5 ms·

For every patient like him, there's probably 10 or more being treated for conditions they could have avoided entirely through better diet and exercise. Nearly

For every patient like him, there's probably 10 or more being treated for conditions they could have avoided entirely through better diet and exercise. Nearly all cases of diabetes, heart disease, osteoporosis, and most cancers are preventable, just to name a few. I think the point is that if we focused more on health (i.e. long term preventative health) instead of on medicine alone, there would be far more available resources to handle the genuine medical needs.

hughprime 17y ago
Most cancers preventable? Lung cancers maybe (and only maybe), but on the whole (and as far as we know) cancer isn't affected all that strongly by lifestyle factors.
- kingkongrevenge 17y ago
  Cancer types and rates have varied dramatically over time in populations and between populations. Ergo cancer is driven by lifestyle factors.
- abecedarius 17y ago
  Some sources: http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2008/07/cancer-among-inuit.html http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2008/07/cancer-among-i... http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2008/07/cancer-in-other-non-industrialized.html http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2008/07/cancer-in-othe...
  - fatdog789 17y ago
    "Dr. Albert Schweitzer examined over 10,000 traditionally-living natives in Gabon (West Africa) in 1913 and did not find cancer. Later, it became common in the same population as they began "living more and more after the manner of the whites." " Well, there's your problem. They didn't find a lot of things back in 1913, and the ability to detect cancer back then was about as advanced as their ability to detect neutrinos. All of the studies cited are more than 40 years old, with questionable methods or tools used.
    - abecedarius 17y ago
      Cancer was given its current name by Hippocrates and first described in the surviving medical literature over a millennium before him. Neutrinos were first detected in the 1950s. I'd love to see newer studies on the few surviving traditionally-living populations. Here's one: http://www.medsci.org/v04p0053.htm http://www.medsci.org/v04p0053.htm While I'm a layman and would like to be enlightened (how should they have done these studies? What evidence would make you think there's something to look into?), I don't think you're fair to the linked sources. Like, "One of these physicians was captain George B. Leavitt. He actively searched for cancer among the traditionally-living Inuit from 1885 to 1907. Along with his staff, he performed 50,000 examinations a year for the first 15 years, and 25,000 a year thereafter. He did not find a single case of cancer. At the same time, he was regularly diagnosing cancers among the crews of whaling ships and other Westernized populations. It's important to note two relevant facts about Inuit culture: first, their habit of going shirtless indoors. This would make visual inspection for external cancers very easy. Second, the Inuit generally had great faith in Western doctors and would consult them even for minor problems. Therefore, doctors in the arctic had ample opportunity to inspect them for cancer."
- hs 17y ago
  it's affected by dietary factor: cancers are caused by animal-based protein such as meat, fish, milk, and egg cancers are not only preventable, but also reversible -- see ch3 turning off cancer, especially starting from the indian report on rat studies given aflatoxin in 'the china study' by collin campbels, hosted on google books for reference: http://books.google.com/books?id=FIRLLcLjyC8C&lpg=PA74&ots=h8Zyb-hbjs&dq=china%20study%20chart%204.3&pg=PA47#v=onepage&q=china%20study%20chart%204.3&f=false http://books.google.com/books?id=FIRLLcLjyC8C&lpg=PA74&#... solution? whole-plant-based diet, no, not vegetarian nor vegan diet. basically non-processed food (marketing does play trick saying, correctly, sugar/hfcs is natural plant-based because it's made from cane/corn -- but we know it's harmful) why whole-plant and not vegan? because one can eat fried potatoe, chewing candies, drinking sodas, sipping alcohol, smoking cigarretes ... and still claim (validly) to be vegan, but s/he probably isn't healthy

hughprime 17y ago

Most cancers preventable? Lung cancers maybe (and only maybe), but on the whole (and as far as we know) cancer isn't affected all that strongly by lifestyle factors.

kingkongrevenge 17y ago
Cancer types and rates have varied dramatically over time in populations and between populations. Ergo cancer is driven by lifestyle factors.
abecedarius 17y ago
Some sources: http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2008/07/cancer-among-inuit.html http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2008/07/cancer-among-i... http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2008/07/cancer-in-other-non-industrialized.html http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2008/07/cancer-in-othe...
- fatdog789 17y ago
  "Dr. Albert Schweitzer examined over 10,000 traditionally-living natives in Gabon (West Africa) in 1913 and did not find cancer. Later, it became common in the same population as they began "living more and more after the manner of the whites." " Well, there's your problem. They didn't find a lot of things back in 1913, and the ability to detect cancer back then was about as advanced as their ability to detect neutrinos. All of the studies cited are more than 40 years old, with questionable methods or tools used.
  - abecedarius 17y ago
    Cancer was given its current name by Hippocrates and first described in the surviving medical literature over a millennium before him. Neutrinos were first detected in the 1950s. I'd love to see newer studies on the few surviving traditionally-living populations. Here's one: http://www.medsci.org/v04p0053.htm http://www.medsci.org/v04p0053.htm While I'm a layman and would like to be enlightened (how should they have done these studies? What evidence would make you think there's something to look into?), I don't think you're fair to the linked sources. Like, "One of these physicians was captain George B. Leavitt. He actively searched for cancer among the traditionally-living Inuit from 1885 to 1907. Along with his staff, he performed 50,000 examinations a year for the first 15 years, and 25,000 a year thereafter. He did not find a single case of cancer. At the same time, he was regularly diagnosing cancers among the crews of whaling ships and other Westernized populations. It's important to note two relevant facts about Inuit culture: first, their habit of going shirtless indoors. This would make visual inspection for external cancers very easy. Second, the Inuit generally had great faith in Western doctors and would consult them even for minor problems. Therefore, doctors in the arctic had ample opportunity to inspect them for cancer."
hs 17y ago
it's affected by dietary factor: cancers are caused by animal-based protein such as meat, fish, milk, and egg cancers are not only preventable, but also reversible -- see ch3 turning off cancer, especially starting from the indian report on rat studies given aflatoxin in 'the china study' by collin campbels, hosted on google books for reference: http://books.google.com/books?id=FIRLLcLjyC8C&lpg=PA74&ots=h8Zyb-hbjs&dq=china%20study%20chart%204.3&pg=PA47#v=onepage&q=china%20study%20chart%204.3&f=false http://books.google.com/books?id=FIRLLcLjyC8C&lpg=PA74&#... solution? whole-plant-based diet, no, not vegetarian nor vegan diet. basically non-processed food (marketing does play trick saying, correctly, sugar/hfcs is natural plant-based because it's made from cane/corn -- but we know it's harmful) why whole-plant and not vegan? because one can eat fried potatoe, chewing candies, drinking sodas, sipping alcohol, smoking cigarretes ... and still claim (validly) to be vegan, but s/he probably isn't healthy