Could it be that people started living long enough to develop these problems, or that the problems were just previously undercounted? There are a lot of fairly boring theories that are more likely than anything extravagant.

Cancer rates skyrocketed because we started screening for cancer. It's that simple.

And obesity skyrocketed because nobody knew the difference between a fat person and a skinny person before 1970? We knew what cancer was before 1970. We certainly knew what diabetes was. The simple fact is that people started getting sicker in the 70s.

For a very long time people have been going to the doctor when they feel sick. Oliver Cromwell consulted with doctors and was convinced that he was very ill. Later on we understand that he had bipolar disorder. When people feel sick they consult doctors and have been doing this for hundreds of years. An illness like diabetes presents very specific symptoms and doctors have been aware of diabetes for a very long time. The same is true for many kinds of cancer. And even mental illnesses as I have pointed out were recognized as medical ailments by people for hundreds of years. It wasn’t that we suddenly started diagnosing these things.

Also, there are communities of people who do not develop heart disease or insulin resistance or depression or cancer. The common thread between every community like this is that they live outside of the modern world and do not eat modern foods. They live in an old way. This is well documented. Yet another insane data point that people somehow ignore. There are literally people out there who basically do not get cancer heart disease or diabetes and nobody seems to think it’s important to get to the bottom of this, people like you who leave snide comments and contribute nothing. A worthless parasite.

So there are communities that live in the old way and do not get any of these diseases. We see that these diseases exploded for us around 1970. It couldn’t be more obvious.

The documentary “sugar coated” details this period when the sugar industry got everyone believing excessive sugar was fine and fat wasn’t healthy. Leading to a wave of low-fat sugar-fortified food in the late 70s on. Obesity exploded in response and related outcomes.

> An illness like diabetes presents very specific symptoms and doctors have been aware of diabetes for a very long time. The same is true for many kinds of cancer

You can have diabetes and high blood pressure and cancer and not have symptoms. That's why we screen for them. If you have symptoms, it is no longer screening, it's diagnosing. A lot more screening is happening now than before the 70s so we are obviously finding a lot more disease.

I'm not arguing against the fact that lifestyle and environment play a significant role in increasing cancer, but that doesn't change the fact that dramatically increased screening rates have contributed to dramatically increased disease diagnoses.

> There are literally people out there who basically do not get cancer heart disease or diabetes and nobody seems to think it’s important to get to the bottom of this

I think there is probably more research these days into causes of cancer than ever before.

> people like you who leave snide comments and contribute nothing. A worthless parasite.

Really?

I don’t buy it. Cancer that is screened eventually will present. It doesn’t change the amount of cancer that presents. Again, this changes survival but not diagnoses. People who abstain from living in the modern way almost never get cancer or diabetes. Is this because they aren’t being screened? The explosion doesn’t correlate to change in screening methodology. Yes, people who ignore the simple facts are parasites. Like with the recent breakthrough in epigenetic aging, for decades the theory of mutation based aging dominated despite the clear and simple fact that there was contradictory evidence. For decades we had to put up with the amyloid theory of Alzheimer’s even though the plain and simple fact was that there were people without Alzheimer’s who had plaques and there were people with Alzheimer’s who didn’t have plaques. The reason why billions of dollars were spent on the wrong solutions and the reason why millions of people have suffered and died prematurely for no good reason is people like you who glom onto whatever is the least painful thing to believe. Whatever liberates you the most from accountability. No, it’s not anything we are doing, it’s just data anomalies and we are totally helpless. The same doom worship that is responsible for every global warming advocate getting really glassy eyed and avoidant whenever you start to discuss actual solutions rather than just rave about how utterly screwed we are. People don’t want solutions they want to resign to their helplessness. So yeah you are part of the problem in my opinion. You just want to resign to the fact that cancer is totally beyond our ability to comprehend or do anything about it. And you ignore these insane data points that demand to be scrutinized and made sense of because it would interrupt your world view.

You have a fundamentally incorrect misunderstanding: "Cancer that is screened eventually will present"

The problem is screening is very sensitive, and has a high false positive rate. What doctors aren't worried about is people having benign tumors- it's having aggressive cancers that impact a person's health.

But I think you have deeper problems; based on your various posts it looks like you're just angry at the health care system and want to believe that it's being irrational or ignoring problems.

