World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
Plastic Sugar Teflon Roundup Lead Pesticides Fertilizers
Just a few of the hazardous substances we regularly come into contact with on a semi-daily basis. The cause of the problem is capitalism.
Old people come into contact with all that stuff too, not just young people.
edit:
Cancer deaths are consistently declining in the US. American Cancer Society's 2023 report
According to the American Cancer Society's 2024 stats cancer deaths are declining in some areas (ie: lung cancer) but increasing in many others.
you’re conflating mortality metrics with incidence metrics. increasing incidents are very likely biased by improved detection and reporting.
anyway the point is not that cancer is going away or anything, but that you can’t easily say “pollution is giving young people cancer” as the top comment is.
Both mortality and incidence rates are included in what I quoted.
I know, that was my point.
So your point was that I conflated metrics but that had nothing to do with the OPs original post?
Agreed, the above doesn’t mesh with this variable
My point is that a lot of these things have flooded the market since the early 80s, which would make the tail end of Generation X the first generation that's been in constant contact with these things their entire lives.
Scotch Guard (PFAS) was released in the 50s and everyone went gangbusters spraying it on everything.
Plastic based and molded products started to be seen around 1910 and surged in the 50s after WW2.
Processed foods were a thing since the 1800s with sugars as HFCS added into everything since the 60s.
Not to discredit what you’re saying, but, and this is solely based within the context of this particular headline discussion, it would cause you to look elsewhere. I’m thinking it’s more stress based. I’m working my butt off to evolve my small business just to survive. While we are having success and growth, it takes no less than 16 hours a day Sunday through Saturday to make it happen. I remember watching some family members and other inspiring business leaders as a kid in the 80s working regular 8 hour days and owning two homes.
Further to that, psychological medicine is so far behind and mental health has a major, if not direct, effect on physical wellness.
It's not just capitalism. I'm from east Germany and you wouldn't believe how much crap was buried, fumed into the air or pumped into the water in the name of peace and socialism.
Don't forget, Chernobyl happened because of a cost saving measure.
BTW, you forgot alcohol, tobacco, vapes, stress and enforced sedentary lifestyle in your cancer list.
That was the false justification because the actual reason was capitalism.
Cutting costs to make a profit is capitalism - especially when the "externality" is a catastrophe for other people.
Ah yes, the famous capitalist powerhouse Soviet Union.
Younger generations drink less and use less tobacco than basically any other generation, so that's probably not it.
I don't know what you mean by "enforced sedentary lifestyle," but young people tend to do activities that don't involve exercise in their free time: computer use, phone use, video games, etc.
I think the fact that obesity is up something like 20% since the 90s is probably related. Young people exercise less and eat like shit, which seems pretty related to rectal/colon cancers.
Skill issue, I'd argue. May I introduce you to the concept of "working in an office"?
We're on Lemmy, every evil in the world is the result of capitalism.
Doesn't make it less true.
Honestly the working from home with less walking and more sitting seems like the biggest reason for this since there’s some pretty major dietary differences between all these countries, but they probably have a higher rate of WFH compared to other countries.
Read the article. The trend started in 1990, a time where wfh meant assembling ballpoint pens or prostitution.
“The overall evidence points to lifestyle change," says Shuji Ogino, professor of pathology and epidemiology at Harvard University
A quote from the article. People were starting WFH well into the 80s. It’s part of a sedentary lifestyle and growing obesity problem. Both of which researchers are pointing to as well as microplastics in our system.
No, they didn't. Especially not in relevant numbers: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1450450/employees-remote-work-share/
This only starts in 2015 (I was too lazy to research your idiocy), but even then (very very much after the internet was a very relevant factor) we start at 7% and you can clearly see that there was an upwards trend at that time.
So in short: get your head out of your ass and don't vomit you unfounded stereotypes and boomerisms on the general public.
What’s the stereotype you think I’m playing into? 😂
I literally work from home in the tech sector. I’m a young, fit 30 year old with this exact same set of issues. There’s no problem with WFH, what I’m pointing to is that a sedentary lifestyle which is boosted by people who only walk 5 steps from bed to office (like me) has helped to exacerbate an issue. My parent had work from home days back in the 90s and early 2000s, so we know they existed and started growing, much like this issue with cancer. It’s not because of only WFH, but it’s part of that grouping of a sedentary lifestyle. I think you’re taking my position on that as some sort of attack on WFH, which it isn’t.
Lead and Teflon have gone down since the 90s. I'd say it's mostly plastic. Up and into most all of the 80's everyone drank tap water and sodas/other drinks were all canned or glass bottles.
Then around 1990 everyone started putting their drink in plastic. Then 15 years later for some dumbass reason, people started to buy and drink all their water out of plastic as well.
The largest contributor to the micro-plastics in your body is tire dust, though, it's not new. More of it since the 90s, yeah, maybe there's a threshold?
Doesn't really seem like there's more plastic dust? But since this study looked at colon cancer, maybe inhalation plastic has less of a role?
Problem with PFAS and many other stuff is that it is accumulating in the biosphere. So while the new emissions go down, you still end up being exposed to more and more of them over time. They still get into the water and then into the plants and animals that you eat later.
I'm still convinced that the aluminum in deodorants are not safe either...
Aluminum is in antiperspirants, not deodorants (usually).
Same. When that news first hit I switched to non-aluminum brands just to be safe.
~~capjtalism~~
Greed, in any form. In any economic model. Greed.
Yes, but capitalism is an economic model that aids and abets greed. Where greed is rewarded almost exclusively.
Which economic model do you prefer?
The distinction between capitalism and socialism isn't always a bright line.
And communism has yet to succeed.
An economic model that doesn't prioritize profit over everything else... which is what capitalism does.
Let me know if you form an opinion beyond "all the dictators told me that this is what communism is, so I have no choice but to believe them".
Can you point to communism succeeding. Anywhere?
Because it's just another greed mechanism where those in charge, being corruotible humans, accumulate power and wealth. So far.
Cuba might have had a good run except our embargo didn't help them.
Capitalism is greed as an economic model
This