"Cathy F." <clfr@adelphiadot.net> wrote in message news:...
>
> "Cathy F." <clfr@adelphiadot.net> wrote in message news:...

>
> I did a very, very quick Google & found this... glanced through it
> super-quickly - looks like it might be at least partially relevant.
> (excerpt: "Background: Fourfold to sixfold higher prostate cancer rates in
> Japanese-American men in the United States compared with Japanese men in
> Japan have been cited to support a role for environmental risk factors in
> the etiology of the disease.")
>
> http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=2120705

Just dawned on me - wasn't paying much attention (obviously!): that was
Japanese vs. Japanese-American men, not vs. Japanese men who moved to
America.

Here's another one, & seems to be the right populations. But this one -
again at quick glance, appears to cite diet as a likely culprit.
http://www.usrf.org/CBS/newsArticles.asp.htm

Cathy

In article <E4qdnfYCM41s6jDYnZ2dnUVZ_sOknZ2d@giganews.com>,
"Cathy F." <clfr@adelphiadot.net> wrote:

> "Cathy F." <clfr@adelphiadot.net> wrote in message news:...
> >
> > "Cathy F." <clfr@adelphiadot.net> wrote in message news:...
>
> >
> > I did a very, very quick Google & found this... glanced through it
> > super-quickly - looks like it might be at least partially relevant.
> > (excerpt: "Background: Fourfold to sixfold higher prostate cancer rates in
> > Japanese-American men in the United States compared with Japanese men in
> > Japan have been cited to support a role for environmental risk factors in
> > the etiology of the disease.")
> >
> > http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=2120705
>
> Just dawned on me - wasn't paying much attention (obviously!): that was
> Japanese vs. Japanese-American men, not vs. Japanese men who moved to
> America.
>
> Here's another one, & seems to be the right populations. But this one -
> again at quick glance, appears to cite diet as a likely culprit.
> http://www.usrf.org/CBS/newsArticles.asp.htm
>
> Cathy

I don't pay much attention to news articles.
--

On Tue, 16 Jan 2007 20:12:17 -0500, "Cathy F." <clfr@adelphiadot.net>
wrote:

>
>"Cathy F." <clfr@adelphiadot.net> wrote in message news:...
>>
>> "Cathy F." <clfr@adelphiadot.net> wrote in message news:...
>
>>
>> I did a very, very quick Google & found this... glanced through it
>> super-quickly - looks like it might be at least partially relevant.
>> (excerpt: "Background: Fourfold to sixfold higher prostate cancer rates in
>> Japanese-American men in the United States compared with Japanese men in
>> Japan have been cited to support a role for environmental risk factors in
>> the etiology of the disease.")
>>
>> http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=2120705
>
>Just dawned on me - wasn't paying much attention (obviously!): that was
>Japanese vs. Japanese-American men, not vs. Japanese men who moved to
>America.
>
>Here's another one, & seems to be the right populations. But this one -
>again at quick glance, appears to cite diet as a likely culprit.
>http://www.usrf.org/CBS/newsArticles.asp.htm
>
>Cathy
>
>

Like I said.....

Turns out to be sushi and McDonald's burgers....

You guys really need to start listening to me...LOL


--

Scott in Florida

"Scott in Florida" <askifyouwant@mindspring.net> wrote in message
news:7k0rq2dqrilhdqt5m82lsr2rm9fn3rfkno@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 16 Jan 2007 20:12:17 -0500, "Cathy F." <clfr@adelphiadot.net>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Cathy F." <clfr@adelphiadot.net> wrote in message news:...
>>>
>>> "Cathy F." <clfr@adelphiadot.net> wrote in message news:...
>>
>>>
>>> I did a very, very quick Google & found this... glanced through it
>>> super-quickly - looks like it might be at least partially relevant.
>>> (excerpt: "Background: Fourfold to sixfold higher prostate cancer rates
>>> in
>>> Japanese-American men in the United States compared with Japanese men in
>>> Japan have been cited to support a role for environmental risk factors
>>> in
>>> the etiology of the disease.")
>>>
>>> http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=2120705
>>
>>Just dawned on me - wasn't paying much attention (obviously!): that was
>>Japanese vs. Japanese-American men, not vs. Japanese men who moved to
>>America.
>>
>>Here's another one, & seems to be the right populations. But this one -
>>again at quick glance, appears to cite diet as a likely culprit.
>>http://www.usrf.org/CBS/newsArticles.asp.htm
>>
>>Cathy
>>
>>
>
> Like I said.....
>
> Turns out to be sushi and McDonald's burgers....
>
> You guys really need to start listening to me...LOL

Hah! OTOH, this was from 2 years ago, & who knows what has been found since
then... Would take a lot more Googling. With research, things are always
morphing - they often come upon unexpected results.

