america's health goals!

[abifae]

http://www.physorg.com/news181552453.html

it seems to me that the health goals were NOT met. the environment (work place injuries, kids getting their vaccines) were met. the actual physical health of each person is worse, but the way they're hurting themselves is staying more personal LOL.

The nation has had better luck raising childhood vaccination rates, lowering cancer death rates, increasing smoking laws and reducing most types of work injuries.

To many health officials, simply making progress is a victory. An analysis of 635 of the nearly 1,000 targets for the past decade shows only 117 goals have been met. But progress was made toward another 332. In other words, there was improvement in 70 percent of the measures.

however...

The CDC analysis done this fall found that just 18 percent of those goals have been met so far. Worse, the nation actually retreated from about 23 percent of the goals.

One example: Healthy People 2010 called for the percentage of adults who are obese to drop to 15 percent. That goal was set at a time when nearly a quarter of all adults were obese. Now, about 34 percent of adults are obese, according to the latest federal statistics.

Some other backslides:

-An estimated 28 percent of adults had high blood pressure in 2000. The goal was to reduce that to 16 percent. But the most recent government data say the proportion has risen to 29 percent.

-About 16 percent of young children had untreated tooth decay in 2000. The target was 9 percent. The latest statistic is about 20 percent.

-The proportion of births by cesarean section increased despite a 2010 goal of lowering them, and the percentage of infants born very small and fragile also increased.

So things we directly effect seem to be what got worse. Our diets and our exercise.

Things that are just advancing in medicine or legislature (stricter work safety and cigarettes banned and taxed) are where improvement lies.

I find that very interesting!

 

[freemotion]

Wow. Sad. The saddest to me is that this generation of kids is the first in many decades to have a SHORTER life expectancy than their parents, and it is due to lifestyle choices made by the parents....or by parents who allow their children to make their own lifestyle choices as far as diet and exercise. So preventable.

Good news on workplace safety and cancer treatment stuff!

OK, I am running off to get my announcement on my upcoming classes up....thanks for the segue, sorry for the kinda hijack!

 

[me&thegals]

Very interesting. Seriously not trying to cause problems here, really, but this is very political. For example, the children and tooth decay I would guess to be very related to Medicare coverage (dentists don't take Medicare generally).

C-sections I see as more of a cultural thing. I'm just going on my own very limited experience, but I often hear about C-sections based on convenience for the mother and doctor, not medically necessary.

People hate legislated health moves (like banning public smoking), but sometimes it seems to be the only way to improve public health.

Again, just my opinion, but I think true health would take huge public changes like:
* walking and biking paths planned into every community
* communities planned in a way to allow most people living in them to bike/walk to work
* either no crop subsidies on corn and soybeans OR crop subsidies on fruits and veggies to make them more accessible to all
* a complete revamping of the school breakfast/lunch program
* workplace dynamics that encouraged enough time/workplace kitchens for healthy eating and enough time/workout rooms for exercise

 

[abifae]

freemotion, i agree. it's very sad. i spammed my friends about your class

me&thegals... i agree with you too i hate legislated health, i think it's none of their business if i kill myself smoking BUT! if they want change and decide to do it, do it right. and i really like your ideas on what to change.

offer incentives. there is now a plan that if you are overweight you can tax deduct the gym. look it up guys! i'm hoping to get that next year with the autism. we'll see. but there are a few benefits out there more and more work places are being encouraged to benefit gym memberships too.

 

[FarmerChick]

*

 

[abifae]

yes. that's what the smoking bans and cigarette taxes are.

and the proposed tax on soda.

 

[FarmerChick]

*

 

[me&thegals]

At least some of the health insurance companies seem to be getting a slight clue.

We get about $250/year that we choose in the form of gift cards to an area sports store. We earn this by keeping track of our physical activity and mailing them the forms.

Another $100 is a credit for belonging to a CSA (even if you own it ).

My employer pays half of the fees for our local work-out facility, half of Weight Watchers membership and $50/year for anything sports related.

Still, bad health (IMO) seems to come from much larger cultural and city-planning issues, from subsidizing the wrong foods, from the school lunch and phy-ed programs, and on and on and on.

 

[me&thegals]

HA HA HA

I know that

I meant "legislative health" as in this is a political thread which have been banned and I know I want to respond regarding taxes and such etc etc and I know we can't.

Well, I know, but every single aspect of life is attached to politics in one form or another, and most definitely American's health is affected by, caused by, linked to politics.

I definitely was not trying to overstep lines above, but even the goals set for health are political, some of the reasons for not reaching them are political, what health issues get money thrown at them are political, and who gets protected (like tobacco, in the old days, for example) is political.

 

[freemotion]

Very interesting. Seriously not trying to cause problems here, really, but this is very political. For example, the children and tooth decay I would guess to be very related to Medicare coverage (dentists don't take Medicare generally).

C-sections I see as more of a cultural thing. I'm just going on my own very limited experience, but I often hear about C-sections based on convenience for the mother and doctor, not medically necessary.

People hate legislated health moves (like banning public smoking), but sometimes it seems to be the only way to improve public health.

Again, just my opinion, but I think true health would take huge public changes like:
* walking and biking paths planned into every community
* communities planned in a way to allow most people living in them to bike/walk to work
* either no crop subsidies on corn and soybeans OR crop subsidies on fruits and veggies to make them more accessible to all
* a complete revamping of the school breakfast/lunch program
* workplace dynamics that encouraged enough time/workplace kitchens for healthy eating and enough time/workout rooms for exercise

How 'bout I get it back to science for y'all? Tee-hee. Everything is politics nowadays, it seems. Well.

When a woman gets preggers and she does not get proper nutrition, some of the things that happen are deformities of the skeletal system of the child. This is very noticable in the mouth, with a small mouthful of overcrowded teeth and lots of cavities. It is not genetic, it is nutrition. That was well-documented half a century ago, but for some reason, it is still not what we are taught. Sadly.

Another very common deformity is the shape of the pelvis. The pelvic opening will be rounder in the offspring of a well-nourished mom, allowing for easy and relatively painless delivery for their future babies. In the poorly nourished mom's offspring, the pelvic opening is more eliptical, making childbirth difficult or impossible.

The mom's nourished on corn and soy are not the well-nourished moms....The ss-types (us! Yay!) raising their own pastured meat, milk, eggs, and veggies are more likely to have proper nourishment.

Lots unsaid there......