Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: THE ANT who wrote (175649)	8/2/2021 2:38:01 PM
From: sense	Respond to of 219082

Humans "success" has led them to alter their diet to the point it kills them... Although, from the perspective of population biology... the quality versus quantity arguments are clearly still being won by quantity... as it seems that crappy food that kills you... still manages to pass the Darwinian wicket... to keep people alive long enough to enable them in making more people faster than it kills them. Since humans were last almost wiped out... the population has grown in fits and starts, and only slowly... until climate change (a benefit... with the end of the ice ages) greatly expanded our range, combined with a series of social and technological advances... agriculture... the logic of science enabling medicine... Ponder the Maunder Minimum in that context ? Mortality, since then, at least until recently, has been trending lower in the long term... as crappy food that kills you still tends to be far less dangerous than food made with inadequate sanitation... or not having any ? It's been a while since we've seen outbreaks of wheat rust thinning the population ? Famine... ? Sustained systemic failures in systems of commerce might reverse those trends, globally... more if war, pestilence and disease are paired with locusts, floods, drought... that reverse trends in production and global transport. and to alter their social structure to the point it causes great mental illness. Somewhere between... "let's do nothing"... and the Bill Gates crowd's approach to "let's kill 90% of the population so I don't have to see them, smell them... or compete with them"... there's likely some solid middle ground to be found... where sustainability intersects with a bias toward quality versus quantity ? How strange is it... that positive pro-active potential would be ignored... by those intent on "other ways"... that require extending the insanity resulting from hyper-concentration of populations detached from the natural world... to impose that as group think on those few who remain attached to the natural world... who the majority clearly depend upon for their survival ? If you were to chose "quality" over "quantity"... and imposed it by the usual means of propagation of social insanity... it wouldn't require much ? Simply outlaw the use of chemicals in agriculture... "to improve our quality of life" by ensuring we all enjoy the benefit of food that is less toxic... ? Our civilization would collapse within a year... allowing each of us to wallow in the improved Mad Max life style our leaders appear to be intent on achieving, for us... by one means or another...

To: THE ANT who wrote (175649)	8/5/2021 4:05:36 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Respond to of 219082

Prostate cancer has long looked like a sexually transmitted disease, like cervical cancer. Viruses, radiation, chemicals, genetics, poor nutrition = cancer. Maybe prostate cancer needs the right combination of those with a necessary component being the virus. That's my guess, with the virus being dominant. Myeloid leukaemia = benzene carcinogen is dominant. Lung cancer = inhaled carcinogens dominant. Skin cancer = radiation and DNA (melanin) dominant. Cervical cancer = virus dominant. Stomach cancer in family of Dr Mark (of Tauranga) = DNA dominant. There is some evidence that more frequent ejaculators decrease prostate cancer risk but this may be hidden by increasing prostate cancer risk a bit for every 10 different partners you have had. Do men with vasectomies get more prostate cancer since their sperm and fluid carrier are absorbed not ejaculated? I guess so if they also have the virus I propose. I also guess breast cancer is caused by hormone contraceptives (in part) since part of treatment is hormone treatment. Same for men since part of prostate cancer treatment can be castration if I remember rightly. Mr Smart Aleck Mq has PSA at 2.2 (stable for decades) = no virus and frequently cleared drains. Fingers crossed. Condoms were a much better invention than hormone contraceptives and vasectomies. Mqurice