Quit smoking, live 5 years less
- Thread starter caramel
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
come on now we can't throw obesity into this mix.obesity has gone up in this country over the same time period.please don't confuse these people with facts. hehehehe
My guess is that the main problem is the income, not the education level. Try to compare the price of let's say fresh ingredients, home prepared Mediterranean diet with prepackaged / fast food and you're in for a shock.
Add the need for those in the lower income bracket to work 2-3 jobs just to pay rent and the basics and they don't even have the time to prepare proper food,
Add the need for those in the lower income bracket to work 2-3 jobs just to pay rent and the basics and they don't even have the time to prepare proper food,
I truly believe that stress is the big killer. All of the "self-medicating" with caffeine, nicotine, alcohol, "other" substances, endorphins produced by "intimate encounters", running and sports is simply human beings staying true to the survival imperative. Force Puritanism and you condemn many to death.
EDIT: Assuming of course, you believe that evolution brought us here
Just saw that comment. Oh my God (s/he happens to be universal), is that actually still a question among people who promote science and evidence based policy making?
Just saw that comment. Oh my God (s/he happens to be universal), is that actually still a question among people who promote science and evidence based policy making?
Sure. Especially since "we don't know the long term effects" of evolutionism. Shall be banned.
Come on now, possibly (having read many of your posts, probably) your comment is either "tongue in cheek" or outright sarcasm. My post was about true astonishment. I really can't imagine that any logical person would actually dismiss evolution and choose to "read" spiritual texts as literal and not parable.
I forgot the /sarcasm tag.... However any construction using the antzy "we don't know the long term effects" shall be suspected of such 
I read a very interesting book about 5 yrs ago, about how our digestive system had evolved, *because* we had discovered the use of fire to "cook" or otherwise process our foods (smoking meat and fish, etc) -- apparently we would need a far longer digestive tract than we already have, if we had not learned that skill -- e.g. cows, who have 4 stomachs and must still stand about chewing their cud all day. By the introduction of cooking, we furthered our own evolutionary process, by freeing ourselves from a great deal of time and energy required just to chew our food and digest it.
This mindset embraces the fact that a vegan or raw-foods diet does make us lose weight, because we must spend so much of the energy *from* the food, just to masticate and digest the food. And further, that the more processed a given food, the more our bodies will assimilate it, use it, and store it -- leading to fat when there is little activity necessary to procure it, or even energy required to digest it.
Andria
It's a bit like the fake PC "Not that there's anything wrong with it". If you do it for the one side, then it seems reasonable to do it for the other - but of course, that's simply not the case
Very true. I was very fortunate to marry a man with similar ideas about food to my own -- that quality is worth it, and that fresh-prepared food is always better, and that healthy does NOT mean less tasty. We've scrimped on a lot of stuff thru the years, but never on food. And I'm pretty sure that one of the big reasons it's never bothered him that I don't work outside the home is because about 5 days out of every 7, I'm cooking something -- and with all these years' experience, I do it well, too.
Andria
Quite interesting. The general consciences is that smokeless tobacco is about 99% plus or minus 1%, less harmful then smoking, and that e-cigs will likely follow suite in the long run. The question has to be ask is if low risk tobacco and nicotine has an overall positive effect on health. We know they have negligible negative health effects, but it is very possible it could be a positive effect.
With increased cognitive power and relaxation, low risk tobacco and nicotine can certainly add to the quality of life.
Last edited:
It's a bit like the fake PC "Not that there's anything wrong with it". If you do it for the one side, then it seems reasonable to do it for the other - but of course, that's simply not the case
Hey Kent,
Interpretation please. Are you intimating that I "sit on the fence"? Let me make my position clear - raised as a Catholic, I would tend to view any religion (note not necessarily spiritual leaning) as hypocritical. Been there, done that, seen the consequences (and they're not pretty). What I do allow for, given the immensity of the universe we are a tiny speck of - almost anything is possible (but may not be actual).
but even plain meat, fruits and vegetables are plastered with pesticides and hormones, etc.
Not to mention that the soil fruits and veggies (and the feed for the critters too) gets grown in is so depleted of nutrients that we don't get the same levels we would have in the past with the same diets.
And just because it needs repeating 'correlation does not equal causation'... Anyone unsure of what that means should take 15 minute reading break now please and head to their nearest search engine.
