yes yes ------------- take a look again at the map -
look at the global position of Australia and New Zealand -
they are, by country miles - the furthest societies on the planet from their genetic roots
View attachment 6707937if you take one other - say America - what you see is less cancer - and they are not as far from their genetic roots as Australians and Kiwis
whilst America has higher rates of cancers than other places - Russia, Africa, South America, Asia ---------- they are much closer to their genetic roots than are Aussies and kiwis
then you see some other examples - France and Italy - well, France has had people coming from all parts for centuries - but, nothing like Aus or NZ (Italy, well one word should speak for that - Rome)
you can read the northern hemisphere keeping in mind that during the palaeolithic -movement was slow - and quite limited, during the neolithic, movement sped up a lot - but, still - movement was not far by modern standards
only in 200 years - do we have the gigantic leap from one side of the planet to the other - to Australia and NZ. (400 or so years for America - and only one ocean away)
One has to discount aboriginals - because,
1. they make up such a tiny proportion of the population
2. the 'pure bred' so to speak are miniscule
3. their movement south was way way slower - over thousands of years
Not so modern Australia, or New Zealand
now - all of that is fact --------and it's outstanding how far from home Aussies and Kiwis are, and so are the data on cancers - real standouts
the question is ------------is it coincidence?
I don't know. But, it's ball knockingly obvious when one looks at a map of the world
