My handy heuristic for headlines like this: Is it a scary new trend that means something or did other factors suppressing its natural emergence decline? Or is it a matter of observation?
A recent real-world example was the detection of two different objects entering the solar system. The naive speculation was "they came on the same plane, so they must be alien!" But the reality is more mundane: the new detection method that found them, while flexible, started by looking at that plane. So of course both objects it detected were on that plane.
Unfortunately, that doesn't seem the be the case here, and the article goes into this. Deaths due to colorectal cancer under 50 simply used to be incredibly uncommon. Younger people were simply not screened for it. The rise is not solely relative to other forms of death, but in absolute terms has increased.
Earlier screenings are just compensating for poor education. It's not a solution to anything but the question of how to raise insurance costs for young people.
Just eat your damn vegetables!
Some things to consider:
>There are classifications of fiber, insoluable vs soluable
>Even those classifications are overly generalized, and can/should be broken down into basically individual foods.
>Fiber and the various types have impact on your gut bacteria. If your gut bacteria is bad, you might be fueling growth of bad bacteria.
>You don't actually need fiber
>You don't actually need a colon
>I think gut bacteria management will probably be the next big thing. A combination of more scientific probiotics + fiber/prebiotics.
>I'm guessing the colon cancer thing is probably due to pollutants. Not necessarily air, but could be from food.
Splitting hairs beyond that, like insoluble and soluble, is the kind of thing that just confuses and intimidates people about nutrition advice.
It's a bridge you can cross once everyone is eating 50g+ of fiber per day, has chiseled physiques, and are looking to min/max.
> You don't actually need fiber
Hey, you know what fiber is good for? Speeding up gut motility! You know what a faster gut motility is good for! Getting toxins out of our body quicker!
At least if you can find some not previously doused in poison.
I walked in and walked out no issue and went on about my day. Prep was fine but would be hard if I didn't work at home.
I thought it was going to be awkward but wasn't at all. We just chatted. It was him and an assistant. I was able to watch the TV of my colon while he was doing it.
My doc looked at me like I was crazy when I asked if it could be done without sedation, and reminded me that it would be uncomfortable, but otherwise didn't have any problem with it. I've endured 50k runs, brutal workouts, and traumatizing childhood neglect - I really can't see what the fuss is with mild discomfort that, by comparison, barely registers, and for such a short amount of time at that.
I assume that's not actually a realistic risk, right?
If I ever receive that procedure again, I will ask to skip the fentanyl microdose. The anesthesia and the buzz were not only underwhelming but for some reasons I started to feel the typical opioid warmth when the procedure was almost completed. Had they waited a few minutes after the IM injection I might have had another opinion on the usefulness on fentanyl during endoscopie because the last 30s were almost pleasant!
Definitely enjoyed the following times with anesthesia because, of course 0/10 as far as I know. Also, anesthesia just trips my mind—how seemingly time travel (going forward in time) seems to be involved.
The prep was horrible, particularly the electrolyte drink they make you take the night before. I almost puked several times trying to get that stuff down.
Actual procedure was a breeze. I was sedated, and then I woke up and it was over.
And you get diarrhea-like bathroom runs half a dozen times maybe.
Yes it was annoying to get the runs and gross to drink the stuff the first few times, but people eat things like cow tongue or live octopus or whatever... I can handle some bad-tasting Gatorade and some diarrhea just fine, especially given the 5 years of peace-of-mind it buys me afterward.
Overall, the colorectal cancer story is encouraging https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47078840
If people enjoy it and really get a lot out of it then I wouldn't judge them for doing it, but let's not pretend it's healthy, because all the evidence is that it isn't.
In terms of cardio being able to run a half decent 5k a couple of times a week is probably a good idea, any more volume than that is really not necessary and at some point becomes harmful
Also there's "distance running" as in running maybe 50k a week, that's probably okay, although as you get older it will increase your risk of stroke. But ultramarathons are a whole different ball game and almost certainly bad for you
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11720530/ says there's a higher rate of AF in older, male althetes but a lower risk of stroke compared to similar aged, non-athletes.
