Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Saturday February 25 2017, @12:46PM   Printer-friendly
from the all-you-can-eat-and-then-some dept.

Researchers at Imperial College London have performed a meta-analysis of 95 studies concerning the consumption of fruits and vegetables. They found that the greater the amount of such foods that was eaten, the greater the beneficial effects on health and longevity were—up to the largest amounts that had been studied. Effects included lessened risks of premature death, of cardiovascular disease, of stroke and of cancer.

Fruit and vegetable intake and the risk of cardiovascular disease, total cancer and all-cause mortality–a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of prospective studies has been published in the 22 February International Journal of Epidemiology.

coverage:


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by Dunbal on Saturday February 25 2017, @06:09PM

    by Dunbal (3515) on Saturday February 25 2017, @06:09PM (#471553)

    with better lifestyle choices changing your odds. A lack of healthfulness tends to build up over time

    It doesn't work that way. You'd like to think that it does, but it doesn't. I can tell you that if you have x lifestyle, then your statistical probability of a certain income is "x". However this will never account for the bus that is going to hit you tomorrow. Length and quality of life is under the influence of MANY variables. Some are in your control (like overall eating habits, exercise, etc). Some are OUT of your control. Like genetics. Accidents. Etc.

    When you look at sick people and start making generalizations of the type: oh, if only this person had done this or that differently, then they would be in a better position today - is not true at all. There are plenty of reasons people get sick and not all of them have to do with how much fruit they ate. Trying to apply said generalization is merely a rationalized way of blaming people for their own illnesses. "He's sick so it's his own fault - he must have done something wrong" which is only one step away from "it must be a sin, God is punishing him" which is only one level above the tribal "he has evil spirits".

    I had a fucking heart attack at 26 years old. I was never overweight. Turns out to be an extremely rare genetic condition, in my case. How many fucking salads are going to fix that?

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by Dunbal on Saturday February 25 2017, @06:11PM

    by Dunbal (3515) on Saturday February 25 2017, @06:11PM (#471554)

    errata: a certain "outcome" not "income". First line.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 26 2017, @09:47AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 26 2017, @09:47AM (#471780)

    "How many fucking salads are going to fix that?"

    You're doing it wrong: you're supposed to eat them.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 26 2017, @10:06AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 26 2017, @10:06AM (#471786)

    "Extremely rare" as you said. Just because there's a chance of things outside of your control happening in no way diminishes the value of doing what you can to optimize the result of things that are under your control. Well there might be an argument for that if the vast majority of deaths were caused by completely random things - a wild rodent probably needn't care too much about their longterm health. But things are not so random. We live a long time and how we die is usually strongly related to how we lived.