Cathy

>
>
> --
>
> Scott in Florida
>

" dbu.," <Demsonhotseatnow@repubsofhook.com> wrote in message
newsemsonhotseatnow-957BDE.19575216012007@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
> In article <E4qdnfYCM41s6jDYnZ2dnUVZ_sOknZ2d@giganews.com>,
> "Cathy F." <clfr@adelphiadot.net> wrote:
>
>> "Cathy F." <clfr@adelphiadot.net> wrote in message news:...
>> >
>> > "Cathy F." <clfr@adelphiadot.net> wrote in message news:...
>>
>> >
>> > I did a very, very quick Google & found this... glanced through it
>> > super-quickly - looks like it might be at least partially relevant.
>> > (excerpt: "Background: Fourfold to sixfold higher prostate cancer rates
>> > in
>> > Japanese-American men in the United States compared with Japanese men
>> > in
>> > Japan have been cited to support a role for environmental risk factors
>> > in
>> > the etiology of the disease.")
>> >
>> > http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=2120705
>>
>> Just dawned on me - wasn't paying much attention (obviously!): that was
>> Japanese vs. Japanese-American men, not vs. Japanese men who moved to
>> America.
>>
>> Here's another one, & seems to be the right populations. But this one -
>> again at quick glance, appears to cite diet as a likely culprit.
>> http://www.usrf.org/CBS/newsArticles.asp.htm
>>
>> Cathy
>
> I don't pay much attention to news articles.

Ummm... this was a report on a "research study by Urological Sciences
Research Foundation." Unless you read peer-reviewed papers in medical &
science journals, then news articles which report on those findings -
whether in the paper, in Time or Newsweek - or science mags, etc., are the
most likely ways the general public is going to come across their findings.

Cathy


> --
>

In article <Sq-dnVcvWraYGDDYnZ2dnUVZ_oKnnZ2d@giganews.com>,
"Cathy F." <clfr@adelphiadot.net> wrote:

> " dbu.," <Demsonhotseatnow@repubsofhook.com> wrote in message
> newsemsonhotseatnow-957BDE.19575216012007@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
> > In article <E4qdnfYCM41s6jDYnZ2dnUVZ_sOknZ2d@giganews.com>,
> > "Cathy F." <clfr@adelphiadot.net> wrote:
> >
> >> "Cathy F." <clfr@adelphiadot.net> wrote in message news:...
> >> >
> >> > "Cathy F." <clfr@adelphiadot.net> wrote in message news:...
> >>
> >> >
> >> > I did a very, very quick Google & found this... glanced through it
> >> > super-quickly - looks like it might be at least partially relevant.
> >> > (excerpt: "Background: Fourfold to sixfold higher prostate cancer rates
> >> > in
> >> > Japanese-American men in the United States compared with Japanese men
> >> > in
> >> > Japan have been cited to support a role for environmental risk factors
> >> > in
> >> > the etiology of the disease.")
> >> >
> >> > http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=2120705
> >>
> >> Just dawned on me - wasn't paying much attention (obviously!): that was
> >> Japanese vs. Japanese-American men, not vs. Japanese men who moved to
> >> America.
> >>
> >> Here's another one, & seems to be the right populations. But this one -
> >> again at quick glance, appears to cite diet as a likely culprit.
> >> http://www.usrf.org/CBS/newsArticles.asp.htm
> >>
> >> Cathy
> >
> > I don't pay much attention to news articles.
>
> Ummm... this was a report on a "research study by Urological Sciences
> Research Foundation." Unless you read peer-reviewed papers in medical &
> science journals, then news articles which report on those findings -
> whether in the paper, in Time or Newsweek - or science mags, etc., are the
> most likely ways the general public is going to come across their findings.
>
> Cathy
>
>
> > --
> >

Trouble is those news services pick and choose which parts they want the
public to see. I've looked at many of those types of articles. Quite a
few originating from GB and Scandinavia. Let me repeat, this is not
rocket science any more. Heredity, black men and age are the major risk
factors. There have been articles about the type of food you eat
perhaps has impact, such as tomatos helps to keep from getting it, so
everybody eat lots of tomatos, yea right... Too much fat in the diet
might be a factor for increase risk, how much, nobody knows they just
think it might be, ect ect.
--