At any rate, the data doesn't seem clear enough to claim that "distance running bad for you" or "any distance over 50K is bad for you".
I think the biggest risk though is acutely doing high intensity exercise (e.g. a marathon) whereas doing low intensity regular exercise (e.g. a 5k jogged at moderate pace 4x a week) is probably good.
So it's not "running is bad", it's more "running insane distances and/or running at insanely high intensity is bad", but the issue is a lot of people who get really into running end up doing one or both of those things.
One sign that marathons (let alone ultramarathons) may not be particularly healthy is that the first guy to do one famously died, and then subsequently people die doing them every single year. Yes the risk is low overall, but that doesn't mean it's actually good for you
I recommend everyone do a gut cleanse once a year.
Doing an ambiguous preventive activity on 1 out of 365 days doesn't sound effective.
Yes I can eat this 4200cal Costco pizza, I did my cleanse last month.
And I’m not sure what toxins is supposed to mean and how Americans are more exposed to toxins than developing world children scouring through our electronic garbage on a daily basis
Gut cleanse, colon cleanse, detoxing. None of this is supported by science. Nor would any of these things cure, prevent or in anyway help a parasitic infection.
Here are some common parasitic infections and how they're treated. None of these treatments recommend gut cleanse. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giardia#Infection https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toxoplasma_gondii#Treatment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ascariasis#Treatment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hookworm_infection#Treatment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinworm_infection#Treatment
Gut inflammation can be a problem, but I would not recommend treating it or even diagnosing it without evidence.
For similar reasons, I also wonder about people who consume raw milk. These people are more likely to endorse ivermectin for e.g. covid, because it made them feel much better. Maybe it's possible these people aren't lying about that, but not because it cured their covid.
eat healthy my lads. trust not the media
The current US administration is not at all interesting in addressing America's unhealthy food.
[1] https://cen.acs.org/environment/pesticides/glyphosate-roundu...
[2] https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-take...
Those standards put processed carbs like bread/pasta as the largest part of a "healthy diet". Whoops.
Correct. The root of the problem is that corporate interests influence government regulation. [1] That hasn't changed. What has changed is which industry is offering the largest bribes.
"Food pyramid dumb, eat meat" is a very reductive take.
National estimates suggest only 8%-14% of Americans ever followed MyPlate. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40752889/
Also, MyPlate only used "grains" as a category, with a note to make half from whole grains...not just processed carbs. Big difference. And, vegetables are the biggest category.
Adding on to that, if you workout in ANY capacity, you need simple carbs.
I suspect there are other factors at play.
That certainly does not help the situation. Whether it's correlational or causal I'd leave up to people more knowledgeable in the subject.
It is also across normal BMI, "healthy" diet and regular exercising population. Thats what's concerning about the uptick.
The odds ratios for nearly all diseases and all-cause mortality shift so far from those two interventions it's almost unbelievable.
Whatever's going on, it's probably going to end up being complicated and multifactorial.
(I do love me a crucifer, though).
- insufficient fibre
- too much high fructose corn syrup
- too much milk
- too much citric acid
- toxins and parasites (gut cleanse!)
- washing chicken in chlorine (voiced as hypothetical)
- ultra-marathoners - maybe their supplements and too much carbs or dehydration?
- too much processed junk
- vitamin and mineral deficiencies
- radiation
- insufficient veggies
I’m more amazed at the toxic (no pun intended) comments in this post. It seems HN isn’t a place to voice health theories.
I'm likely going to die of either a heart attack (already had one, at age 28), or cancer, and it seems genetic.
EDIT: Specific genes and alleles below, if anyone is curious
But since this is all one-party and relatively anonymous, I’d like to take the opportunity to tell everyone that unless you have a PhD or MD in a relevant field, your thoughts about fiber are irrelevant and unwelcome to anyone actually suffering from the disease(s) in question.
