Far better coverage here, including links to the original study and a deeper dive into the statistics: https://www.healthdata.org/news-release/lancet-almost-ha

Far better coverage here, including links to the original study and a deeper dive into the statistics: https://www.healthdata.org/news-release/lancet-almost-half-global-cancer-deaths-are-due-risk-factors-smoking-alcohol-use-and https://www.healthdata.org/news-release/lancet-almost-half-g... Some other facts left out of the Guardian version: > "When examining environmental and occupational risks, researchers found that the cancer attributable DALYs were three-fold higher among males (3.9%) than females (1.3%), suggesting that males may be more likely than females to work in places that have higher risk of being exposed to carcinogens." There's this rather unfortunate trend in corporate media reporting on cancer to bury any discussion of carcinogen exposure due to industrial activities, contamination of processed foods, agricultural use of pesticides and herbicides, etc. and instead focus on 'personal choice' issues like smoking tobacco and drinking alcohol and not maintaining personal health (i.e. obesity). While the latter are indeed significant, ignoring the former isn't justified. This does somewhat mirror an academic trend over the past few decades in which cancer research turned towards 'inherited genetic' causes of cancer while also neglecting industrial and agricultural exposure to carcinogens. It's not hard to see a link between the corporatization of American universities, i.e. the spread of public-private partnerships between agribusiness and petrochemical corporations and academic institutions, and this trend.