Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
jstan
climber
|
|
|
Oct 23, 2012 - 06:28pm PT
|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK12708/
From NIH.gov
Holland-Frei Cancer Medicine. 6th edition.
Kufe DW, Pollock RE, Weichselbaum RR, et al., editors.
Hamilton (ON): BC Decker; 2003.
Epidemiology
An age-related incidence curve of testicular cancer reveals a bimodal distribution. The major peak occurs between ages 15 and 35 years, due almost exclusively to tumors of germ cell origin, which account for approximately 95% of all testicular cancer. Embryonal carcinoma represents the predominant histopathologic diagnosis up to the age of 35 years, after which seminoma is more common up to the age of 75 years. Overall, lymphoma is the most common testicular tumor in older adults.
The incidence of testicular cancer varies markedly based on geographic distribution. The incidence is highest in northern Europe and North America, and lowest in Asia and Africa.
There is also a striking influence of race, with the incidence among black and Hispanic males worldwide far less than that for their white counterparts.2,3 The rate of testicular cancer rises with increasing socioeconomic status,4 but even when stratified by this parameter, the racial differences persist, with blacks having a lower incidence than whites in each class.
Testicular cancer is increasing among young white males in the Scandinavian countries, the United Kingdom, and the United States. In Denmark, from 1945 to 1970, the age-adjusted incidence for testicular cancer nearly doubled to 6.4 per 100,000. During that period, the percentage of malignant neoplasms in the 15- to 34-year age range attributable to testicular cancer increased from 17% to 29%.5,6 A similar doubling in incidence in younger age groups in England and Wales over the same period was also observed.7,8 In the United States, from 1937 to 1976, the age-adjusted incidence for testicular cancer in white males rose from 2 to 3.8 per 100,000, whereas the rate for African American males remained constant at 0.9 per 100,000.7,9–11 Incidence rates have subsequently increased for both races. During the period from 1995 to 1999, incidence rates averaged 6.2 and 1.4 for whites and blacks, respectively.11a It is estimated that 7,500 cases of testicular cancer were diagnosed in the United States in 2002, with approximately 400 persons dying of the disease.12
Risk Factors
Cryptorchidism is the major identifiable risk factor associated with the development of testicular cancer, with a risk ratio variably reported between 2.5 and 14 in case-control studies.13–16 The location of the maldescended testicle appears to be an important cofactor in the subsequent development of cancer, because those patients with intraabdominal retention have a fourfold higher incidence of malignancy than do those with the testicle retained in the inguinal canal. For a number of reasons, it seems unlikely that maldescent, in and of itself, represents the initiating event in the development of germ cell tumors: only 10% of testicular tumors are associated with cryptorchidism; at least 25% of the malignancies in patients with cryptorchidism occur in the contralateral, normally descended testicle; prepubertal orchiopexy fails to prevent the subsequent development of malignancy in the undescended testicle,17 and first-degree male relatives of patients with testicular cancer exhibit an increased incidence of cryptorchidism, hydroceles, and inguinal hernias, as well as testicular cancer.18 These data suggest that some genetic predisposition and/or in utero environmental event may result in several genitourinary developmental abnormalities, including maldescent and germ cell neoplasia. Interestingly, an increase in the frequency of cryptorchidism has been observed and appears to parallel the timing and magnitude of the increase in incidence of testicular cancer.19
The use of exogenous estrogens during pregnancy in the mothers of testicular cancer patients has been analyzed by a number of investigators. Three case control studies show a relative risk of developing testicular cancer of 2.8 to 5.3. However, it is unlikely that exogenous steroids contribute to a major degree to the incidence of testicular cancer in the United States. Their lack of use in other endemic areas with rising incidence rates (Denmark) underscores their relatively minor (if any) role in the etiology of this disease. Other investigators report that males with dysplastic nevi may have a higher incidence of developing testicular cancer in comparison with the population as a whole.20
Patients with a history of unilateral testicular cancer are at risk for developing cancer in the other testicle. In a large Danish series, 2.7% of 2,338 patients developed a contralateral testicular tumor during the period of follow-up.21–25 Patients with nonseminoma had a higher overall relative risk of developing contralateral tumors than did those with seminoma. Investigators at the Royal Marsden Hospital reported a similar rate of 2.75% for developing contralateral tumors among 760 men in an interval as long as 15 years.26 These observations underscore the importance of continued follow-up after treatment.
By agreement with the publisher, this book is accessible by the search feature, but cannot be browsed.
Copyright © 2003, BC Decker Inc.
EDIT:
A petty officer is a non-commissioned officer in many navies and is given the NATO rank denotion OR-5. They are equal in rank to sergeant in the British Army and Royal Air Force. A petty officer is superior in rank to leading rate and subordinate to chief petty officer, in the case of the British armed forces.
