Make America Healthy Again
POSTED BY: SIGNYM
UPDATED: Monday, November 17, 2025 14:12
VIEWED: 1205
PAGE 4 of 4
Why does the USA nearly lead the world in age- adjusted cancer rates?
Quote:
Key Takeaways
Cancer rates vary by country due to differences in age structure, genetics, lifestyle, environmental exposures, healthcare access, screening practices, and data quality.
Many low- and middle-income countries show lower age-standardized incidence rates (ASRs), reflecting differences in risk factors and cancer detection.
Cancer is one of the world’s leading causes of death, but its prevalence varies significantly from country to country.
In this infographic, we show age-standardized cancer incidence rates across 180+ countries, revealing striking contrasts between different regions. Understanding these differences sheds light on how lifestyles, environment, and healthcare reporting all contribute.
Data & Discussion
The data for this visualization comes from the World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF). It presents age-standardized incidence rates (ASR) per 100,000 people, enabling a more fair comparison between regions with different population structures.
Partial list, nation and age-adjusted incidence rate
Australia* 463
New Zealand* 427
Denmark 375
U.S. 367
Norway 358
Canada 346
Ireland 345
Netherlands 341
France 339
Hungary 337
Belgium 325
Croatia 313
Sweden 310
UK 308
* high rates because of high skin cancer due to white people exposed to a lot of UV
COMPLETE LIST AND MAP HERE
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/Cancer-Rat
es-by-Country-Website.avif
-----------
"It may be dangerous to be America's enemy, but to be America's friend is fatal."- Henry Kissinger
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I didn't catch your New Year's post.
Some thoughts:
I don't recall if your neighborhood was hilly, or not. Or if you have stairs in your house. For several reasons and purposes, try emphasizing climbing hills or stairs, particularly near bedtime if possible. Like between final meal and bed. I had a parking ramp I like to visit at night, open and public.
I suggest Dollar Tree, which has small cups of mandarin orange segment, 3/$1. Real fruit, simple fructose, in 100% juice. Easy to fit in your routine. Walk down any canned fruit aisle at grocery store, find items you might enjoy. Canned and sitting in your cupboard is better than none at all - get yourself in the habit, then migrate to fresh fruit if you feel like it.
Since you say you have not drank milk, I'm wondering if you are familiar with ultra-pasturized milk? I get it in the quart size, and the Best By date is about 2 months from purchase date - and the container helps after opening, with the reduced surface area exposed to air, as long as it stays upright. You mentioned kidney damage - whole milk has less potassium than reduced fat milks, in case your kidneys have trouble with that.
Livestock production does include grass eating for most all beef, and some pork. But Ag industry focuses financial results on GROWTH, so ground feed is utilized to maximize weight gain for market sale (at slaughter house). "Fattening up" is slang, but it really means adding muscle mass for leanest rating, which provides producers with best price per pound. Feed includes lots of corn, a grain, which is known for "fattening them up" and was not historically part of the bovine or porcine diet. So comparing old world meat in other nations is not the same as mass produced American slaughter products.
I was under the impression that cooking vegetables was what leeched the nutrients out of them.
About building muscle: if your muscles are sore the next day, then that means that while you slept, when your muscles are supposed to repair, mend, you didn't have enough of the needed nutrients in your bloodstream to accomplish the repair. If you had adequate nutrient levels, your muscles would be far less sore, if at all.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I'm not sure if you are being rhetorical here, or not paying attention/keeping your head in the sand, or what.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Why does the USA nearly lead the world in age- adjusted cancer rates?Quote:Partial list, nation and age-adjusted incidence rate
Key Takeaways
Cancer rates vary by country due to differences in age structure, genetics, lifestyle, environmental exposures, healthcare access, screening practices, and data quality.
Many low- and middle-income countries show lower age-standardized incidence rates (ASRs), reflecting differences in risk factors and cancer detection.
Cancer is one of the world’s leading causes of death, but its prevalence varies significantly from country to country.
In this infographic, we show age-standardized cancer incidence rates across 180+ countries, revealing striking contrasts between different regions. Understanding these differences sheds light on how lifestyles, environment, and healthcare reporting all contribute.
Data & Discussion
The data for this visualization comes from the World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF). It presents age-standardized incidence rates (ASR) per 100,000 people, enabling a more fair comparison between regions with different population structures.
