Last week’s post included a list of various chronic diseases that we are suffering from at higher rates than our paleolithic ancestors. Included in that list, to the surprise of many, were certain types of cancers. We have good evidence to link colon, breast, lung and prostate cancers to modern lifestyles. These are all among the most common cancers afflicting us. According to the American Cancer Society, at least 40% of cancers are preventable by simply by following habits common among our paleolithic ancestors: exercise, healthy foods, nonsmoking, normal body weight, and limiting alcohol consumption. It is also likely that a number of other cancers are related to lifestyle habits though we lack sufficient data to conclude that with certainty.
That cancers are increasing over time is itself not all that surprising. We are after all living longer. Undoubtedly age is a risk factor for cancer so naturally this is to be expected. What is surprising though is that cancers appear to be increasing at younger ages. The illustration below from this month’s issue of Nature indicates that a higher percentage of people under the age of 50 years are developing cancer. This is unexpected and requires an explanation.
Fortunately treatments are getting better over time as well and so the death rates from cancers are still declining over time (at least to now). And yet, how much better it would be to prevent cancer rather than treat it however successfully after it develops.
Here’s how to make sense of what we are experiencing. Truth be told, we don’t exactly know the reason for increasing rates of cancers at relatively young ages. What we do know though is that apart from our failure to follow the known healthy lifestyle habits, we are also increasingly creating all sorts of unnatural chemical and environmental exposures on account of the vast number of products and services we create and consume.
PFAS is a term you might start to hear about increasingly. It stands for per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances. These and other chemicals are an increasingly common “forever chemicals”. They practically resist decomposing and remain in our environment forever (or at least a very long time). They contaminant our drinking water and accumulate in fish and other wildlife. All of us are inevitably exposed to these (it’s thought to be in the blood of 98% of the human population). Likewise, we all consume microplastics in our drinking water. We don’t really know the implications for how these impact our health.
The way we manage PFAS reminds me a little about how we manage our food supply. The designation of GRAS by the FDA is to tell the public that these “foods” are “Generally Regarded As Safe”. What that is supposed to mean is interesting and contradictory. Sugar is GRAS. As are a whole bunch of chemical ingredients you would be challenged to recognize. Many of these are not safe. As we have come to learn over the last few decades, sugar consumption leads to all sorts of disease. These include obesity, diabetes, heart disease, and even certain kinds of cancer. Thus we ought to feel skeptical about the designation of GRAS. Likewise, we ought to be concerned about “forever chemicals” entering into our environments.
If we include those cancers preventable by avoiding exposure to a myriad of known and unknown environmental toxins, my guess is that instead of preventing 40% of cancers (thought to be preventable through a healthy lifestyle), a good majority of cancers arising at younger ages are probably altogether preventable. But I don’t have the evidence to back up this claim. Its only a hypothesis. We probably don’t know enough about the various toxins and how they relate to cancer rates to make definitive conclusions. On the other hand, clearly, genetic factors alone do not explain the rising rates.
The conclusion I’m hoping to direct you towards is obvious to those used to reading my blogs: mindless consumerism by which we unintentionally generate a myriad of carcinogens (known and unknown) is THE underlying reason for the burden of cancer (and of course various other chronic diseases) we face today.
BOTTOM LINE: THERE IS A BETTER WAY!
- As John Maynard Keynes said a century ago, people of our time ought to be largely independent of our employers for our income – unfortunately, due to “mindless consumerism”, we are not.
- Mindless consumerism is the underlying reason leading to the rise of chronic disease for 3 major reasons:
- It ties us to dependence on our employers and modern day employment is a health hazard for most (in part due to the sedentary nature of most jobs).
- It has led to environmental changes toxic to our wellbeing:
- (a). We evolved in and are best suited to natural environments and instead we live in increasingly artificial environments.
- (b). Overconsumption has lead us to engineer out the need for meaningful use of our legs for ambulation.
- Finally, it transforms workers to work with blinders on – instead of working for the product or service and receiving money as a side effect, workers focus on making money and the product or service is instead the side effect. The results (with respect to health) is that “food” is no longer food but changed to maximize pleasure and extract profit in spite of the toxicity to our health.
- Based on the science of wellbeing one can derive the philosophy that once basic needs are met, “The best things in life are free” therefore —>
- Most people can live far below their means without sacrificing happiness AND by investing the rest, they can become financially independent of their employers enabling them to be —>
- Happier. Healthier. Wealthier. More engaged. Simply better.