It's a bit hard to tell from your post what you're saying. Certainly I can imagine being annoyed by constantly being given health advice from layman. But this is... a forum.
I don't understand the relevance to the article. Does Multiple Sclerosis come with a higher risk of colon cancer?
You would have never guessed he was an unhealthy guy by looking at him, but I do assume it has something to do with foods we consider normal in the US. I've taken a page out of Bryan Johnson's book and started eating well over 100% of recommended daily fiber intake (easy and enjoyable if you make some chia seed porridge every morning), and I will say my digestion has never been better. Keeping the system clear seems like a sane first line of defense to preventing this kind of thing.
Such that, yes, we can still get better. But people here are reacting as if there is some damning evidence that just doesn't track with the data. Even with an uptick in younger people getting this, we still don't have a smoking gun on anything that is directly causal to this.
Also, holy crap, if you have rectal bleeding, don't ignore it! That that is listed as an early warning sign that people ignore is terrifying.
But, no. They didn't find a single thing. Blood and stool tests came back fine. Not even a polyp was found during the colonoscopy.
The only thing that kind of sucked, was the prep - there's no way around that. But the colonoscopy itself, no problem. I get some mild sedatives, but was completely awake during the procedure - even watched it on the screen.
kvgr•1h ago
leetrout•1h ago
I think it's a combination of our pesticide usage and general food processing but like a sibling said these are educated guesses.
imglorp•1h ago
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9170474/
damnesian•1h ago
staticassertion•1h ago
boringg•1h ago
staticassertion•56m ago
Jerrrrrrrry•29m ago
Why would more fiber help?
staticassertion•25m ago
> Why would more fiber help?
Because there is an incredible amount of research into high fiber diets being good for your gut, including reduced colon cancer rates.
jabroni_salad•48m ago
normie3000•1h ago
US diet? Is corn syrup common elsewhere?
freshpots•1h ago
imglorp•44m ago
It's also the crazy amounts: we're accustomed to high levels of sweetness. Like 40g sugar in a can of soda.
John23832•25m ago
luhn•14m ago
Anonasty•1h ago
OJFord•52m ago
zvqcMMV6Zcr•1h ago
askonomm•1h ago
nativeit•56m ago
taeric•1h ago
My expectation is that it is less that there has been a growing trend of this cancer getting worse, and far more that we have gotten better at many other cancers. That is, overall, this is good news on progress. Not a scare headline.
doubled112•45m ago
The choices, personal or otherwise, I have seen can't be good for your body, and some you're simply not allowed to make anymore.
Ironically, sitting on this laptop typing this might be as bad, but win some/lose some.
But some obvious examples?
Ever dip a shirt in benzene because it cools you down? Apparently it feels like Vicks, but doesn't leave that sticky feeling behind.
A good portion drank 6+ beers a day. I know they must have eaten, but some I never saw consume food. At all.
Some smoked a pack or two of cigarettes a day. Asbestos was in everything.
There was no ventilation/filtration for welders, painters, woodworkers, etc. If you could open the shop door it was a good day.
vharuck•34m ago
https://seer.cancer.gov/statistics-network/explorer/applicat...
taeric•25m ago
By all means, we should study this more. But the way folks are talking about this is a touch nuts.
hombre_fatal•1h ago
It's tempting to focus on some magic bad ingredient/practice to explain our bad health (like seed oils), but we don't exercise, we eat directly against dietary guidelines, and we eat foods that we know are bad for us.
Now add on to that the social media grifters and industry advocates who tell you that eating poorly is good for you.
I don't blame individuals just trying to live their life though. This is how we've let our whole food environment set up shop.
NotGMan•1h ago
hombre_fatal•1h ago
But processed meat consumption would be another good example of where we happily eat against dietary guidelines despite its link with colorectal cancer.