Ok, this is way off topic but I kind of wonder how many of those cancers
allegedly to be caused by HRT in fact were (and I am not saying that
some weren't and have not been illustrated to have been so - Oh and by
what - research I believe...it is a risk factor on cancer assessment
these days)...and if there was a control study done to quantify how many
women not on HRT also fell foul of the same disease and if these
statistics actually match....and indeed how much the press in all of our
respective countries jumped on the bandwagon to vilify a valid treatment
for a lot of women going through the menapause with a scare tactic that
"incidents of cancer are higher in those taking this drug" - thing is
more women take HRT than ever happened before...women still get
cancer...more women take the drug so by definition you get a higher
percentage of those taking the drug that now get cancer than you would
do if fewer women took HRT...Statistics, statistics and more damn lies
masked as statistics....looking at statistical research is one thing -
and I am not saying an invalid form of research but needs backing up by
science as well....Breast cancer is on the increase, consumption of HRT
meds are on the increase ergo HRT is the problem and the research is
flawed....a little bit of "research" would actually show that the
increase in breast cancer cases is within the "pre-menopausal" group of
women....who haven't even sniffed an HRT tab let alone taken one....and
then lets look at the whole factors in an increase in pre-menopausal
breast cancer and I believe that "research" although not giving a
definitive answer is suggesting that the stress of modern living plays a
big part in all of this - might explain the increase in young as well as
old....

Research gives us a chance of understanding such things....the survival
rate of a breast cancer patient is now infinitely higher than it was 10
years ago and unimaginable 20 years ago....and how did this
happen....oh, forgive me, it was research....well on a personal level
long may research continue.....Just a few years ago, without the
research, every woman with breast cancer was condemned to death....now
there is hope....why...I believe it is down to research and developing
stuff they find out and more research....and then treating people to
give them true hope of getting through this disease....and those they
can't help giving them a few more years to see their children grow up to
an age when they can actually remember who Mummy was....

Now to pull this whole thing back on topic - which technically is
off-topic for the subject line but on topic for rec.ponds - no
commercial company producing fish food is about to produce bogus
research claiming that their feed is better than dog or cat food for
feeding fish....they will spend millions perfecting a good diet
specifically aimed at promoting the growth, health and well-being of the
fish it is sold to feed....if they didn't they would be straight down in
the dung heap.....people can go out and "research" what food is
best...but I'm sorry I have no issues in stating that food designed for
a specific animal is designed just with that animal in mind....if any
animal food provider was proven to just adapt their feedstuff by one or
two minerals/vitamins rather than fundementally providing a nutritional
balance for the creature in question they would go out of business
quicker than their b*tts could touch the ground - especially in the US
where it would almost get sued quicker than they could say the word
"b*tt"....

Fish food for fish, Cat food for cats, dog food for dogs....mcd*n*lds
for those that occassionally enjoy a treat but not as a staple diet....

Gill

PS Apologies all but this is a subject I feel strongly about even if it
is sort of "off-topic"