That bell sound in the background music is the same as my ringtone. Had me looking for my phone half the video. Yes, the phone I was watching the video on. 🤦🏽♂️
A bit more elaboration on why large tumors are less viable than small ones: Oxygen diffusion limit. Molecular oxygen can only diffuse a few micrometers from a blood vessel. In normal tissue there's always a capillary a few microns away so that's not an issue. However as cancer cells are by definition abnormal growth, oxygen supply inevitably become too low inside a solid tumor. The cells experiencing low oxygen (hypoxia) will secrete a signal molecule called VEGF to stimulate capillary growth, but usually in a messy way, leading to internal bleeding etc. So as the tumor grows larger the inside often becomes necrotic and dies off due to lack of oxygen and nutrient.
Does cancer come with a moon named Triton that orbits the planet Saturn that can only be comprised of a now advertised missing ring? I would have thought that was Mercury. What types of radiation do these events emit?
Joe, I believe that you should have mentioned that people, in the past, used to die far earlier than we do now, so the high spike in cancer cases could be explained by lower number of cases of other deadly illneses that we were able to overcome. If you die due to infection when you are 25 you wont die from cancer at age 40-50. Just to be clear, I fully agree that our lifestyle has major flaws, but I just wanted to add this idea, so we can see the bigger picture.
That is called Survivorship Bias - another example is that after the first introduction of helmets in war, the cases of head injuries spiked up. Not because the helmets were causing injuries, but because they saved soldiers from shots that would've been otherwise fatal.
I have heard - and I want to stress how much science I DON'T have to back this up - that a healthy portion of that is down to infant/childhood deaths. In other words, the average lifespan of people as a whole was "weighed down" by the high infant mortality rates, but once you hit 10 or so, you were just as likely to make it to 30. And once you hit 30, you were just as likely to make it to 50. I don't think this is meant to account for all lifespan differences through the ages, just that it explains a good portion of the gap and why, say, even in the middle ages most people were in their 30s rather than teens.
@@Gildedmuse Just a note on this, it's true that excluding infant mortality does bump up the average lifespan of someone living between the 12th and 19th century they still were more likely to die at each stage of life. The average lifespan (excluding infant mortality) was closer to 55 compared to almost 80 in modern America.
*so the high spike in cancer cases could be explained by lower number of cases of mither deadly illness* That's not how it works. What matters are the *incidences* & not just sheer number of cancer cases. Thus it won't matter if there are more 40 year olds as we can calculate the *prevalence* of cancers which should be unaffected by more 40 year olds if the causes are the same ie old age in this case. Why should a 20 year old today be more likely to get some cancer than 100 years ago? The fact that they made it to 20 shouldn't change their odds.
Thank you! Was just about to leave a comment on this. I do wish he’d gone into *how* weight and diet could cause higher rates of cancer, because without it mortality rates punch a big old hole in that line of reasoning.
Cancer cells differ from normal cells in many ways. For instance, cancer cells: grow in the absence of signals telling them to grow. Normal cells only grow when they receive such signals. ignore signals that normally tell cells to stop dividing or to die (a process known as programmed cell death, or apoptosis). invade into nearby areas and spread to other areas of the body. Normal cells stop growing when they encounter other cells, and most normal cells do not move around the body. tell blood vessels to grow toward tumors. These blood vessels supply tumors with oxygen and nutrients and remove waste products from tumors.
@@etownshawn i have a friend that is 5'5, could only get dates im the Usa if he offered dinner. Years of dead end relationships. Fast forward to today he has a fiance from the Philippines, but i know looking overseas is not for everyone. Lots of tiny women outside the USA though.
Humans are huge. the average size of vertebrates (eliminating all the insects bacteria and plants) is about the size of a domestic cat. Humans are around the size of a deer. I think everyone forgets just how big we are, instead focusing on why aren't we bigger. we could be half our current size and not much would change for us in terms of day to day living.
The way it was explained to me was that tumors require support structures to survive such as blood vessels, and that at the scale of a whale, a tumor that grows large enough to be a health problem for the whale would not be able to build the support structures required to survive and get enough oxygen. Sounds like that was a bit of a simplified version.
There was an evolutionary comparative genomic study that revealed that in big animals, they trend to inherit together a lot of genes that controls regeneration and cell proliferation along with tumor suppressor genes. OTW, probably the most important tumor suppressor gene, is constantly activated in elephants. A transgenic mouse with elephant s p53 has less tumors than a normal mouse, but it gets older so much faster. Which means that elephants have also anti old genes. Basically, big animals have a lot of genes inherited together that in balance allows for a healthy life. If we want to extend lifespan in humans, we need to know how to maintain the proportion and balance of these clustered genes. If not, we will have cancer.
Maybe if you explained why something was real or fake instead of dismissing her very valid concerns, she'd feel better. They're obviously bothering her. Simply saying "don't worry" doesn't help anything and can even make her feel like you aren't taking it seriously, which could prompt her to be extra careful. Gotta validate and teach, not just dismiss her fears. This goes for anyone and anything.
@@angela_flute52689 I explained a lot to her even showing doctors documentary about many types of cancer, but my mom is Asian so she is just like that. She is healthy and strong person but easily anxious and worrying things a lot.
it's really difficult to fight misinformation, especially with some people who're less experienced with the internet. Power through though, maybe find some good, solid education videos as examples? I managed to show my mother in law that homeopathy won't help with the things she's concerned with through a Kurzgesagt video, and she's now listening to the doctor.
Oh, bless your heart! Or, brain! Pot helps triply with chemo symptoms, brain protection, and apoptosis of cancerous cells. Don't take my word, though I've studied this for years, I'm no doctor. Look up Lancer and Journal of the AMA published studies, as well as the American Nurses Association. Please, Be Well, Live Long, and Prosper. 🖖
@@injunsun Thank you so much! I have an MRI in a few days and hoping for the best! I have done a lot of research over the years because learning everything I can is a form of therapy for me. I've since started a podcast to share my experiences and what I've learned to help people who are in the same situation. And it's like you knew I'm a huge Star Trek fan!
Evolution never stops being interesting to me! Could watch videos like this all day! Also, as an average sized guy who doesn’t smoke, drink or eat animals, this video was very reassuring 😂
yeah but your lack of testosterone will shorten your life span. stop virtue signaling and just live the life you want, in the end death comes for us all and no one will care in 100 years. or keep it up, in the end its all the same.
@@mikehawk2610 this isn’t entirely true, if aging gets slowed via medical intervention, there’s a small chance death won’t come for you anytime soon. Eating and exercising right will be good for you in this scenario.
