Middle-Aged Americans Sicker Than British

[Judi Lynn]

Middle-Aged Americans Sicker Than British
By CARLA K. JOHNSON and MIKE STOBBE, Associated Press Writers
12 minutes ago

CHICAGO - Middle-aged, white Americans are much sicker than their counterparts in England, startling new research shows, despite U.S. health care spending per person that is more than double what Britain spends.

A higher rate of Americans tested positive for diabetes and heart disease than the British. Americans also self-reported more diabetes, heart attacks, strokes, lung disease and cancer.

The gap between countries holds true for educated and uneducated, rich and poor.

"At every point in the social hierarchy there is more illness in the United States than in England and the differences are really dramatic," said study co-author Dr. Michael Marmot, an epidemiologist at University College London in England.
(snip/...)

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060502/ap_on_he_me/sick_america

[mom cat]

1. You can blame the insurance companies for part of the disparity.

[simonm]

2. And/Or the food industry

The other day I found out I was basically eating aluminum from pancakes. Can you believe they put aluminum in fu#@ing pancakes!!? Please tell me I'm just being paranoid.

Edit: Pancake mix contained sodium aluminum phosphate

[mom cat]

4. Shit! ... Poison alert! ... I am starting on a plan to grow most of my own

food.

[leftyladyfrommo]

7. I have really been trying to watch what I eat. Unfortunately,

I am a horrible cook so I think I am losing weight just because I can't eat half of what I fix.

I have been trying to stick to fresh fruits and vegetables and beans and stuff like that. Anything processed has all kinds of just plain wierd stuff in it. Like, why would you need aluminum in pancake batter? Does it make it sparkle or what?

I should write a book.

[noonwitch]

18. I've lost 20 lbs by cooking my own food, and I'm a good cook

I wasn't even trying to lose weight-I gave up a long time ago. When I bought my new car, I had to give up eating at restaurants as frequently, among other things, so I started making even more of my own food.

I eat plenty, but most of it's now all home-made. I make my own goodies instead of store-bought ones, which are full of preservatives and have more sugar in them than necessary. I take vitamins, too, and drink more water than I did a few years back.

Spices are better flavoring than fats. Pam and olive oil are much better for you than butter, although I always use butter for spinach pie-nothing else works on philo dough.

[KansDem]

9. You're not being paranoid. You're being high-fructose-corn-syruped

HFCS -- "high fructose corn syrup"

I've complained about this before and will continue to do it again and again.

HFCS is in everything. Every try to buy a loaf of bread from a supermarket that didn't contain it?

One Saturday morning last year I took myself out to breakfast (my family was still asleep and I didn't want to wake them by stumbling about the house). I sat near a table of fellow breakfasters and took a kind of inventory of what they were eating that might contain HFCS:

Pancakes--batter contained HFCS
Pancake syrup--HFCS was no. 2 or 3 ingredient
Toast--bread contains HFCS
Jam/jelly--HFCS was no. 1 ingredient
Catsup (for hash browns)--HFCS was no. 2 or 3 ingredient
Coke (yeah, someone had a soft drink)--HFCS was no. 2 ingredient
Hot chocolate--sweetened with HFCS
Steak sauce (for the steak and eggs)--HFCS was no. 2 ingredient
Fruit cups or compote--HFCS used to sweeten.
(I'm sure there was more but these come to mind)

HFCS--It's made with genetically-modified enzymes and is difficult for the body to process. And you can't escape it!

And this observation didn't include the artificial sweeteners, colors, and flavors. And other crap, like aluminum.

[simonm]

13. "rats on the high fructose diet looked like the livers of alcoholics"

Thanks for the info. Very informative. I always thought it was similar to regular syrup.

"The medical profession thinks fructose is better for diabetics than sugar," says Dr. Field, "but every cell in the body can metabolize glucose. However, all fructose must be metabolized in the liver. The livers of the rats on the high fructose diet looked like the livers of alcoholics, plugged with fat and cirrhotic."

[simonm]

15. Forgot to mention - about soda and American obesity

I read a story about a scientist that believes in a relation between America's obesity problem and soda. Interestingly, as soda was introduced and consumed more, there was an increased rate of obesity. Sorry, can't find a link for it.

