Another good product from good science, page-38

There may be an increase in the quantity of life but there appears to be a decline in the quality of life.

Appears is not the same as is. You can't compare because the people did not live long enough to find out if they would get cancer. Unless they died of cancer.
This isn't to minimise the risks and the problems.

So many in nursing homes and so many with underlying health conditions - many severe.

So what were the underlying health conditions that resulted them not living longer than we are now?
Was malnutrition or times of starvation contributing factors?





.... point to the Western diet as the leading risk factor for disability and death. The fast-food and processed meal habits of all-too-many Americans is taking its toll on our well-being as a nation. Even the fact that we are exercising more does not counteract the pollutants that many of us ingest on a daily basis.

Notice the text highlighted in bold. Which is better - living longer with diseases or shorter with less suffering?? A matter of perspective.


Notice you left out what the article was about. Maybe I shall highlight it for you for a matter of perspective? Maybe draw a picture to help out a little.

A new study, reported last month by CBS News, found that although the life expectancy of Americans has been slowly increasing, obesity rates continue to climb.


The people who did not live longer like we do now, didn't have obesity as contributing factors. Malnutrition and times of starvation were.
I'm not going to disagree with your sentiment because it is mostly correct but the point is, without the pesticides and fertilsers a lot more people will go hungry and or die. It is how it is till it isn't.

I agree with you other understanding:

My understanding will not fix the issues raised -