Australia* 463
New Zealand* 427
Denmark 375
U.S. 367
Norway 358
Canada 346
Ireland 345
Netherlands 341
France 339
Hungary 337
Belgium 325
Croatia 313
Sweden 310
UK 308
* high rates because of high skin cancer due to white people exposed to a lot of UV
COMPLETE LIST AND MAP HERE
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/Cancer-Rat
es-by-Country-Website.avif
How about Libtard "science", Libtard "health care", Libtard "cancer research", to start?
One obvious factor is Libtard Breast Cancer.
USA pushes very hard to increase breast cancer as much as possible, and avoid cures and prevention.
WCRF.org has data from 2022 showing USA at 95.9 incidents of breast cancer per 100k, which it Ranks as 2nd in the world.
Global average is 46.8. So USA has 49 of excess, above global average, per 100k. Subtracting this single excess factor brings your 367 down to 318 all by itself. Libtards of American Medical community should be ashamed of themselves.
UK is 94.0, rank 10. Their 308 could drop to 261 if they didn't follow USA down the rabbit hole.
Germany is 77.0, #7.
Japan 74.4, #5.
Brazil 63.1, #4.
Russia 57.7, #6.
Indonesia 41.8, #8.
China 33.0, #1.
India 26.6, #3.
They rate France higher than USA - but only if they isolate "metro" as a separate country, for 105.5, #9.
At pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/pmc12050159 they have some data from 1990 and 2021, although they try to obscure it.
Global average was 21 incidents per 100k in 1990, and 24.5 in 2021. they combine males and females for this calculation, as any sensible Libtard would do for breast cancer. (I didn't look at their data on testicular cancer among females - Babylon Bee can handle that data mining)
For global females, it was 40 in 1990, and 46 in 2021.
However, all of their other figures continue to combine males and females.
They provide a map showing USA highest in the world with over 100 in 1990, and in 2021 in the same range with Australia at over 77. This 77 is higher than global 24.5 by 52 excess per 100k - which would bring your 367 down to 315 all by itself, at a minimum.
It would also take Australia's 463 down to 411 all by itself.
Australasia was 43.5 in 1990, and 42 in 2021.
High Income North America was 67 in 1990, and 50.50 in 2021.
Western Europe was 45 in 1990, 43 in 2021.
North Africa + Middle East was 8 in 1990 and 23.7 in 2021 - probably all that "assistance" from USA, exported to to these unfortunates.
Sub Saharan Africa was 11 in 1990 and 18 in 2021.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I was hearing some info about this subject.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Why does the USA nearly lead the world in age- adjusted cancer rates?Quote:Partial list, nation and age-adjusted incidence rate
Key Takeaways
Cancer rates vary by country due to differences in age structure, genetics, lifestyle, environmental exposures, healthcare access, screening practices, and data quality.
Many low- and middle-income countries show lower age-standardized incidence rates (ASRs), reflecting differences in risk factors and cancer detection.
Cancer is one of the world’s leading causes of death, but its prevalence varies significantly from country to country.
In this infographic, we show age-standardized cancer incidence rates across 180+ countries, revealing striking contrasts between different regions. Understanding these differences sheds light on how lifestyles, environment, and healthcare reporting all contribute.
Data & Discussion
The data for this visualization comes from the World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF). It presents age-standardized incidence rates (ASR) per 100,000 people, enabling a more fair comparison between regions with different population structures.
Australia* 463
New Zealand* 427
Denmark 375
U.S. 367
Norway 358
Canada 346
Ireland 345
Netherlands 341
France 339
Hungary 337
Belgium 325
Croatia 313
Sweden 310
UK 308 [/quoe]
* high rates because of high skin cancer due to white people exposed to a lot of UV
COMPLETE LIST AND MAP HERE
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/Cancer-Rat
es-by-Country-Website.avif
They were saying Vitamin D3 deficiency was leading to breast cancer, or maybe cancer overall.
Another issue was ESTROGEN QUOTIENT and Black Box labeling. Apparently there are 3 forms of estrogen. Standard tests only check the total estrogen. However, most estrogen problems will show enough estrogen because the bad estrogen (which spurs malignancy) will be too high while the 2 good estrogens are too low, not able to match.
There is a corrective process, but FDA advises against preventing breast cancer, and instead advises for more breast cancer. FDA started issuing Black Box Labels on the good stuff starting around 2002ish, based upon some faulty and defective single study.
So that could be a big issue.
Color me not surprised.
https://healthmatters.io/understand-blood-test-results/eq-e3-e1-e2-rat
io
I think the preventative process was called hormone replacement therapy.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME