Rep. Allen West Says Up To 81 House Members Are Communists

rocket88 · Apr 20, 2012

Facts, 360 B.C.-A.D. 2012 - chicagotribune.com

Though few expected Facts to pull out of its years-long downward spiral, the official cause of death was from injuries suffered last week when Florida Republican Rep. Allen West steadfastly declared that as many as 81 of his fellow members of theU.S. House of Representatives are communists.

Facts is survived by two brothers, Rumor and Innuendo, and a sister, Emphatic
Assertion

Grant · Apr 20, 2012

GhostlyJoe said:
You want to demand absolute pragmatism and precise language from your debate opponent

Yes, I do.

while you gleefully wander off on unsubstantiated flights of fancy. I don't know if you're trolling or what, but it's hard to take you seriously.

If i do as you claim then call me on it and I'll give you what I have. But as it is you have nothing and are only making the same false claims as your ally. This is yet another example of leftist deflection.

AdamT · Apr 20, 2012

Grant said:
So. to be clear, is it your contention that John Earl Haynes is the "revisionist" and that he actually said Senator McCarthy was "a great guy"? I saw no mention of that.

Don't be an idiot -- you know what I meant. :roll:

Grant · Apr 20, 2012

GhostlyJoe said:
GhostlyJoe said:

As far as Democrats killing people goes, the answer is, again, evident. American liberals are not responsible for atrocities committed by foreign powers,

Click to expand...

Nowhere, absolutely nowhere, did i make the claim that liberals are responsible for atrocities committed by foreign powers. This is why liberals should always use the quote system. It was probably designed with them in mind.

and vague ideological similarities don't make it so.

Click to expand...

Often, as we have seen, these ideological similarities are not vague at all. I've pointed out several areas where they are very similar and this has never been denied.

If we're going to expand the definition of "communism" to include all "leftists," then "communism" necessarily will be as moderate and tolerant as its most moderate and tolerant practitioners.

Click to expand...

Of course I never said I wanted the definition of "communism" to include all "leftists either. If you are going to do it though it's fine with me. Please use quotes.

It doesn't work the other way around. People don't change to fit your preconceived definition of words. So whether you or West or anyone else calls Democrats or liberal posters or Ronald McDonald "communist" doesn't magically make them evil, but that is clearly what is intended by the application.

Click to expand...

Please use quotes, okay?

Grant · Apr 20, 2012

AdamT said:
Don't be an idiot -- you know what I meant. :roll:

I'm not about to start guessing at what a leftist means.

Someone on this thread said words have meanings. Why not say exactly what you mean without the usual leftist hyperbole and, as well, you should also use the quote system.

AdamT · Apr 20, 2012

Grant said:
I'm not about to start guessing at what a leftist means.

Someone on this thread said words have meanings. Why not say exactly what you mean without the usual leftist hyperbole and, as well, you should also use the quote system.

You really have no idea how ironic that is, coming from you, do you? :lol:

Centinel · Apr 20, 2012

GhostlyJoe said:
OK. How many mass graves have American liberals dug? How many killing sprees have Democrats gone on?

The question was: What do you despise about communism? Why are you asking me about American liberals when I was answering your question about communism?

GhostlyJoe · Apr 20, 2012

Centinel said:
The question was: What do you despise about communism? Why are you asking me about American liberals when I was answering your question about communism?

It has to do with the context of the thread. The whole point of that branch of the discussion was that some in this thread were equating all "leftism" or "liberalism" with communism. The original question -- the one you responded to -- was intended for Grant.

Misterveritis · Apr 20, 2012

AdamT said:
It's not a guess. In fact it's a number derived from the most optimistic source availiable -- the revisionist historian who is trying to make the case that McCarthy was really a great guy.

Well, no. He was as bad as he sounds. But he was right. There were Soviet spies in the State Department. I believe there were also Soviet spies in the White House during FDR's time.

