The authors acknowledge that coronary heart disease has been declining significantly in recent decades. However, they do not adequately consider the effects of competing causes of death. Specifically, one cannot evaluate the frequency of one major disease, like cancer, without considering trends in competing causes of illness and death. In fact, recent studies indicate that 30 percent of the increase in cancer mortality between 1973 and 1987 was due to declines in other major diseases, mainly heart disease. Taking this concept to the extreme, it is obvious that a cure for heart disease would make the cancer incidence and mortality rate soar.
Humans are still mortal.
Blaming Agricultural Chemicals Scientists count among their recreational activities sessions where they pick apart the published work of colleagues, pointing to specific omissions or shortcomings. This is fair sport at academic seminars, and scientists understand that one study does not a conclusion make. Journals such as JAMA have no qualms about publishing studies with which many editors might disagree because they know there will be in-context dialogue after publication to resolve differences. The problem here then was not the Davis article itself, but the fact that it was plucked out of context and reported uncritically by the media. Because, they said, there were epidemiological data that farmers had an increased risk of cancer and they thought that occupational risk might carry over to consumers who eat the food farmers produce.