Benefits of streaming public-health documentaries

[aheight]

Recently I've had a revelation about health and I wish to share it with others. It concerns public health documentaries I've watched on Magellan, Prime, and Netflix. I cannot emphasize enough the benefits of watching, understanding, and seriously considering the messages in these documentaries: they would make, I believe, a significant contribution to happiness if taken seriously. So I suggest everyone interested in personal health and the health of the planet, consider investigating these programs.

As an example, yesterday I watched "Take Out" on Prime Video. I'll leave the details for you to discover.

I can make a list of others if desired.

 

[russ_watters]

Recently I've had a revelation about health and I wish to share it with others. It concerns public health documentaries I've watched on Magellan, Prime, and Netflix. I cannot emphasize enough the benefits of watching, understanding, and seriously considering the messages in these documentaries: they would make, I believe, a significant contribution to happiness if taken seriously. So I suggest everyone interested in personal health and the health of the planet, consider investigating these programs.

As an example, yesterday I watched "Take Out" on Prime Video. I'll leave the details for you to discover.

I can make a list of others if desired.

I'm a little confused; I googled "Take Out" and it doesn't appear to me to have anything to do with "public/personal health". Is your point/interest about "public/personal health" or "planet health"? They really aren't the same thing.

 

[aheight]

I'm a little confused; I googled "Take Out" and it doesn't appear to me to have anything to do with "public/personal health". Is your point/interest about "public/personal health" or "planet health"? They really aren't the same thing.

Oh but it does have to do with public health: Why is Brazil burning up the Amazon jungle? It's one word. And that single word has an enormous, enormous effect on world-wide public health. Sadly though many don't understand or don't care what they're doing to themselves but maybe they would if they took the time to understand what's going on, i.e., being curious enough to watch. But they don't and then they and the people around them regret not doing so, after it's too late.

 

[russ_watters]

Oh but it does have to do with public health: Why is Brazil burning up the Amazon jungle? It's one word. And that single word has an enormous, enormous effect on world-wide public health. Sadly though many don't understand or don't care what they're doing to themselves but maybe they would if they took the time to understand what's going on, i.e., being curious enough to watch. But they don't and then they and the people around them regret not doing so, after it's too late.

[Shrug] I guess my answer to your OP then is no, I'm not interested in watching if I don't know what I'm watching or why I'm watching it. You're right: I don't understand, and being cagey about it seems like the opposite of the approach I'd take if I wanted to convince someone to watch a documentary I felt had an important message.

 

[aheight]

[Shrug] I guess my answer to your OP then is no, I'm not interested in watching if I don't know what I'm watching or why I'm watching it. You're right: I don't understand, and being cagey about it seems like the opposite of the approach I'd take if I wanted to convince someone to watch a documentary I felt had an important message.

Ok. You're right. That's not what I want to accomplish here. How about if I compile a list of shows today I think are important to watch with a short one-sentence describing why and ask you if you can please update my original post to include them since I can't edit it? I really do want to make a positive contribution here.

 

[russ_watters]

Ok. You're right. That's not what I want to accomplish here. How about if I compile a list of shows today I think are important to watch with a short one-sentence describing why and ask you if you can please update my original post to include them since I can't edit it? I really do want to make a positive contribution here.

Thanks. Rather than posting a list, how about starting with a synopsis of the one you already listed? If people are interested, others will comment and it could become a list thread.

 

[aheight]

Thanks. Rather than posting a list, how about starting with a synopsis of the one you already listed? If people are interested, others will comment and it could become a list thread.

Ok. I'll have to watch it again and take notes to do a good job. Also, the extent of this, what I consider to be a global health crisis, only emerges after watching a good many of them I believe; one will just not do to solidify the effect; people will just watch one and forget about it. Would you reconsider having me post a list of say 10 in the original post with a comment that I feel strongly that only after watching all of them, all scientifically-based, will the conception of just how important this is slowly begin to emerge?

 

[russ_watters]

Ok. I'll have to watch it again and take notes to do a good job. Also, the extent of this, what I consider to be a global health crisis, only emerges after watching a good many of them I believe; one will just not do to solidify the effect; people will just watch one and forget about it. Would you reconsider having me post a list of say 10 in the original post with a comment that I feel strongly that only after watching all of them, all scientifically-based, will the conception of just how important this is slowly begin to emerge?