@@mikehawk2610 I am living the life I want. And just because we all die in the end, doesn't mean there aren't healthier and/or more ethical ways to live. I didn't even leave my comment as any kind of "virtue signal" it was more in response to Joe's joke about worrying about cancer as a tall person. But while we're on the subject, calling out "virtue signalling" is just a way of shutting down conversations and it helps absolutely no one. I would rather people openly discuss health and ethics than just keep it to themselves because they're worried they'll offend someone online.
@@tuathaigh-aa too much testosterone yeah, but too little can also shorten life spans as well as cause brittle bones lean muscle and low energy. Not too mention the b vitamins you miss out on without meat consumption. It's all about a balanced diet. Low T can also cause heart attacks, diabetes and coronary artery disease.
That Star Trek movie where they transported whales, then brought them to their time. Transporters and bioscanners use the same tech. Meanwhile, they could have just scanned hundreds of whales' genomes, and stored the data, and brought the one female, allowing her to have a few babies, then altering their DNA, and "poof" de-extinction on a large scale. If only that tech was real.
We as humans are also exposed to more carcinogenic factors in our environment plus this is compounded by diets that increase IGF1, chronic inflammation and poorly functioning immune systems. I'm so pleased you finished on this note. There is much we can do to change our lifestyle to improve overall health and thus reduce cancer rates
One of the last giraffes at the National Zoo had to be put down in 2005 due to the fact that he had cancer. RIP Jafari! The rest were moved permanently to other facilities to make room for the renovations to the Elephant house.
This video was so mind blowing to me when you covered how life basically had to find a way to fight itself in order for the organism as a whole survives. It's just crazy to think how complex multicellularity is, how amazing it is.
Our higher rates might have something to do with rapid gains in life expectancy over the last few hundred years. Way too fast for evolutionary biology to catch up. I'd expect elephants and whales probably have a similar life expectancy to 300 years ago, or maybe even lower.
4:10 before I get to it, this is what I’ve heard and read elsewhere, large animals do get more cancer, but since they are so large the cancer never reaches a state where it’s harmful before it itself turns cancerous, a sort of anti cancer. This has actually happened to people where their cancer growth, had a cancer growth which killed the cancer cells before they could spread.
You been exercising bro? Looking a little leaner. I know I`ve been getting fat over the winter. Now that spring is here it`s time to get back into shape. Here`s to healthy living.
If you grew up in the 1700s as a doctor, their big fight, according to diaries and newspaper reports, was trying to cure fever. I wonder if us all trying to cure cancer is like that, in that cancer is a symptom rather than the disease.
doubt it... Did the doctors back then understand the basic mechanisms and purpose of fever? I don't think so; they just knew that if you had fever, you're more likely to die. That's not the same with cancer today; even though we don't yet understand everything about it, we know quite a lot about why and how it happens. This time, we know who the enemy is.
Plants often times do grt tumours, but its the least of their concerns, they have no pain receptors, and their organs are constantly replaced and grows around the tumour. The cellwalls of plant cells also prevent cancer cells from spreeading and metastasizing to different parts. The plants should be worried if they do not get enough nutrients for photosynthesis. where they have mutations in their pigments and less fertile soil (low nutrient).
Tangent for the SF writers -- maybe this is one of the great filters in the way of galactic civilizations? If your species manages to figure out altruism (overcoming cancerous self-destructive tendencies like greed and war), you can grow beyond your home planet and system.
@8:39 ok, I can’t let this comment pass without mentioning that not only do elephants get drunk, but they’re apparently total lightweights. (I’m not talking fermented fruit, I’m talking breaking into grain alcohol silos and going on drunken rampages). Trust me, humans are not the only animals that get high and make poor choices.
humans are also apparently exceptionally tolerant of alcohol. I only know of few multicellular organisms that can survive blood alcohol concentrations of over .1%, and for many humans that's where the fun starts
@@nicolaiveliki1409 apparently part of this is because some people have diets that result in fermentation of alchohol in their guts, and this was made more possible with agriculture. The small amount of alcohol we produce doesn't get us drunk, but there are some people with exceptional gut biomes who actually can get drunk from the amount of alcohol their gut produces from their normal diet
Blue whale Is not the largest thing to live on earth, but the largest animal to live on earth. Some plants are bigger than blue whale. However great video! You are very professional. (Sorry for my bad english I'm from italy)
This paradox technically only works within a species, right? It is a nice way of introducing the subject of tumour suppression and but with the same logic there should be a Peto's age paradox as well. The bigger the organism is, the more cell divisions it needs to develop from a zygote to a full grown organism , the faster cells reach senescence. This should then result in larger organisms living faster and thus shorter than smaller ones. This is not the case because well, cells have worked around and with senescence to keep the organism healthy. The explanations for this a more accessible than for cancer but they lie in the same direction. Same goes for cancer, feels like its very easy to mistake evolution as a premeditated path instead of a literal trial and selection. This means that mathematically it wouldn't be sensible for an organism that has evolved to be enormous to have more cancer because it would be statistically unlikely to have survived selection. Only superficially the logic holds. I think you touched upon this around 7:00 minute mark but it didn't seem clear to me that you grasped the essence. An overly simplified analogy might be: If I comment more on your video's, I'm more likely te make mistakes. That doesn't mean people who comment more than me will make more mistakes. English is not my first language so my development in that area might be less for example and not all of your video's are within my area of expertise. Other people have had those experiences by just being in their place and time. Similarly big animals were able to fill a niche and more aggressively preventing malicious tumours was more advantageous to them somewhere in their evolutionary size journey.
In short, some animals are so large, that cancers can't reach critical mass before developing cancers themselves or before a competing cancer develops.
Joe, I didnt understand one thing: if large animals probably evolved independently to compensate the risk of cancer caused by their high number of cell divisions (4:12), why didnt it happen to mammals that eat other mammals (7:25)?
Probably because evolution doesn't care about the rest of the body after reproduction. As long as an animal can reach reproduction age and produce offspring, what happens after is irrelevant. So whales needs the defense mechanism to reach their enormous size at reproduction age, but most meat eating mammals don't need that to reliably reproduce.
@@johncao6516 Evolution can care about the body after reproduction if a species is more likely to survive with older members, like intelligent social species that rely a lot on teaching rather than preprogrammed instincts. Humans are a major example: even if you just consider the hunter-gatherers that made up most of human history, people generally could survive at least a decade or two after reproductive age. Compare that to the many insect or fish species that die immediately after reproducing.
