Acne Vulgaris: A Disease of Western Civilization (2002) • Hacker News Board

Re: Acne Vulgaris: A Disease of Western Civilization (2002)

#101

Post by mistersquid » Thu, Jan 25, 2018, 1:19 AM UTC

ars wrote: post #22

This title "Acne vulgaris is virtually nonexistent in non-Western populations" is not supported by the article. HN policy is not to change the title which is "Acne Vulgaris - A Disease of Western Civilization"

Agreed. The HN title is misleading and inaccurate, but even the original title obscures the presence of acne in non-Western countries.

For example, many Japanese suffer very bad acne through adolescence and young adulthood. In one study, nearly 60% of the teenagers had acne and many "had seborrhea and a family history of acne." [0] Indeed, even the most basic web search for "acne vulgaris in Japan" yields plenty of results to studies and treatments. (The study linked in the OP does mention Okinawa, whose relationship to Japan is complicated, as having practically zero incidence of acne vulgaris.)

In any case, given the current and historical prevalence of acne in Japan and the assertions of the study in the OP, would Japan be considered Western or is it a condition of urbanization and the health effects due to environment and diet?

Perhaps the word "Western" confounds easy interpretation of this study because it's actually a proxy for "outside Papua New Guinea".

[0] https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/dermatol/111/9/111_1347...

EDIT: clarify source of reference to Okinawa.

Re: Acne Vulgaris: A Disease of Western Civilization (2002)

#102

Post by paulcole » Thu, Jan 25, 2018, 1:19 AM UTC

scarecrowbob wrote: post #78

cal5k wrote: post #48

I'm always amused/horrified by Hacker News comments on anything health-related. Herein lie a group of incredibly smart individuals sharing anecdotal evidence and folk remedies without a lick of irony.

The idea of "hey, this strange thing worked for me, and I don't wholly understand all parts of the system but it seems to have some results" is pretty much the core of what "hacking" is, right?

Do you say that people who take spoonfuls of cinnamon to cure their diabetes are hackers?

Re: Acne Vulgaris: A Disease of Western Civilization (2002)

#103

Post by skosch » Thu, Jan 25, 2018, 1:20 AM UTC

zappo2938 wrote: post #40

qwerty456127 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's the discussion and the paper on vitamin D: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15867918 . TL;DR: make sure to always get at least 8000 IU of vitamin D per day (10 times the RDA) if you want to be healthy and have good bones, skin, mood, sleep, immunity and metabolism. I have also heard a rumor that recent studies suggest solid vitamin D pills are better than oil capsules. Would be nice if somebody knowing wha…

I love taking vitamin D before bed. It passes me right out.

You must be an outlier; the consensus seems to be that it counteracts fatigue: https://www.gwern.net/zeo/Vitamin-D

Re: Acne Vulgaris: A Disease of Western Civilization (2002)

#104

Post by peterburkimsher » Thu, Jan 25, 2018, 1:20 AM UTC

huac wrote: post #81

ars wrote: post #22

This title "Acne vulgaris is virtually nonexistent in non-Western populations" is not supported by the article. HN policy is not to change the title which is "Acne Vulgaris - A Disease of Western Civilization"

The paper also only observes two groups: "the Kitavan Islanders of Papua New Guinea and the Aché hunter-gatherers of Paraguay." That's not anywhere close to all non-Western populations!

I guess that those two groups haven't had genetic contact with "Western" races.

It's highly misleading, because my Taiwanese girlfriend has acne (worse than mine, and she's over age 30).

She probably has some Dutch blood in her from 400 years ago (her mum is from Tainan, and the light brown hair, double eyelids, and larger cleavage are probably a result of that too).

What the article is suggesting is that if that contact hadn't happened 400 years ago, she wouldn't have acne. Malicious propagandists could easily exaggerate that to blame Western civilisation for their ills, which I think is divisive.