Edit: as you mentioned "Soda HFCS was no. 2 ingredient"

[Love Bug]

21. I know someone allergic to corn. She has quite a time trying

to find stuff without HFCS in it. And no, she doesn't have a weight problem.

[Lindacooks]

35. Sodium aluminum phosphate is just baking powder.

You can make your own pancake mix (there are tons of recipes on the web), and use Rumford baking powder, which is an all-phosphate powder. I always use it because the aluminum in the regular baking powder has a bitter aftertaste.

[kestrel91316]

42. If you make your OWN pancakes from scratch, and avoid

using baking powder containing aluminum, you won't have to worry about this sort of crap.

[nicknameless]

43. Most baking powder contains aluminum.

Consuming store-bought baked goods (those made with baking powder) carries the risk of aluminum ingestion.
Some brands of salt also contain aluminum.

*Sometimes* it's noted on the label. :(

[Liberal Gramma]

61. Riglht on!

Law and industry standards favor agribusiness over the consumer. If we are stupid enough, or time-strapped enough, to eat any prepared food or restaurant meals, we take in additives, preservatives, hormones, and unnecessary, hard-to-metabolize fats. The only way to avoid this in America is to shop local and prepare your own foods from scratch. Incidentally, but definitely related, is the fact that produce and dairy products TASTE BETTER in Europe than they do here.

[clspector]

68. Uhm, sometimes compounds are not as they seem

>>The other day I found out I was basically eating aluminum from pancakes. Can you believe they put aluminum in fu#@ing pancakes!!? Please tell me I'm just being paranoid.

Edit: Pancake mix contained sodium aluminum phosphate<<


I did a web search and found that sodium aluminum phosphate is a leavening agent. <http://dwb.unl.edu/Teacher/NSF/C12/C12Links/www.cosmocel.com.mx/english/c-leave.htm>

Now I'm not saying that it's automatically safe, but to assume that because a compound has aluminum in it that it's automatically unsafe just isn't backed up by the science. There's also an article on studies on rats, dogs and men who were fed sodium aluminum phosphate here: <http://www.inchem.org/documents/jecfa/jecmono/v17je26.htm>

[simonm]

77. guinea pig

I'd prefer to limit my aluminum intake rather than take a chance.

"Because aluminum is so pervasive in the environment, to the point of being unavoidable, researchers have long been studying its effects on humans. This research has revealed a link between aluminum intake and neurological dementia in kidney dialysis patients (dialysis encephalopathy). In recent years, the public and the media have become concerned about other possible adverse effects of aluminum on human health, including its role in Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (Lou Gehrig's disease). In addition, questions have been raised about the potential risks to infants who drink baby formula containing aluminum."

http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ewh-semt/water-eau/drink-potab/aluminum-aluminium_e.html

[UpInArms]

3. Britain's National Health Service

http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-44717

The National Health Service (NHS) provides comprehensive health care throughout the United Kingdom. The NHS provides medical care through a tripartite structure of primary care, hospitals, and community health care. The main element in primary care is the system of general practitioners (family doctors), who provide preventive and curative care and who refer patients to hospital and specialist services. All consultations with a general practitioner under the NHS are free.

The other major types of primary medical care are dentistry and pharmaceutical and opthalmic services. These are the only services of the NHS for which charges are levied, though persons under age 16, past retirement, or with low incomes are usually exempt. Everyone else must pay charges that are below the full cost of the services involved.

Under the Department of Health in England are four regional health directors who oversee area health authorities, whose major responsibility is to run the hospital service. (Overseeing the health authorities in Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland is the responsibility of their respective parliament or assembly.) Hospitals absorb more than two-thirds of the NHS budget. All hospital treatment under the NHS is free, including consultations with doctors, nursing, drugs, and intensive care, whatever the type of medical problem and however long the hospital stay. Hospital doctors are paid a salary rather than a fee for service but can combine salaried work for the NHS with a private practice.

The Community Health Service has three functions: to provide preventive health services; to act as a liaison with local government, especially over matters of public health; and to cooperate with local government personal social service departments to enable health and personal care to be handled together whenever possible.

...more...

