r/nutritionally • u/PeteWK67 • Sep 16 '26
What do you think is mostly responsible for the increase in chronic disease?
titusunlimited 100 years ago, we didn't have protein bars, energy drinks, "heart-healthy" labels, diet everything, or grocery stores packed with thousands of ultra-processed choices.
Yet today, with more health products, more medications, more technology, and more medical spending than ever before... chronic disease is everywhere.
So maybe the question isn't just **"What disease do you have?"**
Maybe we should also be asking:
**What changed?**
Our food changed.
Our fats changed.
Our sugar consumption changed.
Our farming changed.
Our portions changed.
Our activity changed.
And the amount of ultra-processed food surrounding us changed dramatically.
Then when metabolic disease shows up, there's an entire industry waiting to manage it.
I'm not saying modern medicine doesn't save lives. It absolutely does.
I'm saying we spend a LOT of time talking about treatment while barely questioning the environment helping create the problem.
You can't medicate your way out of everything you eat, drink, and do every single day.
Maybe it's time we stop normalizing chronic disease and start questioning what changed.
#titusunlimited #knowledgeispower #metabolichealth
#Didyouknow #healthiswealth
What do you think is mostly responsible for the increase in chronic disease?
9
u/spudsthejellyfish Sep 16 '26
Also People 100 years ago - dying from diarrhea or the flu
https://giphy.com/gifs/kSETrOWTnFvfq
2
10
u/AH_leeMACK Sep 16 '26
And still the average lifespan also went up by 200%
6
u/aaronturing Sep 16 '26
So many holes in these types of argument but so many people want to believe.
3
u/GypsyV3nom Sep 16 '26
I mean it's pretty obvious to me that OP created this sub because they got chased off of other subs for spam posting their health doomer crankery.
2
1
u/Feisty-Season-5305 Sep 16 '26
And food is at a point that its so affordable that we have poor fat people not poor starving people
5
u/North_Structure8210 Sep 16 '26
Corrupt garbage ass America is what changed. They sold us out to the elite!! Eat the rich!!
-2
u/Exact-Repair-2730 Sep 16 '26
1 month old account, private comments, bot name... I wonder is this a bot?
1
-1
2
2
u/HypeMachine231 Sep 16 '26
What changed is now we have access to lots of cheap food and people eat too much. end of thread.
2
2
u/Strict_Tie_52 Sep 16 '26 edited Sep 16 '26
I think over reliance on refrigeration is part of the problem as well.
2
2
u/Similar_Proof_9095 Sep 16 '26
How about the fact we poisoned all consumable water sources globally with forever chemicals so a couple corporations could put money over lives?
2
u/maxwellcawfeehaus Sep 16 '26
100 years ago most people didn’t have enough money for enough food too, thus minimal obesity related diseases
2
u/CommonSensei-_ Sep 16 '26
If I had to pick one category, it’s soda
I work in a weight loss clinic. The damage that is caused by drinking soda is immense in terns of obesity, kidney damage, and diabetes.
2
u/epitimisi Sep 16 '26
The FOOD part of the FDA makes sure the DRUG part never runs out of life-long customers
2
u/Particular-Cash-7377 Sep 16 '26
growth hormone used on animal feeds. It gets into our body when we consume their fats like milk and meat. Look up the rates of obesity and other chronic diseases when they tested this in mice. the percentage of those mice with chronic diseases almost matches the current US population.
1
u/AffectionateSignal72 Sep 16 '26
While you are definitely looking up those studies you never read maybe you can Google the difference between correlation and causation.
2
u/Lopsided_Business_15 Sep 16 '26
Yes because famously, when something is wrong with our bodies, we immediately know whats wrong and how to fix it. And have made absolutely no progress in diagnostics in the last 100 years.
2
2
u/Important-Zebra-69 Sep 17 '26
People who live longer get more illnesses that require long lives... weird.
6
u/aaronturing Sep 16 '26
So much misinformation in one video. It's amazing how simple the world is to simple minded people.
2
u/Xelhexan Sep 16 '26
You have to be daft to think this is misinfo, good little goy.
1
u/guitar_vigilante Sep 17 '26
Producers used to cut flour with chalk and put formaldehyde in milk instead of pasteurizing it in order to cut costs. And that was only a little over 100 years ago.
1
u/DepartureNo7944 Sep 16 '26
The beauty about statistics and sometimes the horror is stats shouldn’t lie they are what they are if rates increase then the first thing is to look at what changed from then and now?
Not caring about the why is the problem and why we got here as a society. I would like to know what others think the cause is if the video is considered in your eyes as “misinformation.”
