Valerie, we actually can't extrapolate much from those numbers without some
other numbers:  specifically, what were the sizes of the populations in
which those breast cancer statistics were reported?  What looks like a big
jump in the age group 45-54 would be a much smaller increase if, for
example, the size of that age group also increased significantly.  (To use
an easy example, a chart could show that 10 breastfed babies were seen in an
ER with otitis media during the month of January 1990, and 50 breastfed
babies were seen in the ER with otitis media during the month of January
1995.  Did the incidence increase by 500%?  Well, if the population of
breastfed babies was 1000 in 1/90 and 5000 in 1/95, the incidence actually
stayed exactly the same.)  I know the population of Florida didn't undergo
any such drastic change, but the size of a particular cohort - especially
that 'aging baby boomer' age of 45-54, very well could have changed quite a
bit over several years.

We'd be able to say more about what these numbers mean if they were
expressed as *rates* for that population rather than the raw data of
numbers.  No question but that this is a thought-provoking set of numbers,
though.

Mary Renard RN, BSN, IBCLC
Vienna Virginia  USA

             ***********************************************
The LACTNET mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software together with L-Soft's LSMTP(TM)
mailer for lightning fast mail delivery. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html