|
An adult male in 1871
U.K. lived almost as long (75 years) as
a male today (77)---WHY?
Given the
great increase in survival of the two principle reapers of the elderly, cancer
and heart attacks, plus the [i]reduction
in adult deaths from infectious diseases, strokes, kidney stones, and physical
traumas, this
entails that various conditions in the UK (and US) are shortening life
sufficiently to reduce significantly the improvements in medical treatment,
sanitation, and immunology that extend the life of adults of this century
compared to those of the late 19th century.. And in the
19th century there were
extremely unhealthy work conditions in certain industries, such as mining,
smelting, and textiles; something is very amiss as to our current longevity. What
has countered the benefit in the reduction
in smoking?
The answer
is simple we have poisoned every cell in our body with excessive dietary sugar.
Fructose, a very reactive sugar, one half of sucrose (table sugar) goes from
the hepatic portal vein to the liver for metabolism. It is metabolized after
glucose. In the liver it damages the liver cells and
their mitochondria by a process known as fructosylation (also called glycation)
where it bonds to proteins and unsaturated fats in the cell wall, which thereby
hinders their functions. On the western
diet, which averages over 180 grams of sugar a day all sources—up from 30 grams
a day 2 centuries ago—overwhelms the cellular repair systems and also damages
these systems. For about 90% of adults
their cellular systems have been damaged and these people--including many of
normal weight—they are at elevated risks for non-infectious conditions, known
as conditions
associated with the western diet—see link for list. Fructose is
a slow poison which first affects
the liver and this causes other issues which eventually affect every cell in
the body: it has been in journal articles
compared to ethanol, which also goes to the liver and damages it, only it is
even worse. The second big hit is the
weird chemicals we take given to us by the dupes of pharma, known as physicians. Pharma
is in the business of treating illness,
and they have replaced tobacco as the second great health disaster.
- Spain:
79.08 years in 2002, 81.07 years in 2010
- Australia:
80 years in 2002, 81.72 years in 2010
- Italy:
79.25 years in 2002, 80.33 years in 2010
- France:
79.05 years in 2002, 81.09 years in 2010
- Germany:
77.78 years in 2002, 79.41 years in 2010
- UK: 80
years in 2002, 81.73 years in 2010
- USA:
77.4 years in 2002, 78.24 years in 2010
- Monaco:
79.12 years in 2002, 89.73 years in 2011 {Suspect failed
to confirm in link, etc}
- Canada, 78.6 years in 2002; 81.9
years in 2009, 78.8 for men, 83.3 for women
Longevity
and lifestyle Wikipedia
“longevity” 2015, unchanged February 2018
“Evidence-based studies indicate that longevity is based on
two major factors, genetics and lifestyle choices.[6] Twin studies have
estimated that
approximately 20-30% of an individual’s lifespan is related to genetics, the
rest is due to individual behaviors and environmental factors which can be
modified.[7] Recent
studies find that even modest amounts of leisure time physical
exercise can extend life expectancy by as much as 4.5 years.[7]
In preindustrial times, deaths at young and middle age were
common, and life-spans over 70 years were comparatively rare. This is not due
to genetics, but because of environmental factors such as disease, accidents,
and malnutrition, especially since the former were not generally treatable with
pre-20th century medicine. Deaths from childbirth were common in women, and
many children did not live past infancy. In addition, most people who did
attain old age were likely to die quickly from the above-mentioned untreatable
health problems. Despite this, we do find a large number of examples of
pre-20th century individuals attaining life-spans of 75 years or greater,
including Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson,
John Adams, Cato the
Elder, Thomas Hobbes, Eric of Pomerania, Christopher
Polhem, and Michaelangelo. This was also true for poorer people like
peasants or laborers. Genealogists will almost
certainly find ancestors living to their 70s, 80s and even 90s several hundred
years ago.
For example, an 1871 census in the UK (the first of its
kind) found the average male life expectancy as being 44, but if infant
mortality is subtracted, males who lived to adulthood
averaged 75 years. The
present male life expectancy in the UK is 77 years for males and 81 for females
(the United States averages 74 for males and 80 for females). Women would have fared worse because of risk from bearing
children and effect of repeated pregnancies….”
