On Apr 13, 2:23*pm, newshound wrote:
Confirmed, but can't provide a link. The cancer deaths also correlate
pretty well with population density, suggesting it could well be urban
pollution.

Whilst a relative worked with the EPA in the USA on cat converter, it
was well known that particulates were a major carrier of carcinogens,
dust a key carrier for viruses (many in turn triggering cancers) and
effect of radioactivity on the body was extremely non-linear. People
at NASA at the time simply pointed out that radioactivity had been
substantially higher in the past, and life seems to have made it
pretty well to this point in time. There is even research that
indicates elevated background radiation might actually prime the
immune system against cancers, however environmental pollution does
not have the same effect.

With USA having MTBE in fuel, Benzene in fracking, the actual
"environment" is changing - so as always correlation may not
necessarily be causation.

The USA motor industry did oppose particulate scrubbers being fitted
to cars, a push for that was probably lead (making fuel lead free had
lower per vehicle cost). I think the EPA does indicate pollution
within a home can be significantly higher than outside, HEPA filters
being useful. The problem is the cleaner you make somewhere, the lower
the low dosing of bugs which can itself be beneficial in priming the
immune system.

Impact of radioactivity is, without any doubt, non-linear.
Unfortunately regulations assume otherwise - perhaps useful when one
considers the ridiculous handling of blue & brown asbestos in the past.