This forum is for the discussion of anything to do with Prostate Cancer. There are only four rules:
No fundraisers, no commercials (although it is OK to recommend choices of treatment or medical people based on your personal research; invitations to participate in third-party surveys are also acceptable, provided there is no compensation to YANA);
No harvesting e-mail addresses for Spam;
No insults or flaming - be polite and respectful at all times and understand that there may be a variety of points of view, all of which may have some validity;
Opinions are OK, but please provide as much factual evidence as possible for any assertions that you are making
Failure to abide by these simple rules will result in the immediate and permanent suspension of your posting privileges.
Since this is an International Forum, please specify your location in your post.
Thanks for the good link, Warwick. It makes it clear that fish consumption has no apparent value towards avoiding prostate cancer, yet has much value reducing the mortality therefrom.
I think it is unfortunate that common discourse always seems to speak of things that are cancer fighting and things that are cancer causing. Without any further distinction.
In that regard here is a clip from the Johns Hopkins health alert that I regularly get via email.
The development of cancer is broadly viewed as a two-step process. The first step is initiation, when the cell is exposed to substances (such as a chemical), agents (such as a virus), or forces (such as radiation) that cause an alteration (mutation) in the genetic machinery of the cell. The second step is promotion, in which other chemicals, hormones, or diet and lifestyle patterns stimulate the growth and reproduction of the abnormal cell. A promoter does not set the process in motion, but it creates an environment favorable for the runaway growth that causes a cancerous tumor to form and progress.