Carnivora settled on a different evolutionary strategy to deal with cancer, one which isn't really an option to something the size of a whale. They have fairly short generation times and short lives. Even the largest cats and large canines like wolves typically only have lifespans hovering around the 10 year range. The exception to this is bears, but they're also not as carnivorous as lions, tigers or wolves.
1:04 these are called non-synonymous mutation, in which, in small strand DNA changes and the places of amino acids in peptides(amino acids strand which connected to each other) change and mostly this ones are harmful However, you don't need to be worried cause the cell will neutralize these mutated strands to prevent cell from collapsing
I'm not sure if you have ever mentioned it in previous video's but a nicely linked subject is the Selection shadow! Developing cancer after your sexually mature period doesn't affect your fitness which in time results in a more heterogenous amount of old age diseases because the healthier centenarians have almost no fitness advantage in their reproductive period! Would be an interesting video! Maybe if care of grandchildren would become the norm this would artificially change. Might not be very moral to do tho ;)
Are you talking about the African or the Asian elephant? Because the African elephant lives between 60 and 70 years and the Asian elephant lives about 48 to 50 years. Also, interestingly, the African elephant doesn't go through menopause so it has babies until the very end. The Asian elephant on the other hand does go through menopause, and lives a few years, not many, after it ceases being reproductively viable. I wonder, at least for the females of the species, if that's related to whether or not it gets cancer? I wonder if Asian elephants get cancer more than African elephants? Great, now you've got me thinking and I have work I got to get done today. No deep dives for me! :-)
In my opinion you should have covered the ways how gene editing could be used to prevent cancer in humans. Because it is the best technology we have to prevent cancers.
I was going to say diet I'm sure has to do with it. But you got to it. Especially since you mentioned mice. Humans and mice tend to have the same diet. Since they live off of our scraps. It would be nice to get some of the genes that other animals have to produce the tumor supresson stuff you mentioned. But we might end up like the movie splice. Also it's considered unethical to expirement like that which I feel is why advancements in this type of stuff has slowed down drastically. We can't even experiment with stem cells.
So is there a reason humans couldn’t take the proteins that protect against cancer in elephants or blue whales and put them into our own bodies? Would they not be viable since they’re not programmed to work with our cells? has it been attempted or thought of and disproven before? If anyone knows any more about any of this, I’d love to hear it!!
Humans already have most of those genes that are tumor suppressors, since the functions they have are ones that humans need too. There might be some proteins that are novel, but as the video mentioned the main thing is that they have a lot more copies. That makes it a lot harder to inactivate the tumor suppressor, since instead of having to have two mutations happen in once cell to inactivate both copies, now you need to have forty different mutation events happen in the same cell which knock out gene function, which is much less likely. Some researchers are working with trying to mutate the tumor genome to restore tumor suppressor function or introduce mutants of them that are more effective in cancer cells. I think they don't use protein directly because it's not feasible, but restoring the functions of tumor suppressor genes is definitely a topic of research.
I think the difference is that a human diet and way and place of living changes during his lifetime, but all of the animals, migrate, eat and live the same way of life, throughout their lives. Human's start and stop smoking, they move to places with more and less toxins in the air, they change their diet from carnivores to herbivores. I wrote this comment before the clip got to 07:00 which he covers further in the video)
2 года назад
Damn you, it took me a while to figure out what's that high pitched beeping in my left ear :D
For small animals that reproduce frequently and rapidly, cancer-fighting mechanisms are not needed. People also belong to this category. And all you need to do to live more than 100 years is to take these mechanisms and introduce them into human DNA. I wonder how many mothers want their children to live longer? Unfortunately people on this planet are still very stupid. And they are afraid to try new things. You need more than 1000 years of development for people to understand that your lifespan is the highest value.
We most definitely do not reproduce rapidly. Gestation time and quantity in humans is only faster than animals weighing as much as cars lol. 9 months for on average 1 baby? Pandas are one of the worst and they take at most 5 months.
@@setcheck67 We need a correlation, the life span in nature + the probability of survival with the rate of reproduction of the animal types. Man has long been separated from the natural mechanisms of nature, many mutations have already accumulated, and this must also be taken into account when comparing him with animals in the wild.
@@Banianiamuffins That is accounted for though. It's in the age it takes for humans to be sexually mature. At best a human sexually matures at 9 years old(with outliers earlier and later that aren't representative of general reality), but for females that's not really a reproductive age as they would die in childbirth without medical intervention(some very rare exceptions). So the REAL reproductive average for humans would be the earliest known examples we know of that worked in old times, about 14. 14 years to become sexually mature and for females a severe chance of death delivering the baby until the age of 20+. When it comes to age to sexual maturity I think there is only something like 4 other animals that are as long as humans. All of which are animals that live extremely long lives.
He mentions that we don't know how much cancer whales get because nobody is putting them in a machine and scanning them. Later he says the only place where whales get cancer as often as people is in the one Canadian river. So how do we know that? Really would have been great to explore that. Like do we actually know how often whales get cancer or not? What is it like for the Whales who do get cancer that we know about in the river? Can the tumors get big or not in them? He asks some questions that he implies we don't have answers to but clearly we do know at least a little bit about it if everything he says is correct.
If you read Yuval Noah Hariris book Sapiens, particularly the section on the agricultural revolution, you'll find that the biggest mistake humans ever made was crawling down from the trees and migrating out of Africa. It's been steady downhill since then.
I've been eating super healthy, lots of salad, fish, whole grains. And then I watch this on my cheat day with chicken nuggets and taquitos. Go figure :D
Hey, may I suggest you guys get more subtitle languages ? Your videos are extremely educational and we, teachers in non-English speaking countries, could benefit our students with your animations in class! Btw, Brazilian. We speak Portuguese
What I learned from this video: 1) Humanity will kill all wales in search of an anti cancer strategy 2) Humanity will kill all krill, because it's the next super food
As a man who is 5 ft tall...hahaha jokes on you. I've always said there is no advantages to being over 6 ft in our modern society, and now i have more ammunition knowing what i learned here.
Think about it like a computer, if you rate a hard drive you can either have it go faster or increase the redundancy. Anything from 50% redundant to 10% striped among every single drive, that way if one drive fails all you have to do is replace it and it automatically copies over. So if there's less risk of data corruption, you don't need as much data redundancy. If you had a hard drives that failed every 10 seconds you would want 50% redundancy with off-site backups. Like an elephant
Honest question: How do we know that they don't? Do we do as many whale autopsies, elephant autopsies, etc., as I think we'd need to be certain? (I wouldn't bet on animals in captivity having the same incidence as those in the wild.)
