Just found this rather incentiary article that propounded the need for more 'social justice' in healthcare.
The folks on the left will love this...and see validation here.
Read for yourself:
"The health inequality gap in Britain is greater than it was during the post-World War I slump and the Great Depression, a study suggests.
Despite the continued rise in life expectancy, it is well documented that the gap between richest and poorest has actually been widening in recent years.
The researchers analysed mortality data for England and Wales, obtained from the Office for National Statistics, and for Scotland, obtained from the General Register Office for Scotland.
Between 1999 to 2007, for every 100 deaths before the age of 65 in the richest 10th of areas, there were 212 in the poorest 10th.
This compared with 191 deaths in the poorest areas from 1921 to 1930 and 185 deaths from 1931 to 1939.
"Health and wealth are directly linked and, unless we tackle the income gap, we could well see life expectancy actually starting to fall for the first time in the poorest areas."
"This should not be taken as a counsel of despair. Over the last decade, life expectancy for the bottom quarter of the population increased significantly, but their health did not catch up with the average, because of persisting social and economic inequalities."
BBC News - Health gap 'wider than in Great Depression'
http://www.sasi.group.shef.ac.uk/publications/2010/ThomasDorlingDaveySmith_2010_BMJ.pdf
1. Are we to assume that both groups
a. were the same size?
b. were the groups normalized for smokers, diets, cause of death (accidents and homicides), lifestyle choices incl. alcoholism and drug use, and educational background.
2. Is this report to be taken as an indictment of the national healthcare program, to which, I believe, all have access.
a. If so, what are we to make of the healthcare plan the administration has for us?
b. Could it be that any health problems must be laid to the liberal concept of healthcare?
3. What are we to make of these parts of the report: "continued rise in life expectancy" and "life expectancy for the bottom quarter of the population increased significantly..."
a. Doesn't this obviate the rest of the report?
4. Is this report no more than a biased political polemic...
a. If so, on whose side?
The folks on the left will love this...and see validation here.
Read for yourself:
"The health inequality gap in Britain is greater than it was during the post-World War I slump and the Great Depression, a study suggests.
Despite the continued rise in life expectancy, it is well documented that the gap between richest and poorest has actually been widening in recent years.
The researchers analysed mortality data for England and Wales, obtained from the Office for National Statistics, and for Scotland, obtained from the General Register Office for Scotland.
Between 1999 to 2007, for every 100 deaths before the age of 65 in the richest 10th of areas, there were 212 in the poorest 10th.
This compared with 191 deaths in the poorest areas from 1921 to 1930 and 185 deaths from 1931 to 1939.
"Health and wealth are directly linked and, unless we tackle the income gap, we could well see life expectancy actually starting to fall for the first time in the poorest areas."
"This should not be taken as a counsel of despair. Over the last decade, life expectancy for the bottom quarter of the population increased significantly, but their health did not catch up with the average, because of persisting social and economic inequalities."
BBC News - Health gap 'wider than in Great Depression'
http://www.sasi.group.shef.ac.uk/publications/2010/ThomasDorlingDaveySmith_2010_BMJ.pdf
1. Are we to assume that both groups
a. were the same size?
b. were the groups normalized for smokers, diets, cause of death (accidents and homicides), lifestyle choices incl. alcoholism and drug use, and educational background.
2. Is this report to be taken as an indictment of the national healthcare program, to which, I believe, all have access.
a. If so, what are we to make of the healthcare plan the administration has for us?
b. Could it be that any health problems must be laid to the liberal concept of healthcare?
3. What are we to make of these parts of the report: "continued rise in life expectancy" and "life expectancy for the bottom quarter of the population increased significantly..."
a. Doesn't this obviate the rest of the report?
4. Is this report no more than a biased political polemic...
a. If so, on whose side?
Last edited:
