Life Expectancy Drops for Some U.S. Women
Filed under: Feature, United States — Michael van der Galien, Editor-in-Chief on April 22, 2008 @ 8:33 pm CEST
The Washington Post reports that ‘[f]or the first time since the Spanish influenza of 1918, life expectancy is falling for a significant number of American women.’ ‘ In nearly 1,000 counties that together are home to about 12 percent of the nation’s women,’ the article goes on to say, ‘life expectancy is now shorter than it was in the early 1980s, according to a study published today.’
The downward trend is evident in places in the Deep South, Appalachia, the lower Midwest and in one county in Maine. It is not limited to one race or ethnicity but it is more common in rural and low-income areas. The most dramatic change occurred in two areas in southwestern Virginia (Radford City and Pulaski County), where women’s life expectancy has decreased by more than five years since 1983.
The trend appears to be driven by increases in death from diabetes, lung cancer, emphysema and kidney failure. It reflects the long-term consequences of smoking, a habit that women took up in large numbers decades after men did, and the slowing of the historic decline in heart disease deaths.
It may also represent the leading edge of the obesity epidemic. If so, women’s life expectancy could decline broadly across the United States in coming years, ending a nearly unbroken rise that dates to the mid-1800s.
I think that a lot can be explained as follows: for a long time, men were the ones who drank and smoked. We were the ones who lived like that, women didn’t. Furthermore, it has to be pointed out that women didn’t work for centuries; they all worked at home. Nowadays, however, women have jobs like men have. Jobs create stress. Stress caused one to die early / earlier.
So to a degree it’s logical. But we also have to keep in mind that, although the process may be natural to a degree, life expectancy is a good indicator of a country’s wealth and progress. Money may not buy you love and happiness, but it does most certainly enable you to live a longer and more healthy life.
1 Chris
April 22, 2008 @ 9:53 pm CEST“Money may not buy you love and happiness, but it does most certainly enable you to live a longer and more healthy life.”
Hmmm and this case money may have bought a shorter life (via cigarettes)
2 PatHMV
April 22, 2008 @ 11:12 pm CESTThat study says something negative about the United States, and therefore I refuse to believe it…
(sorry, just trying to live down to expectations…)
3 C Stanley
April 22, 2008 @ 11:38 pm CESTLOL, I agree, Pat, the study must be flawed.
4 Jason
April 22, 2008 @ 11:43 pm CESTThere must be other factors that merely wealth and prosperity that affect life expectancy. Otherwise, there would appear to be no reason by Greece and Italy finish well ahead of the Netherlands. Also, if life expectancy was a valid measurement of wealth and prosperity, it would be weird that impoverished Puerto Rico and Guam finished ahead of much richer mainland USA.
In truth, life expectancy results from a highly complex mixture of variables, including things like culture, diet, and lifestyle choices that are partially or even completely independent of wealth and prosperity. The study specifically notes tobacco use and obesity as causal factors. Notably, these tend to be higher among the poor than among the rich, but they are not CAUSED by lack of wealth.
Of course, if the only purpose was to say "America isn’t perfect, nyah, nyah, nyah", you can rest assured that we already knew that and, UNBELIEVABLY we even talk about it amongst ourselves from time to time. But since it is Tuesday, it may just be time for our weekly reminder by Europeans that they are better than us in every possible way. :rolleyes:
5 Michael van der Galien
April 23, 2008 @ 11:01 am CESTNetherlands: Jason, how about food? In the Netherlands, we eat reasonably fatty and big meals (because our ancestors all worked hard on the fields, etc.). Whereas in Italy and Greece people eat a lot of fish and vegetables.