The modern petty officer dates back to the Age of Sail. Petty officers rank between naval officers (both commissioned and warrant) and most enlisted sailors. These were men with some claim to officer rank, sufficient to distinguish them from ordinary ratings without raising them so high as the sea officers. Several were warrant officers, in the literal sense of being appointed by warrant, and like the warrant sea officers, their superiors, they were usually among the specialists of the ships's company.[1] The Oxford English Dictionary suggests the title derives from the Anglo-Norman and Middle French 'petit' meaning "of small size, small; little".[2]
Two of the petty officer's rates, midshipman and master's mate, were a superior petty officer with a more general authority, but they remained no more than ratings. However, it was quite possible for a warrant officer, such as the armourer, to be court-martialed for striking a midshipman as his superior officer. The reason why was both were regarded as future sea officers, with the all-important social distinction of the right to walk the quarterdeck.
|
|
Vitaliy M.
Mountain climber
San Francisco
|
|
|
Oct 23, 2012 - 06:33pm PT
|
Chief, are you worth over $100m because you took drugs when you were young in the Navy? Did you cheat to become a chief?
His title is Chief Petty Officer.
pet·ty/ˈpetē/
Adjective:
1. Of little importance; trivial.
|
|
Mighty Hiker
climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Oct 23, 2012 - 06:37pm PT
|
If indeed, he still has millions squirriled away, he's laughing, at you, the sport, at the public. Sort of like some bankers.
It would be no surprise to learn that Armstrong is a Republican.
|
|
mouse from merced
Trad climber
The finger of fate, my friends, is fickle.
|
|
|
Oct 23, 2012 - 06:43pm PT
|
Well, podnuh, who the f*#k is being petty now, huh?
Belittle, B.O. Wulf, Bitches.
http://www.richardpettymotorsports.com/
Lance coulda been a contender. He coulda done as well as Richard.
He coulda been something more than an asterisk.
For all the good he's done, thank you, Lance.
For the rest, fess up, take it, and then come back and dish out the rest.
Just be honest. It's no crime.
And lay off the Chief. He's not the problem. I know he can take care of himself, but Cheese, let him breathe...
|
|
Vitaliy M.
Mountain climber
San Francisco
|
|
|
Oct 23, 2012 - 06:59pm PT
|
but Cheese, let him breathe...
Let me let another bomb out first! (beans were good this morning)
|
|
Vitaliy M.
Mountain climber
San Francisco
|
|
|
Oct 23, 2012 - 07:13pm PT
|
Why does a thread about a cyclist get so many posts on a climbing site? Dude was the best and took some illegal substances to be the best (like a lot of other cyclists who also took substances, but did not get caught).
He took a risk, got caught, and stripped from his titles.
Is it wrong that he got stripped of his titles? NO. Is it wrong that he lied? Yes. Did many others take illegal substances? Yes, many. And I hope they are punished too. Baseball went through this same garbage with Barry Bonds, Mark McGuire, Sami Sosa, and several other players involved. It is good to take a stand against the use of these substances. Or allow it all.
|
|
Lloyd Campbell
Social climber
St. Cloud, MN
|
|
|
Oct 23, 2012 - 07:59pm PT
|
It's ridiculous to say Lance is the only one that's being punished. Out of all the podium standers during Lance's reign, all but one have been caught and sanctioned over the years. Many seem to know this, but ignore it. He gamed the system to avoid his failed tests, so he double cheated.
As it turns out...Lance is almost the last one to get caught and punished. They should have started with the biggest fish, not finished up with him. Lance is a perfect example of our twisted world... lie, cheat, put millions in the bank, then get a slap on the wrist and walk away with more money than you will ever need. The lesson of Wall Street.
|
|
Gary
Social climber
Right outside of Delacroix
|
|
|
Oct 23, 2012 - 08:03pm PT
|
The "System" is finally saying enough is enough and unfortunately for LA, he will be the example that they will use to implement the new standards of consequences that yes should have been practiced a longass time ago.
So it is OK for Merckyx to cheat and keep his titles because he's your hero. Armstrong bested your hero in Tour wins, so he must be taken down.
That's what this is all about, isn't it, The Chief?
Merckx has condemned doping but he tested positive three times...
The first time was in the 1969 Giro d'Italia...
Merckx was also found positive after winning the Giro di Lombardia in 1973...
Then he was caught after taking Stimul (pemoline) in the 1977 Flèche Wallonne...
