At times death is so scary to people that they embrace it as something useful and desirable. Or they elevate quality of life on a golden pedestal as if quantity didn't matter at all. This form of cognitive dissonance is sometimes called "deathism".
I will take this opportunity to explain why living a very long and healthy life is worthwhile:
It starts with a reasonable objection: "...trying to link what is really a very small part of life to mortality. [is problematic or wrong]"
Yes, but that's a known issue in nutrition science. We use corroborative evidence and studies of dietary patterns to avoid bias.
All-cause mortality is the best (or at least it's exceptionally useful) and hardest endpoint in epidemiology, but the author does not like it, because it has something to do with dying:
You are going to die...
Everyone has their own motivations for pursuing a lifestyle that has more fitness and better nutrition in it. But one prevailing theme, not usually explicitly stated, is (and I'm going to make up a word here), "life maximization"...
Here's the thing: You don't know when you're going to die...
Here's my main beef with long-term correlational mortality studies: The underlying assumption is that these events are not only bad, but preventable. I'm not talking about heart attack studies or stroke studies in which the subjects survive, but the ones where the subjects have heart attacks, or strokes and DIE. Or worse yet, the baffling, "All-cause mortality" variable. Somehow removing or adding a single food item or group increases or decreases ALL-CAUSE mortality (i.e. your chances of dying--from anything, including, but not limited to, being struck by a falling piece of space debris.)So avoiding food that kills you is somehow supposed not to reduce your chance of dying during a given time-frame? How is that? (We can even show that food alters all-cause mortality during a given time-frame in the lab!) Conceptually, this is similar to lifespan and we know for a fact that it can be increased. Since some 80% of people die due to CVD and cancer it is obvious why we can ignore meteorites and black holes as a first approximation.
All-cause mortality can tell us for instance if cancer risk offsets CVD benefits of a treatment/life-style choice, or in a real world example, perhaps, if death from bleeding offsets the cancer and heart benefits of aspirin.