I was explaining what DC2's EDIT was. An attempt at being 'PC' - "assuming", but leaving open the idea that someone might not believe evolution 'brought us here'. But in a way that might not be that PC in the manner of the rather popular Seinfeld sketch on gays. ("not that there's anything wrong with that...") If you don't know the episode, you won't have a clue. Not that important to explain any further.....
That said, I thought your comment was a tad presumptuous (as to who may read the post) and perhaps even what liberals might consider a microagression when directed at their endless line of factions for which everyone should be "showing consideration". All the while practicing the same 'microagression' or worse on groups with which they disagree - gun owners, capitalists, rich people, religious people, straight people, white people, Hispanics who have traffic tickets and run for President, Black conservatives, women conservatives, gay and transsexual conservatives, etc. etc. etc.
IOW, unlike me, I thought you took DC2's edit too seriously :- )
Now seriously I'm wondering if the data they used is publicly available, there must be some other interesting inferences after so many years of declining smoking prevalence. Or is it under embargo like the climate data?
Similar to my own leanings -- I do believe in "God," whatever that is. For a human to think he knows much of anything about the universe (in the spiritual sense) strikes me as being somewhat on the order of a flea on a dog thinking he understands why the human that owns the dog wants to get rid of the flea.
I certainly won't depend on so-called "scriptures" that have been written by men, interpreted and abridged by men, and translated by men... that would be like that flea having scriptures all about that human's motivations. Andria
Actually, my edit was due to the fact that I don't believe evolution is what brought us here.
That does not mean, however, that I think the concept of "evolving" is invalid.
That does not mean, however, that I think the concept of "evolving" is invalid.
That "healthy diet" crap is based on the same fraud they use against tobacco, namely falsely blaming them for diseases that are really caused by infection. Poorer people are more likely to have been exposed to those infections, especially cytomegalovirus. The single largest cause of death is cardiovascular disease, and it is CMV-related.
"[T]he most striking finding of Simanek et al.'s study is that the relatively modest OR of CVD associated with CMV infection translates into an estimate of the population attributable risk or attributable fraction of CVD of ∼ 40%... What is striking about this 40% attributable fraction estimate is the implication that eliminating CMV infection would prevent as many CVD cases as the complete removal of smoking and almost twice as many as the elimination of either hypercholesterolaemia or hypertension from the population." (Commentary: Understanding the pathophysiology of poverty. FJ Nieto. Int J Epidemiol 2009 Jun;38(3):787-790.)
Commentary: Understanding the pathophysiology of poverty
Persistent pathogens linking socioeconomic position and cardiovascular disease in the US. AM Simanek, JB Dowd, AE Aiello. Int J Epidemiol 2009 Jun;38(3):775-87.
Persistent pathogens linking socioeconomic position and cardiovascular disease in the US
The vitally important thing this couldn't evaluate is the age at which people were infected. An earlier age at infection, for socioeconomic reasons, would account for an earlier onset of heart disease, such as the anti-smokers blame on smoking. And every Surgeon General report is fraudulent because it ignores the role of CMV.
The Surgeon General Lies That Smoking Causes Heart Disease
"[T]he most striking finding of Simanek et al.'s study is that the relatively modest OR of CVD associated with CMV infection translates into an estimate of the population attributable risk or attributable fraction of CVD of ∼ 40%... What is striking about this 40% attributable fraction estimate is the implication that eliminating CMV infection would prevent as many CVD cases as the complete removal of smoking and almost twice as many as the elimination of either hypercholesterolaemia or hypertension from the population." (Commentary: Understanding the pathophysiology of poverty. FJ Nieto. Int J Epidemiol 2009 Jun;38(3):787-790.)
Commentary: Understanding the pathophysiology of poverty
Persistent pathogens linking socioeconomic position and cardiovascular disease in the US. AM Simanek, JB Dowd, AE Aiello. Int J Epidemiol 2009 Jun;38(3):775-87.
Persistent pathogens linking socioeconomic position and cardiovascular disease in the US
The vitally important thing this couldn't evaluate is the age at which people were infected. An earlier age at infection, for socioeconomic reasons, would account for an earlier onset of heart disease, such as the anti-smokers blame on smoking. And every Surgeon General report is fraudulent because it ignores the role of CMV.
The Surgeon General Lies That Smoking Causes Heart Disease
- Status
Similar threads