Yeah, you could have mentionned that the St-Lauwrence river that's outside my Québec window drains from the great lakes, where a lot of the pollution came from Chicago, Detroit, Buffalo, Toronto, Montreal... And it's also much better now than ot was in the 1980s thanks to stricter norms.
8:53 Speaking of which, Joe, considering your recent endeavors with our giant cetacean brothers i have a request to you. All animals are also great apothecaries. Does any plant or critter consumed by proud proboscideans or courios cetaceans have been found to be enjoyed for their prominent pleasurable psychedelic properties? On a side note, considering how much cetaceans are -m1ndlessly slaughtered by 3vil corporations- i mean constantly researched for scientific purposes -(as the story goes)- worldeide to this very day; i would have assumed cancers would/could be found in our disfortunate deep dwelling distant counterparts.
Can we use crispr cas 9 to insert the sequence from the elephant genome that regulate tumour suppression system into humans to decrease their chances of getting cancer?
2:33 I don’t mean to be that person who tries to be smart and prove people wrong, but I heard you say that and my dinosaur loving brain thought “that can’t be right, right?” So I did a little research, and I was excited to find that there are creatures that were larger than a blue whale. Bruhathkayosaurus was a sauropod found in the Kallamedu Formation of India who went extinct in the late Cretaceous. Bruhathkayosaurus was estimated to be 130-150 feet (39.624 meters-45.72 meters) in length, whereas the largest blue whale ever recorded was apparently 110 feet and 17 inches (33.9598 meters) in length. No, I did not copy paste all these words from Google, but you can probably find everything there. Idk, I wanted to share this knowledge even if it only matters to me.
I really have problem of one statement in this video. At 1:25 "In fact, humans are living longer and longer..." How have humans have been living longer and longer? How do you even get this obvious false conclusion?
@@kaantax8666 Right. How do you make human live longer? Make individual human live longer. You only mean making entire human race die less at younger age. If one human can live for 150 years in the past, although all humans together live only 40 on average, then now with access of nutrition and healthcare and vaccines, all live to 80, but no one lives past 90, this is not live longer, this is just dying less from at younger age. How do you make one individual human live longer, like go beyond the age of 120?
Yeah, but some experiments also show that cancer can also be caused by metabolic dysfunction in mithocondria. So, the increased frequency of cancer might also have something to do with our highly processed diets etc.
it could be considered valid in long scale number systems, but you usually dont hear it in short scale number systems (like what the US, canada, the UK, and most english speaking countries use). en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_and_short_scales
what is it is the result of corrupted ie cooked food that maybe slightly different from original molecules when that reacts with body leads to abnormal substances....?
That bell sound in the background music is the same as my ringtone. Had me looking for my phone half the video. Yes, the phone I was watching the video on. 🤦🏽♂️
Lol 😂
When you walk in your room because you want to lay down but then you forget why you’re in your room so you leave
OMG😂.
Millions of years of evolution for this.....
Peak evolution
A bit more elaboration on why large tumors are less viable than small ones: Oxygen diffusion limit. Molecular oxygen can only diffuse a few micrometers from a blood vessel. In normal tissue there's always a capillary a few microns away so that's not an issue. However as cancer cells are by definition abnormal growth, oxygen supply inevitably become too low inside a solid tumor. The cells experiencing low oxygen (hypoxia) will secrete a signal molecule called VEGF to stimulate capillary growth, but usually in a messy way, leading to internal bleeding etc. So as the tumor grows larger the inside often becomes necrotic and dies off due to lack of oxygen and nutrient.
Perfect explanation 👍🏻👍🏻
Couldn't the outside of the tumor still grow outwards, even if the inside is dead?
@@Alex_Deam At one point the rate of cells dying and growing are the same, so they can't grow any bigger
@@Alex_Deam Yes, but the lack of nutrient supply can limit the overall growth rate. It can then only grow on the periphery.
It seem's that fasting is the way to destroy them when small before making to much damedge.
"Why big thing not get cancer."
- Joe 2022
why is cancer ♋ such big deal 😏
Does cancer come with a moon named Triton that orbits the planet Saturn that can only be comprised of a now advertised missing ring? I would have thought that was Mercury. What types of radiation do these events emit?
Mama
@@elpozomierda5106 no sé verdad en esta lingua.
@@johnnykwon8173 just the normal electromagnetic type
Joe, I believe that you should have mentioned that people, in the past, used to die far earlier than we do now, so the high spike in cancer cases could be explained by lower number of cases of other deadly illneses that we were able to overcome. If you die due to infection when you are 25 you wont die from cancer at age 40-50. Just to be clear, I fully agree that our lifestyle has major flaws, but I just wanted to add this idea, so we can see the bigger picture.
That is called Survivorship Bias - another example is that after the first introduction of helmets in war, the cases of head injuries spiked up. Not because the helmets were causing injuries, but because they saved soldiers from shots that would've been otherwise fatal.
I have heard - and I want to stress how much science I DON'T have to back this up - that a healthy portion of that is down to infant/childhood deaths. In other words, the average lifespan of people as a whole was "weighed down" by the high infant mortality rates, but once you hit 10 or so, you were just as likely to make it to 30. And once you hit 30, you were just as likely to make it to 50.
I don't think this is meant to account for all lifespan differences through the ages, just that it explains a good portion of the gap and why, say, even in the middle ages most people were in their 30s rather than teens.
@@Gildedmuse Just a note on this, it's true that excluding infant mortality does bump up the average lifespan of someone living between the 12th and 19th century they still were more likely to die at each stage of life. The average lifespan (excluding infant mortality) was closer to 55 compared to almost 80 in modern America.
*so the high spike in cancer cases could be explained by lower number of cases of mither deadly illness*
That's not how it works.
What matters are the *incidences* & not just sheer number of cancer cases. Thus it won't matter if there are more 40 year olds as we can calculate the *prevalence* of cancers which should be unaffected by more 40 year olds if the causes are the same ie old age in this case.
Why should a 20 year old today be more likely to get some cancer than 100 years ago? The fact that they made it to 20 shouldn't change their odds.
Thank you! Was just about to leave a comment on this. I do wish he’d gone into *how* weight and diet could cause higher rates of cancer, because without it mortality rates punch a big old hole in that line of reasoning.