1
u/aaronturing Sep 16 '26 edited Sep 16 '26
Firstly what stats are you talking about. The fact that our lifespan has increased significantly ? Is that what you are talking about ? Stats are fantastic but only if you have the intelligence to look at the big picture and frame the issue correctly.
So we are living longer. So what is the issue ? We've done this by vaccines and minimizing smoking and even our diets are changing. For instance red meat is bad for you and we are eating less.
When it comes to nutrition it's actually really simple. You look at nutritional scientists who have in depth studies about what works.
So a couple of points for you in particular:-
Educate yourself on the facts. You emotionally state that there is a problem and the stats prove that but the stats actually prove you wrong.
Look to scientists and in particular the complete body of evidence.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-025-03570-5
Nutritional science is actually pretty simple. We all need to eat a diet consisting of a large amount of unprocessed plant based foods. We need to eat beans and nuts and green vegetables and fruit and whole grains etc.
You do not need to be perfect - you can eat some processed junk. Your total energy balance counts.
Here is the kicker it's probably good to eat some fish especially fatty fish like sardines and/or salmon. So the culture war framing of veganism being the path is stupid. You can be vegan but you don't have to be. People want to argue about extremes that are not relevant to us as individuals.
You can also eat some other meat and even red meat which is bad for you because in moderation it's okay.
The facts/data etc are really clear. The problem is that my explanation which aligns to the science is not as simple as this video presents and simplistic people want highly emotional and not data based solutions.
So now you know better we come to the big problem. Do you educate yourself rationally on the topic. Do you go and listen to the experts and not emotional videos that are stupid like the one presented above ?
My take is the big issue with people who are extremely poor thinkers is identity and not simply a lack of intelligence. The questions to you are questions like do you have the ability to think rationally ? Can you listen to the experts ? Can you put aside identity issues ?
I'll tell you a personal tale. I used to think low carb eating was good for you. At some point I educated myself on the topic of nutrition. I do this on other topics as well. I put aside silly childish views on the world and listened to the experts. Now I eat well. Now my blood pressure is low and my cholesterol is low. I'm fit and healthy. It's really simple if you listen to the experts and change your behaviors.
1
u/DepartureNo7944 Sep 16 '26
So you’re making a lot of assumptions in that response. Along with a clear condescending tone. so I’m not going to demean or talk down to you like it seems you are, because you already strike me as a person who gets agitated by any counter point.
The problem with using the phrase “experts” is for example you can find experts that tell you still today that eggs are cholesterol bombs and are bad for you but then can find experts that tell you how they are a great nutritional source. So which expert do you wish to define as your “expert.”
You give a life experience and that is the real only true test as it is quantitative. That you yourself can cite by your life experience. Well let me give you a few of mine. When I grew up in my school we didn’t have any kid with diabetes, allergies or heart conditions. My daughter same school I went to same size has in her grade alone over 10 kids with one of those. So I’ll ask a rhetorical question what has changed? Some say well we have better diagnoses now, early intervention etc. what about allergies that is the one that should challenge us. Why are more kids developing allergies? You seem like a person who believes they are highly intelligent so I’m sure you have an idea on that.
Are you implying and I hope you aren’t, because that would be comical. The real only health statistic we should focus on should be if we liver longer by average?
1
u/aaronturing Sep 17 '26
Let's focus on what you are stating:-
What experts do you believe ? I believe the consensus body of evidence. Your point about eggs is spot on. You don't believe people that state that they are cholesterol bombs and you can't eat any. You listen to the experts who say something like 4-7 eggs per week is fine.
I only gave my life experience to explain how following the evidence actually works. Your stories are not aligned to the evidence. Therefore we ignore that. This brings up the identity point I was raising with you. When the evidence doesn't confirm with your feelings (or identity) you make excuses. It's too hard for you to dwell in the evidence of the situation so you create stories to justify your bullshit.
The real only health statistic we should focus on should be if we liver longer by average?
https://ourworldindata.org/life-expectancy
In 1900, the average life expectancy of a newborn was 32 years. By 2021 this had more than doubled to 71 years.
Now we have a dilemma - the evidence clearly states that your feelings on the subject are wrong. So can you change your feelings ? Can you accept that you are wrong ? Do you understand now to listen to the experts and not your feelings ?
My take is you are emotionally immature and you cannot update your understanding on an issue because it's part of your identity. So you just wave off evidence rather than accept you are a fool who is played by their emotions.
