How a Healthy Economy Can Shorten Life Spans

During the 2008 recession I witnessed people in better shape then they had ever been. In our area the gyms were full by people working out to manage their stress. They were not only in better shape, but had time for community. CA does have better unemployment insurance their other states and this allowed people to stress less. Their were also state unemployment groups where people could network that provided some structure to their days. Now with the growth, regulations are cut for environmental health and people are working longer hours and monitoring their e-mails 24/7. Yes, I agree with the article's premise.

In some respects, free-market capitalism mixes with medical care almost as badly socialism mixes with agriculture. The economic failures of communism are well known, particularly the inability of state-run agriculture to provide even basic staples. In free markets "consumer sovereignty" directs the producers of goods and services to follow the dictates of supply and demand. As Adam Smith explained in 1776, no central authority coordinates the delivery of food and the plethora of goods that a major city like London needs every day. Rather, the "invisible hand" of competitive free markets results in an abundance of goods and services being provided to consumers in the most efficient manner. The "consumption" of medical care overturns many of the economic assumptions that underlie free-market efficiency. Usually, the conditions under which medical care is provided are the exact opposite of consumer sovereignty. In most cases the "sellers" i.e. the doctors, tell you, the "buyer" what and how much you need and set the price. The prevalence of third-party payers further removes medicine from the purview of the normal supply and demand market economics that prevails for goods whose sellers do not face inelastic demand. The price inelasticity of health care is also a consequence of the success of the medical science. 200 years ago, consultation with a physician did not significantly alter the outcomes of most medical conditions..." http://seekingalpha.com/article/1647632

Longer lives doesn't mean better lives. As a physician I see this every day. Just because people are living longer doesn't correlate with better life in that period. Many many people are living longer and longer, but sadly with more miserable lives. This is the biggest flaw in studies that project lower mortality with better economies. In India, one out of ten people only die a sudden death. This may apply to the West too. The majority die of chronic debilitating illness, poor and almost negligible (barring Kerala State) access to palliative care. If we have to feel good about longer lives, we need to be equally passionate about keeping those lives pleasant and comfortable, both mentally and physically, not just economically.

The findings are definitely ironic that mortality rates would increase in a stronger economy (even in the short run), yet we can’t be surprised that air pollution, substance abuse and auto accidents – all byproducts of an industrial economy – are harmful to our health.

The analysis is seriously flawed if it is applied to the US. Refinery workers, who are exposed to higher pollution levels than the general public, have longer life expectancies than the general public. Because they have jobs through thick and thin. People who get laid off during a recession do not take to healthier lifestyles. They worry about finding a better job, they work off the books to supplement their unemployment insurance and lie abed at night, concerned about the uncertainty in their lives. In China, a growing economy leads to shortened lives because of pollution. The air in Europe, particularly in industrialized areas, is far more polluted than in the US because they substituted diesel fueled autos for gasoline fueled vehicles because diesel produces less CO2 per mile driven. The catch is diesel produces ten to 100 times the conventional pollutants of gasoline. That explains why air quality in Paris and London has deteriorated to 1970's quality and there were several days last winter when the air quality in London and Paris was worse than in Beijing. The US achieved greater reductions in CO2 production by not following the Kyoto protocol than those who did follow it. Air quality improved in the US and deteriorated in the EU. Perhaps the UN, like most centralized bureaucracies, doesn't do a very good job of centralized planning. The further the bureaucracy is from democratic accountability, the less likely it is doing an effective job.

Equitable development is better for your health than what passes for growth today.

With all the discussions about climate change and fossil fuels, it is seldom mentioned that air pollution, caused by their burning, contributes directly to poorer health. Thanks for bringing this up. So even if climate change is a hoax, as some would like us to believe, reducing fossil fuel use would lead to a healthier country.

More access to healthcare means more access to aggressive and unnecessary medical procedures as well as to pharmaceuticals that are prescribed at far higher rates here than elsewhere and that are known to have devastating side effects. When nurses and doctors went on a labor strike in Texas a few decades ago, the regions health statistics actually got better. We'll never fix healthcare if we continue to be held hostage to the concept that pharmaceuticals equal wellbeing. Countries with great statistics also provide massage, herbs and acupuncture among other non-pharma treatments. In a system hardwired for drugs, Americans are exposed to toxins at a far higher rate than other industrialized nations.

I lived in both the San Francisco bay area and San Jose South Bay for a quarter century. I retired early so I could flee. it's called running for your life. No amount of money can justify the degradation of quality of life that resulted from the obscene accumulation of wealth in the hands of the few, at the expense of the millions who can barely afford a decent home in the area where they work and must commute an average of 3 to 5 hours a day just so they can keep their jobs. If you have not lived there it may be difficult to imagine the level of anxiety and stress that can rule your life in those conditions, and the very clear and present danger that it represents for your physical and emotional health. You can keep the money.

Come now the economy is not good and unemployment is not low either. Unless you actually believe those numbers found by surveys and have low standards. Perhaps in a few years when the economy is growing at or above 4% we might get both of those.

Agreed that we should not allow illegal aliens to enter the U.S. in order to shorten their lives.