The real research has shown a statistical correlation within a small sample size. That doesn't imply causation, or give any guidance on how to manage or mitigate the effects.

If future children getting acne is really your major worry about choosing a partner, the research might be of interest to you, but it fails to emphasise that even connections in the distant past can have an effect, and rejecting Westerners is not a suitable solution.

Re: Acne Vulgaris: A Disease of Western Civilization (2002)

#105

Post by ekianjo » Thu, Jan 25, 2018, 1:24 AM UTC

cal5k wrote: post #48

I'm always amused/horrified by Hacker News comments on anything health-related. Herein lie a group of incredibly smart individuals sharing anecdotal evidence and folk remedies without a lick of irony.

> group of incredibly smart individuals

It's not because you are smart that you can't be ignorant of certain things at the same time. Even smart people can be fooled about stuff they are not familiar with. It's like trusting blindly the stories on your newspaper.

Re: Acne Vulgaris: A Disease of Western Civilization (2002)

#106

Post by tintor » Thu, Jan 25, 2018, 1:25 AM UTC

paulcole wrote: post #102

scarecrowbob wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea of "hey, this strange thing worked for me, and I don't wholly understand all parts of the system but it seems to have some results" is pretty much the core of what "hacking" is, right?

Do you say that people who take spoonfuls of cinnamon to cure their diabetes are hackers?

If it helps them, then yes.

Re: Acne Vulgaris: A Disease of Western Civilization (2002)

#107

Post by ggm » Thu, Jan 25, 2018, 1:26 AM UTC

Given that all humans share a remarkably high % of genome, and race is a social construct, I'm struggling with the 'this is not genetic' part. Either its a truism, or its backed by strong evidence of no genetic linkage. Because this 'its not your race' thing, applies to almost anything. For instance the supposed Asian intolerance to unmodified milk proteins which has been changing as diet shifts. Is that also now not actually genetically determined?

Re: Acne Vulgaris: A Disease of Western Civilization (2002)

#108

Post by t3rmi » Thu, Jan 25, 2018, 1:26 AM UTC

brucephillips wrote: post #91

t3rmi wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are several kinds of acne. The kind that you get when you hit puberty is not related to diet. Adult acne in most cases is however. The thing is food does not directly cause acne. The logic is pretty simple actually. Acne causing bacteria grow in blocked pores and greasy food and dairy makes me super oily . More sebum more blocked pores aaand more acne.

> Adult acne in most cases is however. Source? Because no, it's not. There's also no evidence that greasy food increases sebum production. You're buying into a bunch of snake oil.

Sorry I guess I generalized too much. I definitely get super oily after eating dairy It might be that some people have my skin type. I've noticed some of my friends dont get oily at all after eating a ton of pizza. Depends on the person I guess. As for the snake oil thing their treatment has already worked for me so if you have acne I would advise giving it a try.

Re: Acne Vulgaris: A Disease of Western Civilization (2002)

#109

Post by colordrops » Thu, Jan 25, 2018, 1:26 AM UTC

I know this is anecdotal, but I lived in Beijing for 8 years, and it was VERY existent amongst the population there. Perhaps it's a function of the "western" cosmopolitan lifestyle of urbanites.

Re: Acne Vulgaris: A Disease of Western Civilization (2002)

#110

Post by dawhizkid » Thu, Jan 25, 2018, 1:29 AM UTC

cal5k wrote: post #48

I'm always amused/horrified by Hacker News comments on anything health-related. Herein lie a group of incredibly smart individuals sharing anecdotal evidence and folk remedies without a lick of irony.

Nutrition science is, in general, a massive joke. It's more frustrating that the scientific/medical community will stand by the status quo because proving something to be true of humans is so incredibly difficult.

Edit: IMO, "hacking" is simply recognizing that the scientific community moves at a glacial pace and not waiting around for "experts" to arrive at a consensus 30 years from now to change something about your lifestyle/diet today that has been shown to be true of animals/smaller scale human studies many times over.