Currently viewing the category: "poverty"

Older Americans Living Longer

By On · Add Comment · In education, exercise, life expectancy, living longer, National Institute on Aging, obesity, Older Americans 2008, poverty

Older Americans are wealthier and living longer than ever before. So says the National Institute on Aging’s report titled, Older Americans 2008. According to the report, the number of older people in the U.S. living in poverty has gone down, education has increased, and life expectancy has increased.

Americans today are living on average to 84 years old–that’s seven years older than the generation that turned 65 in 1900. Despite this, some problems exist. For instance, obesity has risen significantly in the last 10-15 years. In the 2005-2006 study period, 37 percent of women aged 65 to 74 were obese, and 24 percent of women age 75+ were obese. This is up from the 1988-1994 study period, when 27 percent of women age 65 to 74 and 19 percent of women age 75 and over were obese.

Despite evidence showing exercise to improve and prolong life, older Americans are just not jumping on the bandwagon. Only 25% of people 65 and over are exercising or participating in leisure-time physical activity on a regular basis. No bueno. And no surprise that health care costs rise significantly every year following peoples’ 65th birthday

So some good news and some not so great news about areas that can definitely use improvement. Overall though, I think quality of life is improving for people as they get older, and I think as health and wellness becomes more ingrained into the public consciousness, these numbers will only get better.

Good Nutrition Leads to Bigger Bucks

By On · Add Comment · In childhood, childhood feeding programs, earning power, feeding, growth, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), nutrient, nutrition, nutritious foods, poverty, real food

There’s a popular belief that earning power leads to better nutrition. Seems like a simple cause and effect. I personally don’t buy it, as I know that fast-food restaurants do quite well in poorer neighborhoods; and fast-food isn’t cheap. Nutritious foods can be purchased for the same amount of money–or less!

But now we know for sure that the reverse is true; that better nutrition, especially in early childhood, can lead to greater earning power later in life. So says a long-term study conducted in Guatemala, which researchers point out could lead to less poverty through childhood feeding programs. Hallelujah! Now that’s science that makes sense. Finally a study that doesn’t try to squeeze the data to fit a particular (and often political when it comes to poverty) viewpoint. Just plain ol’ data collection, analysis and final conclusions. Crazy thing that science.

The study looked at 1,500 people that had been involved in a nutrition study between 1969 and 1977 with some receiving a nutrient-rich protein porridge-like drink and others receiving a less nutritious placebo. They found that men who had received the nutritious porridge before the age of three earned 46% more per hour than those who did not. Children over three years old receiving the nutritious porridge showed no increase in earning power. These results show that early childhood nutrition through feeding is crucial, especially since many well-known programs–like the United Nation’s World Food Program–focus on early childhood nutrition through supplementation and save the feeding programs for older kids.

I always say that there is no substitute for real food–regardless of age. Supplements are good to supplement real food, not substitute for them. And real food should be the focus for all children, especially at the early age. So much development happens in the first few years of life, and young children need basic building blocks for proper growth and tissue formation; and this can only be gotten from real food. Bravo to the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) for conducting this study–it should help developing nations, and it should help us here at home.

Political Correctness and Health

By On · Add Comment · In education, health, health care, income, poverty, socioeconomic status, universal health care

I try. I really do. But sometimes I just can’t help it. As much as I want to leave the political stuff to political writers, every once in a while I’ve got to speak up. According to findings of a new study, education levels and socioeconomic status have important yet different effects on health.

According to the study, a person’s education level independently (when adjusted for income) determined a person’s likelihood of becoming ill or disabled. OK, no problem there. We know that the more educated a person is, the more likely he or she will know which behaviors are health enhancing and which are detrimental. Further, more education leads to a better understanding of various and alternative therapies, thus leading to a greater probability of self-empowerment when it comes to one’s health.

Socioeconomic status, on the other hand, determined how a person’s illness would progress. Whether an illness became chronic and how likely a person was to die during the study also depended on one’s income level. For instance, ill or disabled people with annual incomes below $10,000 were three times more likely of their illness progressing than people earning $30,000 or more per year. Also no surprises here, as lower income individuals are less likely to seek out or afford quality health care.

However, here is what I take exception to: According to Dr. Pamela Herd of the University of Wisconsin-Madison, the study’s lead author, the findings are “really about the way that poverty has negative ramifications for health,” noting that poor people may live in worse housing, have a more difficult time obtaining healthy foods, and have a tougher time getting health care. And poverty can increase stress levels, she adds, which in itself can worsen health.

Uh, and how about the other factor? Like how being financially stable, let alone wealthy, requires focus, discipline, and plenty of blood, sweat, and tears. All the same things needed to achieve and maintain good health. It also requires being proactive and empowering oneself in many areas including education, finance, professional life, social life, family life, and spiritual life. How about that?

I know that’s not the PC thing to say. Oh no, it’s much more correct to say that being “stuck” in poverty is a form of victimization; poor people being at the mercy of circumstance, of which they have very little, if any, control at all. Moreover, for one to pull oneself out of poverty, or at least survive, is highly dependent on social and governmental change. I guess this means socialized…oops, I mean universal health care. Says Dr. Herd, “We already know what people need to do to be healthier. What we talk about a lot less is what kind of structural changes need to be made for people’s health to improve.”

What a bunch of baloney. No doubt, education and economic levels enormously influence health. But I hardly think it’s because people don’t have medical care at their fingertips. Hell, in a lot of ways, those that don’t are the lucky ones; at least they can investigate other options. More likely, those people who diligently focus on their mental growth, and in turn their financial growth (even if it’s relatively modest), also focus on their physical health (to varying degrees, of course). And, in general, they probably treat their health with the same care and discipline that they approach other aspects of their lives.

There, I’ve said it and I’m sticking by it. This isn’t a belligerent bout of insensitivity at all; no sir. It’s an observation that any type of growth requires work–hard work–as well as focus, discipline, and a burning desire for evolution, despite one’s obstacles (we’ve all got obstacles, and money is simply one of the many in existence). Achieving and maintaining great health also requires these same things. And the power is in the individual. Everything else is just a cop out.

Copyright © 2013 Dr. Nick Campos - All Rights Reserved.