Slashdot Mirror
European Health Levels Suddenly Collapsed After 2003 and Nobody Is Sure Why
KentuckyFC writes "Europeans are living longer. But since 2003, they've suddenly enjoyed fewer years of healthy life. For example, in Italy between 1995 and 2003, life expectancy increased from 75 to 80.1 for men and from 81.8 to 85.3 for women. At the same time, the number of years of healthy life increased from 66.7 to 70.9 for men and from 70 to 74.4 for women. But since 2003, while life expectancy has increased further, the number of years of healthy living has plummeted to about 62 for both sexes. More worrying still is that demographers say the same trend has been repeated right across Europe. Only the UK, Denmark and the Netherlands appear to have escaped. That raises an obvious question: what happened in 2003? One idea is that the weather is to blame. In 2003, Europe experienced an extreme heat wave that led to some 80,000 extra deaths across the region. And the higher temperatures could also have triggered ill health, particularly in older people suffering from chronic diseases such as diabetes. That has important implications for governments who have to pay for health costs in Europe. And it raises the possibility that climate change is already having a bigger impact on human health than anyone imagined."
People get sick in the winter. Global warming will shorten winter and the weather less cold, therefore less people will get sick!
See, I can speculate wildly too!
My guess would be that they are just following America's lead and are becoming fatter.
The article even says:
And yet this increasing lifespan masks a dark secret. Many developed countries are suffering an epidemic of chronic diseases such as diabetes and heart disease thanks to poor diets and sedentary lifestyles. The numbers are such that they must inevitably influence the health of nations as a whole but by how much?
Then the authors go on to blame it on the weather.
Rather than conclude that the heat wave is the culprit, first find some comparative events. Its not like there is a historical shortage of heat waves to use to validate the theory, yet there seems to have been no attempt to do so mentioned.
How about the austerity measures, put into place across Europe. Perhaps the stress countries are coming under is spreading to peoples health to the point were it is a negative response. Happy people live longer and in many EU countries, people are not happy.
Life is a great ride, the vehicle doesn't matter
Screw it. It's too hot to go outside we'll stay inside and eat. I know that most older people that I know start going downhill quickly when they stop moving.
Is the cause in 2003 or is it a delayed cause from a decade, two decades or even eighty years ago?
Could this be because it's easier to get diagnosed with diabetes, COPD, or other non-healthy conditions than it was in 2002? I've heard enough anecdotal evidence to make me ask the question, but it would be nice to see a study. How many people who were considered healthy in 2002 could visit a doctor in 2013 and be declared unhealthy, and how does that fraction vary by country? Unless an article can control for that variable, the other numbers don't really mean much.
Millions of years. Actually, billions of them.
So since that hasn't changed much, this "winter season" thingy you're proposing, I suspect it isn't the cause here.
And the heatwaves and deaths of 80,000 people isn't "speculate[ing] wildly" you misanthropic piece of shit.
Try again, sonny.
More and more of electronic pollution? Mire wifi usage, more cellphones + more upper gigahertz traffic (G2, G3, G4)?
Imbalanced chakras? Cold and squared audio output from transistor amps? The decline of the department store?
-- Using the preview button since 2005
This paper is in its infancy. It is somewhat garbled, the methods don't really specify the methods.
The methods are basically "we graphed mortality over time". But you can't really criticize it much,
because it is not published, and probably not submitted yet. The only question is why did it get to slashdot?
The most likely explanation for the effect at this stage is some kind of error. Either in the calculation,
or as the authors point out, in the wording of the questions (which probably would be a good idea to
test before this paper is published ?)
"Standardized translations of the questionnaire have been used; nevertheless it is likely that linguistic or cultural differences, as well as changes in the wording of questions, have influenced the way the respondents indicate a longstanding health problem or disability and their way of communicating the types of restrictions caused by this problem"
Or, in the population measured (migration from East-Block countries?) or many other possible problems.
All these I'd bet much higher chances than a real health effect.
Really well!
http://seekingalpha.com/article/1864111-the-post-crisis-facts-are-in-and-theyre-not-kind-to-keynesian-thinking
Even if it doesn't work out, it's worth trying.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
If any for-profit hospital tried that approach, the libertarian solution of "Then you can sue them" would prevent it from going on too long. Certainly not for the whole summer.
Libertarians believe you should be able to sue people for choosing to take vacation instead of providing you services? A private hospital wouldn't have the freedom to sell its services howsoever it chose, including saying "sorry, we're on vacation, come back next month"? What's the Libertarian ground for a lawsuit against someone who says "wow, there are suddenly lots of customers desperate for my product, I can raise prices to maximize profits"? Isn't that how the "free market" is supposed to work, regardless of whether it murders people unable to pay prices set at the profit-maximizing point?
Wow, maybe Libertarians less ideologically inflexible than I thought --- they think you should be able to sue to prevent free market pricing from causing harm, imposing non-market-based government controls to avert socially harmful market failures. Mandating price and production levels to best serve the public good, rather than allowing private providers to set their own policies according to profit maximization (or vacation time desires): how very Libertarian?!?!
That has important implications for governments who have to pay for health costs in Europe.
Government does not pay health costs. Citizen do through taxes, or insured people do through fees.