I guess what I am trying to ascertain was whether Paleolithic man's lifespan 
was too short (for whatever reason) in order for cancer to take hold. Now, 
from what I seem to gather about cancer is that it is a very slow-to-develop 
multi-stage disease which takes years to manifest in symptoms. So if 
paleoman on average died fairly young (for whatever reason and unimportant 
in this query), he would therefore have rarely succombed to the disease.

However, if it is in fact a disease of civilization and not age-related, 
then my question is moot, I guess. The latest books that I have read 
indicate that food plays a major preventative role therefore supporting the 
view that it is a modern or civilized disease.

Marilyn

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Paleo Phil" <[log in to unmask]>

> soon thereafter. So a Stone Ager who reached the age of 30 probably had 
> good
> odds of reaching 50 or 60.