It may result in a fatal automobile accident, but you'll be dead in a much nice car.

"Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of a cancer cell." Edward Abbey

When I was unemployed for six months right after college, I trained for a marathon, a virtuous pastime, while looking for work. Ran a 2:49. Maybe we should hope for 20% unemployment.

This piece depends too much on the research of academic economists, especially microeconomists. Mortality rates depend on many direct and secondary causes. One cause Dr. Frakt overlooks is poverty. When poverty rates rise in a recession or depression, families tend to stick together and help each other. In a boom time there may be fewer marriages and more divorces. Many younger people like to be free of the constraints of marriage and children. They partake in more risky behavior, such as extreme sports and drug use. They discount the future at a higher rate than married people do. Dr. Frakt should to other sources, such as cultural and economic history, if he decides to investigate this complex problem more deeply.

Theory versus practice. Short term versus long term. But mostly, bad science that counts and generalizes, pretending to be "causal" (an overused word, if not wholly misunderstood), whilst correlation after correlation, as well as common sense, is shunned, usually because the thought might - gasp! - be counter to God Profit. After all, when statements like "...there’s little question that long-term economic growth broadly improves the human condition..." are held as Bona Fide Truths, yet only true based on data crunching (surveys, spending patterns, etc., all quite unreliable) plugged into software that produces "answers" that most truly understand...well, of course a "healthy economy" is both good and bad, because that is a meaningless answer to a meaningless question(s). Squint, and the answers may look differently. Science!

A better economy usually leads to more meat consumption. This has a direct impact on mortality through heart disease, etc. Check out mortality rates in Norway during WW2 when under occupation. Meat consumption declined massively and so did mortality.

Economy going up does not equal to health or happiness going up. Sometimes health or happiness go precipitately down when the economy goes up. In Jamaica Tom Marcione, an anthropologists (of the The Thomas Marchione Food-as-a-Human-Right Student Award https://foodanthro.com/thomas-marchione-award/) found when the economy went up infant mortality went up. This is not just a statistic but the biggest sorrow imaginable to have the body of your lifeless child in your arms. Tom documented one of the reasons was that as soon as people had money they were targeted by companies such as NESTLE to aggressively market instant formula, which everyone knows is not as healthy as mother's milk. In a place where there is no clean water to mix the formula the health damage became lethal. This is just one example that what is good for the bottom line of multinationals is not necessarily good for the consumer. And it is not just in poor countries. Sugar drinks anyone?

University of Kansas, March 18, 1968 by RFK Even if we act to erase material poverty, there is another greater task, it is to confront the poverty of satisfaction - purpose and dignity - that afflicts us all. Too much and for too long, we seemed to have surrendered personal excellence and community values in the mere accumulation of material things. Our Gross National Product, now, is over $800 billion dollars a year, but that Gross National Product - if we judge the United States of America by that - that Gross National Product counts air pollution and cigarette advertising, and ambulances to clear our highways of carnage. It counts special locks for our doors and the jails for the people who break them. It counts the destruction of the redwood and the loss of our natural wonder in chaotic sprawl. It counts napalm and counts nuclear warheads and armored cars for the police to fight the riots in our cities. It counts Whitman's rifle and Speck's knife, and the television programs which glorify violence in order to sell toys to our children. Yet the gross national product does not allow for the health of our children, the quality of their education or the joy of their play. It does not include the beauty of our poetry or the strength of our marriages, the intelligence of our public debate or the integrity of our public officials.

Constantly having to multi-task while driving will most certainly lead to more car crashes. Tiring of the texting/phone crowd on the roads. Their stupidity should not affect other's lives. I am seeing more large vehicle/truck drivers on their devices, which is plain hazardous to all's health. Keep your Darwinism to a minimal please. And stay in your lane!

Ever read the disclaimers on drugs or farm chemicals?

Economic "booms" are associated with the filthy rich, and powerful, grabbing every resource they can, without regard for environmental consequences, or the welfare of the general population. Another reason not to give these people any kind of tax break. RAISE their taxes.

Bottom line: today’s jobs create stress and are inherently unhealthy.

A near-zero CO2 plan would save lives, mine funds itself by eradicating mental illness, which is a vast hidden expense.

It measures neither our wit nor our courage, neither our wisdom nor our learning, neither our compassion nor our devotion to our country, it measures everything in short, except that which makes life worthwhile. And it can tell us everything about America except why we are proud that we are Americans. If this is true here at home, so it is true elsewhere in world.

We are genetically programmed to crave fat, salt and sugar by our evolutionary fit 300,000+ year African ancestral nature when there was limited access to those foodstuffs and we were active hunter-gatherers who did not live much past 40 years. And we are now paying an unhealthy price due to our easy inactive long lived modern access.

That is exactly the economy Republicans want with their tax cuts and rollback of regulation. They haven't yet figured out you can have adequate regulation and growth.

