Announcement

Collapse

HUG - here for all audio enthusiasts

The Harbeth User Group is the primary channel for public communication with Harbeth's HQ. If you have a 'scientific mind' and are curious about how the ear works, how it can lead us to make the right - and wrong - audio equipment decisions, and about the technical ins and outs of audio equipment, how it's designed and what choices the designer makes, then the factual Science of Audio sub-forum area of HUG is your place. The objective methods of comparing audio equipment under controlled conditions has been thoroughly examined here on HUG and elsewhere and should be accessible to non-experts and able to be tried-out at home without deep technical knowledge. From a design perspective, today's award winning Harbeths could not have been designed any other way.

Alternatively, if you just like chatting about audio and subjectivity rules for you, then the Subjective Soundings area is you. If you are quite set in your subjectivity, then HUG is likely to be a bit too fact based for you, as many of the contributors have maximised their pleasure in home music reproduction by allowing their head to rule their heart. If upon examination we think that Posts are better suited to one sub-forum than than the other, they will be redirected during Moderation, which is applied throughout the site.

Questions and Posts about, for example, 'does amplifier A sounds better than amplifier B' or 'which speaker stands or cables are best' are suitable for the Subjective Soundings area only, although HUG is really not the best place to have these sort of purely subjective airings.

The Moderators' decision is final in all matters and Harbeth does not necessarily agree with the contents of any member contributions, especially in the Subjective Soundings area, and has no control over external content.

That's it! Enjoy!

{Updated Oct. 2017}
See more
See less

Living longer and cancer statistics: what can we do?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Living longer and cancer statistics: what can we do?

    On the BBC's Today program this morning, Prof. Sir Michael Marmot (reference here and here) talks of the correlation between demography, old age and lifestyle choices.

    There is clear advice as to what we as individuals and as members of society can do to push back cancer to the very last stage of our lives. I found what Prof. Marmot said accessible and thought provoking.

    Audio here:

    Loading the player ...
    Alan A. Shaw
    Designer, owner
    Harbeth Audio UK

  • #2
    Inexplicable cancer

    Originally posted by A.S. View Post
    On the BBC's Today program this morning, Prof. Sir Michael Marmot (reference here and here) talks of the correlation between demography, old age and lifestyle choices.

    There is clear advice as to what we as individuals and as members of society can do to push back cancer to the very last stage of our lives. I found what Prof. Marmot said accessible and thought provoking.

    Audio here:

    Loading the player ...
    It's excellent advice obviously given by an expert. However, the thing to remember is that what may be true across populations - and which therefore forms the basis for good public policy - will not always hold at the individual level. Recently, someone close to me was diagnosed with stage 2/3 colorectal cancer. Radiation, chemo, and surgery required. Prognosis uncertain at this point. She's young (early 40s), very physically fit (has been a serious cyclist and swimmer since her early teens), has never smoked, eats well, drinks very moderately, and has a happy family life and a good income. And yet. Sometimes there's just no explanation - nothing obvious, at any rate.

    Get tested.

    Comment


    • #3
      Chemicals?

      Alan, is propylene oxide exposure an issue in the manufacture of RADIAL drivers?

      {Moderator's comment: sorry but we have never heard of that chemical, so I suppose the answer is no.}

      Comment


      • #4
        Sorry

        Originally posted by EricW View Post
        It's excellent advice obviously given by an expert. However, the thing to remember is that what may be true across populations - and which therefore forms the basis for good public policy - will not always hold at the individual level. Recently, someone close to me was diagnosed with stage 2/3 colorectal cancer. Radiation, chemo, and surgery required. Prognosis uncertain at this point. She's young (early 40s), very physically fit (has been a serious cyclist and swimmer since her early teens), has never smoked, eats well, drinks very moderately, and has a happy family life and a good income. And yet. Sometimes there's just no explanation - nothing obvious, at any rate.

