U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Health and Wellness
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 07-31-2018, 02:30 PM
 
Location: Raleigh
7,036 posts, read 5,219,555 times
Reputation: 9508

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Good4Nothin View Post
Of course I am aware that people died from infections before there were effective antibiotics.

But in non-industrial societies, the "diseases of aging" we have now were uncommon. Of course people died of old age, but probably not very often of the chronic degenerative diseases mainstream medicine tells us are the natural result of age.

No, they are the natural result of age, in a modern industrial society.
Heart disease is about the only one, that I can think of. And they still died of it, just not as many people suffered from it because they had more physical activity.

Alzheimers, Strokes, Arthritis, etc...Have little to do with industrial society. Alzheimers might have a dietary component, but even that's tenuous.

 
Old 07-31-2018, 02:56 PM
 
3,481 posts, read 941,576 times
Reputation: 2607
Quote:
Originally Posted by JONOV View Post
Heart disease is about the only one, that I can think of. And they still died of it, just not as many people suffered from it because they had more physical activity.

Alzheimers, Strokes, Arthritis, etc...Have little to do with industrial society. Alzheimers might have a dietary component, but even that's tenuous.
Where did you get that information from? The chronic degenerative diseases are much more common in industrial societies.

Mainstream medicine advocates will tell you that's because non-industrial people died before they could get the degenerative diseases. But they make that statement based only on their beliefs, not facts.

In very poor societies people are likely to have short lives, because they don't get enough nutrition. That's a different problem. But in non-industrial societies that are not poor, that have enough food, people often get old, in good health. Lots of articles around on this.

Alzheimer's, like heart disease and diabetes 2, seems to be related to insulin resistance and chronic inflammation (metabolic syndrome).

All the chronic degenerative diseases seem to be related to metabolic syndrome, which is primarily related to lifestyle (physical inactivity, processed food).
 
Old 07-31-2018, 03:29 PM
 
5,607 posts, read 4,168,407 times
Reputation: 12348
Quote:
Originally Posted by Good4Nothin View Post
Where did you get that information from? The chronic degenerative diseases are much more common in industrial societies.

Mainstream medicine advocates will tell you that's because non-industrial people died before they could get the degenerative diseases. But they make that statement based only on their beliefs, not facts.

In very poor societies people are likely to have short lives, because they don't get enough nutrition. That's a different problem. But in non-industrial societies that are not poor, that have enough food, people often get old, in good health. Lots of articles around on this.

Alzheimer's, like heart disease and diabetes 2, seems to be related to insulin resistance and chronic inflammation (metabolic syndrome).

All the chronic degenerative diseases seem to be related to metabolic syndrome, which is primarily related to lifestyle (physical inactivity, processed food).


Metabolic syndrome has the following risk factors per the Mayo clinic:

Age. Your risk of metabolic syndrome increases with age.

Race. In the United States, Mexican-Americans appear to be at the greatest risk of developing metabolic syndrome.

Obesity. Carrying too much weight, especially in your abdomen, increases your risk of metabolic syndrome.

Diabetes. You're more likely to have metabolic syndrome if you had diabetes during pregnancy (gestational diabetes) or if you have a family history of type 2 diabetes.

Other diseases. Your risk of metabolic syndrome is higher if you've ever had cardiovascular disease, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease or polycystic ovary syndrome.

Inactivity and eating processed foods are not, in and of themselves, risk factors for metabolic syndrome unless they result in obesity. People can become obese regardless of the which foods they overeat.
 
Old 07-31-2018, 03:53 PM
 
3,481 posts, read 941,576 times
Reputation: 2607
Quote:
Originally Posted by UNC4Me View Post
[/u][/b]

Metabolic syndrome has the following risk factors per the Mayo clinic:

Age. Your risk of metabolic syndrome increases with age.

Race. In the United States, Mexican-Americans appear to be at the greatest risk of developing metabolic syndrome.

Obesity. Carrying too much weight, especially in your abdomen, increases your risk of metabolic syndrome.