Sparkles · Apr 21, 2012

winston53660 said:
I'm willing to bet there are still spies.

Hard to say. After Hoover, there were a few bad leaders, and then they had a massive clearing of the house, which included known spies. Who knows. After the crash in 1990, the Russian government couldn't really afford to carry out the types of covert ops they had before. That last spy ring, was arguably the most pathetic yet. There was more interest in that one girls facebook page, than what information they got, assuming that got anything.

Russia just doesn't have the wide spread left-tard support they had back in the day. Something about ruining your country until people were eating each other for lack of food, seems to sour people on your ideology.

Sparkles · Apr 21, 2012

AdamT said:
It's not a guess. In fact it's a number derived from the most optimistic source availiable -- the revisionist historian who is trying to make the case that McCarthy was really a great guy.

I don't give a crap if he helped old ladies cross the street, and returned dimes he found on the street to the people who dropped them.

He could be as much of a jerk as Al Gore, or as crazy as Charlie Sheen.

Back to the point... HE WAS RIGHT. I'm going to keep saying this over and over until the end of time. You can bring up all the blaw blaw blaw you want, you are still wrong, and McCarthy was STILL RIGHT.

winston53660 · Apr 21, 2012

Sparkles said:
I don't give a crap if he helped old ladies cross the street, and returned dimes he found on the street to the people who dropped them.

He could be as much of a jerk as Al Gore, or as crazy as Charlie Sheen.

Back to the point... HE WAS RIGHT. I'm going to keep saying this over and over until the end of time. You can bring up all the blaw blaw blaw you want, you are still wrong, and McCarthy was STILL RIGHT.

a broken clock is right twice aday too......

Sparkles · Apr 21, 2012

GhostlyJoe said:
OK. How many mass graves have American liberals dug? How many killing sprees have Democrats gone on?

You are missing the point. No communist regime ever had "mass graves" as part of their fundamental belief system.

It's not like Chairman Mao, wrote out his plan for China and had entry 5 "mass graves for half of China".

Instead, death is the natural result of socialism. it's simply the automatic end to the path of destruction paved with good intentions.

Look at Mao's great leap forward. Even Mao could see clearly that China was falling far behind the four Asian tigers around them, and it was embarrassing. So he tried to institute the great leap forward.

Do you think Mao was sitting there writing "mass graves" on his to do list? No, obviously not. But the results of the new communes, new government projects, and other programs was a huge famine that killed off 45 Million Chinese.

Why do you think there is a lack of food in North Korea, when South Korea is a boom economy?
North Korea faces famine: 'Tell the world we are starving' - Telegraph

People are dying there from starvation, while people in South Korea have McDonalds.

Why? It's real simple. Socialism kills.
Every time you follow socialism to it's natural end, you'll end up with people dying.

Let's see.... Capitalist system with the highest survival rate, or socialized care, with a lower survival rate?

The pattern repeats itself consistency over history and across nations. It's universal.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/21/world/americas/venezuela-faces-shortages-in-grocery-staples.html

By 6:30 a.m., a full hour and a half before the store would open, about two dozen people were already in line. They waited patiently, not for the latest iPhone, but for something far more basic: groceries.

“Whatever I can get,” said Katherine Huga, 23, a mother of two, describing her shopping list. She gave a shrug of resignation. “You buy what they have.”

Venezuela is one of the world’s top oil producers at a time of soaring energy prices, yet shortages of staples like milk, meat and toilet paper are a chronic part of life here, often turning grocery shopping into a hit or miss proposition.

Again, leftism at work. No milk. No meat. Not even toilet paper. Can't eat, can't live.

Do you think Chavez was up in the government house thinking "I want to starve my people to death". No, he was simply following the basic philosophy of the left, and it's hurting people, as it always does.

Sparkles · Apr 21, 2012

winston53660 said:
a broken clock is right twice aday too......

Yet another admission of failure. If that's the best you can do, you fail. Thanks for stopping by.