        Get tested.
        On behalf of HUG, may we say how sorry we are to hear that news. There really is no justice in the matter of cancer. I too have two ex-colleagues (from 30+ years ago) one of whom, living a quiet, balanced life, had his prostate removal last month, and the other (our boss), an uncertain relationship with bowl cancer. It brings home the seriousness of the disease, and the impact it has on the sufferers life and all those around him or her.

        I have often wondered how small a dose of an external agent can trigger cancer. We have nuclear engineers here on HUG; perhaps they know. Could it take as little as one breif unwitting exposure to one single radioactive atom to start the process?
        Alan A. Shaw
        Designer, owner
        Harbeth Audio UK

        Comment


        • #5
          Radiation Effects

          Originally posted by A.S. View Post
          I have often wondered how small a dose of an external agent can trigger cancer. We have nuclear engineers here on HUG; perhaps they know. Could it take as little as one breif unwitting exposure to one single radioactive atom to start the process?
          This thread really hits home, as cancer has unfortunately become so commonplace, affecting most of us on a very personal level. Within the past year, a very close friend passed away after struggling with ovarian cancer. A few months back a fellow engineer was diagnosed with late-stage prostate cancer. Finally, my stepmotherís oncologist recently informed her that after five years of remission, her breast cancer recurred and spread throughout several major organs.

          Since Iím one of the nuclear engineers Alan referred to, Iíll try and explain our current understanding of low-level radiation exposure and risk.

          Based on numerous accidents and radiation effects studies, we have a very good understanding of the dose/biological damage relationship at high exposure levels. However, it becomes extremely difficult to draw similar accurate conclusions when dealing with low levels of radiation, mainly due to natural variation in background radiation that affects all of us on a daily basis. We simply cannot state exactly how much radiation is necessary to cause harm.

          In the US nuclear industry, we operate under a principle referred to as ALARA, or ďAs Low As Reasonably Achievable.Ē Specifically, because of the unquantifiable risk associated with low-level radiation exposure, ALARA is both an operating philosophy and a regulatory requirement. The basic assumption supporting ALARA is that there is no scientific study that conclusively supports a minimum safe level for radiation exposure. This concept is referred to as the linear non-threshold hypothesis. A large body of evidence supports the hypothesis, however it has not yet been demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt. So, theoretically, any level of radiation exposure may be harmful to biological tissue. We do our best to minimize dose by reducing exposure times, maximizing distance from radiation sources, and increasing the amount of shielding between sources and personnel.

          Practically, we cannot eliminate all exposure. The general public will continue to be exposed to normal background radiation. Industry must continually consider both the practical engineering limitations and economic impact of absolutely minimizing or eliminating the risk. Radiation exposure is a risk we all live with and hopefully mitigate to extent possibleÖ

          On a more positive note, and because this is my first post, I would like to express my appreciation to the HUG community for the wealth of information provided. The HUG has been an invaluable resource in acquiring more knowledge about Harbeth, the design philosophy behind the product, and (snake-oil free) audio in general. Also, many thanks to Alan and all the great folks at Harbeth for producing outstanding speakers based on science and sound engineering principles. I recently purchased a pair of M30.1 speakers and without doubt, I believe these are the finest sounding speakers Iíve ever had the opportunity to enjoy in my home!

          Comment


          • #6
            Obesity and smoking are the two main drivers behind the soaring numbers of cancers, heart attacks, strokes and diabetes worldwide, grouped together officially as non-communicable diseases. They are the biggest killers of the modern world.
            We seem to have mastered (at least, in the West) food production to the point that we can't tease people enough to consume that plenty. Shame that production cannot be more fairly distributed around the world so the have-nots have a chance of a decent diet.
            "Health bill will be Ďenormous burdení without more preventative measures to check worsening epidemic, say experts"
            Alan A. Shaw
            Designer, owner
            Harbeth Audio UK

            Comment

            Working...
            X