A London Telegraph article recently reported that scientists have found that regular exposure to a cat or dog can reduce the risk of developing non-Hodgkins Lymphoma ( NHL ).  NHL is a  cancer that affects the lymphatic system, the process by which infection-fighting white blood cells are carried thoughout the body.

Researchers who did the study believe that the presence of the dogs or cats helps boost the immune system which in turn offers more protection against the cancer.  In Britain the disease affects about 10,000 people each year, most commonly in those who have a weak immune system.

More than 4,000 patients were analyzed by scientists at Stanford University and the University of California.  About half those patients had non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma.

The findings, published in the journal Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers and Prevention, shows that those who owned animals were almost 30 per cent less likely to develop the cancer than those without pets.

The longer they had kept pets, the greater their protection against the disease appeared to be, according to the study.

The greatest occurrence of NHL is in adults, with those over 50 more at risk.  Symptoms can include a swelling of lymph nodes in the neck, armpit or groin, a fever, especially at night, and weight loss and tiredness.  From the lymph nodes the cancer cells can spread through the bloodstream to any other part of the body including the brain, bowel, stomach and bones.

Interesting question before a Wisconsin appeals court. In it’s decision the appeals court upheld an earlier lower court decision that allowed a man’s wife and daughter to inherit his estate even though they assisted him to commit suicide.

In what some legal analysts say is a precedent setting case in the nation, the court held that while state law prohibits anyone who “intentionally kills” another person from inheriting and benefiting from the death, Wisconsin’s District 4 Court of Appeals said that provision isn’t applicable to cases of assisted suicide.

Edward Schunk suffered from non-Hodgkins Lymphoma and had been hospitalized. His doctor allowed him a one-day pass to go home and see his dogs one last time. His wife and daughter took him home.

Later that day he was found dead from a gunshot wound - self inflicted. His entire estate, about half a million dollars, was left entirely to his wife and daughter with nothing being left to his other five children. They contested the will saying that his wife and daughter assisted in his death by providing the shotgun and therefore should not be entitled, under Wisconsin law, to inherit because it’s a felony to assist another to commit suicide. The law provides that anyone who “intentionally kills” another cannot inherit from that person.

The Court held that that provision of law is not applicable to assisted suicide. The key phrase for purposes of this appeal is “unlawful and intentional killing of the decedent”, the court held. “The objectors contend that this plainly includes assisting the decedent to commit suicide. We disagree and conclude the phrase plainly does not include this conduct……”unlawful” and “intentional” modify “killing” by limiting its meaning. If, as we have concluded, assisting another to commit suicide is not “killing” another, it does not become so because the conduct is unlawful and intentional.

The three judge panel was unanimous in the decision and concluded that Edward deprived himself of life by shooting himself with the shotgun.

Pro-lifers are upset because they think that this does not hold those who assist in suicide to be accountable and gives them financial motive to assist the suicide.