AdamT · Apr 21, 2012

Sparkles said:
Why? It's real simple. Socialism kills.
Every time you follow socialism to it's natural end, you'll end up with people dying.

Let's see.... Capitalist system with the highest survival rate, or socialized care, with a lower survival rate?

The pattern repeats itself consistency over history and across nations. It's universal.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/21/world/americas/venezuela-faces-shortages-in-grocery-staples.html

Again, leftism at work. No milk. No meat. Not even toilet paper. Can't eat, can't live.

Do you think Chavez was up in the government house thinking "I want to starve my people to death". No, he was simply following the basic philosophy of the left, and it's hurting people, as it always does.

Way to cherry pick the data. Is there a reason you didn't look at, say, infant mortality ... where the US ranks 34th -- one place behind Cuba?

List of countries by infant mortality rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sparkles · Apr 21, 2012

AdamT said:
Way to cherry pick the data. Is there a reason you didn't look at, say, infant mortality ... where the US ranks 34th -- one place behind Cuba?

List of countries by infant mortality rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

No the reason I didn't look at infant mortality is because most countries don't use the same standard we do.

In cuba, a doctor could be punished, even lose his job for reporting an infant mortality, thus he simply doesn't report it.

In England and Canada, a baby that is too young, is simply left to die, and isn't counted.

Premature baby 'left to die' by doctors after mother gives birth just two days before 22-week care limit | Mail Online

'Doctors told me it was against the rules to save my premature baby'

Sarah Capewell begged them to save her tiny son, who was born just 21 weeks and five days into her pregnancy - almost four months early.

They ignored her pleas and allegedly told her they were following national guidelines that babies born before 22 weeks should not be given medical treatment.

Why? Because if they did, and it didn't live, it would be counted as an infant mortality. This way, it isn't counted.

Our system tries to save every baby, no matter how young, and if it dies, it's counted. Almost no other nation does that.

Further, we save babies from Canada routinely.
Canada's Expectant Moms Heading to U.S. to Deliver | Fox News

So, we even make Canada look good. These kids would die if they were left in Canada. But because they can come here and get good care, they live. Our system, makes their system, look good.

And the evidence goes on and on. Cherry pick whatever. You just can't handle the truth.

GhostlyJoe · Apr 21, 2012

Sparkles said:
You are missing the point. No communist regime ever had "mass graves" as part of their fundamental belief system.

It's not like Chairman Mao, wrote out his plan for China and had entry 5 "mass graves for half of China".

Instead, death is the natural result of socialism. it's simply the automatic end to the path of destruction paved with good intentions.

Look at Mao's great leap forward. Even Mao could see clearly that China was falling far behind the four Asian tigers around them, and it was embarrassing. So he tried to institute the great leap forward.

Do you think Mao was sitting there writing "mass graves" on his to do list? No, obviously not. But the results of the new communes, new government projects, and other programs was a huge famine that killed off 45 Million Chinese.

Why do you think there is a lack of food in North Korea, when South Korea is a boom economy?
North Korea faces famine: 'Tell the world we are starving' - Telegraph

People are dying there from starvation, while people in South Korea have McDonalds.

Why? It's real simple. Socialism kills.
Every time you follow socialism to it's natural end, you'll end up with people dying.

I don't even know what to say. Not only do you fully misunderstand my point, you give this simplistic analysis of sociopolitical/economic climate on the Korean peninsula. I'll just agree that North Korea is a failed state.

Let's see.... Capitalist system with the highest survival rate, or socialized care, with a lower survival rate?

The pattern repeats itself consistency over history and across nations. It's universal.

The pattern doesn't even repeat itself in the chart you've linked. If American liberals are communists, and Obamacare is socialist, then most of the countries near the top of that list are also communist/socialist by the same logic. It's also cherry-picked data. The U.S. doesn't fare as well as a lot of so-called "socialist" health care systems using other metrics. Of course, it matters little, because even though you failed to support your point, it was based on a logical fallacy anyway.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/21/world/americas/venezuela-faces-shortages-in-grocery-staples.html

Again, leftism at work. No milk. No meat. Not even toilet paper. Can't eat, can't live.

