Forgive me if I'm being ignorant or pedantic. Is your criticism that the title fails to clarify that it's using generalised notions of death and cancer? I personally found that I automatically translated the title to
> Why DNA mutations associated with abnormal division of cells in plants do not correlate with high fatality rates
This was surprising to me because a priori I didn't see why plants should cope with abnormal growth any better than humans. This made the question intriguing. The explanation that plant cells are designed so that dead cells can be quickly replaced and that cells are surrounded by rigid walls was gratifying in a way that "question is too anthropocentric" isn't.