Cancer cells differ from normal cells in many ways. For instance, cancer cells:
grow in the absence of signals telling them to grow. Normal cells only grow when they receive such signals.
ignore signals that normally tell cells to stop dividing or to die (a process known as programmed cell death, or apoptosis).
invade into nearby areas and spread to other areas of the body. Normal cells stop growing when they encounter other cells, and most normal cells do not move around the body.
tell blood vessels to grow toward tumors. These blood vessels supply tumors with oxygen and nutrients and remove waste products from tumors.
Shosh
so glad 😊 I saw the video I don't know anything about Cancer ♋
Joe: **cries in tall person**
Me, a 5'1 person: 😎
But you are tall!
Greetings from someone who is 4'10".
one benefit of only being 5'7 here. while all the 6'3ers get the girls hah
@@etownshawn the solution is go after 4'10 girls, you are a giant to them.
@@jbrown8601 true, though it is the easy way out haha
@@etownshawn i have a friend that is 5'5, could only get dates im the Usa if he offered dinner. Years of dead end relationships. Fast forward to today he has a fiance from the Philippines, but i know looking overseas is not for everyone. Lots of tiny women outside the USA though.
Humans are huge.
the average size of vertebrates (eliminating all the insects bacteria and plants) is about the size of a domestic cat.
Humans are around the size of a deer.
I think everyone forgets just how big we are, instead focusing on why aren't we bigger. we could be half our current size and not much would change for us in terms of day to day living.
but im short
As with nearly everything else, the bigger the better
@@phiterhcs5260 Yeah, no. We need more food and all other resources, which means fewer of us on the same amount of land.
@@phiterhcs5260 lol. This is your ancestral scarcity mindset. How can having a higher risk of cancer and a shorter life expectancy be “better”????
@@DanielDornekDorda Congrats.
The way it was explained to me was that tumors require support structures to survive such as blood vessels, and that at the scale of a whale, a tumor that grows large enough to be a health problem for the whale would not be able to build the support structures required to survive and get enough oxygen. Sounds like that was a bit of a simplified version.
There was an evolutionary comparative genomic study that revealed that in big animals, they trend to inherit together a lot of genes that controls regeneration and cell proliferation along with tumor suppressor genes. OTW, probably the most important tumor suppressor gene, is constantly activated in elephants. A transgenic mouse with elephant s p53 has less tumors than a normal mouse, but it gets older so much faster. Which means that elephants have also anti old genes. Basically, big animals have a lot of genes inherited together that in balance allows for a healthy life. If we want to extend lifespan in humans, we need to know how to maintain the proportion and balance of these clustered genes. If not, we will have cancer.
My mom so afraid of cancer that she learn everything from Internet myths, I always told her not to worry so much but she believe everyone except me.
Maybe if you explained why something was real or fake instead of dismissing her very valid concerns, she'd feel better. They're obviously bothering her. Simply saying "don't worry" doesn't help anything and can even make her feel like you aren't taking it seriously, which could prompt her to be extra careful. Gotta validate and teach, not just dismiss her fears. This goes for anyone and anything.
@@angela_flute52689 I explained a lot to her even showing doctors documentary about many types of cancer, but my mom is Asian so she is just like that. She is healthy and strong person but easily anxious and worrying things a lot.
Unhapply, this bahavior on older generations appears to be turning common worldwide
Thankfully they just explained that large animals such as Whales and Elephants don't really suffer from cancer, so I think your mom will be OK.
it's really difficult to fight misinformation, especially with some people who're less experienced with the internet. Power through though, maybe find some good, solid education videos as examples? I managed to show my mother in law that homeopathy won't help with the things she's concerned with through a Kurzgesagt video, and she's now listening to the doctor.
It’s all fun and games until the *tumor suppressor gene* is the one that mutates.
#TrueFacts
Wow. You forget it's a gene not a ce.
That’s cancer. Proto-oncogenes mutate and remain “on”, tumor suppressor genes mutate and remain “off”
Cancer sure isn't fun but I'm 5.5 years out from a glioblastoma diagnosis!
Oh, bless your heart! Or, brain! Pot helps triply with chemo symptoms, brain protection, and apoptosis of cancerous cells. Don't take my word, though I've studied this for years, I'm no doctor. Look up Lancer and Journal of the AMA published studies, as well as the American Nurses Association. Please, Be Well, Live Long, and Prosper. 🖖
@@injunsun Thank you so much! I have an MRI in a few days and hoping for the best! I have done a lot of research over the years because learning everything I can is a form of therapy for me. I've since started a podcast to share my experiences and what I've learned to help people who are in the same situation.
And it's like you knew I'm a huge Star Trek fan!
The way American Ts sound like Ds is pretty unfortunate for poor Professor Peto
Wait, that sounded like a D ? o_0
*Edit:* am 'Murican so probably used to it
Good thing he wasn't a pediatrician
Good thing he wasn't a pediatrician
Evolution never stops being interesting to me! Could watch videos like this all day!
Also, as an average sized guy who doesn’t smoke, drink or eat animals, this video was very reassuring 😂
Yeah, well, nobody is really 100% safe tho
yeah but your lack of testosterone will shorten your life span.
stop virtue signaling and just live the life you want, in the end death comes for us all and no one will care in 100 years.
or keep it up, in the end its all the same.
@@mikehawk2610 this isn’t entirely true, if aging gets slowed via medical intervention, there’s a small chance death won’t come for you anytime soon. Eating and exercising right will be good for you in this scenario.
@@mikehawk2610 I am living the life I want. And just because we all die in the end, doesn't mean there aren't healthier and/or more ethical ways to live.
I didn't even leave my comment as any kind of "virtue signal" it was more in response to Joe's joke about worrying about cancer as a tall person.
But while we're on the subject, calling out "virtue signalling" is just a way of shutting down conversations and it helps absolutely no one. I would rather people openly discuss health and ethics than just keep it to themselves because they're worried they'll offend someone online.
@@tuathaigh-aa too much testosterone yeah, but too little can also shorten life spans as well as cause brittle bones lean muscle and low energy. Not too mention the b vitamins you miss out on without meat consumption.
It's all about a balanced diet.
Low T can also cause heart attacks, diabetes and coronary artery disease.
Getting a whale to a CAT scan made my day, Thanks Joe, Have a great day yourself.
That Star Trek movie where they transported whales, then brought them to their time. Transporters and bioscanners use the same tech. Meanwhile, they could have just scanned hundreds of whales' genomes, and stored the data, and brought the one female, allowing her to have a few babies, then altering their DNA, and "poof" de-extinction on a large scale. If only that tech was real.
There are principles revealed here, would you ra...
