tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22066416.post7424480356739849976..comments2023-07-04T22:09:51.208+08:00Comments on Tropic Temper: Where you should live if you don't want to die unnecessarily...Glenda Larkehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10113271268122909969noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22066416.post-60701136074904456662008-01-10T20:10:00.000+08:002008-01-10T20:10:00.000+08:00Hmm...that's funny - a number of pages all have th...Hmm...that's funny - a number of pages all have the same URL. You click on the link, then go to the box that says "consumer" and click on the one that says France best, US worst. It's not the original paper, just a summary.<BR/><BR/>The researchers "considered deaths before age 75 from numerous causes, including heart disease, stroke, certain cancers, diabetes, certain bacterial infections and complications of common surgical procedures." Presumably all forms of the diseases that one need not die from with proper attention.<BR/><BR/>Maybe you had better leave your rock before you get old, hmmm? BTW, does everyone call it the rock? Or is that just you?Glenda Larkehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10113271268122909969noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22066416.post-17434020326424295632008-01-10T16:54:00.000+08:002008-01-10T16:54:00.000+08:00I couldn't find the report (maybe one has to be a ...I couldn't find the report (maybe one has to be a subscriber).<BR/><BR/>What interested me was whether the report divided the statistical information into age ranges. I mean, taking the US stats, saving 101,000 extra people per year means those people have to be housed, fed, administered and provided for. But is that 101,000 spread equally across the whole age range, or what proportion are between say the ages of 25-55 (those more likely to be working and contributing to the country's resources and economy), or over the age of 70 or under the age of majority (and thus likely to be more dependent and requiring state support or a greater amount of health care etc.)? It does make a difference.<BR/><BR/>Of course I'm not saying that we shouldn't save lives just because people are older or weaker, or of less benefit to the economy. But I live on a rock where over 10% of our population are now over 70 years of age and resources to provide for them are limited, because one also has to care for the needs of the children, the sick, the unemployed, single parent families etc.<BR/><BR/>Saving lives and prolonging life expectancy brings new obligations, it impacts on the whole of society (not just the government). It is changing the face of our everday culture. I'm not saying that's a bad thing. But it requires some fairly major re-thinking and adapting for everyone - taking on board the consequences of our actions - which most people are loth to tackle (humans specialise in inertia, complacency and expediency, do they not?) :\hrugaarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08621922879300266376noreply@blogger.com