https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_cancer_ra...
1. http://www.who.int/dg/speeches/2010/iaea_forum_20100921/en/
Here's a world map showing population cancer rate: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/share-of-population-with-... Definitely cancer is positively correlated with wealth, but there is clearly another factor as well.
1/5th the old people generally means ~1/5th the cancer rates.
PS: This also explains much of the increase in cancer rates globally: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.65UP.TO.ZS
Muslim people do not fast at night time. On average, they tend to eat much more during Ramadan what with the vast array of seasonal sweets.
The true difficulty of fasting during Ramadan is not being allowed to drink water during the day.
My friends here have told me that the main problem is to eat enough during the night because after fasting for 18 hours your body get used to it. I assume similar to my issues eating a bkg breakfast in the morning directly after waking up.
Not eating food for 12 hours isn't very hard at all.
What?! To hell with that. That's just dangerous.
Still, I don't care for dietary guidelines mandated by religious bodies.
Our modern diet and lifestyle leads to a massive hormonal imbalance. E.g. many have started to blame insulin resistance for many cancers, which is also the leading cause for type 2 diabetes and obesity.
I suspect that countries with low cancer rates or low rates of type 2 diabetes simply haven't adopted the western diet.
1. high in refined carbohydrates
2. snacks between meals
Yes, there are Asian cultures with diets high in carbs that don't suffer from our epidemic. But those diets aren't high in refined carbohydrates or other crap we've been told to eat to lower the fat intake (e.g. margarine).
Where is it written that thou shall only eat three meals a day? This is in itself a Western cultural bias.
The obesity crisis started in approx 1977. If you look at the the eating patterns from 1950, people ate less meals per day back then, an average of 3.
There's also a scientific explanation for it: when you snack, insulin goes up. By having 6 meals per day, like the average American now does, the insulin never goes down during the day. The body then develops insulin resistance, leptin resistance (satiety hormone) and it's all downhill from there.
In fact, ACTUAL studies show that the number of meals doesn’t affect weight loss, only the amount of calories[0].
How you eat, how many times and how that affects your weight loss is totally up to the individuals preference, and what they feel is easier for them to maintain in their daily life.
And you did not address his main point: that when one snacks, insulin goes up. It's a contributor to obesity, and as I understand it, is not controversial.
It’s probably safe to say it is high sugar, high carb, high fat, high protein, high preservatives, high in toxins, highly inflammatory, high in calories... yet low in micro nutritional value (vitamins and minerals). When you have all that, it explains why we focus on sugar and carbs, because when you combine all that with insulin spikes/high blood sugar levels it becomes deadly, and in that environment removing the sugar/carbs (insulin spikes) it is going to result in significant improvements in health and weight.
Those factors also explain high incidents of chronic diseases (heart disease, fatty liver, type 2 diabetes) and obesity.
Walk only around the outside of the store and you'll be fine. Don't go down any aisle except for spices.
Most people just don’t understand/know what is and isn’t crap as you call it. But I think understanding what foods lead to metabolic disorders and chronic diseases, people would look at American grocers as peddlers of poison (of course they have a small percentage of healthy foods too).
1) produce aisle
2) butcher
3) some dairy
4) a few dried base foods like oats, rice, and maybe beans.
The entire rest of the grocery store is tasty poison.
Is this an indirect way of saying people are eating high calories? Because most people use these terms in a relative manner. i.e. high carbs compared to fat and protein, or high fat and protein with fewer carbs.
So for counter example you could eat a calorie surplus (like body builders bulking phase or maybe an endurance athlete refueling and preparing for another event) but that doesn’t necessarily mean the macros are all high (above daily recommended or above the amount to maintain body weight).
Curious, is insulin resistance the leading cause of type 2? I thought insulin resistance was the definition of type 2.
Also, it doesn't say that 40% of cancer is due to diet. It says that 40% of cancer diagnoses are types of cancer that are associated with being overweight or obese. This does not mean that 40% of cancers are due to diet for several reasons.
Being overweight or obese is not always due to diet. You could become overweight for other reasons and still suffer many of the negative health consequences.
Correlation is not causation. Just because a cancer is associated with being overweight doesn't necessarily mean that being overweight causes the cancer. Perhaps some cancers cause you to become overweight. Perhaps there are some third factors that cause both. Maybe one of those factors is diet for some cancers but not others.
Having a cancer that is caused by with being overweight or obese doesn't mean that it was a cause or the cause of your particular cancer. Just as there are nonsmokers with lung cancer, there will be a lot of skinny people in that 40%.
As a fasting schedule, it is rather self-defeating. Even not drinking water during the day is not such a big problem, if you go about it smartly. On the other hand, complaining about Ramadan seems to be as big a part of the tradition as the eating after dark.
I was pointing out Islam is the only TOTAL fasting (food+water) major religion, versus food-only fasting happening elsewhere.
Dietary wise it's closest to intermittent fasting, as you normally wont eat for 8-14 hours of the day, then have a big dinner. I had a bodybuilder friend who used it as an enforced time to cut weight.
And of course, it's a combination of multiple factors (cultural, climate, and people dying by other means before being affected by cancer)