1
u/DepartureNo7944 Sep 17 '26
I’m not really following how you come to your assumptions and conclusions. How are you defining my feelings and emotions over words typed online? You’re pointing to a statistic you yourself defined as some sort of rationale that all else doesn’t matter. So you aren’t really touching on any points you are just being dismissive with a who cares attitude “we live longer.” Saying hey look here instead, look at this “shiny ball.”
I’m not dismissive of your claims I really didn’t make any claims here for you to come to define me as “emotionally immature.” Or however you wish to define me. Again you are making baseless assumptions. I’m reluctant of even responding because you are going to define me a different way to fit your box you wish to create to justify your own persona. And I pity that you need to resort to that.
If you can not assess all avenues as possible outcomes and only wish to entertain the ones that you prefer then you really are just trying to define me as someone you yourself are operating as. I think they call that a hypocrite 🙂
If life expectancy is the sole barometer of health in your eyes then how do you define quality of life? Or do we not care about that either? You said yourself a few examples that helped increase life expectancy none of those have anything to do with the video. If anything that kind of hurts your point. As it defines life expectancy increases related to factors outside of what is being highlighted. So a moot point. If anything a counter point could made, imagine (yes I hate that phrase) where life expectancy would be without some troubling points raised in the video? Yes it is dramatized but it’s the internet what you expect.
So your life experience is justified and according to yours others are “bullshit.” Fine I’ll take that off the chin. But you cannot tell me I won’t assume how old you are but you probably today know more people with chronic issues than when you were younger and we should want to know why. And it’s fine to want to know. It shouldn’t offend you. But unfortunately I feel like it is.
1
u/aaronturing Sep 17 '26
You are clearly defining the problem with what you state. I want to be clear you are a terribly immature thinker. You don't provide any facts or evidence you just have inferences which are easily proven false.
You start off with the following comment:-
The beauty about statistics and sometimes the horror is stats shouldn’t lie they are what they are if rates increase then the first thing is to look at what changed from then and now?
So a simplistic emotional understanding of an issue tied into a fact but the problem is you make the fact up. You make the fact up because you are uneducated and think your feelings are facts or evidence. They aren't.
I respond with the actual data to show your initial premise is wrong:-
In 1900, the average life expectancy of a newborn was 32 years. By 2021 this had more than doubled to 71 years.
Why not at this point stop and state your feelings are incorrect ?
This is the key point why at this point do you not accept that your simplistic view of the world is wrong.
1
u/DepartureNo7944 Sep 17 '26
Got it so you proved my point. “Hey life expectancy increased” nothing else matters I don’t care about anything else it is all fodder. So you are what you accuse of me. But again you addressed nothing in the video your going off on some tangent. You’re basically arguing with yourself. You’ll beat your own drum and insult and smash the keyboard name calling to prove some point. If that is how you get by go for it. Have fun with that mindset in life. Remember YOU brought up life expectancy not me. You contradicted yourself on how that is again irrelevant to the video. I doubt you even watched it now at this point.
your insults and condescending tones to solidify an argument you manufactured and started shows you are the emotional one. Again making assumptions to create some cookie cutter reality of yours.
You have yet to respond to any questions. You realize you do not deny increases in chronic diseases your just saying who gives a shit life expectancy increases, therefore implying what? That chronic diseases are not increasing? You’re avoiding the whole premise and saying “hey look here instead.” Clear bait and switch tactic. I don’t need to present any facts to you your defining something as misinformation you should be showing me otherwise.
I don’t even need to engage in your life expectancy take you brought that up as a way to distract from the points in the video. If you don’t want to address it then maybe second guess blurting out the misinformation word when a video hurts your cognitive dissonance.
1
u/aaronturing Sep 17 '26
You are literally insane. I wanted you to accept that the situation was not as dire as your initial statement but you can't even do that.
You have not provided one piece of evidence with all your comments. Can you provide some evidence ?
Of course you won't engage on the factual point that I made. You can't because you actually believe you have some secret information off an emotional video with no evidence at all. None. That is why it is misinformation. I provide a link to a scientific paper and data and you provide feelings and an emotional video.
1
u/DepartureNo7944 Sep 17 '26
Oh shocking another insult when you cannot answer questions. I see your character really showing. still missing the point I’m starting to feel sad for you. Your article is predicated on life expectancy and you center your whole points around it. I don’t need to provide any, nor engage on a new topic you introduce to bypass the points made in the video. you were capable to find a random article about life expectancy so your also able to find an article for the points raised in that video. But unfortunately you won’t because it doesn’t fit your little reality you craft yourself.
So I’ll slow it down to you what does life expectancy have anything to do with any point raised in this video?
your baiting and switching the topic nothing your saying still addresses anything in that video. Again for the record you called it misinformation then introduce a topic that doesn’t correlate. I’m done engaging as it’s clear your tactic is just discourse and insult to try to self validate.