Diabetes. You're more likely to have metabolic syndrome if you had diabetes during pregnancy (gestational diabetes) or if you have a family history of type 2 diabetes.

Other diseases. Your risk of metabolic syndrome is higher if you've ever had cardiovascular disease, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease or polycystic ovary syndrome.

Inactivity and eating processed foods are not, in and of themselves, risk factors for metabolic syndrome unless they result in obesity. People can become obese regardless of the which foods they overeat.
Wrong. Things have probable causes. You aren't even thinking about what might cause what. All your statements here are wrong or confusing or meaningless.

Various factors contribute to metabolic syndrome and there is no doubt that inactivity and processed food are major factors.

You make it sound like cardiovascular disease and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease CAUSE metabolic syndrome. It's exactly the opposite.

I don't know where you read this, but you probably read it wrong.

Last edited by Good4Nothin; 07-31-2018 at 04:59 PM..
 
Old 07-31-2018, 03:59 PM
 
4,630 posts, read 10,515,895 times
Reputation: 10333
Quote:
Originally Posted by Good4Nothin View Post
Back to longevity:

How you frame and interpret the longevity data is related to your world view. So that's how world views, such as atheism, got brought up.

Life evolving as a pile of random junk, organized by natural selection, leads to the idea that human intelligence can improve on nature.

Trying to improve on nature is characteristic of mainstream medicine. Instead of trying to work with nature, and remove obstacles to the natural healing process.

Adding artificial chemicals to the system that raise or lower certain values, with no regard for the system overall.

Then declaring this approach victorious, because average lifespan has increased.

So I have tried to show some of the false thinking involved in the underlying philosophy, and in its interpretation of longevity data.
There is no "framing" of actuarial data related to ones "world view"

You have been provided data that answers the question of whether or not people live longer today than they did 20...50...100 years ago

There is no debate....the data is unequivocal and improvements in infant mortality rates play no role in this increase in average age of death...

Fact: More people in the US today live to the age of 80 or beyond than any time in human history not just in absolute numbers but in percentage by a large margin...

IF YOU HAVE DATA THAT CAN DISPUTE THIS BASIC PREMISE THAN PROVIDE IT OTHERWISE THE DEBATE IS OVER

By the way, world views didn't just get "brought up" YOU entered them into a conversation where they don't belong.

Evolution as a result of natural selection is unquestioned...

New flash....human intelligence HAS improved on nature....again NOT just an ldea a proven FACT of our existence...

Last point for someone who "thinks" they understand "science" you cannot even frame the question correctly this thread purports to answer..

There is no debate over whether "average lifespan has increased"

The question you raised in your OP is in regards to "life expectancy" NOT "lifespan"

Lifespan remains essentially unchanged throughout human history at 0-120 years give or take

A "scientist" understands the need to be precise with language particularly regarding a very basic concept between lifespan and life expectancy...
 
Old 07-31-2018, 04:09 PM
 
5,607 posts, read 4,168,407 times
Reputation: 12348
Quote:
Originally Posted by Good4Nothin View Post
Wrong. Things have probable causes. You aren't even thinking about what might cause what. All your statements here are wrong or confusing or meaningless.

Various factors contribute to metabolic syndrome and there is no doubt that inactivity and processed food are major factors.

You make it sound like cardiovascular disease and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease RESULT from metabolic syndrome. It's exactly the opposite.

I don't know where you read this, but you probably read it wrong.
I said where I read it in my post. It also clearly says the listed are RISK factors for metabolic syndrome NOT the result of metabolic syndrome. Here’s the link:

https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-...s/syc-20351916

And once again, inactivity and over eating ANY foods can cause obesity which then becomes a RISK factor for metabolic syndrome.
 
Old 07-31-2018, 04:49 PM
 
Location: Middle of the ocean
27,646 posts, read 17,699,238 times
Reputation: 40050
Quote:
Originally Posted by JONOV View Post
Heart disease is about the only one, that I can think of. And they still died of it, just not as many people suffered from it because they had more physical activity.