Do you think Chavez was up in the government house thinking "I want to starve my people to death.". No, he was simply following the basic philosophy of the left, and it's hurting people, as it always does.

The basic philosophy that you've prescribed to the "left." And, from a logical standpoint, you still haven't crossed the most important bridge, anyway -- the one that connects Venezuela, North Korea and American liberals.

GhostlyJoe · Apr 21, 2012

Sparkles said:
Canada's Expectant Moms Heading to U.S. to Deliver | Fox News

So, we even make Canada look good. These kids would die if they were left in Canada. But because they can come here and get good care, they live. Our system, makes their system, look good.

And the evidence goes on and on. Cherry pick whatever. You just can't handle the truth.

From your linked article:

The cost of these airlifts and treatments, paid to U.S. hospitals by the province under Canada's universal health care system, runs upwards of $1,000 a child.

So the Canadian preemie units are taxed, so their system airlifts patients to a neighboring country at about $1,000 a flight. My son was lifeflighted a few years ago (he's fine) from Amherst, Ohio, to Cleveland, Ohio (it's about a 20-minute drive). I had pretty good insurance at the time. What do you think my bill was?

I also liked this passage:

"The Canadian healthcare system has used the United States as a safety net for years," said Michael Turner of the Cato Institute. "In fact, overall about one out of every seven Canadian physicians sends someone to the United States every year for treatment."

It sounds impressive, until you realize that's about 10,000 people a year in a country with 34 million people.

What is this supposed to prove again?

Sparkles · Apr 21, 2012

GhostlyJoe said:
I don't even know what to say. Not only do you fully misunderstand my point, you give this simplistic analysis of sociopolitical/economic climate on the Korean peninsula. I'll just agree that North Korea is a failed state.

All leftism eventually leads to a failed state.

The pattern doesn't even repeat itself in the chart you've linked. If American liberals are communists, and Obamacare is socialist, then most of the countries near the top of that list are also communist/socialist by the same logic. It's also cherry-picked data. The U.S. doesn't fare as well as a lot of so-called "socialist" health care systems using other metrics. Of course, it matters little, because even though you failed to support your point, it was based on a logical fallacy anyway.

The point of the chart was that in most of those other countries, they have socialized health care, and more people die under their system, than our more capitalist based system.

Again, leftism leads to death. As for your "other metrics" I've heard them all, and they all suck. There is not one worth while metric that our system doesn't lead in.

Back to the point, the idea that socialist is like a switch, is not true. We all know that there is no completely 100% free-market capitalist country, and nor is there any 100% socialist country.

Electing one guy to one office, doesn't magically change the entire country into one or the other. Instead it's a process of policy reforms over a long period of time. As the system gets more and more socialized, it gets worse and worse and worse. Equally, as it becomes more free-market capitalist, it will get better and better.

ObamaCare, is undoubtedly a more socialist policy, and it has clearly made things worse as I would expect. When companies have to get waivers from the policy in order to keep their health insurance, clearly it's screwing things up.

But that still doesn't mean we're *shazam* all socialists now. It's just one more step in that direction.

The basic philosophy that you've prescribed to the "left." And, from a logical standpoint, you still haven't crossed the most important bridge, anyway -- the one that connects Venezuela, North Korea and American liberals.

All leftism, is the basic belief that government knows best. That more regulation, more control, and more government power is good.

All leftists believe this to one extent or another. If the leftist do get their way, and health care is socialized, we'll end up with the same problems that all other socialized systems have. Survival rates will decline, and more people will die. Waiting lists will start up, and people will die. We'll have shortages of doctors and nurses, and people will die. Just like Canada, UK, and so on.

