The International Cancer Research Agency has not classified uranium among more than 500 safe, likely and even possible carcinogens, Photo: Giphy
cancer is one of today's most fatal diseases. Although diseases from a type of malignancy come from a factor that can not be affected, there are several things that reduce the risk of cancer.
Epidemiologist Prof. Dr. Zoran Radovanović in his book "The Truth of Cancer", referring to relevant and proven sources of the history of the habits you will use daily, but also explains why smoking increases the risk of cancer.
In standard dictionaries (Oxford, Webster), stress is defined as a physical, chemical or emotional factor that leads to physical or mental tension, but also as a tension created under undesirable or demanding circumstances.
The key issue for us is now: is it and how it is strain related to cancer?
There are a number of articles that indicate that stress affects the effects and progress of cancer in laboratory conditions (tissue culture, animal testing). It's about strong, usually chemical stimuli, usually called oxidative stress and free radicals, so it tries to investigate the role of antioxidants in the treatment of cancer based on these experiences. This is of course not the type of stress we are interested in in this section. (…)
However, the importance of mental stress is still discussed. Often, attitudes towards cancer are methodically narrow, recognizing that it is unclear whether stress is a cause or consequence of cancer. The absence of solid evidence is usually replaced by detailed references to experiments showing the effect of mental stress on neurological, immune, hormonal, biochemical and other mechanisms, theoretically potentially important for the development and development of cancer. (…)
Indirect effects are also mentioned in the drug at work. It can be noted that stress in the workplace can be alleviated by tobacco, alcohol, drugs and unnecessary nutrition, and consequently by creating conditions for the emergence of cancer. However, this does not put stress in the causes of cancer in the sense we consider the cause and effect mechanisms for the formation of this group of diseases (according to this logic, for example, bad marriage or strict professors would lead to cancer). (…)
Stress's impact on cancer development challenges the most authoritative sources. So when you ask for stress causes cancer, a categorical response from the International Cancer Office will be: Stress does not feel like a cause of cancer. The only possibility is that stressful circumstances can cause a person to abandon unhealthy habits – giving up tobacco, drowsiness or alcohol. But then such habits are the causes of cancer, not stress.
The famous American National Cancer Institute has determined that psychological stress has not been shown to cause cancer, but if it lasts for a long time it can affect the patient's general condition and his ability to cope with existing cancer. (…)
Bombs and diseases
During the spring of 1999, during the war of KiM, within our then federal state, according to different sources, about 8.5, slightly more than nine, about 10 or even 10-15 tonnes of OU. About 90% of the total mass of OU has ended in KiM's territory. In Montenegro there was a site targeted, and in central Serbia – some, all in the marginal area against KiM. (…)
For decades it has not been shown that professional exposure to uranium is associated with the risk of people suffering from lung cancer. An investigation of uranium enrichment workers with a gas diffusion method has been preceded by half a century.
In the most vulnerable group, there was an association with lung cancer, but the author acted with caution. Firstly, a group of medium-sized workers had a significant (but not statistically significant) lower risk of lung cancer, which contradicts the expected dose effect.
Secondly, smoking was not considered to be the dominant risk factor for this malignant tumor. Later turned out caution was in place. Unnamed: For French workers employed in uranium enrichment, overall mortality was even lower than expected, and exposure to uranium (internal) and gamma radiation (externally) was not significantly related to any cause of death. (…)
An experiment on American veterans
What is important is the experience of people's observation, and the ideal respondents who have been in the body for decades are OU, because among the first one can be expected side effects. It is an ideal natural experiment (this is called a spontaneous emergence of a situation that corresponds to the design according to the design) activated by a group of 36 American veterans traced under 25 years. None of them have any damage to the organs. (…)
The most modern institution in the world for this area, the International Cancer Research Agency has not classified uranium among more than 500 for sure, probably and even possibly cancer-dependent.