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
An important fact can shoot down a
beautiful, logic theory. Several
theories concerning conditions of the western diet and western lifestyle has
been promoted as a way of deflecting research, discussion, and appropriate
response to a major health issue. There
is a pattern to it which is why I use the labels tobacco science, tobacco ethics,
and scientists for hire. In this
pattern is a verboten list is the real causes while minor causes are promoted
to major causes. Tobacco has been on that verboten list since the 1920 for
cancer and cardiovascular disease (CVD), and even to this day its role in CVD
is downplayed—even though for those who smoke a pack a day lifelong there are
more excess deaths from CVD than cancers.
The corporate press and corporate shadow government and the failure to
place the people before profits entails that there is a well-established
pattern, thus my illusion to tobacco. This
explains the confusion and cognitive dissonance that mankind has about the
health villains.
We should be asking what has gone
wrong with our health, what has brought on the conditions of the western
society/diet, the joint problems, the osteoporosis, the heart burn, the dementia,
the diabetes, the out of
control growth in adipose (fat) tissues
and its broken weight-regulatory system, and the cardiovascular disease with
its hypertension, strokes and heart attacks.
Instead of unveiling its major cause, we get in the press a parade of
minor causes: among them is stress
(cortisol theory), sedinatary lifestyle, and reactive oxygen species. And we
get a parade of fake fixes: prescription drugs, vitamin pills,
supplements, miracle foods, and the advice to exercise more and eat less. But
once the weight regulatory system is
broken and there has been for over 2 years excess weight, that system resets to
the new weight, and for them there is the yo-yo diet as the system gradual
restores the adipose tissue to its prior level. Yes we should be asking what
has gone wrong.
We should be asking why do the
elderly among aboriginal societies on their traditional diet have virtual not
of those conditions and cancer is about 1/5th our rate? Why
were these conditions rare among the
masses in the preindustrial and early industrial western societies? Why was
the reduction in smoking, which
declined from 46% of adults in 1970 to 16% in 2015, have not produced a
corresponding reduction in deaths from CVD?
But the answer is not in the interest of pharma who profits from illness
and the food manufactures who have changed our diet during the 20th
century. The answer, the big one
driving our health disaster is the amount of reactive sugar consumed all
sources fructose, which is one half of the disaccharide sucrose (table
sugar). The US average is 120 pounds
yearly, with one half consuming more.
What I want you to do is read the abstract of
an a
article that appeared in an Ophthalmology journal in 1995. It is an example
of a minor cause become
major.
The role of free radicals in disease
Abstract
Evidence is accumulating
that
most of the degenerative diseases that afflict humanity have their origin in
deleterious free radical reactions. These diseases include atherosclerosis,
cancer, inflammatory joint disease, asthma, diabetes, senile dementia and
degenerative eye disease. The process of biological ageing might also have a
free radical basis. Most free radical damage to cells involves oxygen free
radicals or, more generally, activated oxygen species (AOS) which include
non-radical species such as singlet oxygen and hydrogen peroxide as well as
free radicals. The AOS can damage genetic material, cause lipid peroxidation in
cell membranes, and inactivate membrane-bound enzymes. Humans are well endowed
with antioxidant defences against AOS; these antioxidants, or free radical
scavengers, include ascorbic
acid (vitamin C),
α-tocopherol (vitamin E), beta-carotene, coenzyme Q10, enzymes such as catalase and
superoxide dismutase, and trace elements including selenium and zinc. The eye is an organ with
intense AOS activity, and it requires high levels of antioxidants to protect
its unsaturated fatty
acids.
The human species is not genetically
adapted to survive past middle age,[contradicted by the article above and our
current average age of death in the 7th decade] and it appears that
antioxidant supplementation of our diet is needed to ensure a more healthy
elderly population.
The problem with this answer is
that as in the article on longevity of adult men is the fact that shoots
down their theory. They didn’t,
nor do the aboriginal peoples on
a traditional diet take antioxidants supplements. All people are exposed to
AOS, thus it cannot
explain the health disaster. Yes such
supplements, they are a good idea, and I take them in a mega dose. The evidence
for their benefits are
compelling, but pharma who is in the business of treating illness educates the
doctors that they are useless, and they do studies to prove it.
And true to the business pattern
others are seldom listed in our main source of information the corporate
media. These minor causes include GMO
crops, chemical pollutents, pesticides, ethanol, and prescription and
over-the-counter drugs.
We
Behind the bad science is corporation being
corporations. The case against
tobacco was essentially complete by the mid nineteen twenties. A summation of
the evidence based on journal
published research was set out by Dr. Kellogue the founder of the cereal
company. A public figure who had a major
clinic for health not far below Lester Burbank and Thomas Edison.
|
