Once you have cancer, the original cause is really a moot issue. But the desire to spare others from what we suffered prompts this type of questioning. I hope that Brian does remain steadfast in keeping OCF firmly in the realm of evidentiary science. The current news onslaught highlights the inherent unreliability of surveys. Simply too many variables to factor in correctly.
The proposed list could be expanded to ask
Did you work at a high stress job?
Did you drink tap water regularly?
etc, etc etc
One reason why all the money for Cancer research has not been as fruitful as it might have been is institutional reward for publishing more sophisticated versions of Bailey's post. While very human, confusing coincidence with causality is the false premise behind otherwise logical approaches. As David says, JM2cs. It seems like the perfect (total prevention of cancer) is driving out the good (a better cure than burn & poison) in most of the cancer fundraising material I receive.