3 ms·

I think both of you have over simplified a much more complex eco system. It's not a winners vs losers. Yes, sure, eat shit die faster but that's not what an e

I think both of you have over simplified a much more complex eco system. It's not a winners vs losers. Yes, sure, eat shit die faster but that's not what an environmental vs bad gene pool comes to teach us. If cancer was an absolute case of being born to the bad gene pool we'd have to tackle the problem in how do we advance our genes to be more error resistive. Being that it's more of an environmental, the problem suddenly change to how do we as a whole bring up our environment several levels up to a more healthier region. You can et the healthiest stuff there is, it still won't help you when the can lining is full of BPA. You can excursive every day and it won't help you if the weights contain materials you breathe which disrupt cellular functions. You can eat the most nutritious fish and vegetables and you're still going to be hit by the cancerous materials they've been brought up in. Adopting the attitude you do, does nothing to better everybody. Only creates yet another us vs them partition in an already well divided society.

miseg 11y ago
Great point. For me it means there are separate implications: 1. What you can do to help your body day to day (and longer term about where you live, for example) 2. What society and policy makers can do to improve the environment as a whole
- miseg 11y ago
  I would like to know why there are down-votes :)
tkyjonathan 11y ago
I do not fully agree with your point, because it is not black or white, it is a spectrum. So, short of living next to a leaking power station or contaminated waters, the food you eat is the most intimate way you make contact with your environment. Do not forget that your body fights free radicals and oxidative stress. If you give it the proper nutrition it needs to repair itself and eliminate waste then you are statistically in a very good position. Also, about Genes: you may have genes that are more sensitive to certain chronic diseases, but it is your environment that activates those genes. Example, if you are at risk of diabetes, but eat very well, you may never get diabetes.

miseg 11y ago

Great point. For me it means there are separate implications: 1. What you can do to help your body day to day (and longer term about where you live, for example) 2. What society and policy makers can do to improve the environment as a whole

miseg 11y ago
I would like to know why there are down-votes :)

tkyjonathan 11y ago

I do not fully agree with your point, because it is not black or white, it is a spectrum. So, short of living next to a leaking power station or contaminated waters, the food you eat is the most intimate way you make contact with your environment. Do not forget that your body fights free radicals and oxidative stress. If you give it the proper nutrition it needs to repair itself and eliminate waste then you are statistically in a very good position. Also, about Genes: you may have genes that are more sensitive to certain chronic diseases, but it is your environment that activates those genes. Example, if you are at risk of diabetes, but eat very well, you may never get diabetes.