That's a big project you're taking on, but sure, if you're willing to do it we can post it here, in a new thread or update the OP. Sounds like you have a grand/master thesis and I'm interested to hear what it is.

 

[aheight]

Thanks. Rather than posting a list, how about starting with a synopsis of the one you already listed? If people are interested, others will comment and it could become a list thread.

Ok, I watched "Take Out" on Amazon Prime again and here is my synopsis:

Since about 1990, meat consumption has grown rapidly and simultaneously, obesity and cardio-vascular disease. This is primarily due to the saturated fats in meat products: about 50% of calories in meat come from protein and 50 from fat. Reducing meat consumption is often recommended by health professionals to improve health. Consumption of meat is linked to chronic disease. In 2014 WHO classified process meats as a group 1 carcinogen in the category as cigarettes, and red meat as group 2A, same as the pesticide DDT. Saturated fats are linked to chronic disease such as heart disease and stroke and some forms of cancer such as colorectal cancer. Saturated fats can triple the risk of Alzheimer's disease. One of the best things someone can do for their health is to reduce consumption of meat. One way to do this is to adopt more of a whole-food plant-based diet. Meat consumption is responsible for more climate pollution than cars, ships, trucks and planes combined. Scientific evidence is becoming overwhelming the more meat we eat, the higher risk of clogged arteries and colon cancer and meat intake is closely associated with weight gain contributing to the global obesity epidemic.

In order to meet the increasing demand for meat, the amazon rain forest is being burned down and cleared in order to grow soy to export to other countries as cattle feed as well as raise cattle in cleared lands. About an area the size of Los Angeles is being cleared each month. 20% has been lost and some estimate by 2100, all of it will be gone. We are basically, because of our appetite for meat, destroying an ancient ecosystem for burgers. Our tax dollars are being used to support an industry that is destroying our health and the health of the planet and often if we speak up about it, they are able to hire expensive lawyers that tie up the matter in courts for years or worst. Burning the forest releases a tremendous amount of CO2 fueling global warming as well as displacing species that may harbor novel diseases brining them in closer contact with humans.

I've eaten a ton of meat in my life but lately I've begun to cut way down on meat especially red meat. But I am also a Naturalist: even if meat wasn't bad for me, I would still cut it way out because we, by our consumption of meat, are contributing to the destruction of the rain forest, one of the most beautiful ecosystems ever created on earth.

So my message to everyone is to watch the program, take better care of your health, cut down on meat consumption, and not contribute to the reckless destruction of Nature for petty short-term profit.

 

[abnerko1973]

In order to meet the increasing demand for meat, the amazon rain forest is being burned down and cleared in order to grow soy to export to other countries as cattle feed as well as raise cattle in cleared lands. About an area the size of Los Angeles is being cleared each month. 20% has been lost and some estimate by 2100, all of it will be gone. We are basically, because of our appetite for meat, destroying an ancient ecosystem for burgers. Our tax dollars are being used to support an industry that is destroying our health and the health of the planet and often if we speak up about it, they are able to hire expensive lawyers that tie up the matter in courts for years or worst. Burning the forest releases a tremendous amount of CO2 fueling global warming as well as displacing species that may harbor novel diseases brining them in closer contact with humans.

Hey there thanks for posting this. Today I came to know that meat consumption has not only health effects but also climate. I totally agree with your point ( Take out ). This is true but people can't agree with this easily. Meat consumotion will give you temporary pleasure. But in long term it will be heavy for health as well as climate.

Now a days the climate change cause worst effect in human health and again some people are give rise to this for making profit. The meat consumption has cause the increase in greenhouse gases and today the world produces more than 320 million tons of meat each year and its increasing. Growing meat consumption put biodiversity at higher risk and chances of humans coming in contact with animal borne pathogens and viruses (such as Covid-19) is increasing too.

Rapidly increasing population have steadily push the demand for meat. Meat demand give rise to increase in meat industry and poultry. Increasing meat demands, food production has encroached on land meant for wild habitats and has open doors for pathogens to jump to domesticated animals and humans.

Experts has warned earlier about the pandemic break due to animal slaughtering for food.

Due to increase in population, the meat production has been increased fro , decades. It leads to more global emission of greenhouse gases like methane, CO2 and nitrous oxide. 65 percent of global domestic emission is made alone by beef and dairy. There is prediction This will make huge changes in climate in future (by 2050) that it will be hard for human to survive.

