Neither. It's instantaneous the microsecond you're afraid you're going to die. It doesn't "detect a lack of oxygen", it instantiates shallower breathing so as to protect the individual from what it perceives as the IMMINENT possibility of death - which is, evolutionarily speaking, that a predator is nearby.

This is called the fight or flight response, and this has almost nothing to do with illness beyond the fact that excess stress can weaken the immune system, making infection more likely. I also find it amusing that you reject mainstream thought on medicine but accept mainstream thought on evolution, despite the overwhelming evidence that evolution is a flawed theory.

An "existential crisis" leads to a biological kidney program that causes water retention.

Repeating your claims doesn't make them true. Do you have ANY evidence that existential dread/crises cause water retention?

In short, there is no noticeable "dis-ease" with resolution of the kidney program most of the time.

Ooohhh, so you're theory is true, its just undetectable. How convenient!

you tell me about a dis-ease you've had in the past and I'll tell you your conflict shock

Today's your lucky day, I came down with a cold today. My symptoms consist of mild congestion and a sore throat. Psychoanalyze away!

If you were to be honest with me, you'd see that the CAUSATION DIAGNOSIS I provide you is quite accurate, as opposed to the establishment buffet of psuedo-causation, e.g. diet, genetics, germs, family history, lifestyle, environmental carcinogen, etc.

Oh, so I'm only honest if I unquestioningly agree with your diagnosis? How is that not a blind appeal to authority that you accuse me of?

So genetics, diet, family history, lifestyle, and carcinogens have no effect on human health whatsoever? How about we put your theory to the test by having you eat junk food everyday and sleep with some uranium under your pillow. Shouldn't have any effect, right? Cancer is caused by psychology, not radiation! /s

A "brush with death", as you say, would cause perhaps a millisecond of "lung cancer" or maybe 10 seconds, or 10 minutes.

So once again your theory is right, just unverifiable because it vanishes too quickly without a trace. Also, what would cause this lung cancer to last for 10 minutes instead of a millisecond?

Part of the problem you're having with all this is that you've been brainwashed into BELIEVING lung cancer is a deadly

Lung cancer IS deadly, it steals nutrients from healthy lung tissue and physically crowds it out, causing the lungs to not function properly. I dare you to say that lung cancer isn't deadly to anyone who has it or anyone who's lost a loved one to it.

But wait, don't tell me, you need EVIDENCE, right? Evidence the establishment cartel would most definitely want to to provide you, right?

I don't need the establishment to provide evidence for your theory, I want YOU to provide evidence for your own theory. And since there is much evidence that contradicts your theory (like the fact that infection/mortality rates after surgery dropped after better hygiene was adopted), your theory needs to properly address contradictory evidence as well.

Wrong again. I reiterate, pick one topic and we'll dive to the depths, should you dare to agree to.

You haven't answered a single one of my questions so far, like why fear of starvation causes liver cancer and not other problems elsewhere in the digestive tract. Your refusal to answer my questions forthrightly indicates that you don't have an answer that would stand up to scrutiny.

Do you know what "lung cancer" even is? Is it not excess lung aveoli on its face? What else is could it be?

Lung cancer is not excess alveoli. Alveoli are air sacs formed by lung cells, alveoli are not cells in and of themselves. Lung cancer, like any other cancer, is a subset of those cells that do not replicate properly; either by not stopping growth when they're supposed to or growing much faster than they're supposed to. This excess growth create tumors, which are not alveoli and do not function like alveoli.

Is my explanation impossible? Really? Can you kill the CANCER-BOOGEYMAN in your mind for just a minute and think outside the box?

I never said your explanation is impossible, I said you haven't used rational arguments or evidence to back your assertions. Why is this such a hard concept for you? Also, why do you assume that I can't think for myself just because I disagree with you?

If I'm afraid I'm going to die for a year, I'm going to get easily detectable lung cancer for a year should I be foolish enough to get an "annual checkup". I'm actually perfectly healthy during this time, receiving more oxygen than normal to all my organs, which is the purpose of the excess lung alveoli tissue. Now, should I resolve my conflict and no longer fear death, I'm going to have a year of coughing up blood and blood in my sputum - aka "tuberculosis".

You yourself said that if someone fears death, they get what the establishment calls lung cancer (which is not excess alveoli btw). Then you said that if someone gets over their fear of death, this resolution manifests as tuberculosis. So while I should have said lung cancer instead of bone cancer, my assessment that I'm screwed either way is accurate. Pointing out the absurdities of your theory is not a strawman.