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.
Can you explain what you're meaning by this? What is "uninterrupted say"? Has the OP been interrupted in some different way than others on this thread? What are you implying?
The point of this thread has been to question certain mainstream status quo assumptions. Some people have an aversion to questioning the expert consensus. Maybe they need to feel that the experts are taking good care of us.
People who question experts and authorities, these days, are often considered fringe conspiracy theorists. That's an easy way to discredit someone's ideas. It has nothing to do with whether the ideas make sense or not. If they are skeptical of mainstream experts, they are ignored.
Faith in mainstream experts seems to be especially strong on the internet. You can see it in Wikipedia and Google, and Reddit, for example. And here at CD.
A person who questions mainstream experts on any subject usually gets the same reaction -- "Who are you to question the experts? Do you think you know better than someone with a degree and experience in the field?"
However, whenever I question mainstream experts, there are always non-mainstream experts that I agree with. But non-mainstream experts are not tolerated these days. It is becoming nearly impossible for any scientist to have an alternative view on anything.
Or was it always that way? Was there always this much resistance to alternate views? I don't know, but the backlash probably wasn't as vicious as it is now.
And please keep in mind -- it has nothing to do with logic or evidence. It is an entirely emotional reaction to having beliefs questioned that you have held all your life.
I questioned a lot of things I learned as a child. I think that's the only way you can find out what you really believe, what really seems true. I see nothing wrong with doing that, and actually it's supposed to be encouraged in our "free" society. But it isn't, because human nature is tribal.
Our mainstream medical system has a certain way of looking at nature, and how it's related to health. In that view, if we lived like our primitive ancestors we would be lucky to survive to age 40.
If you believe that, as most modern Americans probably do, then you might assume that our much longer lifespans are the result of modern medicine. You might assume things like heart disease and cancer are the natural result of aging, and they are common now because we live long enough to get them.
That is the story the medical industry wants you to believe. They believe it themselves, but it also happens to make them look good and to be profitable.
If you didn't have statin drugs, for example, you would be likely to drop dead of a heart attack or stroke in your 40s or 50s.
People who are into a more natural approach to health, on the other hand, don't believe that story at all.
Prehistoric people did NOT drop dead of old age in their 30s, for one thing. No one can be sure how long people lived in various prehistoric cultures, but it is certain that many of them lived to old age. Infants and young people were much more likely to die than in our society, and that brought the average way down.
Different times and places had different average lifespans. In poverty stricken areas, life was short. If we compare ourselves to that, we look great. But there are, and have been, many non-industrial societies where people generally stay healthy into old age. They don't get our "diseases of aging." And they don't get the aches and pains that are supposedly inevitable.
If you have only been exposed to the mainstream narrative, then you are probably skeptical about lifestyle advice and the idea that "natural is better." You probably feel you should take whatever drugs your MD recommends. After all, you think, people over age 50 are only alive because of medical interventions.
For example, the paleo diet is based on what pre-agricultural people probably ate. The assumption behind it is that they were much healthier than we are. Depending on which narrative you believe, you will think that paleo diet sounds like a good idea, or you will think it's nonsense.
Your keep peddling this idea that previous generations had longer lifespans than the available remains records shows. Why are you so obsessed with distorting truth to fit an agenda you have about "modern medicine"?
Your anti-archaeological evidence and broad generalizations sweep away the evidence-based truth.
What about this ridiculous sentence:
"No one can be sure how long people lived in various prehistoric cultures, but it is certain that many of them lived to old age."
No one can be certain, yet you can be certain?
And what does individuals living into old age versus the population's death rate and average age of death mean? Nothing when it comes to lifespans as a parameter. There is probably a genetic limit to lifespan (which may or may not be overcome or increased in future by biological engineering, who knows) and that probably has not changed in a very, very long time. But the availability of full nutrition (including the scientific identification of all vitamins and trace elements and minerals), aseptic procedures, antibiotics and antiseptics have considerably increased average lifespans, despite your non-evidence based ex cathedra declarations to the opposite. Your nonsense is falsified by the people, the individuals, who live mobile and active into their 90s and centenarians today - a bunch of which fall under categories of medical intervention and others that do not, and others that have a longer healthspan despite living in the modern world and in a modern fashion. There are many effectively pre-industrial societies where you don't see old unhealthy people because when they get unhealthy they die - there are often no treatments available except for ineffective alternative treatments that never worked but are maintained for cultural reasons. Bear gall bladder and shark cartilage nonsense. The extant healthy agers - who didn't get sick in the first place - just like many centenarians in modern society - confuse your confirmation bias.
btw, healthspan is the word you seem to be looking for.