There is no question that wealthier nations have lower infant mortality and long lifespans. Wealth gives greater access to proven technologies (drugs, vitamins, testing) that diagnose health issues and allow infants to live through birth. At the same time, wealthier nations deprive themselves of being truly "healthier" during their longer lifespans through pathetically poor diets consisting of factory farmed animals and processed foods rich in calories, but devoid of any nutrition. China, through its economic resurgence since the 1980s, now has over 50% of its population with pre-diabetes. Previously, this disease was rare. Over 60% of the US population is overweight or obese and Americans are some of the most chronically disease ridden populations in the world. Doctors, drug companies and food processors thrive while consumers suffer needlessly. Living a longer life with chronic diseases such as heart disease, cancer and high blood pressure due to the diseases of affluence is not healthier, it's just plain stupid.

Healthy(!) economy in capitalism= do and consume everything very fast including food stress

"In the short run, economic expansions can cut short the lives of some." Especially when most of the gains go to those who don't need more.

"At times like these, when the economy is strong and unemployment is low, research has found that death rates rise." Maybe, just maybe, the economy isn't as strong as some would have us think - either that or, in Frakt's mind, "the economy" is what people in the upper middle class and wealthy are experiencing?

Paralysis by analysis Austin. In my opinion both deep recessions and booming economies are bad for one's health. In recessions, you are out of work, depressed and wondering how you are gonna survive. Ditto for economic booms, will last for the short term and then a bigger recession. Better to have eight yrs of Obama, dull and meager advancement in the economy that kept everybody's head above water.

That reminds me of the man who turned 100 and then died from all the celebration dinners and drinks.

J Epidemiol Community Health. 2014 Jan;68(1):44-50. doi: 10.1136/jech-2013-202544. Epub 2013 Oct 7. Old age mortality and macroeconomic cycles. Rolden HJ1, van Bodegom D, van den Hout WB, Westendorp RG. 1 Leyden Academy on Vitality and Ageing, , Leiden, The Netherlands. Abstract.... CONCLUSIONS: In developed countries, mortality rates increase during upward cycles in the economy, and decrease during downward cycles. This effect is similar for the older and middle-aged population. Traditional explanations as work-stress and traffic accidents cannot explain our findings. Lower levels of social support and informal care by the working population during good economic times can play an important role, but this remains to be formally investigated.

Some get more income from their work, some get more poison, some get both. According to this link, we are, on average, a lot richer than in 1500: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:World_GDP_per_capita_1500_to_200... The question is whether we are 50 times happier than in 1500. My guess: no so much

You can’t take it with you.

In physics, we have a couple conservation laws-- the conservation laws of linear and angular momentum, for example. This piece suggests another conservation law. I believe that something about cultures and countries is also conserved. There are all kinds of numbers that define a country or culture. We have for example, death rates, education attainment, pollution level and so on. There must be some relationship among these various indices such that the relationship yields the same value for all countries and cultures. If God the creator is just, then no culture or country can be overall superior to any other.

The Economy is not strong in the USA, because of many factors, but one obvious one is The Trump/Pence White House. Healthy economies only increase the quality of life. New Products are usually associated with healthy economies. There haven't been any new products on The Market for awhile. Also, until crime and violence decreases reasonably, healthy economies cannot exist. Again, new products help decrease violence. I wonder why New has not appeared on the Market.

A clearly written article. An additional reminder about the realities within which each of us live,while continuing in many ways,to avoid.Or deny. Outcomes can be,and are,unpredictable.Unexpected.Paradoxical.There is no total control.No matter the levels and qualities of our doings.Nor how often. Randomness is ever present. Even as we plan,implement,and hopefully learn from. In the best ways that we know.Linear cause and effect,for most processes and their outcomes, in our daily lives, remains as a potent, and toxic myth which we have integrated into our daily coping, adapting and functioning.Perhaps to be able to live with another avoided reality.Uncertainty reigns in all of our human activities.And natures.Look around and see. Listen, and hear, above the notes of mantraed descriptions posing as predictable explanations by a host of individual and systemic stakeholders.Life, ours and of our planet, is multidimensional. And dynamic.The Days of the Prophets are long over.What they noted may not have been "evidence-informed," whatever one's principles of faith.What to do? The best that we can. Given who each of us is,with our human and nonhuman resources.Who we are not and are unlikely to ever become and BE.As we make choices.Helpful,unhelpful, even harmful ones.Individually and with others.Who we may or may not know. Learning to become aware of the barriers to needed changes. Using them. Learning about "bridges," and bridging them.In a menschlich manner. Success?Fail better.

One thing I take from this: once you've found work again, you're brutally overworked. That fits with a definition of "healthy economy" as a rise in productivity and profits in which all the gains go to the CEOs and investors.

The last paragraph on.. " there's little question long-term economic growth broadly improves the human condition " needs to be clarified. Florida has gone from 7 million residents in 1970 to 20 million now and with the addition of millions of more annual visits by tourists. The increased traffic and noise from it are detrimental. It was a more relaxed atmosphere in the cities back in 1970 as the pace of life with less people in a geographic area ( general city limits including suburbs ) was beneficial. Adding millions of more people in the upcoming decades, although that would have more units of production ( thus economic growth ) ,it would not be good for overall health and won't " improve the human condition" of our residents here in Florida.