We as humans are also exposed to more carcinogenic factors in our environment plus this is compounded by diets that increase IGF1, chronic inflammation and poorly functioning immune systems.
I'm so pleased you finished on this note. There is much we can do to change our lifestyle to improve overall health and thus reduce cancer rates
Did you make that up?
One of the last giraffes at the National Zoo had to be put down in 2005 due to the fact that he had cancer. RIP Jafari! The rest were moved permanently to other facilities to make room for the renovations to the Elephant house.
This video was so mind blowing to me when you covered how life basically had to find a way to fight itself in order for the organism as a whole survives. It's just crazy to think how complex multicellularity is, how amazing it is.
Know the Safari-Project? Professor Dave and other Sci-RUclipsr covered it!
Our higher rates might have something to do with rapid gains in life expectancy over the last few hundred years. Way too fast for evolutionary biology to catch up. I'd expect elephants and whales probably have a similar life expectancy to 300 years ago, or maybe even lower.
Higher rates can also be related to people becoming taller and fatter due to overconsumption of protein and fats.
Ehh, higher life expectancy doesnt mean humans are living *longer*, as much as we're getting older *more often*, and dying *young* less.
@@Nazuiko soo.... humans are living longer
@@kevintan5497 dude trynna sounds smart, let him be
So it seems like the adventure of being smart has taken the form of acceptance, great work as always
The unfortunate last name award goes to Dr. Peto.
What is Pedos Paradox?
Really curious to know what more we can learn from Peto's files.
In 2021 my cousin died of cancer… it started in his legs and got to his lungs… its been hard for us especially his brothers…
Cries in tall person. Meanwhile, I'm smiling as a tiny shorty.
Congrats. Health is the most important treasure.
4:10 before I get to it, this is what I’ve heard and read elsewhere, large animals do get more cancer, but since they are so large the cancer never reaches a state where it’s harmful before it itself turns cancerous, a sort of anti cancer.
This has actually happened to people where their cancer growth, had a cancer growth which killed the cancer cells before they could spread.
You been exercising bro? Looking a little leaner. I know I`ve been getting fat over the winter. Now that spring is here it`s time to get back into shape. Here`s to healthy living.
Yes! I can bench press most of the comment section
@@besmart nice one joe😂😂
If you grew up in the 1700s as a doctor, their big fight, according to diaries and newspaper reports, was trying to cure fever. I wonder if us all trying to cure cancer is like that, in that cancer is a symptom rather than the disease.
doubt it... Did the doctors back then understand the basic mechanisms and purpose of fever? I don't think so; they just knew that if you had fever, you're more likely to die. That's not the same with cancer today; even though we don't yet understand everything about it, we know quite a lot about why and how it happens. This time, we know who the enemy is.
What about plants? We always hear about cancer in animals but never in plants, are they cancer free or do we just know absolutely nothing about it?
Trees grow tumorous growths known as burls.
Plants have the benefit of growing around tumors, because the only limit to their resources is water and soil content.
Plants often times do grt tumours, but its the least of their concerns, they have no pain receptors, and their organs are constantly replaced and grows around the tumour. The cellwalls of plant cells also prevent cancer cells from spreeading and metastasizing to different parts. The plants should be worried if they do not get enough nutrients for photosynthesis. where they have mutations in their pigments and less fertile soil (low nutrient).
Peto’s Paradox sounds like some intellectual theory thought up by one of the guys caught on that show To Catch A Predator.
Beautiful video, really interesting
Tangent for the SF writers -- maybe this is one of the great filters in the way of galactic civilizations? If your species manages to figure out altruism (overcoming cancerous self-destructive tendencies like greed and war), you can grow beyond your home planet and system.
@8:39 ok, I can’t let this comment pass without mentioning that not only do elephants get drunk, but they’re apparently total lightweights. (I’m not talking fermented fruit, I’m talking breaking into grain alcohol silos and going on drunken rampages). Trust me, humans are not the only animals that get high and make poor choices.
humans are also apparently exceptionally tolerant of alcohol. I only know of few multicellular organisms that can survive blood alcohol concentrations of over .1%, and for many humans that's where the fun starts
@@nicolaiveliki1409 powerful liver
@@nicolaiveliki1409 apparently part of this is because some people have diets that result in fermentation of alchohol in their guts, and this was made more possible with agriculture. The small amount of alcohol we produce doesn't get us drunk, but there are some people with exceptional gut biomes who actually can get drunk from the amount of alcohol their gut produces from their normal diet
@@watsonwrote yes I've heard of this phenomenon, and I wouldn't want it, regardless of how much I like to drink 😎
I didn't realize you changed the name of channel, shame, I really liked it
As an "average sized" male I'm already conscious of my abilities and being compared to whales did nothing to alleviate any anxieties.
What do you mean?
This channel is awesome!
Really good vedio good job brother
Love from Bangladesh🇧🇩💖💝
Oh wow first time I found a Bangladeshi in this channel. I am a Bangladeshi too. Where are you from
Blue whale Is not the largest thing to live on earth, but the largest animal to live on earth. Some plants are bigger than blue whale.
However great video! You are very professional. (Sorry for my bad english I'm from italy)
Your English is a lot better than how my German probably reads.
3:40 FUN unusefull fuct: Peto in italian means "fart" 👍
This paradox technically only works within a species, right? It is a nice way of introducing the subject of tumour suppression and but with the same logic there should be a Peto's age paradox as well. The bigger the organism is, the more cell divisions it needs to develop from a zygote to a full grown organism , the faster cells reach senescence. This should then result in larger organisms living faster and thus shorter than smaller ones. This is not the case because well, cells have worked around and with senescence to keep the organism healthy. The explanations for this a more accessible than for cancer but they lie in the same direction. Same goes for cancer, feels like its very easy to mistake evolution as a premeditated path instead of a literal trial and selection. This means that mathematically it wouldn't be sensible for an organism that has evolved to be enormous to have more cancer because it would be statistically unlikely to have survived selection. Only superficially the logic holds. I think you touched upon this around 7:00 minute mark but it didn't seem clear to me that you grasped the essence. An overly simplified analogy might be: If I comment more on your video's, I'm more likely te make mistakes. That doesn't mean people who comment more than me will make more mistakes. English is not my first language so my development in that area might be less for example and not all of your video's are within my area of expertise. Other people have had those experiences by just being in their place and time. Similarly big animals were able to fill a niche and more aggressively preventing malicious tumours was more advantageous to them somewhere in their evolutionary size journey.