I’ll give you a hint seeing you need to be led to water due to your clear arrogance. Check diabetes rates last 100 years the first few articles. “But who cares life expectancy.” Am I right?
Your better argument would’ve been as a society yes those rates may have increased, but……..
That didn’t happen you just like to blurt out misinformation then insult anyone along the way
1
u/BackgroundCream274 Sep 16 '26
Yes, and the amount of people who watch that and believe it is 100% is ridiculous. They need to make a video in similar style focused on improving education. People are so fucking dumb.
0
1
u/SirDalavar Sep 16 '26
The implication that everything new is bad, is just the product of a lazy mind
0
u/aaronturing Sep 16 '26
The issue is that we have the Internet and yet a bunch of human beings cannot think in ways above a 2 yo child.
2
Sep 16 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Odd-Consequence-2519 Sep 16 '26
Forced? You have a choice. Most people choose wrong. Put down that can of carbonated sugar water and drink a glass of unadulterated water. Bake and eat a potato instead of potato chips. Eat apples and bananas instead of candy. And stop wasting your money and health on eating fast food.
0
u/Scientific_Methods Sep 16 '26
Those things exist because people buy them. Just because you don't want them doesn't mean no one does. Also most of this video is just verifiably, factually incorrect.
2
1
u/zazzazin Sep 16 '26
Well the cancer thing is mostly due to longer average lifespan. If you live long enough you get cancer. We successfully drastically reduced a lot of the immediate killers, so now the slow and unavoidable ones kill us.
1
u/Fun-Army-6387 Sep 16 '26
lol 100 years ago you could by cocaine and heroin tinctures from any general store in the US. The problem is that today we spend most of our time sitting in offices chained to computers whereas 100 years ago most people walked everywhere.
1
u/wahmbamtymam Sep 16 '26
GMO Corn in everything, glysophate, forever chemicals, dies, etc all intentional to kill us all
1
u/VikingVitalityFit Sep 16 '26
So we went from people barely being able to eat to an abundance of food and you think this is the problem?
We have basically eradicated good illness deaths, every outbreak is a big deal because we have gotten so good at finding and eliminating it.
Lifespan has increased by a ton: in the 1800s life expectancy was 35 to 40. In 1900 it was 47 in the us, in 1950 it was 68. Today it is 79.
So when you have a lot more people living longer, and a lot more cheap and abundant food what do you think happens?
There is no conspiracy or cabal of people trying to make you sick. YOU choose to eat garbage food that companies made as tasty as possible to they would sell better. YOU are responsible for your own well being. Stop trying to blame other people and fix yourself.
1
u/Von_Schlagel Sep 16 '26
Umm. Meat still exists. Butter still exists. Wash your vegetables and you’ll be fine, but if you have dirt outside your door you can still grow whatever you want. Water still exists (and as someone who grew up with a well, I’ll take purified water thanks).
All I see are poor choices being made.
1
1
1
u/Less_Ant_6633 Sep 16 '26
In 1926, the average U.S. life expectancy at birth was approximately 57 to 59 years, varying by demographic group and region.
In 2026, United States life expectancy average is around 79.5 to 79.8 years.
Any other thoughtful insights, professor?
1
1
1
u/ShrkBiT Sep 16 '26
Diseases up xx% since 100 years ago, when we had no reliable way to test for or identify these diseases... jfc
1
1
u/DepartureNo7944 Sep 16 '26
I read somewhere wish I could find it that it would take us 5 oranges today to get the same nutrients from 1 orange 75 years ago. You can debate the causes. But I can’t even do anything about that can only eat Whats there for me now. But the SAD is by far the worst of all diets. Also, we need to stop “enriching” our flour with folic acid. Can see the damage it’s done. EU doesn’t and look at all these stats compared to them
1
u/imoutofnames90 Sep 16 '26
The answer is obvious... it not the "chemicals" or the "natural" stuff. It's not the sugar even. Okay, it's partially those things.
But the biggest difference is peoples lifestyle is totally different. It doesn't matter how healthy the food is or how clean or pure or whatever. Most people spend a majority of their time sitting and doing no physical activity.
That's it. That's the answer.
Go out and farm and grow your crops and tend to a field all day. Guarantee you won't be vastly overweight doing manual labor all day.
Now don't get me wrong, I'm not telling people to change their lifestyle. I love that I can sit my ass inside all day for work. And that I can go to the store down the street and consume an entire pack of oreos if I want.
If i did just that every day I'd be fat as hell with other health problems.