This is one of the strangest threads I've ever followed here on CD, and that's saying a lot!
Basically G4N is saying that practically no one questions their doctors (not true) and that people don't understand the importance of healthy lifestyle (not true).
She seems to think she has discovered some previously hidden knowledge that she just HAS to share with the world (or more accurately, shove down our throats). But news flash: we care a lot more about our own health than G4N cares about our health.
It's one thing to say to us, "Hey ask your doctor if you can control your cholesterol with lifestyle instead of taking a statin" (a conversation most people would have already had anyway). But to act like you have this treasure trove of knowledge, because you have read a bunch of articles online, and the rest of us simply "do not get it," is insulting and tiresome.
I'm still alive and posting because of modern medicine. Thank you, doctors.
WHY would doctors recommend lifestyle changes if these diseases occur naturally with age? They DO NOT occur naturally, and I have shown plenty of evidence.
You contradict yourself and you are not rational. And you are CONDESCENDING.
"Sorry if you cannot understand that. It really is very simple."
There are no rules against saying things like that???
This is purely hilarious. It's almost a direct parroting of what you have said yourself.
This is one of the strangest threads I've ever followed here on CD, and that's saying a lot!
Basically G4N is saying that practically no one questions their doctors (not true) and that people don't understand the importance of healthy lifestyle (not true).
She seems to think she has discovered some previously hidden knowledge that she just HAS to share with the world (or more accurately, shove down our throats). But news flash: we care a lot more about our own health than G4N cares about our health.
It's one thing to say to us, "Hey ask your doctor if you can control your cholesterol with lifestyle instead of taking a statin" (a conversation most people would have already had anyway). But to act like you have this treasure trove of knowledge, because you have read a bunch of articles online, and the rest of us simply "do not get it," is insulting and tiresome.
I'm still alive and posting because of modern medicine. Thank you, doctors.
Amen.
I keep asking for a pic of the perfect specimen she is so she can back her theories. Nada.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CatzPaw
This is purely hilarious. It's almost a direct parroting of what you have said yourself.
This is one of the strangest threads I've ever followed here on CD, and that's saying a lot!
Basically G4N is saying that practically no one questions their doctors (not true) and that people don't understand the importance of healthy lifestyle (not true).
She seems to think she has discovered some previously hidden knowledge that she just HAS to share with the world (or more accurately, shove down our throats). But news flash: we care a lot more about our own health than G4N cares about our health.
It's one thing to say to us, "Hey ask your doctor if you can control your cholesterol with lifestyle instead of taking a statin" (a conversation most people would have already had anyway). But to act like you have this treasure trove of knowledge, because you have read a bunch of articles online, and the rest of us simply "do not get it," is insulting and tiresome.
I'm still alive and posting because of modern medicine. Thank you, doctors.
Thank you for a succinct and very apt description - I'm so glad we haven't all been gaslighted!
SuzyQ, and those here who agree with her, believe that heart disease, diabetes 2, dementia, cancer, etc., are the normal result of aging. They do NOT think these diseases are more common in modern societies.
Therefore, it logically follows, that changing your lifestyle would not do much good.
If you believe we only live past age 40 or 50 because of modern medicine, and that we naturally come down with these diseases regardless of lifestyle, then why bother improving your lifestyle?
There is not much logic in the above beliefs. Yet some of you insist they are true, in spite of not making sense.
SuzyQ, and those here who agree with her, believe that heart disease, diabetes 2, dementia, cancer, etc., are the normal result of aging. They do NOT think these diseases are more common in modern societies.
Therefore, it logically follows, that changing your lifestyle would not do much good.
If you believe we only live past age 40 or 50 because of modern medicine, and that we naturally come down with these diseases regardless of lifestyle, then why bother improving your lifestyle?
There is not much logic in the above beliefs. Yet some of you insist they are true, in spite of not making sense.
SuzyQ, and those here who agree with her, believe that heart disease, diabetes 2, dementia, cancer, etc., are the normal result of aging. They do NOT think these diseases are more common in modern societies.
Therefore, it logically follows, that changing your lifestyle would not do much good.
If you believe we only live past age 40 or 50 because of modern medicine, and that we naturally come down with these diseases regardless of lifestyle, then why bother improving your lifestyle?
There is not much logic in the above beliefs. Yet some of you insist they are true, in spite of not making sense.
Perfect example of the fallacy of circular reasoning. Like many of your posts.
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.
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.
Cannot rep you.
Like many of your posts.