The food system is responsible for 30% human driven greenhouse-emission gases and increase in meat consumption is one of its cause. It plays major role for climate change. Eating substantial amount of meat is not good for environment and health too. Food systems contribute to global greenhouse gases, and furthermore contribute to deforestation, biodiversity loss and declining water tables and live stock is biggest problem now a days.

Temperature in the Arctic Circle is also rising, resulting in melting of the ice and permafrost. It is opening a door for infectious agents to re-emerge. Study shows, the global climate change will brings out new microbes and human’s ability to regulate body temperature may be in danger.

Hence we people have to take actions to reduce the possibility of climate change and pandemic. Every citizen should aware of health consequences of cumsuming meat. This will make people understand how meat affect their health and their generation due to climate change. So if people themselves understand and can see such big problem, the meat consumption can reduce in future.

 

[russ_watters]

Ok, I watched "Take Out" on Amazon Prime again and here is my synopsis:

Since about 1990, meat consumption has grown rapidly and simultaneously, obesity and cardio-vascular disease. This is primarily due to the saturated fats in meat products...

In order to meet the increasing demand for meat, the amazon rain forest is being burned down and cleared in order to grow soy to export to other countries as cattle feed as well as raise cattle in cleared lands.

...We are basically, because of our appetite for meat, destroying an ancient ecosystem for burgers. Our tax dollars are being used to support an industry that is destroying our health and the health of the planet...

Burning the forest releases a tremendous amount of CO2 fueling global warming as well as displacing species that may harbor novel diseases brining them in closer contact with humans.

I've eaten a ton of meat in my life but lately I've begun to cut way down on meat especially red meat. But I am also a Naturalist: even if meat wasn't bad for me, I would still cut it way out because we, by our consumption of meat, are contributing to the destruction of the rain forest, one of the most beautiful ecosystems ever created on earth.

So my message to everyone is to watch the program, take better care of your health, cut down on meat consumption, and not contribute to the reckless destruction of Nature for petty short-term profit.

Thanks for the synopsis. So in short, it's a two-pronged argument for vegetarianism. Fair enough. I may watch it, but I'm not sure it is going to be an easy sell, for a number of reasons:

1. The health benefits of vegetarianism/risks of meat are debatable/not clear. For one thing, the connection with heart disease is tenuous because while it is correct that overall meat intake is increasing, animal fat intake is decreasing, and it's the fat that is supposed to be the unhealthy part (so if the video claims an increase in animal fat consumption, it's a false claim). And yet, obesity is increasing. So is it fat or is it the sugar we've replaced it with that is the problem? Or the coincident decrease in physical activity? My maternal grandparents were Pennsylvania German farmers who's cooking was largely animal fat and starch (and egg) based. Both lived into their 90s, with full mental faculties.

2. As @abnerko1973 pointed out, meat is in pretty much considered a luxury item. People eat it because they enjoy it. So the ask is to reduce the standard of living in order to prevent...a reduction in standard of living? that's tough to weigh. Even if considered a luxury and health risk together, that still doesn't necessarily make something a dealbreaker. I ski and I'm currently taking flying lessons. Both are unquestionably luxuries and substantial health risks. It's something I have to weigh; pleasure vs risk.

3. Assuming one accepts the environmentalist mandate, the link between a single person's eating and climate change or other environmental risks, while direct is also small. Government choices are the big ticket items. And it's tough for me to be critical of Brazil for allowing forests to be cleared to graze cattle or grow grains while in Europe they are burning their forests in power plants and claiming that's climate neutral. But in terms of pollution/climate change problems, by far my biggest desire is to end coal power. And sadly, most who claim an environmentalist mandate support policies that undermine the goal in favor of an all-or-nothing/exclusionary approach. It's tough for me to align myself with that.

4. Brace yourself for a very controversial view: do we really have a responsibility to the environment beyond our own pleasure and personal health? I went on an African Safari a few years ago -- best vacation of my life (thanks M&D). It was an awe inspiring, cathartic experience. I'd like to preserve the experience so I can have it again or others can also have it. But beyond that...what's the responsibility? The safari had strict safety rules, including not leaving the vehicle and not leaving your lodge without a guide after dark. This is because many of the animals would gladly eat you if given the chance. Why is our responsibility to them different from their responsibility to us? Is it just because we have a choice? Who gets to make that choice?