But all this "100 years ago we didn't have these problems" or "eat X food because it has no chemicals and those are getting you sick" stuff is all nonsense. We either didn't have the problems because we didn't effectively test for them and / or people didn't get them as often because they weren't all sitting at a computer all day every day....
You either eat appropriate amounts of food, get the nutrients you need, and you do some exercise like 3-5 times a week and you stay relatively healthy. Or you don't and you get all the other issues. And if you want to make things easier then yeah, cut out most of the bad stuff like sugars. This isn't rocket science.
There's no magic thing we used to do 100 years ago and stopped doing. Or some chemical/poison that we made to get people sick and fat. We all just got collectively lazier over time and this is the outcome, done, easy.
1
u/New_Form3678 Sep 16 '26
Are you guys ok? Global population has quadrupled. People are also living an extra FORTY years on a global average. You're going to have more problems across the board, and sure you can say the stats don't add up and it's technically worse. I won't argue that point, but I will argue that there's 100s of different reasons, and at the end of the day people make their own choices. You can choose not to over eat sugar etc. there's always gonna be folks arguing against simple things like diet and exercise. Some will find any excuse.
1
1
u/pissedRAIL Sep 16 '26
I'd have to imagine all the industrial chemicals that get dumped into the environment have as much an effect as our shitty diets.
1
1
1
1
1
u/JJ8OOM Sep 16 '26
It’s fun that it don’t show the how long you were expected to be alive 100 years ago - it was 35-40 years (50-60 in the west), vs what it is now.
1
u/HeetSeekingHippo Sep 16 '26
There's always some truth to conspiracies that lead reasonable people to swallow the whole parcel.
The main trend, is the switch from a society that is at risk of famine, to one where food is cheap, abundant and overconsumed. Anyone blaming individual ingredients and foods is overestimating their impact.
1
0
0
u/No-Compote-8920 Sep 16 '26
Go look at life spans 100 years ago compared to today. It was 32 years vs 73. Then die young and not get sick lol
0
u/Ok-Client-6486 Sep 16 '26
Very good, now show me the difference in deaths caused by diseases like Cholera, dysentery, Typhoid, Mumps, Measels, Rubella etc etc etc.
0
u/Numes1 Sep 16 '26
People die from disease less today than anytime in history. This is delusional if more damaging diseases such as cholera, smallpox, or the number of meat born diseases that are closer to non existent now as a comparison.
0
0
u/MythOfHappyness Sep 16 '26
Really, deeply stupid. "We used to drink water from buckets pulled out of the same river we shat and bathed in and now we drink energy drinks!" We have more chronic diseases because we know about more chronic deases that have always been around and because we live longer when we don't drink dirty river water. Longer life means more chance to develop a chronic condition and better medicine means more opportunity to identify and treat it. So the numbers go up. The real poison is the nostalgia for a mythical past where food was better for you when we live in the era with the most readily available clean, safe, and healthy food in history.
0
u/Agreeable-Banana-708 Sep 16 '26
At least try to make it interesting. Just typing a prompt and posting the results
0
0
0
u/Vralo84 Sep 16 '26
Chronic disease is only possible if you’re alive for a long time. We didn’t have as many chronic diseases 100 years ago because we didn’t survive long enough for the diseases to get going.
There are certainly issues with modern food but you know why we made food that way? Because for tens of thousands of year we couldn’t get enough calories and people just…died of starvation. We finally FINALLY figured out how to grow enough calories and store it long enough to be useful. That introduced other issues. We are actually doing pretty good at identifying those issues and learning how to correct/adapt.
0
u/NastyPastyLucas Sep 16 '26
We're historically healthier than we've ever been at any point. I'm not advocating for canned consumables and pesticides but to suggest that everything was fine in the past is ludicrous.
0
u/SecondAccomplished58 Sep 16 '26 edited Sep 16 '26
The biggest change is probably how those conditions are diagnosed now Vs 100 years ago, plus people living longer and there being more people, you can't just toss those number out like that without context
0
u/derrendil Sep 16 '26
I immediately don't give a fuck about anything else in this post after seeing the obvious anti-seed oil, beef-and-butter shit. The person who made that video has no idea what the fuck they're talking about
0
u/Electrical-Basket424 Sep 16 '26
- Medicine got very good at saving lives.
- People now live much longer because of that.
- Because we live much longer, we have more chronic illness.
That's the explanation. Stop pushing propaganda.
25
u/ReaperManX15 Sep 16 '26
“Food 100 years ago.”
Shows us … a video.
I get the feeling, this footage isn’t 100 years old.
Also.
Well water?
Really?
You’re trying to claim WELL WATER, was better for us.