News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:“We have no reason to believe 5G is safe” by andrepd on Monday October 21, 2019 @11:37AM (#21313496)
You are looking at cancer deaths, which indeed have gone down from better treatments and better screening. This does not imply less incidence of cancer.
Re:“We have no reason to believe 5G is safe” by aey on Monday October 21, 2019 @02:54PM (#21315869)
I think you just answered your own question. As detection improves, so will the rates at which cancer is detected.
Re:“We have no reason to believe 5G is safe” by shkkmo on Monday October 21, 2019 @04:24PM (#21316889)
AFAIK, Better detection means earlier detection and may not lead to a decrease in cancers that are never detected.
Re:“We have no reason to believe 5G is safe” by manicdee on Tuesday October 22, 2019 @01:42AM (#21320672)
It leads to in increase in cancers detected before the person dies of non-cancer causes.

Situation: person has an almost undetectable cancer. They see a doctor, no cancer detected, later that week they are shot by police at a routine road stop.

We get in our time machine, go back a week and a bit, and supply the doctor with a better detection kit.

Situation 2: person has an almost undetectable cancer. They see a doctor who refers them to a specialist, cancer detected, another notch on the cancer tally board. Later that week they are shot by police at a routine road stop.

Nothing has changed except in the second case there’s another cancer detected. The person is still dead from non-cancer causes, just in one scenario they died as a haver-of-cancer and in the other they didn’t.

Better/earlier detection will necessarily lead to a decrease in cancers that are never detected (which I interpret as an increase in cancers detected before mortality from other causes), otherwise it’s not better/earlier detection.