Oh god im definitely getting cancer, i got the genes, the lifespan, the height
Same i am very tall 🙃
In short, some animals are so large, that cancers can't reach critical mass before developing cancers themselves or before a competing cancer develops.
Joe, I didnt understand one thing: if large animals probably evolved independently to compensate the risk of cancer caused by their high number of cell divisions (4:12), why didnt it happen to mammals that eat other mammals (7:25)?
Probably because evolution doesn't care about the rest of the body after reproduction. As long as an animal can reach reproduction age and produce offspring, what happens after is irrelevant. So whales needs the defense mechanism to reach their enormous size at reproduction age, but most meat eating mammals don't need that to reliably reproduce.
@@johncao6516 Evolution can care about the body after reproduction if a species is more likely to survive with older members, like intelligent social species that rely a lot on teaching rather than preprogrammed instincts. Humans are a major example: even if you just consider the hunter-gatherers that made up most of human history, people generally could survive at least a decade or two after reproductive age. Compare that to the many insect or fish species that die immediately after reproducing.
Carnivora settled on a different evolutionary strategy to deal with cancer, one which isn't really an option to something the size of a whale. They have fairly short generation times and short lives. Even the largest cats and large canines like wolves typically only have lifespans hovering around the 10 year range.
The exception to this is bears, but they're also not as carnivorous as lions, tigers or wolves.
@@jared_bowden ok AA
@@jared_bowden Precisely.
Keep up the good work Joe!
1:04 these are called non-synonymous mutation, in which, in small strand DNA changes and the places of amino acids in peptides(amino acids strand which connected to each other) change and mostly this ones are harmful
However, you don't need to be worried cause the cell will neutralize these mutated strands to prevent cell from collapsing
I'm not sure if you have ever mentioned it in previous video's but a nicely linked subject is the Selection shadow! Developing cancer after your sexually mature period doesn't affect your fitness which in time results in a more heterogenous amount of old age diseases because the healthier centenarians have almost no fitness advantage in their reproductive period! Would be an interesting video! Maybe if care of grandchildren would become the norm this would artificially change. Might not be very moral to do tho ;)
Are you talking about the African or the Asian elephant? Because the African elephant lives between 60 and 70 years and the Asian elephant lives about 48 to 50 years. Also, interestingly, the African elephant doesn't go through menopause so it has babies until the very end. The Asian elephant on the other hand does go through menopause, and lives a few years, not many, after it ceases being reproductively viable. I wonder, at least for the females of the species, if that's related to whether or not it gets cancer? I wonder if Asian elephants get cancer more than African elephants? Great, now you've got me thinking and I have work I got to get done today. No deep dives for me! :-)
I want a sassy talking globe in my room. haha
In my opinion you should have covered the ways how gene editing could be used to prevent cancer in humans. Because it is the best technology we have to prevent cancers.
yes. wouldve loved to have seen this one
I know a friend that got cancer at the ripe old age of 14
He is alive
A friend of mine I met in third grade had it. I don’t know when he first got it but it was before we were 8
I was going to say diet I'm sure has to do with it. But you got to it. Especially since you mentioned mice. Humans and mice tend to have the same diet. Since they live off of our scraps. It would be nice to get some of the genes that other animals have to produce the tumor supresson stuff you mentioned. But we might end up like the movie splice. Also it's considered unethical to expirement like that which I feel is why advancements in this type of stuff has slowed down drastically. We can't even experiment with stem cells.
So is there a reason humans couldn’t take the proteins that protect against cancer in elephants or blue whales and put them into our own bodies? Would they not be viable since they’re not programmed to work with our cells? has it been attempted or thought of and disproven before? If anyone knows any more about any of this, I’d love to hear it!!
Humans already have most of those genes that are tumor suppressors, since the functions they have are ones that humans need too. There might be some proteins that are novel, but as the video mentioned the main thing is that they have a lot more copies. That makes it a lot harder to inactivate the tumor suppressor, since instead of having to have two mutations happen in once cell to inactivate both copies, now you need to have forty different mutation events happen in the same cell which knock out gene function, which is much less likely. Some researchers are working with trying to mutate the tumor genome to restore tumor suppressor function or introduce mutants of them that are more effective in cancer cells. I think they don't use protein directly because it's not feasible, but restoring the functions of tumor suppressor genes is definitely a topic of research.
Imagine existing for the solo purpose of suppressing cancer but you get deactivated and there is only one of u, no backups... RIP
interesting video thank you Joe .
Good episode. I watched it twice!
Peto’s paradox isn’t really even a paradox. We are not thinking about it enough to realize it makes sense.
6:03 Tumor cell (when it gets big enough) also get tumor?
This is the best content on RUclips.
I feel so dumb tho...
I think the difference is that a human diet and way and place of living changes during his lifetime, but all of the animals, migrate, eat and live the same way of life, throughout their lives. Human's start and stop smoking, they move to places with more and less toxins in the air, they change their diet from carnivores to herbivores.
I wrote this comment before the clip got to 07:00 which he covers further in the video)
Damn you, it took me a while to figure out what's that high pitched beeping in my left ear :D
Very interesting and very well presented.
Joe im begging you... I want to see your videos in 1440p!!!!! great vid lov u
It's ok to be smart➡️➡️be smart
0:27 that’s also known as more than 50 billiard in the long scale, or 50 quadrillion in the short scale.
I know it’s customary for North Americans to pronounce a lot of their T’s as D’s, but in a name like Peto you may want to make an exception.
In my dialect (?), it sounded very distinctly like a T instead of a D, but I've learned today that is not the case for the rest of the world XD ._.
weight about 40kg, in my early 20's, 5ft and have stage 2 lymphoma. Yeah evolution!
1:01 Transformers: Prime shooting noise?
Speciation and adaptation are also correlated to higher mutation rates.
"why big thing not get cancer"
God finally i can understand this show
"we can't accelerate our own evolution" Every gene editing tool: hold my beer
6:52 I myself know quite a few walking tumours, they don’t have cancer though
Why Big Thing Not Get Cancer is a great title
Me: “I should really get some more sleep”
Also me: up at 2AM wondering about large animals and cancer
For small animals that reproduce frequently and rapidly, cancer-fighting mechanisms are not needed.
People also belong to this category.
And all you need to do to live more than 100 years is to take these mechanisms and introduce them into human DNA.
I wonder how many mothers want their children to live longer?
Unfortunately people on this planet are still very stupid. And they are afraid to try new things.
You need more than 1000 years of development for people to understand that your lifespan is the highest value.