GhostlyJoe · Apr 21, 2012

Sparkles said:
All leftism eventually leads to a failed state.

The point of the chart was that in most of those other countries, they have socialized health care, and more people die under their system, than our more capitalist based system.

Again, leftism leads to death. As for your "other metrics" I've heard them all, and they all suck. There is not one worth while metric that our system doesn't lead in.

Back to the point, the idea that socialist is like a switch, is not true. We all know that there is no completely 100% free-market capitalist country, and nor is there any 100% socialist country.

Electing one guy to one office, doesn't magically change the entire country into one or the other. Instead it's a process of policy reforms over a long period of time. As the system gets more and more socialized, it gets worse and worse and worse. Equally, as it becomes more free-market capitalist, it will get better and better.

ObamaCare, is undoubtedly a more socialist policy, and it has clearly made things worse as I would expect. When companies have to get waivers from the policy in order to keep their health insurance, clearly it's screwing things up.

But that still doesn't mean we're *shazam* all socialists now. It's just one more step in that direction.

OK, can you just admit, then, that West is full of it? You're basically arguing for my point now.

All leftism, is the basic belief that government knows best. That more regulation, more control, and more government power is good.

All leftists believe this to one extent or another. If the leftist do get their way, and health care is socialized, we'll end up with the same problems that all other socialized systems have. Survival rates will decline, and more people will die. Waiting lists will start up, and people will die. We'll have shortages of doctors and nurses, and people will die. Just like Canada, UK, and so on.

I think your post in nonsense. But instead of presuming to speak for other "leftists," I'll just point out that you have no idea what I believe, and what you've written here is nowhere close. Do you believe people around the world are cleanly divided into political "lefties" and "righties?" That what you seem to be saying, and it's incredibly naive.

Sparkles · Apr 21, 2012

GhostlyJoe said:
OK, can you just admit, then, that West is full of it? You're basically arguing for my point now.

I have no idea. Are there people who are communist in nature in the government? Of course there are. That doesn't mean we're all communist, but that doesn't mean that those individuals are not following communist ideology either.

These are not mutually exclusive. You can have a free-market capitalist person run a generally communist country, and the reverse. Remember, someone in the Communist party of China, in 1978, had to push a policy of dismantling the farm communes, allowing free-enterprise, and opening up the markets from regulation. By any measure possible, those were heavily free-market capitalist reforms... in China a self-proclaimed communist country.

Someone in the Communist Party of China, had to be pushing free-market Capitalism. If someone in China said that there are a dozen capitalists in the Chinese government, they'd likely be right.

So when West says there are communists in the US government, why is that such a stretch?

I think your post in nonsense. But instead of presuming to speak for other "leftists," I'll just point out that you have no idea what I believe, and what you've written here is nowhere close. Do you believe people around the world are cleanly divided into political "lefties" and "righties?" That what you seem to be saying, and it's incredibly naive.

Of course not. People often divide themselves up by arbitrary ideological lines that are generally meaningless.

I'm a Marx, and nothing like a Maoist, and nothing like a Stalinist, and nothing like a Nazi, and nothing like a Leninist.

But if you boil all those down, they really are not all that different.

And even people who openly support one specific point of view, often still have a some area where they support the opposing view.

For example, 1/3rd of all food produced in the Soviet Union under Stalin himself, came from private capitalist (pay for my goods or you don't get them) farms. So even Stalin has a policy that was capitalist, as limited as it was.

Granted I wish people were black and white on their ideology. That would sure make it easier for me to vote.

Centinel · Apr 21, 2012

GhostlyJoe said:
It has to do with the context of the thread. The whole point of that branch of the discussion was that some in this thread were equating all "leftism" or "liberalism" with communism. The original question -- the one you responded to -- was intended for Grant.

Okay. I was just answering the specific question on communism.

