[valo403]

Originally Posted by moncton golden flames

written in 'in defense of food: an eater's manifesto' author michael pollan suggests that "while it is true that our life expectancy has improved dramatically since 1900 (rising from 49 yrs to 77 yrs in the u.s.), most of that gain is attributed to the fact that more of us are surviving infancy and childhood; life expectancy of a 65 yr old in 1900 was only about 6 yrs less than that of a 65 yr old living today.* when you adjust for age, rates of chronic diseases like cancer and type 2 diabetes are considerably higher than they were in 1900. that is, the chances that a 60 or 70 yr old suffers from cancer or type 2 diabetes are far great today than they were a century ago."

*it may be that the explosion of chronic diseases during the 20th century is now taking a toll on american life expectancy. in 2007, the cia world factbook ranked the u.s. 45th for life expectancy at birth, below countries like israel, jordan, bosnia and bermuda. future gains in life expectancy depend largely on how much we can extend life among the elderly...exceedingly difficult, when you consider that the incidence of diabetes in people over 75 is projected to increase 336% during the first half of this century.

now, i am a big fan of michael pollan and i trust his research and logic. if we aren't seeing a decrease right now, i think he suggests that a decrease could be in our near future. unless our food consumption habits change dramatically, i'm not sure we will get thru these diet related hurdles like cancer and type 2 diabetes.

Even if we just assume all of that to be true, where's the causation link? You've basically said that x is happening and the cause is y without demonstrating even the slightest tie between the two.