Final answer:
The correct answer to the question is (d) 'neither 1 nor 2 follows'.
Step-by-step explanation:
When considering the statement and conclusions, it's essential to analyze the relationship between nutrition and cancer incidence based on provided information. While the statement suggests that diet might affect the rates of certain types of cancer, such as stomach and bowel cancer in Japanese individuals based on their location, we cannot conclude that bowel cancer is less severe than stomach cancer simply based on these rates. The severity of cancer types is determined by various factors including aggressiveness, stage at diagnosis, and treatment options, not merely incidence rates.
Regarding the first conclusion, propagating the same diet in Japan that Japanese immigrants adopt in Hawaii seems like a premature suggestion without thorough research to substantiate that the diet directly causes these changes in cancer rates. Cultural, economic, and genetic factors also influence cancer rates, and moving a diet from one region to another without understanding these variables may not produce the same results.
Therefore, the correct answer to the question based upon the statements and conclusions would be 'neither 1 nor 2 follows', as there is insufficient evidence to support either conclusion without further study. This is in line with the complexity of cancer and the multifactorial interplay between genetics, lifestyle, and environmental factors.