5 ms·

There is going to be some big AHA moment tied so couple food practices. Like washing chicken in chlorine or something. I wonder how are the stats in other devel

by kvgr 7mo ago

There is going to be some big AHA moment tied so couple food practices. Like washing chicken in chlorine or something. I wonder how are the stats in other developed countries. The title says US.

zvqcMMV6Zcr 7mo ago
My bet is on low-fiber diet and people spending half hour playing with phone instead of getting up from toilet.
- askonomm 7mo ago
  Why would me sitting down cause colon cancer?
  - nativeit 7mo ago
    Because anything that allows another person to look down on you and feel superior must therefore be true and moral.
  - toraway 7mo ago
    Not saying it’s actually linked to cancer but it definitely does increase the risk of hemorrhoids, rectal prolapse and bleeding from straining. Which could mean chronic stress at a cellular level repairing damage over the long term.
leetrout 7mo ago
I had no clue this was a thing. Thanks for sharing your thought... I think it's a combination of our pesticide usage and general food processing but like a sibling said these are educated guesses.
imglorp 7mo ago
My money is on massive overexposure to high fructose corn syrup in the Western diet. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9170474/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9170474/
- damnesian 7mo ago
  lack of fiber is a biggie too. Foods too highly processed. too many oils.
  - staticassertion 7mo ago
    This is my personal bet. It's just low fiber diets.
    - boringg 7mo ago
      It can't just be low fiber diets - there has to be some other exposures involved.
      - staticassertion 7mo ago
        Why?
        Jerrrrrrrry 7mo ago
        Apt username from a person suggesting that non edible fiber is the nutrient causing illness and thats the presupposition we should argue against. Why would more fiber help?
        staticassertion 7mo ago
        Uh, what? I have not made a presuppositional argument (I made no argument at all...). I made a statement about my epistemic state - ie: that I would "bet" on low fiber being the major contributor to colon cancer rates. Someone then asserted that it can't be that, and I asked "why?". > Why would more fiber help? Because there is an incredible amount of research into high fiber diets being good for your gut, including reduced colon cancer rates. This is the consensus of various organizations such as WHO - high fiber diets have lower risks of colon cancer.
taeric 7mo ago
The trend has been down, even for this cancer. Such that I agree there were probably some big AHA moments. But I assert they almost certainly happened 50 years ago. My expectation is that it is less that there has been a growing trend of this cancer getting worse, and far more that we have gotten better at many other cancers. That is, overall, this is good news on progress. Not a scare headline.
- doubled112 7mo ago
  I grew up in a fairly industrial area with lots of trades people around me. From my anecdata, I'd suspect you're right. We know more about some cancers and the causes and they are easier to prevent. The choices, personal or otherwise, I have seen can't be good for your body, and some you're simply not allowed to make anymore. Ironically, sitting on this laptop typing this might be as bad, but win some/lose some. But some obvious examples? Ever dip a shirt in benzene because it cools you down? Apparently it feels like Vicks, but doesn't leave that sticky feeling behind. A good portion drank 6+ beers a day. I know they must have eaten, but some I never saw consume food. At all. Some smoked a pack or two of cigarettes a day. Asbestos was in everything. There was no ventilation/filtration for welders, painters, woodworkers, etc. If you could open the shop door it was a good day.
- vharuck 7mo ago
  The trend has been upwards for invasive colorectal cancer among US residents under 50: https://seer.cancer.gov/statistics-network/explorer/application.html?site=20&data_type=1&graph_type=2&compareBy=age_range&chk_age_range_9=9&rate_type=2&sex=1&race=1&stage=101&advopt_precision=1&advopt_show_ci=on https://seer.cancer.gov/statistics-network/explorer/applicat...
  - taeric 7mo ago
    It has ticked up 1-2 per 100k over the past few decades for that group. Zoom the chart out, and you would probably be excused for assuming it is flat with some noise. By all means, we should study this more. But the way folks are talking about this is a touch nuts.
hombre_fatal 7mo ago
> An estimated 95% of American adults and children fail to meet daily fiber recommendations, with intake often falling below 10 grams per 1,000 calories consumed It's tempting to focus on some magic bad ingredient/practice to explain our bad health (like seed oils), but we don't exercise, we eat directly against dietary guidelines, and we eat foods that we know are bad for us. Now add on to that the social media grifters and industry advocates who tell you that eating poorly is good for you. I don't blame individuals just trying to live their life though. This is how we've let our whole food environment set up shop.
- NotGMan 7mo ago
  Focusing on fiber while leaving out glyphosate, sugar etc... is myopic.
  - hombre_fatal 7mo ago
    I don't think I need to enumerate every way our diets are bad in an HN comment, do I? You didn't even want to do it and you're the one gunning for it. But processed meat consumption would be another good example of where we happily eat against dietary guidelines despite its link with colorectal cancer.
toraway 7mo ago
That seems like wishful thinking, IMO. Seems more likely we will find it’s due a complex constellation of genetics, diet, lifestyle factors like exercise, environmental exposure, etc associated eith a modern sedentary lifestyle with no clear smoking gun or single preventative intervention. It sort of reminds me of when Lesswrong was fixated on a hypothesis that lithium levels in the water supply was the cause of the obesity epidemic. There was a lot of enthusiasm for the idea at the time, and somewhat understandably as it would have been a single variable that could be tweaked for massive societal benefits. But there wasn’t really any credible evidence to support it. Trying to reduce the complexity of human biology and lifestyle to single cause/effect relationship is an easy and tempting trap to fall into to explain unknowns in medicine.

