Chronic disease is mostly a cumulative reaction to what enters the body daily - contaminated food, medicines and cosmetics - not a fate that comes from outside.
Original statement
ومن هنا فإن المرض المزمن ليس قَدَرًا ينزل بالجسد من خارجه، بل هو في الغالب ردّ فعل تراكمي على ما يدخل إليه يوميًا من طعام ملوّث وأدوية ومستحضرات.
verbatim according to source. Translation by the project; the Arabic wording is authoritative.
Translation
Chronic disease is mostly a cumulative reaction to what enters the body daily - contaminated food, medicines and cosmetics - not a fate that comes from outside.
Origin
- Source status
- Archive editors
- Attribution
- Archive editors (homepage introduction)
- Origin
- https://eltayebat.com/
- Attribution uncertainty
- Written by archive operators; not attributed to Elawady.
- Population concerned
General
- Geographic restriction by Elawady
none found
Diverging source versions
او مدخلات تحمل السموم الصريحه بقايا مضادات حيويه بقايا مخصبات ومنشطات وكيماويات واسمده نيتروجينيه بقايا مبيدات حشريه
- Source status
- Video transcript (own words)
- Attribution
- Elawady (machine transcript)
- Video
- بيان فلسفه النظريه (Open source)
- Published
- 14 February 2026
- Timestamp
- 0:03:06 (location in the original video’s automatic YouTube caption track; confirms where the words occur, not who speaks)
Scientific assessment
Mostly false – Essential parts of the statement are not supported by the evidence or are strongly exaggerated.
Certainty of evidence: moderate – Further research may still affect the assessment.
1. What was claimed?
Chronic disease is mostly caused by food, medicines and cosmetics.
2. What is demonstrably correct?
Diet contributes substantially (about 22% of adult deaths; I-SYS-01); some medicines have long-term harms (audited by other teams, e.g., PPIs).
3. What is wrong or exaggerated?
Tobacco (15.4% of deaths), high blood pressure (19.2%), air pollution, alcohol and others are major causes (I-SYS-02); for cancer, smoking dominates and infections cause 2.2 million cancers yearly (I-CAN-02, I-CAN-05). About one-third of variation in cancer risk is heritable (I-CAN-04); the authors note that heritability is not an attributable fraction, and the large non-shared environmental component they found is compatible with many kinds of environmental causes, which the study does not break down into food, medicines or cosmetics. In GBD 2019, all 87 environmental, occupational, behavioural and metabolic risks combined explained 47.8% (45.3-50.1) of global DALYs (I-SYS-02), so most disease burden is not attributed even to the full set of quantified risks, let alone to food, medicines and cosmetics. Ageing is the strongest risk factor for most chronic diseases (general knowledge; not quantified here). Medicines and cosmetics are not identified as leading causes in these analyses.
4. What remains unclear?
The share of chronic disease attributable specifically to food contaminants, medicines and cosmetics (as opposed to overall dietary pattern) is not quantified in the global risk analyses reviewed. Because GBD covers only risks with sufficient evidence, the unattributed half of the burden may include exposures that are not yet quantified; this does not show that they are food, medicines or cosmetics.
5. Which studies support it?
I-SYS-01 (partial).
6. Which studies contradict it?
I-SYS-02, I-CAN-01, I-CAN-02, I-CAN-04, I-CAN-05.
7. What applies to Germany and Europe?
The global risk analyses (I-SYS-01, I-SYS-02) include European countries; the leading risks (tobacco, blood pressure, diet) are similar.
8. What is known about Egypt?
The global analyses include Egypt; Egypt-specific attributable fractions were not extracted.
9. What practical conclusion is appropriate?
Prevention should address several causes, not only food.
Assessment details
- Rationale for certainty of evidence
Global risk analyses identify many causes - tobacco, blood pressure, alcohol, air pollution, infections, genetics, ageing; diet is major but not 'mostly' the cause, and medicines/cosmetics are not leading causes.
- Source quality
Archive editorial.
- Regional transferability
High.
