Gerhard Kessell-Haak (Gerhard Kessell-Haak) wrote:
> >Considering that transients might end up dying of throat cancer in
I would say start looking for another causative agent,
> >Amsterdam then the fact that they bring their ailments with them creates
> >a very strong statistic.
> Let me state the assumptions here:
> 1. The throat cancer rate in Amsterdam is unusually high (statistic).
> 2. Excessive use of a certain herb may be a causative agent in the
> formation of throat cancer (statistical link).
> 3. Usage of the herb by natives is no higher in Amsterdam than in the
> rest of Europe (assumed from statistic).
> 4. Usage of the herb by transients is higer than natives h in Amsterdam
> And from this the conclusion was reached that the throat cancer rate is
> caused by the transients (?)
I would say start looking for another causative agent,unless the cultivation practices in Amsterdam are markedly different from elsewhere. Now, if even a small but measurable percentage of growers that supply the Amsterdam market used things like DDT, etc in cultivating the herb, then there would of course be some sort of basis for the claim, but since the number of people using herb is consistent with other locations, then I would not expect to see a link with herb unless the herb there were different. As for transients, since throat cancer isn't a condition which just pops up overnight, but requires years of adverse behavior to create, then I would hardly expect to see transients going to Amsterdam, smoking up, and coming down with throat tumors in the course of a normal vacation.
Now, if Amsterdam had excellent cancer treatment facilities, and low cost health care, most probably socialized, then I would expect to see people move into the area in order to get quality health care treatment for no cost. Having an asset like a skill in a special area tends to attract customers for that service.