by kvgr 7mo ago

There is going to be some big AHA moment tied so couple food practices. Like washing chicken in chlorine or something. I wonder how are the stats in other developed countries. The title says US.

zvqcMMV6Zcr 7mo ago

My bet is on low-fiber diet and people spending half hour playing with phone instead of getting up from toilet.

askonomm 7mo ago
Why would me sitting down cause colon cancer?
- nativeit 7mo ago
  Because anything that allows another person to look down on you and feel superior must therefore be true and moral.
- toraway 7mo ago
  Not saying it’s actually linked to cancer but it definitely does increase the risk of hemorrhoids, rectal prolapse and bleeding from straining. Which could mean chronic stress at a cellular level repairing damage over the long term.

leetrout 7mo ago

I had no clue this was a thing. Thanks for sharing your thought... I think it's a combination of our pesticide usage and general food processing but like a sibling said these are educated guesses.

imglorp 7mo ago

My money is on massive overexposure to high fructose corn syrup in the Western diet. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9170474/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9170474/

damnesian 7mo ago
lack of fiber is a biggie too. Foods too highly processed. too many oils.
- staticassertion 7mo ago
  This is my personal bet. It's just low fiber diets.
  - boringg 7mo ago
    It can't just be low fiber diets - there has to be some other exposures involved.
    - staticassertion 7mo ago
      Why?
      - Jerrrrrrrry 7mo ago
        Apt username from a person suggesting that non edible fiber is the nutrient causing illness and thats the presupposition we should argue against. Why would more fiber help?
        staticassertion 7mo ago
        Uh, what? I have not made a presuppositional argument (I made no argument at all...). I made a statement about my epistemic state - ie: that I would "bet" on low fiber being the major contributor to colon cancer rates. Someone then asserted that it can't be that, and I asked "why?". > Why would more fiber help? Because there is an incredible amount of research into high fiber diets being good for your gut, including reduced colon cancer rates. This is the consensus of various organizations such as WHO - high fiber diets have lower risks of colon cancer.

taeric 7mo ago

The trend has been down, even for this cancer. Such that I agree there were probably some big AHA moments. But I assert they almost certainly happened 50 years ago. My expectation is that it is less that there has been a growing trend of this cancer getting worse, and far more that we have gotten better at many other cancers. That is, overall, this is good news on progress. Not a scare headline.

doubled112 7mo ago
I grew up in a fairly industrial area with lots of trades people around me. From my anecdata, I'd suspect you're right. We know more about some cancers and the causes and they are easier to prevent. The choices, personal or otherwise, I have seen can't be good for your body, and some you're simply not allowed to make anymore. Ironically, sitting on this laptop typing this might be as bad, but win some/lose some. But some obvious examples? Ever dip a shirt in benzene because it cools you down? Apparently it feels like Vicks, but doesn't leave that sticky feeling behind. A good portion drank 6+ beers a day. I know they must have eaten, but some I never saw consume food. At all. Some smoked a pack or two of cigarettes a day. Asbestos was in everything. There was no ventilation/filtration for welders, painters, woodworkers, etc. If you could open the shop door it was a good day.
vharuck 7mo ago
The trend has been upwards for invasive colorectal cancer among US residents under 50: https://seer.cancer.gov/statistics-network/explorer/application.html?site=20&data_type=1&graph_type=2&compareBy=age_range&chk_age_range_9=9&rate_type=2&sex=1&race=1&stage=101&advopt_precision=1&advopt_show_ci=on https://seer.cancer.gov/statistics-network/explorer/applicat...
- taeric 7mo ago
  It has ticked up 1-2 per 100k over the past few decades for that group. Zoom the chart out, and you would probably be excused for assuming it is flat with some noise. By all means, we should study this more. But the way folks are talking about this is a touch nuts.

hombre_fatal 7mo ago

> An estimated 95% of American adults and children fail to meet daily fiber recommendations, with intake often falling below 10 grams per 1,000 calories consumed It's tempting to focus on some magic bad ingredient/practice to explain our bad health (like seed oils), but we don't exercise, we eat directly against dietary guidelines, and we eat foods that we know are bad for us. Now add on to that the social media grifters and industry advocates who tell you that eating poorly is good for you. I don't blame individuals just trying to live their life though. This is how we've let our whole food environment set up shop.

NotGMan 7mo ago
Focusing on fiber while leaving out glyphosate, sugar etc... is myopic.
- hombre_fatal 7mo ago
  I don't think I need to enumerate every way our diets are bad in an HN comment, do I? You didn't even want to do it and you're the one gunning for it. But processed meat consumption would be another good example of where we happily eat against dietary guidelines despite its link with colorectal cancer.

toraway 7mo ago

That seems like wishful thinking, IMO. Seems more likely we will find it’s due a complex constellation of genetics, diet, lifestyle factors like exercise, environmental exposure, etc associated eith a modern sedentary lifestyle with no clear smoking gun or single preventative intervention. It sort of reminds me of when Lesswrong was fixated on a hypothesis that lithium levels in the water supply was the cause of the obesity epidemic. There was a lot of enthusiasm for the idea at the time, and somewhat understandably as it would have been a single variable that could be tweaked for massive societal benefits. But there wasn’t really any credible evidence to support it. Trying to reduce the complexity of human biology and lifestyle to single cause/effect relationship is an easy and tempting trap to fall into to explain unknowns in medicine.