Abstract
Recently there has been a confusing and somewhat frustrating difference of opinion in epidemiology concerning the relative merit and utility of descriptive versus mechanistic knowledge in approaching the comprehension and control of human cancer. This distinction has both historical and evolutionary rationale; it generally being necessary to know something of WHAT is happening before one can be legitimately concerned with HOW it is happening. As outlined below, however, there is little justification for making value judgements based on this distinction, and the situation is more one in which descriptive approaches and mechanistic approaches are equally essential in the development of a systematic viewpoint, a viewpoint providing guidance to meaningful intervention.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