Eighty Deuce · Apr 21, 2012

GhostlyJoe said:
...... The pattern doesn't even repeat itself in the chart you've linked. If American liberals are communists, and Obamacare is socialist, then most of the countries near the top of that list are also communist/socialist by the same logic. It's also cherry-picked data. The U.S. doesn't fare as well as a lot of so-called "socialist" health care systems using other metrics. Of course, it matters little, because even though you failed to support your point, it was based on a logical fallacy anyway..... .

And "blah ... blah ... ****ing blah". So sick of hearing this bullcrap about "other metrics" regarding our healthcare. You already know that it is often to compare apples and oranges as different countrues compile statistics in different ways. And the UN is as foul as hell on such, especially when such as liberals are looking for foul data to post.

Here we are tops in cancer treatment, but supposedly suck so bad in the rest. As for life expectency, when such as murder and death by auto are eliminated (as Americans have a propensity for such death, but it has nothing to do with medical treatment), Americans are the longest lived of every country in the world.

Or God forgive I suggest such, but when one compares only every country's white communities, how do we do ?

Point being, your reference to "other metrics" is complete liberal horse poop. Other metrics are contorted beyond belief, to the point of being near useless. Unless one is trying their level best to represent socialism as some panacea that it is not.

Sparkles · Apr 21, 2012

Eighty Deuce said:
Point being, your reference to "other metrics" is complete liberal horse poop. Other metrics are contorted beyond belief, to the point of being near useless. Unless one is trying their level best to represent socialism as some panacea that it is not.

I agree completely. The left is so idiotic in it's attempts to make crappy care look good, you'd think they were pulling measurements out of their butt, running around like Forest Gump saying 'momma always told me'.

The worst, and most obvious cases of all was the 2001 World Health Organization list. Any complete idiot who looked at the way the health care systems were ranked, would realize instantly how utterly dumb as a rock it was. But no no, instead the lemmings ran around "France is number one!".

Then 2003 hit, and French patients died of heat stroke INSIDE THE HOSPITALS OF FRANCE during a heat wave because.... FRENCH HOSPITALS CAN NOT AFFORD AIR CONDITIONING.

It was so pathetic. The morgues sent air conditioned tents to the hospitals, not to help the patients dying of heat stroke in the hospitals, but to keep the bodies of those already dead, from rotting and stinking.

At Hopital Avicenne near Paris, a nurse complained that she was not able to care properly for the sick because the hospital has no air conditioning and no ice.

"We really do feel quite desperate," said Katia Guiermet, an emergency services nurse. "We don't feel incompetent, but it's really difficult for people suffering from heat stroke when you don't have any ice.

"It's very difficult to tell people who brought their grandmothers to hospital to tell them they had died, and of course, people couldn't understand because they often feel the hospital can sort all problems out. But that hasn't been the case."

CNN.com - France tackles heat emergency - Aug. 14, 2003

Hurray for socialized care! Let's save the bodies and kill the patients! At least health care costs are low!!

Of course to really make the ranking pathetic, they had Cuba on there. What a complete joke that is. Cuba... you know where the average Cuban can't get Aspirin? That super expensive wonder drug Aspirin? A country where it's citizens can't get Aspirin, is even on the same list as the US? Really?

There is only one explanation for this level of absolute stupidity, and it is simply that leftist are the most ignorant foolish people on the face of the Earth. Leftism really is like a mental sickness or something.

Gimmesometruth · Apr 21, 2012

Eighty Deuce said:
Here we are tops in cancer treatment, but supposedly suck so bad in the rest. As for life expectency, when such as murder and death by auto are eliminated (as Americans have a propensity for such death, but it has nothing to do with medical treatment), Americans are the longest lived of every country in the world.

Or God forgive I suggest such, but when one compares only every country's white communities, how do we do ?

Meh....good if you are white and have access to quality care...not so good if you are poor, black with little access to quality care......which I think is the point, right?