- Regional scope of the claim
- general (biological/medical)
- Last reviewed
- 25 October 2026 provisional
In plain language
The archive says chronic diseases are mostly a reaction to food, medicines and cosmetics. Food matters a lot. But large studies show that tobacco, high blood pressure, alcohol, air pollution, infections, genes and ageing also cause much chronic disease. Medicines and cosmetics are not among the leading causes.
Studies on this claim
Studies supporting the claim (0)
No studies in this group.
Studies contradicting or limiting the claim (5)
-
High blood pressure and tobacco are the top risk factors for death worldwide
GBD 2019 Risk Factors Collaborators. Lancet 2020 · PMID 33069327 · DOI 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30752-2Risk assessmentindependent cross-checkfull text checked★ key studyIn 2019, high blood pressure was linked to 10.8 million and tobacco to 8.7 million deaths.
Multiple causes
Does the study support the specific claim? No · Methodological quality: moderate · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim
Original publication · Scientific details
Study explained simply
- What did the researchers want to find out?
Rank risk factors.
- How was the study done?
GBD 2019.
- How many people, animals or samples were studied?
204 countries.
- What was actually found?
High blood pressure and tobacco lead; dietary risks rank among the top five; all 87 risks together explain 47.8% of global disease burden.
- How large was the observed effect?
19.2% and 15.4% of deaths.
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
Check blood pressure; avoid tobacco; diet is one lever.
- What are the study's limitations?
Modelling.
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
Multiple causes.
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
High.
- What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?
Individual risk.
-
Smokers die about ten years earlier; quitting gives years back
Doll R et al.. BMJ 2004 · PMID 15213107 · DOI 10.1136/bmj.38142.554479.AECohort studyindependent cross-checkabstract only checked★ key studySmoking tripled death rates; stopping at 30 avoided almost all the excess risk.
Tobacco, not food, major cause
Does the study support the specific claim? No · Methodological quality: high · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim
Original publication · Scientific details
Study explained simply
- What did the researchers want to find out?
Measure smoking hazards over 50 years.
- How was the study done?
Prospective cohort.
- How many people, animals or samples were studied?
34,439 doctors.
- What was actually found?
Smokers die ~10 years earlier.
- How large was the observed effect?
3-fold mortality.
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
Stopping smoking at any age helps.
- What are the study's limitations?
Men only.
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
Contradicts smoking dismissal.
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
High.
- What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?
Effects of other tobacco products.
-
Four in ten cancers in the USA are linked to avoidable risk factors, led by smoking
Islami F et al.. CA Cancer J Clin 2024 · PMID 38990124 · DOI 10.3322/caac.21858Risk assessmentindependent cross-checkabstract only checked★ key studySmoking accounted for 19% of cancers and 29% of cancer deaths; excess weight and alcohol followed.
Tobacco, alcohol, infections, UV - not only food
Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: moderate · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim
Original publication · Scientific details
Study explained simply
- What did the researchers want to find out?
Estimate preventable cancers.
- How was the study done?
PAF analysis.
- How many people, animals or samples were studied?
US 2019.
- What was actually found?
40% of cases attributable.
- How large was the observed effect?
Smoking 19.3%/28.5%.
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
Not smoking, healthy weight, less alcohol and a diet with fibre, fruit and vegetables lower risk.
- What are the study's limitations?
Model assumptions.
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
Diet matters but is not the main cause.
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
Moderate.
- What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?
Individual cause.
-
About a third of cancer risk is inherited
Mucci LA et al.. JAMA 2016 · PMID 26746459 · DOI 10.1001/jama.2015.17703Cohort studyindependent cross-checkfull text checkedHeritability of cancer overall was 33% in 200,000 Nordic twins.
Genetics as cause
Does the study support the specific claim? No · Methodological quality: high · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim
Original publication · Scientific details
Study explained simply
- What did the researchers want to find out?
Estimate heritability.
- How was the study done?
Twin cohort.
- How many people, animals or samples were studied?
203,691.
- What was actually found?
33% heritability.
- How large was the observed effect?
Melanoma 58%, prostate 57%.
