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)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 07-26-2018, 10:46 AM
 
3,507 posts, read 946,946 times
Reputation: 2608

Advertisements

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.

 
Old 07-26-2018, 12:34 PM
 
3,056 posts, read 1,223,512 times
Reputation: 6098
Japanese people have the highest longevity of a more populous country and they donít eat a paleo diet. They also have a higher risk of some cancers and screenings for those cancers are a regular part of the annual physical. They get the BCG (TB) vaccination while we do not. Many people get severe osteoporosis and they have started to add in more milk to combat that, but as a result more people have become obese. Osteoporosis is a disease of aging.

I donít know what point you are trying to make here. Modern medicine has helped women tremendously because it was so easy to die in childbirth. Women were basically pregnant much of the time during their childbearing years, which can go well into your 40s. If you think of the number of women who have to have c-sections, those women would likely have died or had serious complications in pregnancy if they had to go through one outside of modern medicine where a c-section was available. So if you meet a woman who had a c-section who is over 50, yeah, she might very well only be alive today due to medical intervention.

Meanwhile, basic infections like the flu, smallpox, measles, mumps, scarlet fever, etc. killed frequently and easily.
 
Old 07-26-2018, 12:48 PM
 
Location: Wine Country
4,862 posts, read 5,928,980 times
Reputation: 8523
Quote:
Originally Posted by Good4Nothin View Post
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.
It would be great if you have some peer reviewed studies and some statistics to back up your assertions. After all the title of your thread says 'facts'. Otherwise its just one more person's opinion and we certainly have plenty of those here.
 
Old 07-26-2018, 12:50 PM
 
3,507 posts, read 946,946 times
Reputation: 2608
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luckyd609 View Post
It would be great if you have some peer reviewed studies and some statistics to back up your assertions. After all the title of your thread says 'facts'. Otherwise its just one more person's opinion and we certainly have plenty of those here.
I read a lot of things. Nothing prevents you from doing that.
 
Old 07-26-2018, 12:53 PM
 
3,507 posts, read 946,946 times
Reputation: 2608
Quote:
Originally Posted by RamenAddict View Post
Japanese people have the highest longevity of a more populous country and they donít eat a paleo diet. They also have a higher risk of some cancers and screenings for those cancers are a regular part of the annual physical. They get the BCG (TB) vaccination while we do not. Many people get severe osteoporosis and they have started to add in more milk to combat that, but as a result more people have become obese. Osteoporosis is a disease of aging.

I donít know what point you are trying to make here. Modern medicine has helped women tremendously because it was so easy to die in childbirth. Women were basically pregnant much of the time during their childbearing years, which can go well into your 40s. If you think of the number of women who have to have c-sections, those women would likely have died or had serious complications in pregnancy if they had to go through one outside of modern medicine where a c-section was available. So if you meet a woman who had a c-section who is over 50, yeah, she might very well only be alive today due to medical intervention.

Meanwhile, basic infections like the flu, smallpox, measles, mumps, scarlet fever, etc. killed frequently and easily.
When was it so easy to die in childbirth? Mostly when women started having babies in hospitals, delivered by doctors who didn't wash their hands. Then germs were discovered, doctors started washing their hands, and childbirth death rates went down.

There is no simple way to compare now to then. When are you comparing now to? Not very much is known about the distant past, and different times and places were very different.

Compare modern America so a filthy poverty stricken city in the early industrial era, and we look great. We don't look so great when compared to times and places that had clean air and water and plentiful food.

It is not nearly as simple as they want you to think. And our society is very unhealthy, if you look at it realistically.
 
Old 07-26-2018, 12:57 PM
 
Location: Wine Country
4,862 posts, read 5,928,980 times
Reputation: 8523
Quote:
Originally Posted by Good4Nothin View Post
I read a lot of things. Nothing prevents you from doing that.
You are right. And nothing prevents me from asking for hard facts. Perhaps editing the 'facts' part of your title is in order.
I am not saying you are wrong, I am just pointing out when you say you are providing something factual you need to back it up with more than, 'I read a lot'.
 
Old 07-26-2018, 01:37 PM
 
3,056 posts, read 1,223,512 times
Reputation: 6098
Quote:
Originally Posted by Good4Nothin View Post
When was it so easy to die in childbirth? Mostly when women started having babies in hospitals, delivered by doctors who didn't wash their hands. Then germs were discovered, doctors started washing their hands, and childbirth death rates went down.

There is no simple way to compare now to then. When are you comparing now to? Not very much is known about the distant past, and different times and places were very different.

Compare modern America so a filthy poverty stricken city in the early industrial era, and we look great. We don't look so great when compared to times and places that had clean air and water and plentiful food.

It is not nearly as simple as they want you to think. And our society is very unhealthy, if you look at it realistically.
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm4838a2.htm

That is pretty significant. Keep in mind that even at this time, most women had 3-4 children.

To say that childbirth was caused by going to a hospital is ridiculous. Women have been dying in childbirth throughout history. There are many cases where keeping a baby is dangerous for the mother and the baby and this has been the case since well before modern medicine existed. In many cases, the c-section is there because the baby is going to be born breech and will not turn before birth. This can be dangerous for both mother and baby. 3-5% of babies are breech. There are also other conditions like preeclampsia, which killed mothers and babies and now affects about 5% of mothers.
 
Old 07-26-2018, 01:45 PM
 
1,482 posts, read 599,583 times
Reputation: 3770
Are there many people who live into their 90's without medical intervention? Sure.
Are there many people who would be dead without medical intervention? Sure?
Are there people who eat junk food, drink, never exercise and live into their 90's? Sure.
Are there people who eat healthy, exercise, and die in their 40's and 50's? Sure.
Does medical science or holistic science explain any of it? Nope.
 
Old 07-26-2018, 01:58 PM
 
3,507 posts, read 946,946 times
Reputation: 2608
I am NOT saying that modern medicine never saves lives. I AM saying that it is NOT responsible for a great increase in longevity between earlier times and now (except for decreasing infant mortality). I AM saying that our society is NOT very healthy, and if we live past age 40 now, it is not because of medical interventions.

There is a myth that we only survive to old age because of modern medicine, and it is not true. And that myth says that diabetes, cancer, heart disease, arthritis, dementia, etc., are a NORMAL result of aging. That is NOT true.

Because of these myths, people have too much faith in modern medicine. It can save your life in certain emergency situations, but most people never need their life saved that way. I am NOT saying modern medicine is worthless. I AM saying it is only good for certain things, and it is not as all-powerful as you might think.
 
Old 07-26-2018, 02:03 PM
 
3,507 posts, read 946,946 times
Reputation: 2608
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luckyd609 View Post
You are right. And nothing prevents me from asking for hard facts. Perhaps editing the 'facts' part of your title is in order.
I am not saying you are wrong, I am just pointing out when you say you are providing something factual you need to back it up with more than, 'I read a lot'.
Nothing prevents anyone from fact checking. But you have to read more than WebMD or Mayo Clinic.
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