Findings

Global variation in cancer survival was very wide. 5-year relative survival for breast, colorectal, and prostate cancer was generally higher in North America, Australia, Japan, and northern, western, and southern Europe, and lower in Algeria, Brazil, and eastern Europe. CONCORD has provided the first opportunity to estimate cancer survival in 11 states in USA covered by the National Program of Cancer Registries (NPCR), and the study covers 42% of the US population, four-fold more than previously available. Cancer survival in black men and women was systematically and substantially lower than in white men and women in all 16 states and six metropolitan areas included. Relative survival for all ethnicities combined was 2—4% lower in states covered by NPCR than in areas covered by the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) Program. Age-standardised relative survival by use of the appropriate race-specific and state-specific life tables was up to 2% lower for breast cancer and up to 5% lower for prostate cancer than with the census-derived national life tables used by the SEER Program. These differences in population coverage and analytical method have both contributed to the survival deficit noted between Europe and the USA, from which only SEER data have been available until now.

Cancer survival in five continents: a worldwide population-based study (CONCORD) : The Lancet Oncology
--------------------------------------------------------------------

First Worldwide Analysis Of Cancer Survival Finds Wide Variation Between Countries

ScienceDaily (July 16, 2008) — Cancer survival varies widely between countries according to a worldwide study. More than 100 investigators contributed to the study.

And while the USA has the highest 5-year survival rate for prostate cancer than any of the 31 countries studied, cancer survival in black men and women is systematically and substantially lower than in white men and women.

Until now, direct comparisons of cancer patient survival between rich and poor countries have not generally been available. The CONCORD study is, to the authors' knowledge, the first worldwide analysis of cancer survival, with standard quality-control procedures and identical analytic methods for all datasets. It provides directly comparable data on 1.9 million adult cancer patients (aged between 15 and 99) from 101 cancer registries in 31 countries on 5 continents. The study covers cancers of the breast (women), colon, rectum and prostate, which comprise a majority of all newly diagnosed cancers in adults. The study includes analyses of cancer survival in 16 states and 6 metropolitan areas in the USA, covering 42% of the population -- four times as many as in previous studies.

Five-year relative survival for breast cancer (women) ranged from 80% or higher in North America, Sweden, Japan, Finland and Australia to less than 60% in Brazil and Slovakia, and below 40% in Algeria. Survival for white women in the USA (84.7%) was 14% higher than for black women (70.9%).

For colorectal cancer, five-year survival was higher in North America, Japan, Australia and some western European countries and lower in Algeria, Brazil and in eastern European countries. Survival for white patients in the USA was 10% higher than for black patients (60% compared with 50%).

For prostate cancer, 5-year survival was higher in the USA (92%) than in all 30 of the other participating countries. However, there was a 7% difference in survival between black and white men (92% compared with 85.8%).

Michel P Coleman, Professor of Epidemiology and Vital Statistics at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, and lead author of the study, comments: 'The differences in cancer survival between countries and between black and white men and women in the USA are large and consistent across geographic areas. Most of the wide variation in survival is likely to be due to differences in access to diagnostic and treatment services, and factors such as tumour biology, state at diagnosis or compliance with treatment may also be significant.

'Population-based cancer registries are increasingly important in monitoring cancer control efforts, and in evaluating cancer survival. We hope that the information provided here will facilitate better comparison between rich and poor countries, and eventually enable joint evaluation of international trends in cancer incidence, survival and mortality'.First Worldwide Analysis Of Cancer Survival Finds Wide Variation Between Countries

Rep. Allen West Says Up To 81 House Members Are Communists

rocket88

Mod Conspiracy Theorist

Grant

AdamT

Grant

Grant

AdamT

Centinel

GhostlyJoe

Misterveritis

Sparkles

Sparkles

winston53660

Sparkles

Sparkles

AdamT

Sparkles

GhostlyJoe

GhostlyJoe

Sparkles

GhostlyJoe

Sparkles

Centinel

Eighty Deuce

Sparkles

Gimmesometruth

Dr. Tongue’s Evil House of Pancakes