If we could prevent or cure all cancer, what would we die of?

The new year has begun with a war of words over whether cancer is mostly bad luck, as suggested by a new study from Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, and over whether it's a good way to die, compared with the alternatives, as suggested by Dr Richard Smith, a former editor of the British Medical Journal (BMJ).

Cancer is now the leading cause of death in Britain even though it is ever more survivable, with roughly half of people who contract it living long enough to die of something else. But what else? Often another cancer.  Cancer's growing dominance of the mortality tables is not because it's getting worse but because we are avoiding other causes of death and living longer.

It is worth remembering that some scientists and anti-pesticide enviros in the 1960s were convinced that by now lifespans would be much shorter because of cancer caused by pesticides and other chemicals in the environment.

In the 1950s Wilhelm Hueper - a director of the US National Cancer Institute and mentor to Rachel Carson, the environmentalist author of Silent Spring - was so concerned that pesticides were causing cancer that he thought the theory that lung cancer was caused by smoking was a plot by the chemical industry to divert attention from its own culpability: "Cigarette smoking is not a major factor in the causation of lung cancer," he insisted.

In fact it turns out that pollution causes very little cancer and cigarettes cause a lot. But aside from smoking, most cancers are indeed bad luck.

Obviously, the HFR's glass is more than half-full this week with the announcement yesterday (9/25) that the racist scumbag running the Department of Injustice is quitting.

The disgusting tearful hypocrisy of his goodbye to Zero aside, this is an event to be savored.  Here's a sample of the Congressional goodbyes to the most corrupt, criminal, and law-destroying AG our country has ever had the misfortune to endure...

Yet there is more to celebrate than his resignation - it's the timing.  There's lots of speculation on why he chose this moment, but the bottom line is he announced it a scant 40 days before the election...

Let's squelch the latest nightmare rumor on Holder - that Zero plans to nominate him for the next Supreme Court vacancy.  There's as much chance of that as Hillary being able to fly to the moon on her broomstick...

We're taking a break here for an important public service announcement.  The headlines regarding the Ebola epidemic in West Africa are becoming ever more dire.  That of Forbes yesterday (9/25) was: "Ebola - It's Far, Far Worse Than You Thought."

TTPers asked our Forum's resident genius, Skye, what could be done.  Here is his response.  Our suggestion is that you copy and paste it into an email sent to your Congressman, Senator, and any friend who is a health professional.  Who knows how many lives you could save by doing so...

How many times have you been subjected to flashing website ads blaring about the "coming collapse of the dollar"?  Two of the best conservative economic minds put the kibosh on this blather Saturday...

On Wednesday (9/24), Zero gave a speech at the UN.  The link is to the full text.  It was roundly ridiculed and denounced by many conservative pundits.  But believe it or not, there was a lot in it that is praiseworthy...

We close with a tribute to one of the world's most admirable women...

Jersey, Channel Islands.  Americans know of the state of New Jersey, but few know that it was named after the island of Jersey, which is located in the English Channel about 14 miles off the coast of France.

This small island, about two-thirds the size of Washington, D.C. with only 100,000 people, is today home to one of the world's largest financial centers.

Jersey has a higher per-capita income than America, and roughly twice the per-capita income of Britain and France. The globe is dotted with relatively small, prosperous places that have become rich without the benefit of natural resources.

What have they -- Jersey and the island next door, Guernsey, along with Bermuda, Cayman, Singapore, Hong Kong, and even larger places like Switzerland --  done right, leaving many of their larger and more richly endowed neighbors plodding along in their economic dust?

Say goodnight, Fred.  Last night, Saturday (5/12), in a huge ballroom at a hotel in Washington I can't name at a meeting of a group I can't mention, Fred Thompson was the dinner speaker to 500 of conservatism's crème de la crème.

The energy in the room was crackling.  Here's the guy, everyone was either thinking or hoping - the big man who could fill Reagan's shoes, a true conservative who could electrify Republicans and sweep them to victory in 2008.

There were cheers and yells when he was introduced, as everyone stood in sustained applause, then sat down in quiet excited anticipation.

I'm not at liberty to reveal what he said, as this was a closed meeting, a private off the record address.  But I can tell you my reaction and that of the several dozen folks I talked to afterwards.

What a bummer.

[Note:  this essay may be most fruitfully read in conjunction with Terrorism and Tiny Zibbs from September 2003-JW]

When the Kurdish peshmerga forces broke the siege of Mount Sinjar last week, there was no trace of the 5,000 Yazidi women and children abducted from the area in August.

It is thought that they have been mostly sold as concubines to jihadist fighters of Islamic State. When the London Times reporters posed as two British girls interested in joining Islamic State, they were told: "The only way to guarantee being together is marrying the same man."

Meanwhile, the 219 girls still missing in Nigeria after being abducted in April have been "married off," according to the leader of Boko Haram.

My point in connecting these incidents is that throughout history polygamy has fueled violence. Might it be worth suggesting to Moslem leaders, religious and secular, that they push for monogamous norms as one way to reduce violence and bring more peace to the Middle East and to north and west Africa?

Do you want the Obama administration sharing all of your financial information with the Russian, Chinese and Saudi Arabian governments? You may be thinking, not even President Obama would go that far. Not so, read on.

This past week, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) released its full proposal for a global standard for the automatic exchange of financial information. The rationale behind this despicable idea is to more effectively enable governments, such as that of France and the United States, to identify tax evaders.

This might sound like a good idea until one realizes that every individual and business will be stripped of all of their financial privacy if this becomes the law of the land - and it is very close to being just that.

Under the OECD proposal, all of the information that financial institutions now report to the U.S. government to try to ensure income-tax compliance, including your account balances, interest, dividends, proceeds from the sale of financial assets - would be shared with foreign governments.

The United States and other governments will, of course, claim that your sensitive financial information will remain confidential - and that you can trust the governments.

It is bad enough when American officials leak or misuse sensitive financial information about U.S. citizens and businesses, but just think what is going to happen when all of those corrupt officials in foreign governments get ahold of it.