7 ms·

It is never one thing; your lead assessment is probably a serious contender among other pollutants. Then there is better hygiene via food handlers, stiffer USDA

It is never one thing; your lead assessment is probably a serious contender among other pollutants. Then there is better hygiene via food handlers, stiffer USDA rules, cleaner water, less smoking and second hand smoke, more people exercising too.

JacksonGariety 10y ago
Smoking rates are only decreasing in developed nations. Globally it's increasing by ~1% each year.
- Ensorceled 10y ago
  The study is talking about wealthy (e.g. developed) nations this doesn't apply.
  - JacksonGariety 10y ago
    I was just replying to his comment. It's a "mainstream" idea that people like to repeat, but it's simply untrue. It's like a stock phrase: "Smoking is actually going down, you know! People really are getting smarter/healthier/happier/whatever." It's just false.
- cma 10y ago
  That's lower than population growth so would still be a global per-capita reduction.
  - rgarrett88 10y ago
    I would imagine a global smoking increase statistic would be per-capita as well but without a citation we won't know.
    - JacksonGariety 10y ago
      "In his own studies of smoking, Stebbins has shown how the tobacco industry has turned to markets in the developing worl to make up for loss in sales first in the United States and subsequently in parts of the European market. Governments in developing nations often do not have the ability to limit tobacco marketing and, usually in need of financial help, they are open to introducing taxable commodities to their citizens. As a result of extensive advertising in developing nations, Stebbins notes that worldwide tobacco consumption has increased at the rate of 1 percent per a year, and countries such as Brazil, India, and Kenya exhibit the greatest increases (1990)." This is from Bryan Page's "Comprehending Drug Use." It's a textbook but it's accurate, well-cited, and well-written.
      - lusen 10y ago
        This is an area where I see the free market causing great harm. How can a population contend with greedy, money-rich corporations who wage huge psychological and legal campaigns? It's very one-sided. In the US, science and the people's own best interest are seldom enough. The government must have some balance of power to regulate corporations that are otherwise happy to abuse their fellow humans and distort culture and consciousness to systematically disempower whole populations. It's an awful cycle. It's possible that a system built on nurturance and development, one that empowered people with a wide array of tools including compassion and self-realization, would produce corporate leaders who could themselves balance multiple constructive ends. Imagine if the mega-corps who routinely disenfranchise poor communities and third world countries not only sought money and power, growth and impact, but also felt internally compelled to be accountable, admit mistakes, build constructive non-manipulative and non-bullying relationships, empower others when possible, and respect others when not possible even when taking care of oneself, etc. I'm a big fan of free-will and independence and no human having more authority than another, but I also see a huge importance in nurturing and developing children to bear those responsibilities constructively, for example free from low self esteem and arrogance, and rich with curiousity, support networks, courage and inventiveneess. Unfortunately, nurturing, developing and supporting others are tasks that are largely seen as "feminine" and therefore economically unimportant (stay at home parents are free labor, and teachers, nannies, etc earn very little money, and research in those areas is similarly seen as lesser science to math and engineering). These professions are often shunned by those needing to defend their "masculinity", and in fact nurturance and emotional support is often required of women and people of color as free labor (the classic "mother" and "grandmother" and "POC friend" role). So it's a strange world we live in, where corporations are seen as people under the law, and are of course directed by people in charge, and yet we keep the bar very low for how mature and capable these people-corporations are.
- illumin8 10y ago
  The article indicates most of the lower disease rates are also in developed nations, so this could be indicative of a correlation.
- ekianjo 10y ago
  > Smoking rates are only decreasing in developed nations. Except Japan when selling tobacco is still a very healthy business and there is no cancer prevention whatsoever. Lobby has been super effective down here.
  - Herodotus38 10y ago
    When you say no cancer prevention whatsoever I think you are referring to just lung cancer. I do not know much about their national lung cancer recommendations but I do know that Japan has actually had a very robust GI cancer screening history compared to the US. This is partially due to their incidence of gastric cancer being much higher than in the US.
    - ekianjo 10y ago
      Yup, and the main reason for having so much GI cancer is basically alcohol abuse. Salarymen going to drink several times a week with colleagues and having always a beer on your table at home certainly does not help. Korea has the exact same problem, and very high Gastric Cancer rates as well.
lostlogin 10y ago
Cleaner water, foot and environment are proposed causes for the allergy rate increases - the cleaners hypothesis. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/7589193/Excessive-cleanliness-to-blame-for-allergy-rise.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/7589193/Excessiv... Are more people gettin appropriate levels of exercise? Average fitness levels are in steep decline (mainly due to obesity) I thought. http://resmilitaris.net/ressources/10144/31/res_militaris_temporal_trends_in_health_and_fitness-sudom___hachey.pdf http://resmilitaris.net/ressources/10144/31/res_militaris_te...