 

[BillTre]

I found your response interesting @russ_watters.
I had a friend who also did this, and he loved it.
I am guessing you weren't shooing the animals.

Why is our responsibility to them different from their responsibility to us? Is it just because we have a choice? Who gets to make that choice?

IMHO:
I would say, we, as intellectual humans, more aware of consequences that less intellectually endowed animals are, would have a larger responsbility than the animals in some respects.
the particular responsibility could be considered in different ways, such as:

• The overall environment (which the animals may or may not be an important part of).
• The whole species of whatever animal is being discussed.
• The individual animal and how its treated.

Details will vary with the species and situations.

As it is, individuals would mostly be making the choices, along with whatever rules of the country where such things occur.
Some of these could be in the self interest of the individual, depending on the details of their involvemennt in a viable ecosystem, or their appreciation of the species involved.

 

[russ_watters]

I found your response interesting @russ_watters.
I had a friend who also did this [safari], and he loved it.
I am guessing you weren't shooing the animals.

Well, I did shoot this guy with a Panasonic Lumix point-and-shoot from about 50yds :

No kidding, my mom who recently moved told/showed me this very weekend that she mounted him on her wall in exactly the same spot I did on mine; to the left of her bed so when she rolls out every morning she looks right at him. I gave her a framed copy for Christmas that year.

IMHO:
I would say, we, as intellectual humans, more aware of consequences that less intellectually endowed animals are, would have a larger responsibility than the animals in some respects.

It's an interesting question, right? Does knowledge carry responsibility? And to whom/what? Why? I'm aware that a great many people believe the way you do, and I'm aware of the "whats", but it is difficult to come up with a logical reason why that responsibility should exist. Do you have one?

Nature is obscenely brutal/violent. Near as I can tell, the main reason most people believe in the responsibility is a squeamishness about violence (those "consequences" you mention). It pains us to watch animals suffer, so people believe we should do what we can to prevent/avoid their suffering. But that's a very deep rabbit hole to try to follow logically.

 

[BillTre]

Nice shot!

it is difficult to come up with a logical reason why that responsibility should exist. Do you have one?

To me the strongest argument is that if you know you are doing something that will bring down the environment that supports us all, that would be bad and we should avoid it. Its in the self interest of everyone.
However, deciding what will be so powerful as to do that is not a conclusion I would expect everyone to agree on.
The power of the state often comes into establish rules on the subject.

My daughter did a report for some conservation class about how allowing a limited amount of big game hunting is not always a bad thing, because of the economic benefits to locals and conservation efforts.

Removing top predators alone can unbalance ecosystems and change them to fewer species and less overall production (less diverting of environmental energy and resources to biological production).

 

[aheight]

Might I suggest two others at this point? My reason is important. My main thesis here which I stated above is that only after absorbing a good many of them does something very important emerge and that is the real crux of the matter: This emergent quality of what's really going on around us:

Radium girls or what I like to call "Who wants gonorrhea?"

The first secret city or what I think is a better title, "Don't you eat that yellow snow!"

I would prefer, if interested, watch them first without being biased by my own appraisal of the matter. However if you guys insist, I'll again write summaries first but this to me really spoils the fun of everyone discovering the secrets themselves.

 

[russ_watters]

Radium girls or what I like to call "Who wants gonorrhea?"

I'm familiar with the incident -- is there a documentary about it? Also, I'm not following why you like to call it that.

 

[aheight]

I'm familiar with the incident -- is there a documentary about it? Also, I'm not following why you like to call it that.

The name is the documentary on Prime. The event I find quite offensive and wish to to focus on a hidden danger having nothing to do with radium: they were innocent young girls instructed to "lick" the (radium) paint brush tip for a sharp clock number and when they started developing jaw cancer, were told by the "company" doctor they had gonorrhea because he thought they would keep quiet because of the social stigma of an STD. I should also point out the company (and likely the doctor) knew of the dangers of exposure to radium but said nothing. The hidden danger: never expect the company you work for to have your best interest when the bottom-line is at stake. Do your research especially now with instant access to everything. Trust no one.

 

[phinds]

never expect the company you work for to have your best interest when the bottom-line is at stake.

Anyone who needs a documentary to tell them that hasn't been paying attention.