>a pragmatic daily fitness (for example commuting with a bike) instead of a more 'artificial' fitness
For example this just seems random. Driving a bike is not even more natural (were there bikes in the EEA) and if anything will just expose you to more polluted air, and increase your risk of dying by a car crash compared to gym alternatives. This doesn't mean biking is bad compared to not doing anything but that's not the claim here.
There is nothing one can do to avoid disease eventually.
Some people start getting sick in their 80s, some die healthy & peacefully in their sleep in their 90s and some get cancer being <10 years old.
You can move where this cancer is rare.
https://ourworldindata.org/cancer#the-prevalence-of-cancer-a...
Or better yet, optimize for a total healthy lifespan, not just against cancer:
https://ourworldindata.org/burden-of-disease#the-global-dist...
For the cancer one, I feel like it's misleading. E.g. Russia and Central Africa might be low in cancer because of their low life expectancy, and Central Africa additionally because of its majority black population (which I assume to be less prone to skin cancer). As a white person, I believe it would be a mistake to move to Central Africa expecting to reduce one's skin cancer risk, as evidenced by the high skin cancer rates of white people in South Africa or Australia. So for that map it would be great to be able to filter it by age group and ethnicity.
The disability-adjusted life years (DALY) one seems much more useful. What stands out there is how much healthier people are on average in Western Europe compared to the U.S. Perhaps that is in part because of the more egalitarian societies and health care systems in European countries, which greatly improve the health of the less well-off. I wonder if that comes at the cost of the better-off, i.e. if say the top 10% in the U.S. are actually healthier in the U.S. than in Europe. It would be interesting to be able to filter by income level.
As someone from Romania, I believe that is true. But since joining the EU, we've also seen changes in food laws, which have a large impact on health.
For example, recently it became mandatory to label citrus fruit when it was treated with preservatives, to know whether the peel is edible. People used to consume the peel regardless; now more people are aware.
There is also an important difference between "flavorings" and "natural flavorings". For instance, artificial butter flavoring causes "popcorn lung".
I suppose it matters how much of the flavor escapes into the air, but I did not know that it is naturally present in butter.
That said, butter comes with its own issues. For example, 14g/day is associated with a 1% reduction in life expectancy - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4927102/
No, the cancer rates are "measured as the age-standardized percentage".
But skin color definitely plays a role, at least in skin cancer, and I don't think the figures account for it. I did not think of that, thank you!
I figure some of those light coloured countries have more people simply not getting a diagnosis. Additionally going to central africa as a white person might increase your chance of skincancer enough to offset any reduced of other cancers.
It's probably better to just go to where people live the longest and adjust to the local diet/rythm, etc
It's actually also about regularly stressing your body with things like cold/hot exposure (using natural elements/seasons), for example a pragmatic daily fitness (for example commuting with a bike) instead of a more 'artificial' fitness in a gym, an organic diet foraged yourself (with enough knowledge of course) instead of bought from shops, getting sometimes sick and recovering, reinforcing immunity