer still isn't well-understood. My opinion has evolved a bit since making this video. I still think carcinogens are important... but I'm starting to wonder if biological agents (disease organisms) might often be responsible for making the very specific genetic changes that create a human cancer cell. As an example, there's a strong correlation between HPV (a virus) and the onset of cervical cancer - and a vaccine against the virus appears to reduce the incidence of that cancer. We don't have firm links to infectious causes for most other cancers, but that may just be due to inadequate scientific probing.

[@Urgelt]

I will, from time to time. Thank you for your kind words, Quicksilver.

[@Urgelt]

I share your hope, Tim. Thank you for your thoughtful comment.

[@Urgelt]

As a civilization, we have been careless in our ignorance. We didn't understand the implications of proliferating toxic chemicals and pollution, nor did we have the technology to understand, nor to do something about it. But we have both the understanding and the technology now. Thanks for stopping by, Jim, I appreciate it.

[@Urgelt]

It's none too warm in Virginia, either, Andy. Brrr! In my viewership I have found kindness, wisdom, and insight. They restore my faith in humanity.

[@Urgelt]

Thank you, Tim, for your comment and support. I think I must have the kindest, most positive audience in the world.

[@Urgelt]

Most welcome, Tara, I'm glad you found something of interest in it.

[@MeditativeFlow]

Wow, that was some disturbing and eye opening information. Thanks for the video.

[@jeff262630]

My Real Mother passed away in 1999 3 days before my birthday of Breast Cancer. She Shall be missed! Thanks for spreading the word.

[@Urgelt]

Thanks, sposeidon.

[@Subjohny]

You are right! You have also honest face and eyes!

[@joeyinnyc]

My friend I happened upon this video and its weird because YOU were the 1st person I EVER saw on you-tube when I first checked it out! Thank you for informing so many people of these valuable facts, you should be the next president....FOR LIFE!

[@Urgelt]

I'm glad you do, Verobeatriz. Thank you for commenting.

[@Urgelt]

Thank you Mehowee, I'm glad you like the videos.

[@Urgelt]

Before I began to post, I felt alienated, too. This topic is avoided by mass media companies because it would upset many of their advertisers, I believe. This is KZbin's great strength - it lets us speak for ourselves, instead of relying on huge media companies to determine what messages are heard. Your voice would be welcome here, too, Carrie.

[@Urgelt]

Agreed, Christopher. Fossil fuels are the feed stocks for many of the carcinogens that are causing the problem, and of course burning any organic substance produces carcinogenic toxins, too. It's a large part of the problem.

[@Urgelt]

Yep, agreed. Risk reduction is the subject of the next in the series, but you just summarized most of it.

[@Urgelt]

I'm glad, Passinafternoon. Thank you for your comment.

[@solorguy]

Very well stated!! THIS HAS TO BE THE BEST VIDEO I HAVE EVER SEEN ON GOOTUBE!! PLEASE PUT IT OVER ON LV ALSO!

[@Urgelt]

Thank you, Naomi, I will look forward to anything you'd like to share. *hugs*

[@Urgelt]

Much appreciated, SeekingParadigms.

[@francescorengifo]

I love you! thank you for sharing this wisdom with the world! I hope you don't mind if I share it with my viewers

[@Orfloper]

This is something that needs to be known on a more national level, so I am very pleased that someone with your skill at speech, Urgelt, would post this information on an easily accessible site. Accessible to the world, no less. Thank you; I intend to do something about this, no matter how small.

[@Urgelt]

Quite right. You can make toxins from non-toxic sources quite easily. I don't think there are any safe artificial sweeteners, and recommend against using them. Thank you for your comment.

[@Urgelt]

Yes, indeed, patterns emerge when you treat variables as though they were independent. And those patterns are useful information. But they do not tell us very much about which variables dominate.

[@Urgelt]

Yes, and local produce can be fresher, too. If what you want is available, it's always wise to grab local produce. Burt's Bees and Tom's of Maine both have pretty good reputations. I don't use their products myself, but I know people who do.

[@Urgelt]

I don't mind at all, Francesco. Thanks for your positive comment.

[@Urgelt]

I've seen that data, presented in many different formats, but thank you for offering. I do not think it excludes my thesis. Nothing short of a full biochemical understanding of cancer will settle the question, either. Statistical studies simply leave too many variables unaddressed.

[@Urgelt]

Thanks for your comment, Tuor.

[@truemartian]

Enjoyed this video. Totally agree with the comments on govt.

[@Urgelt]

Amen to that, bando8000, and thank you for your comment.

[@Urgelt]

Glad you found it of help, TruthMind. Thank you for commenting.

[@Urgelt]

Thank you! Generous praise, for a guy who just does talking head videos.

[@Urgelt]

You're right, and that's a very sad thing to have to say.

[@trans-unicorn2839]

@Urgelt : Malignant cells are errant trophoblasts (healing cells/new-life cells/pre-embryonic cells). The healing process can only be checked with Amygdalin; the molecularity of which is hydrogen cyanide, benzaldahyde and glucose (sugar).

[@sonus03]

Very well said Urgelt! The problem is the same over here in the UK. Everyday I see people buy yogurts, cans of diet cola, chewing gum and even mints, all containing ASPARTAME. An artificial, carciogenic, sweetner. There's nothing wrong with good old fashioned sugar, in moderation. Everything in moderation is good for you, including exercise. If only people exercised more and ate sensibly! Keep up the good work, spread the word, let us try and educate as many people as possible.

[@Urgelt]

I am sorry for your loss, Jeff. I think most of my viewers know people who have died, some of them loved ones. Let us pray we can find honest politicians who are willing to end this nightmare.

[@Urgelt]

You bring up a good point. Corruption extends to the science. The FDA, in particular, depends on studies funded by the big corporations - which often mysteriously produce "safe and effective" conclusions contradicted by independent science. Which does the FDA rely on? The corporate studies, naturally.

[@Urgelt]

Alas, you're right. I'd rather be doing something else; tackling corruption isn't much fun. Thank you for commenting, S&B.