Originally posted by OnceReturned
It's not a misquote. She is a faculty member at the University of Manchester, and the same quote can be found on the university's website,
here. It's the last paragraph on that page.
Thanks for the original source! I tried looking for it myself but couldn't find it!
Anyways, you have correctly pointed out that she was not misquoted, but I instead believe that the author's conclusions has been uncritically
. For example, here are two different views on the article:
Cancer is not a disease of the modern
Claims that cancer is only a 'modern, man-made disease' are false and misleading
Here are some of the criticisms being put forth from the above article:
“There are dozens of natural causes of cancer, including ultraviolet light from the sun, natural radiation from radionuclides such as radon in
rocks, and infection by viruses that trigger cancer, such as the human papilloma virus, which causes cervical cancer and hepatitis viruses that can
cause liver cancer. Likewise, soot and smoke from fire contain a multitude of carcinogens, as do fungal aflatoxins deposited on peanuts. ‘And
that's to say nothing of cancers caused by genetic inheritance,’ says Kat Arney of Cancer Research UK.”
“Almost all the mummies and skeletons were of people who died before the age of 50. ‘Ageing is one of the major causes of cancer,’ says Schüz.
He dismissed as ‘weak’ the authors' argument that they could find evidence for other diseases of ageing, such as arthritis and hardening of the
arteries, and that cancer should therefore have shown up too. ‘In men today, 90 per cent of cancers occur after 50,’ he says. ‘So if you
examined the bodies of 1000 modern men who died before 50, you wouldn't find many cancers either.’”
“One of the main arguments for cancer being an affliction of modernisation was the apparent lack of evidence for ‘common’ bone cancers in
children. But again, the figures don't bear this out. ‘It's true it's a relatively common cancer, but even still it only affects 1 in 10,000
children,’ Schüz says. ‘So even if you have 10,000 childhood mummies, you'd be lucky to find one.’”
And the author agrees with the criticism
“David concedes that these are valid criticisms. ‘We're not saying what the explanation is, we're proposing it's modern living also taking into
account that people living longer might be to blame,’ she says.”
In conclusion, the authors do not claim that WE have caused cancer, instead they have suggested that it is our modern lifestyle
longer life spans
which is the cause of the sudden increase of cancer, beginning with the industrial revolution.
I also agree that our modern lifestyle is partly the cause for the sudden increase of cancer, but that ain't news, I believe it's been known for
One could say that cancer is simply the unwanted by-product of our current life styles.