Alzheimers, Strokes, Arthritis, etc...Have little to do with industrial society. Alzheimers might have a dietary component, but even that's tenuous.

Yep. Was just listening to a BBC podcast on the history of England (due to a lot of written records) and it was discussing all the arthritis found in bodies exhumed.
__________________
____________________________________________
My posts as a Mod will always be in red.
Be sure to review Terms of Service: TOS
And check this out: FAQ
Moderator: Relationships Forum / Hawaii Forum / Dogs
 
Old 07-31-2018, 05:04 PM
 
3,481 posts, read 941,576 times
Reputation: 2607
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluedevilz View Post

Evolution as a result of natural selection is unquestioned...
It is unquestioned by you and other atheists.

Most people haven't thought about it. Even if they believe in evolution (and most educated people do), they are not usually aware of what extreme Darwinism actually says.

All the evidence for evolution supports the fact that species did evolve. They did not appear on earth from nowhere.

However, there is no evidence that your theory explains it. Most people get very confused about this. Atheists present the evidence for evolution as if it were evidence for their particular theory of evolution. It is not.

But this is off topic. So forget it. I just want you to know you are wrong.

No one knows much about evolution. They also don't know how life began. Atheists make up theories about life beginning by accident, and of course they present their theories as fact.

For those of us who believe the universe is alive and intelligent, it only makes sense that life would appear and evolve.

Not going to debate you. This question has no scientific proof either way. It is way beyond what anyone actually knows.
 
Old 07-31-2018, 05:35 PM
 
4,630 posts, read 10,515,895 times
Reputation: 10333
Quote:
Originally Posted by Good4Nothin View Post
It is unquestioned by you and other atheists.

Most people haven't thought about it. Even if they believe in evolution (and most educated people do), they are not usually aware of what extreme Darwinism actually says.

All the evidence for evolution supports the fact that species did evolve. They did not appear on earth from nowhere.

However, there is no evidence that your theory explains it. Most people get very confused about this. Atheists present the evidence for evolution as if it were evidence for their particular theory of evolution. It is not.

But this is off topic. So forget it. I just want you to know you are wrong.

No one knows much about evolution. They also don't know how life began. Atheists make up theories about life beginning by accident, and of course they present their theories as fact.

For those of us who believe the universe is alive and intelligent, it only makes sense that life would appear and evolve.

Not going to debate you. This question has no scientific proof either way. It is way beyond what anyone actually knows.
1. You failed to answer the simple question I posed in the post above...

Can you, or can you not provide any DATA, any FACTUAL evidence whatsoever that disproves the DATA I have provided which shows that average life expectancy has increased.

Very simple

YES or NO

2. Where did you get this insane idea that EVOLUTION is the brain child and exclusive property of atheists??

"Evolution of the body and nature does not contradict Catholic doctrine, so long as it is held that God is the first cause of the universe."

https://catholicexchange.com/brief-e...tion-evolution

My undergraduate degree a BS in Biology is from a Catholic Institution, my Department Chair who taught my Evolutionary Biology course was a Priest.

I just want you to know, once again, you are wrong and bringing religion (or lack thereof ) has no bearing on this discussion which you took off course long ago.

3. Deniers of Evolution like yourself like to comfort themselves with the mistaken notion that Evolution is an unproven theory....I just want you to know you are, once again, wrong.

Though the bacteria were originally genetically identical, they have evolved. Today’s populations grow roughly 80 percent faster than the original lines, a development that Lenski called “a beautiful example of adaptation by natural selection.”
https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/sto...-in-real-time/

Natural selection has absolutely been proven to exist in nature.
 
Old 07-31-2018, 05:37 PM
 
3,481 posts, read 941,576 times
Reputation: 2607
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluedevilz View Post
2. Where did you get this insane idea that EVOLUTION is the brain child and exclusive property of atheists??
I wonder how many times I said that evolution is a proven fact.

You need a course in reading comprehension.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Health and Wellness
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top