JacksonGariety 10y ago

Smoking rates are only decreasing in developed nations. Globally it's increasing by ~1% each year.

Ensorceled 10y ago
The study is talking about wealthy (e.g. developed) nations this doesn't apply.
- JacksonGariety 10y ago
  I was just replying to his comment. It's a "mainstream" idea that people like to repeat, but it's simply untrue. It's like a stock phrase: "Smoking is actually going down, you know! People really are getting smarter/healthier/happier/whatever." It's just false.
cma 10y ago
That's lower than population growth so would still be a global per-capita reduction.
- rgarrett88 10y ago
  I would imagine a global smoking increase statistic would be per-capita as well but without a citation we won't know.
  - JacksonGariety 10y ago
    "In his own studies of smoking, Stebbins has shown how the tobacco industry has turned to markets in the developing worl to make up for loss in sales first in the United States and subsequently in parts of the European market. Governments in developing nations often do not have the ability to limit tobacco marketing and, usually in need of financial help, they are open to introducing taxable commodities to their citizens. As a result of extensive advertising in developing nations, Stebbins notes that worldwide tobacco consumption has increased at the rate of 1 percent per a year, and countries such as Brazil, India, and Kenya exhibit the greatest increases (1990)." This is from Bryan Page's "Comprehending Drug Use." It's a textbook but it's accurate, well-cited, and well-written.
    - lusen 10y ago
      This is an area where I see the free market causing great harm. How can a population contend with greedy, money-rich corporations who wage huge psychological and legal campaigns? It's very one-sided. In the US, science and the people's own best interest are seldom enough. The government must have some balance of power to regulate corporations that are otherwise happy to abuse their fellow humans and distort culture and consciousness to systematically disempower whole populations. It's an awful cycle. It's possible that a system built on nurturance and development, one that empowered people with a wide array of tools including compassion and self-realization, would produce corporate leaders who could themselves balance multiple constructive ends. Imagine if the mega-corps who routinely disenfranchise poor communities and third world countries not only sought money and power, growth and impact, but also felt internally compelled to be accountable, admit mistakes, build constructive non-manipulative and non-bullying relationships, empower others when possible, and respect others when not possible even when taking care of oneself, etc. I'm a big fan of free-will and independence and no human having more authority than another, but I also see a huge importance in nurturing and developing children to bear those responsibilities constructively, for example free from low self esteem and arrogance, and rich with curiousity, support networks, courage and inventiveneess. Unfortunately, nurturing, developing and supporting others are tasks that are largely seen as "feminine" and therefore economically unimportant (stay at home parents are free labor, and teachers, nannies, etc earn very little money, and research in those areas is similarly seen as lesser science to math and engineering). These professions are often shunned by those needing to defend their "masculinity", and in fact nurturance and emotional support is often required of women and people of color as free labor (the classic "mother" and "grandmother" and "POC friend" role). So it's a strange world we live in, where corporations are seen as people under the law, and are of course directed by people in charge, and yet we keep the bar very low for how mature and capable these people-corporations are.
illumin8 10y ago
The article indicates most of the lower disease rates are also in developed nations, so this could be indicative of a correlation.
ekianjo 10y ago
> Smoking rates are only decreasing in developed nations. Except Japan when selling tobacco is still a very healthy business and there is no cancer prevention whatsoever. Lobby has been super effective down here.
- Herodotus38 10y ago
  When you say no cancer prevention whatsoever I think you are referring to just lung cancer. I do not know much about their national lung cancer recommendations but I do know that Japan has actually had a very robust GI cancer screening history compared to the US. This is partially due to their incidence of gastric cancer being much higher than in the US.
  - ekianjo 10y ago
    Yup, and the main reason for having so much GI cancer is basically alcohol abuse. Salarymen going to drink several times a week with colleagues and having always a beer on your table at home certainly does not help. Korea has the exact same problem, and very high Gastric Cancer rates as well.

lostlogin 10y ago

Cleaner water, foot and environment are proposed causes for the allergy rate increases - the cleaners hypothesis. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/7589193/Excessive-cleanliness-to-blame-for-allergy-rise.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/7589193/Excessiv... Are more people gettin appropriate levels of exercise? Average fitness levels are in steep decline (mainly due to obesity) I thought. http://resmilitaris.net/ressources/10144/31/res_militaris_temporal_trends_in_health_and_fitness-sudom___hachey.pdf http://resmilitaris.net/ressources/10144/31/res_militaris_te...