cancer and zodiac signs

[Kevin O'Donnell]

In article <slawiecd.90.776540850 at usctoux1.cto.us.edu.pl>, slawiecd at usctoux1.cto.us.edu.pl says:
>
>

>
>    MORTALITY RATES, CAUSED BY MYOCARDIAL INFARCT AND CANCERS 
>         AMONG PEOPLE, BORN UNDER DIFFERENT ZODIAC SIGNS 
 (cut)
>     This  finding  is  probably one of first objective arguments 
>that,  after all, the relation between zodiac signs and a kind of 
>personality,  which infuences death circumstances, thus an aspect 
>of human destiny really exists. 
(cut) 
>     We formulated a hypothesis, which facilitates the discussion 
>of  these  results.  Our  hypothesis  assumes  that  some  inborn 
>characterological  features  (personality  type)  of  a  new-born 
>persons  are  induces by the pattern of day-light, perceived by a 
>pregnant  woman.  There are many experimental findings supporting 
>this   hypothesis.  Perceived  light,  through  visual  pathways, 
>nucleus  suprachiasmaticus  and pineal gland determines circadian 
>rythm  of  secretion of melatonin (17,18). Pineal gland acting on 
>hypothalamus  determines  circadian  changes  of many hypophyseal 
>hormons and especially gonadotropins (18,19,20). 

I am not sure whether this is a brilliantly conceived spoof or 
whether it is genuine.....

However, working on the assumption that it is genuine, I would point
out that the above two quotes are contradictory.  Firstly, we are 
told that an experimental difference can be explained by the position
of stars many millions of miles away from us and each other and then
we are told that it is explained by environmental factors such as day-light 
pattern.  I can't comment on your findings re day-light.  However,
by  associating (apparently) scientific work in with astrology
you have devalued your results and simply created ammunition for the 
army of cranks who believe that their destiny is determined by the stars.   
Kevin O'Donnell
Scottish Agricultural Science Agency    
Edinburgh
Scotland