In the 1990s, he became a friend of Lance Armstrong, and supported him when Armstrong was accused of drug use, stating he rather "believed what Lance told him than what appeared in newspapers". Dr. Michele Ferrari claimed that Merckx introduced him to Armstrong in 1995.
|
|
graniteclimber
Trad climber
The Illuminati -- S.P.E.C.T.R.E. Division
|
|
|
Oct 23, 2012 - 08:07pm PT
|
His title is Chief Petty Officer.
pet·ty/ˈpetē/
Adjective:
1. Of little importance; trivial.
Or Chief Petty for short.
|
|
Gary
Social climber
Right outside of Delacroix
|
|
|
Oct 23, 2012 - 09:58pm PT
|
Neit!
They are all slime ball liars to be honest with ya.
All right then, Chief. It's a sad day all around for bike racing.
|
|
jstan
climber
|
|
|
Oct 23, 2012 - 10:33pm PT
|
Reportedly the first race was in 1868 on wooden bicycles and by 1886 doping was already an issue. If we are really serious why not
1. postpone all racing until a good method of surveillance has been achieved
2. destroy all records of past bike races
3. Define a standard bicycle for all racing and never allow it to be improved
Until then we all can watch Kim Kardashian on TV.
I consider this an uplifting proposal.
|
|
MassiveD
Trad climber
|
|
|
Oct 23, 2012 - 11:16pm PT
|
Sure Lance cheated, but so do the regulators. Their case is the regulatory equivalent of cheating, with stuff like claims by co-conspirators, and an endless prosecution that any defendant would have bailed on. I'm not required to believe Lance or his prosecutors, it is not just cyclists who are among the ranks of the professional cheat. Nothing has changed in the last few weeks. We all "knew" Lance cheated because cyclists do, and now we are in the final act where we are all allowed to state it, but there aren't any more facts out there.
|
|
Vitaliy M.
Mountain climber
San Francisco
|
|
|
Oct 23, 2012 - 11:40pm PT
|
More importantly, they NEVER LIED nor CHEATED!
Yea, they were perfect people that you personally observed from the skies above. Come on! Everyone lies at some point! Everyone does things they feel ashamed of (some more than others). No one is perfect. Those you mentioned included. Yes, they were pioneer climbers, but that doesn't mean they are saints. Books won't tell you their whole life.
I have one hero- my mother.
|
|
Srbphoto
climber
Kennewick wa
|
|
|
Oct 24, 2012 - 12:26am PT
|
This thread is pertaining to LA's professional accomplishments... or lack of as of a couple of days ago.
His professional accomplishments will always be there. He did ride the bike against the best dopers and non dopers of his day. They can change the record books but ultimately, he did the rides. (ok I'm starting to sound like Werner)
I think a lot miss that maybe Lance can't admit it. Remember the Fed's (the ones with prisons) were after him. If he admits it he could be in for some serious trouble.
|
|
Vitaliy M.
Mountain climber
San Francisco
|
|
|
Oct 24, 2012 - 12:46am PT
|
Chief you messed up my quote. I said Yes, they were pioneer climbers, but that doesn't mean they are saints. And you have no idea what they lied or cheated about. You did not hold their hand up every summit they claimed. You do not know every little detail about their ascents. Not accusing them of any wrong-doing, but who knows. No one but them. They did have good stories and books published about their lives (so I heard).
|
|
Binks
climber
Uranus
|
|
|
Oct 24, 2012 - 01:15am PT
|
the bigger question is why people idealize sports heros at all
i find it weird why they are lavished with praise and millions of dollars...
i find being a specatator to be distasteful...
the whole culture of watching others play games on tv baffles me
play your own damn games..
|
|
10b4me
Ice climber
dingy room at the Happy boulders hotel
|
|
|
Oct 24, 2012 - 01:29am PT
|
I have one hero- my mother.
excellent. I see your sincerity Vitaly.
fwiw, I actually agree with the chief on the lance issue. lance is a cheat, no doubt about that.
as far as this thread becoming about the chief, well maybe. . . . . . .
if he wasn't so self righteous, and egotistical more people would respect him, but he was that way on summitpost too. it's just a character flaw. everybody has them. nobody is perfect, right chief?
oh, one other thing, the word hero is thrown around a lot. people who join the military know what they're getting into. doesn't make them a hero
|
|
landcruiserbob
Trad climber
BIG ISLAND or Vail ; just following the sun.......
|
|
|
Oct 24, 2012 - 02:28am PT
|
Nobody has ever won da tour clean.
Read the USDA report, George even say lance used less blood than anyone on the team. Wtf.???
I remember in the 80s when everybody was on the stuff. Mostly oral or winstrol V with race horses on the bottle. I also remember the emaciated euros in Rifle in the late 80s using all types of drugs to climb 13& 14's.
Lets move on it really doesn't matter, paddle into big waves & see if drugs help you.
Aloha & be well
RG
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
LA sounds like a bully, especially when truth started to come out. He was never Mr Personable but not many are... 
Let us know!