Thank you for checking up on my post history. I am angry with the medical establishment and I am justified. This all started when i had a serious medical diagnosis and later learned about groundbreaking therapies that have been sidelined by the medical establishment. It turns out that this happens on a wide scale. Wide compared to what one would imagine, zero.

When the very first clinical trial took place, the cure for scurvy was discovered. What people don’t know is that the cure for scurvy was known for hundreds of years. The native Americans knew what scurvy was and knew how to cure it. Various people in the old world learned of this and knew it. But it was ignored by the medical establishment. And what even fewer people know is that after the very first clinical trial proved beyond doubt how to cure scurvy… nobody cared. The results were rejected by the medical establishment and scurvy was not systematically treated until much later.

How is this possible? Weren’t people dying? Wasn’t the situation urgent? Weren’t the medical experts of the time men of reason and very intelligent? The incentive structure of large bureaucracies is never aligned well with the common good or the truth. It’s made up of thousands of people who have their own interests and salaries to worry about. And the system is supported by robots like you who reject logic and refuse to question the current models despite the fact that these models are purpose built to become obsolete — that’s how science works.

I will not look through your comment history because I’m not insecure about myself.

I'm not so sure, cancers seem to be mostly due to environment/lifestyle [0]. Diet is a big factor and it definitely got worse since the 70s

[0] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2515569/

I'm not arguing that they don't, but the fact is

- the American Cancer Society didn't start promoting cervical cancer screening until the 1960s [1] - mammography was first recommended officialy in 1976 [1]

Screening was just coming of age 50 years ago so it's no surprise we started to find something once we started looking for it.

[1]: https://www.cancer.org/treatment/understanding-your-diagnosi...

They have?

https://acsjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.3322/caac...

Looks like they went from 400 to 500 then back to 450 since 1975. It's trending down.

And you'd need to correct for age distribution to make sure it's not just the population having older people and thus higher chance of cancer in a given year.

What part of this document contradicts what I’ve said? The only chart that doesn’t start at 75 is cancer deaths, not incidence.

You said it "skyrocketed" since 1970. Unless it skyrocketed from '70 to '74 (which I doubt), the trend is not up, it's up then back down.

The original comment literally outlines the interaction we’ve just had

Please provide data to back up your original claim.

It's most likely animal fat and meat demonisation https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hzQAHITIUhg

It's one of those things were effects are so far ahead in time you don't really realise they're there until you're 60 and cancer kills you. And then it's "oh well, old people die" or "he had too many beers"

I was striving to be vegetarian for more than a decade (avoid red meat, low fat diet) because of the "science", before I started developing issues.

Good luck in finding research to back this up, the trend seems to be going all towards vegan highly processed food. I was impressed when mainstream science recently reluctantly backtracked on animal fat and meat.

The USDA is still to update recommendations of course.

what issues did you have? Were you tracking macros?

> Cancer rates have exploded since 1970

So has life expectancy!

Cancer is ultimately a numbers game & you roll the dice every single day. Life expectancy in the US today is ten years longer than it was in 1970. All those extra dice rolls add up. Ideally you could correct for this effect, but it’s not clear we know enough about how cancer risk accumulates over time to do this correctly.

Cancer rates for each age have exploded, not just total cancer rates. Cancer rates for cancers that were known and diagnosed well before 1970 have exploded.

I think about things like this:

https://preview.redd.it/clcfr7xw08y31.jpg?auto=webp&s=6dc026...

It was around that time when modern society became remarkably efficient at poisoning or completely destroying ecosystems

This is already well-known and understood in science: cancer rates exploding is not because of an external force causing more cancer, but a sign that we addressed other things that kill you before you get cancer. And we also got far better at screening, including being able to identify benign tumors.

This sort of hyperbole- "killing millions", "trillion pet theories"- is needlessly alarmist.

When the earth is billion, even benign things kill millions. Air pollution kills millions. Cancer for any given age demographic have exploded LIKE A NUCLEAR BOMB. So it’s not lifespan. Cancers of all kinds have exploded, even the ones that were diagnosed before. We didn’t all of a sudden diagnose cancer in 1970. Or diabetes or obesity. And what do you say about communities of people that have almost none of these diseases? It’s not genetics… and they all live in a primitive way. And when these communities adopt western technology and food they start getting sick. But it’s all just an illusion… screening. Sure.