[hombre_fatal]

> Hmmm…

Why did you stop quoting it there?

> There are several factors that help to explain the increase in incidence: population growth, population ageing, exposure to risk factors, improved screening and improved outcomes in other diseases (meaning that more people are reaching an advanced age, leaving them at risk of cancer). The incidence of different cancer types varies widely between different European countries, due to these factors.

There are better epistemic standards available than "numbers went up so my hobby horse causal ideal is doing it" despite its popularity on social media.

[oblio]

The age argument doesn't seem to be holding up since cancer rates are growing for younger people:

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/08/16/health/early-onset-cancer...

Better screening could be a factor.

Also, population growth doesn't matter for a *rate*.

[dwaite]

> Also, population growth doesn't matter for a rate.

You cited cases, not a rate.

[oblio]

Europe's population (and EU's, if you compare the sum of current member state populations) is basically flat since 1995.

Ergo the increase in cases means an increase in rate.

[sneak]

If growth (ie the first derivative) is flat (which means a steady rate of increase) then an increase of cases does not mean an increase in rate.

[oblio]

Thank you for the 10th grade math lesson, I've edited my previous comment.

[pbhjpbhj]

>exposure to risk factors

Like irradiation from telecoms signals, maybe.

[cmsj]

Irradiation from telecoms signals has been around for more than a decade.

We'd also likely notice things like - lots of people getting a sort of rectangular shaped cancer right under their pants pocket ;)