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
Family history matters for screening.
- What are the study's limitations?
Nordic, mainly white population; twin models assume equal shared environments, which cannot be tested.
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
Not all cancer is lifestyle.
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
High.
- What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?
That the remaining two-thirds of risk is due to food; heritability is not the share of cancers preventable by lifestyle (authors); specific genes.
-
Infections cause about 2.2 million cancers a year worldwide
de Martel C et al.. Lancet Glob Health 2020 · PMID 31862245 · DOI 10.1016/S2214-109X(19)30488-7Risk assessmentindependent cross-checkabstract only checkedH. pylori, HPV and hepatitis B/C viruses cause most infection-related cancers.
Infections as cause
Does the study support the specific claim? No · Methodological quality: moderate · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim
Original publication · Scientific details
Study explained simply
- What did the researchers want to find out?
Estimate infection-related cancer.
- How was the study done?
PAF.
- How many people, animals or samples were studied?
Global.
- What was actually found?
2.2 million cases.
- How large was the observed effect?
ASIR 25/100,000.
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
Vaccination (HBV, HPV) and treatment of infections prevent cancer.
- What are the study's limitations?
Modelling.
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
Not all cancer is food-related.
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
High.
- What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?
Individual cause.
No study in this group is marked as key.
Studies with mixed or unclear results (1)
-
Poor diet is linked to about one in five adult deaths worldwide
GBD 2017 Diet Collaborators. Lancet 2019 · PMID 30954305 · DOI 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)30041-8Risk assessmentindependent cross-checkfull text checked★ key study11 million deaths in 2017 were attributed to dietary risks, mainly too much salt and too few whole grains and fruits.
Diet major but not majority of causes
Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: moderate · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim
Original publication · Scientific details
Study explained simply
- What did the researchers want to find out?
Quantify diet-attributable deaths.
- How was the study done?
GBD comparative risk assessment.
- How many people, animals or samples were studied?
195 countries.
- What was actually found?
11 million deaths (22%).
- How large was the observed effect?
Sodium 3 m, whole grains 3 m, fruit 2 m deaths.
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
Eat more whole grains and fruit, less salt.
- What are the study's limitations?
Observational inputs.
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
Diet matters; the main dietary problems differ from the system's forbidden list.
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
High.
- What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?
That food is the sole cause.
No study in this group is marked as key.
Regional context
Germany / EU
The global risk analyses (I-SYS-01, I-SYS-02) include European countries; the leading risks (tobacco, blood pressure, diet) are similar.
Egypt
The global analyses include Egypt; Egypt-specific attributable fractions were not extracted.
What applies in my country?
General scientific assessment
Mostly false Chronic disease has many causes; food is an important one, not the main one in all cases.
This statement concerns biological or medical relationships. The scientific assessment above applies regardless of the country; country-specific food data do not change it.
References
- Global burden of 87 risk factors in 204 countries and territories, 1990-2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019.. GBD 2019 Risk Factors Collaborators. Lancet 2020 · PMID 33069327 · DOI 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30752-2
- Mortality in relation to smoking: 50 years' observations on male British doctors.. Doll R et al.. BMJ 2004 · PMID 15213107 · DOI 10.1136/bmj.38142.554479.AE
- Proportion and number of cancer cases and deaths attributable to potentially modifiable risk factors in the United States, 2019.. Islami F et al.. CA Cancer J Clin 2024 · PMID 38990124 · DOI 10.3322/caac.21858
- Familial Risk and Heritability of Cancer Among Twins in Nordic Countries.. Mucci LA et al.. JAMA 2016 · PMID 26746459 · DOI 10.1001/jama.2015.17703
- Global burden of cancer attributable to infections in 2018: a worldwide incidence analysis.. de Martel C et al.. Lancet Glob Health 2020 · PMID 31862245 · DOI 10.1016/S2214-109X(19)30488-7
- Health effects of dietary risks in 195 countries, 1990-2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017.. GBD 2017 Diet Collaborators. Lancet 2019 · PMID 30954305 · DOI 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)30041-8