We most definitely do not reproduce rapidly. Gestation time and quantity in humans is only faster than animals weighing as much as cars lol. 9 months for on average 1 baby? Pandas are one of the worst and they take at most 5 months.
@@setcheck67 We need a correlation, the life span in nature + the probability of survival with the rate of reproduction of the animal types.
Man has long been separated from the natural mechanisms of nature, many mutations have already accumulated, and this must also be taken into account when comparing him with animals in the wild.
@@Banianiamuffins That is accounted for though. It's in the age it takes for humans to be sexually mature. At best a human sexually matures at 9 years old(with outliers earlier and later that aren't representative of general reality), but for females that's not really a reproductive age as they would die in childbirth without medical intervention(some very rare exceptions). So the REAL reproductive average for humans would be the earliest known examples we know of that worked in old times, about 14. 14 years to become sexually mature and for females a severe chance of death delivering the baby until the age of 20+. When it comes to age to sexual maturity I think there is only something like 4 other animals that are as long as humans. All of which are animals that live extremely long lives.
Humans rather invest in biological warfare.
Humans don’t belong to that category at all. What an ignorant thing to say.
On this very day I noticed the channel name changed from 'It's Okay To Be Smart' to 'Be Smart' it's an end of a 7 year long era. :(
He mentions that we don't know how much cancer whales get because nobody is putting them in a machine and scanning them. Later he says the only place where whales get cancer as often as people is in the one Canadian river. So how do we know that? Really would have been great to explore that. Like do we actually know how often whales get cancer or not? What is it like for the Whales who do get cancer that we know about in the river? Can the tumors get big or not in them?
He asks some questions that he implies we don't have answers to but clearly we do know at least a little bit about it if everything he says is correct.
At around 7:40... does that factor in that we got better at detecting cancer?
Why I feel like I’ve seen this before? But still clicked in and watched
1:42
Laughs in short person
If you read Yuval Noah Hariris book Sapiens, particularly the section on the agricultural revolution, you'll find that the biggest mistake humans ever made was crawling down from the trees and migrating out of Africa. It's been steady downhill since then.
I've been eating super healthy, lots of salad, fish, whole grains. And then I watch this on my cheat day with chicken nuggets and taquitos. Go figure :D
Humans have been tall for a long time, more than one of the big bodies found were about 6’4”
Hey, may I suggest you guys get more subtitle languages ?
Your videos are extremely educational and we, teachers in non-English speaking countries, could benefit our students with your animations in class!
Btw, Brazilian. We speak Portuguese
What I learned from this video:
1) Humanity will kill all wales in search of an anti cancer strategy
2) Humanity will kill all krill, because it's the next super food
As a man who is 5 ft tall...hahaha jokes on you. I've always said there is no advantages to being over 6 ft in our modern society, and now i have more ammunition knowing what i learned here.
Think about it like a computer, if you rate a hard drive you can either have it go faster or increase the redundancy. Anything from 50% redundant to 10% striped among every single drive, that way if one drive fails all you have to do is replace it and it automatically copies over.
So if there's less risk of data corruption, you don't need as much data redundancy. If you had a hard drives that failed every 10 seconds you would want 50% redundancy with off-site backups. Like an elephant
Of course I'd love to see an elephant's off-site back up
So many things I never questioned, but has there been Blue Whales that died from cancer? And how big did the growth have to get?
Cancer prevention would be an interesting topic to cover.
Honest question: How do we know that they don't? Do we do as many whale autopsies, elephant autopsies, etc., as I think we'd need to be certain? (I wouldn't bet on animals in captivity having the same incidence as those in the wild.)
Yeah, you could have mentionned that the St-Lauwrence river that's outside my Québec window drains from the great lakes, where a lot of the pollution came from Chicago, Detroit, Buffalo, Toronto, Montreal...
And it's also much better now than ot was in the 1980s thanks to stricter norms.
@JOY OFEM shut up
8:53
Speaking of which, Joe, considering your recent endeavors with our giant cetacean brothers i have a request to you. All animals are also great apothecaries. Does any plant or critter consumed by proud proboscideans or courios cetaceans have been found to be enjoyed for their prominent pleasurable psychedelic properties?
On a side note, considering how much cetaceans are -m1ndlessly slaughtered by 3vil corporations- i mean constantly researched for scientific purposes -(as the story goes)- worldeide to this very day; i would have assumed cancers would/could be found in our disfortunate deep dwelling distant counterparts.
Great video
Can we use crispr cas 9 to insert the sequence from the elephant genome that regulate tumour suppression system into humans to decrease their chances of getting cancer?
2:33
I don’t mean to be that person who tries to be smart and prove people wrong, but I heard you say that and my dinosaur loving brain thought “that can’t be right, right?” So I did a little research, and I was excited to find that there are creatures that were larger than a blue whale. Bruhathkayosaurus was a sauropod found in the Kallamedu Formation of India who went extinct in the late Cretaceous. Bruhathkayosaurus was estimated to be 130-150 feet (39.624 meters-45.72 meters) in length, whereas the largest blue whale ever recorded was apparently 110 feet and 17 inches (33.9598 meters) in length.
No, I did not copy paste all these words from Google, but you can probably find everything there.
Idk, I wanted to share this knowledge even if it only matters to me.
I really have problem of one statement in this video. At 1:25 "In fact, humans are living longer and longer..." How have humans have been living longer and longer? How do you even get this obvious false conclusion?
healthcare.
vaccines.
nutritions.
@@kaantax8666 Right. How do you make human live longer? Make individual human live longer. You only mean making entire human race die less at younger age. If one human can live for 150 years in the past, although all humans together live only 40 on average, then now with access of nutrition and healthcare and vaccines, all live to 80, but no one lives past 90, this is not live longer, this is just dying less from at younger age.
How do you make one individual human live longer, like go beyond the age of 120?
Yeah, but some experiments also show that cancer can also be caused by metabolic dysfunction in mithocondria. So, the increased frequency of cancer might also have something to do with our highly processed diets etc.
0:40 as a kid I thought “million billion” was a number but now its confirmed.
it could be considered valid in long scale number systems, but you usually dont hear it in short scale number systems (like what the US, canada, the UK, and most english speaking countries use).
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_and_short_scales
BRO WHY IS THERE A BELL I THOUGHT MY ALARM WAS RINGING
1:35 I’m 6’9” 😬
what is it is the result of corrupted ie cooked food that maybe slightly different from original molecules when that reacts with body leads to abnormal substances....?
I liked it...learned a lot A +.
"Why big thing not get cancer?"
All my friends: ooohhhhh
1:34 now I can be really grateful for what I am