English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Or do you think the Democratic Party is using John Edwards Wife who has Cancer, for their own agenda on Global Warming?

2007-03-26 00:15:09 · 20 answers · asked by julia4evert 4 in Politics & Government Politics

From the beginning of time people have been diagonsed with Cancer so how can anyone prove it has to do with the enviroment not to mention Global Warming

2007-03-26 00:22:29 · update #1

20 answers

Damn it...

Who let Kerry out, again?

Everytime that guy gets in front of a mic, something stupid comes out of his mouth.

Why hasn't Heillary Clinton taken his microphone privaleges away?

2007-03-26 00:25:52 · answer #1 · answered by ? 6 · 3 2

Just look over the life of cancer and look at how man has played with food alone and you will see a match.

Man played w/ the genes of food to make them grow more, better breeds of animals, etc, doing that change gave side effects down the line....known as cancer. Smoking gives cancer. Breathing in car exhaust gives cancer. The fact the world has done nuke tests gave everyone cancer. The fact we live in a chemical world and are surrounded by plastics and other items that radiate chemicals all the time, is why we have cancer. This is no using cancer as a crutch or angle, for everything man has today causes cancer. Sitting in front of this computer will give you cancer.

Get off the Dem/Rep fight.....there is no such thing. They work for the same team. Remember some important American words......United We Stand....Divided We Fall. Realize who separates us, why and who profits from it, and then you will start to see the wizard behind the scenes like the Wizard of Oz.

And don't' trust Kerry. About the only person on all the avenues who is running, might run, etc. that is worthy that I can see, that is clean, unbiased and not ran by corporate greed. Ron Paul. Only thing that scares me is he is a Rep. and he comes from Texas, that last part really bothers me.

Me personally, I think we need to elect the next president from the ranks of the people. Get off this bloodline that has held the chair and get off all these corporate fed congressmen and senators. Get away from it all. Find some college professor or high school teacher or even a mayor of a small town and make it like it should be. Governed by the people for the people.

People need to re-read the Bill of Rights and the Constitution and realize what they say. Many have forgotten since school.

2007-03-26 00:26:19 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

There are several factors related to the occurrence of cancer in any individual--all of which have been scientifically proven. We all have cancer cells in our bodies at all times, but when our bodies are healthy, the cancer cells are repressed. There is a strong genetic component to some cancers. Breast cancer and colon cancer, just to name 2, are likely to strike several members of the same family. Someone I know well has lost every paternal cousin to cancer before the age of 40. Her mother died of ovarian cancer and her father has had colon cancer on 3 occasions. In that instance, how much was contributed by the smog of L.A. at the time these family members died is unknown, but other family members who did not live in the L.A. basin did not have the same cancer occurrences.
Without a doubt, many cancers are environmentally induced--lung cancer from smoking is the best example. Scientists have identified many carcinogenic substances, often after the substances have been on the market for years. Even necessary medications for other conditions are carcinogenic. A known risk of hormone replacement therapy for menopausal women is the increase in certain cancers.

2007-03-26 00:34:29 · answer #3 · answered by David M 7 · 0 0

Just look at the cancer link due to living near coal mines. Lung cancer from second hand smoke is purely environmental. Sometimes even high-power transmission lines can cause brain tumors which can become malignant.

Pretty moronic of you to try to make the connection to global warming. My impression is that you didn't exactly spend a lot of time thinking about this.

By the way, there is a lot more to the word 'environment' than its relation to global warming. I think that the difference here is that sometimes you need to be smart enough to make that distinction.

2007-03-26 00:26:09 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

While SOME outside influences can be carcinogenic, there are also some internal things (like genetics, or opportunistic cancers that attach people with impaired immune systems, like Kaposis Sarcoma).

While UV rays (in excess) have been shown to cause skin cancer (and don't forget radiation, in excess), Global Warming is not, by any STRETCH of the imagination, the only contributing factor.

It sounds like Edwards could use a doctor on his staff to explain these things to him.

2007-03-26 01:08:06 · answer #5 · answered by <3 The Pest <3 6 · 0 0

I believe that some cancers are environmentally induced but that has nothing to do with global warming. If you work in a highly toxic environment, you stand a better chance of contracting a cancer.

2007-03-26 00:27:35 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

I don't know what Kerry said but I do know that cancer is caused by a mutation of cells in the human body. The mutations are caused by "stresses" in the cells environment. I don't think it has anything to do with global warming but more about where a person spends most of their time. Many people work in poisonous "environments" and it is not a stretch to say that we are products of the "environment" that we spend our time in.

2007-03-26 01:40:51 · answer #7 · answered by quetzalcoatl 2 · 0 0

Many...not all...cancers are environmentally induced. And who is to say that cancers from the early days of history were not exacerbated by the environment...like prolonged exposure to wood or coal burning fires...contaminated water...etc. Also we have cancers today that were not common in history...again, environmentally induced.

As to whether the Democratic Party will USE Edwards' wife cancer for political purposes...I wouldn't put anything past them.

2007-03-26 01:37:50 · answer #8 · answered by kathy_is_a_nurse 7 · 0 1

Both. My father had bone cancer which his Doctor says was at least worsened by his working in a printing factory for almost 40 years. And some cancers are caused by radiation exposure and really if you think about it so can cervical cancer caused by HPV because if you have never been exposed to HPV , through sex, then your less likely to have cervical cancer

2007-03-26 00:20:35 · answer #9 · answered by heidi t 3 · 2 0

All cancers are caused by external influences on the inside of cells. Where have you been?

Why do Republicans refuse to take responsibility for supporting, encouraging and profiting from cancer causing products?

2007-03-26 00:18:23 · answer #10 · answered by Darth Vader 6 · 1 0

Most cancers are environmentally induced, as you well know. So now you neocons have to feign complete ignorance in order to attack John Edwards about his wife's cancer.

Just when I think these neocons have reached rock bottom and couldn't possibly get any lower, they prove me wrong. LMAO - and this is the only thing they've ever proved me wrong about. What a dispicable bunch of SOBs they are.

2007-03-26 00:25:38 · answer #11 · answered by Vernon 3 · 1 2

fedest.com, questions and answers