[TrogL]

5. Pity they didn't do Canada as well

Some of it can be summed up to America's car culture, driving two blocks to pick up cigarettes.

Canada has a similar culture. It would eliminate (or prove) Health Care as an issue as Canada's system is closer (but not identical) to England's.

[demo dutch]

6. Overweight, bad food habits & not enough exercise. That'll do it

[leftyladyfrommo]

8. They do walk a whole lot more than we do.

Course, they don't have to worry about getting mugged right in front of your home like I do. It's just plain not safe where I live.

[demo dutch]

11. They walk very little anywhere in the US

[leftyladyfrommo]

16. I think New Yorkers walk quite a bit.

Have to if you can't afford a taxi.

[demo dutch]

34. Well NY may be the exception, and maybe a couple of other major cities

the rest of the country doesn't walk

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

54. Bingo.

I moved to the UK from California about a year ago. I've lost about 20 lbs since moving here, even though my diet is worse and I drink more alcohol (ah, that fine English ale.) My friends and family even say that I look healthier. Here's why:

It is 1.5 miles from my house to work. I usually walk this at least four days a week, round-trip. (1.5mi x 2 x 4 = 12mi)

It is 1 mile from my house to the city centre. I usually make that walk around four times a week, round-trip. (1mi x 2 x 4 = 8mi)

It is .25 miles from my house to the nearest group of shops. I usually make this walk five times a week, round-trip (.25 x 2 x 5 = 2.5)

This adds up to 22.5 miles a week of walking, minimum. My guess is it's probably closer to 25-30 miles given my penchant for wandering around the city on weekends. There's no way that walking an additional 25 miles per week doesn't make a huge difference in your health.

[anotherdrew]

10. one word: STRESS

in england you're not thrown out on the street for missing a rent payment or two. You can go to the doctor even if you're poor, etc. In this country, you mess-up, or get messed up and poof, you're now a non-person soon to be seen mumbling on the street.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

53. I'm pretty sure that's part of it.

I recently moved to the UK from California. In both places I've worked in the tech industry, not exactly known for being a low stress environment. But I can certainly say that even though my job here is more difficult, and the hours just as long, my stress level is much lower.

It seems to me that the British do not "take work home" with them to the extent that we Americans do. Work is for work, home is for family, friends, fun, etc. People do not define themselves by their occupation to the extent that we do in the US.

This country also generally gives its workers a far more reasonable holiday allotment than the US. (Mine here is more than double what it was in the US.)

[anotherdrew]

66. sounds like a good move

sounds like a good move you made, I've been thinking about trying that myself.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

99. Prepare for bureaucratic hell.

I had a heck of a time with the mountain of ever-changing paperwork that comes along with being an immigrant. Fortunately, the company I work for was relatively sane and helped me sort it all out (though it took ages)

Highly reccomend trying it to anyone with a bit of a taste for adventure and not a huge amount of family responsibilities.

[MrPrax]

12. What about dental hyigene, huh?

Take that Britain!! :eyes:

[hedgehog]

56. Only if you can afford a dentist!

Missing teeth among the poor are becoming an all to common indicator.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

59. With the way they steam all of the veggies here...

...you don't need any damn teeth.

[tenshi816]

60. That's not true to the extent most Americans

think it is because of the NHS, although that may change as more and more dentists opt out of the NHS system.

Until last month children up to the age of 16 received free dental care, including braces. That's been true for years so there's been no excuse for anyone not to take their children to the dentist. Consequently, bad teeth aren't as common as they used to be. Still, it's a cliche that Americans don't want to let go of.

Even with the new charges, it's still a pittance, really. My older son gets braces next week and it's costing a tiny fraction of what it would cost in the US.

[SoCalDem]

67. Look..there's a difference between HYGIENE and APPEARANCE

of the actual teeth. I really doubt that people all over the UK (and europe) are running around with massive dental disease. Are their teeth like pearly-white chiclets? probably not for most people. There still are places on the planet where orthodontists may not yet have convinced parents to drop thousands of dollars to get braces for their kids before all their permanent teeth have come in..

and maybe the UK and europe are not so obsessed with having teeth so white, that co-workers must shield their eyes from the sparkle:shrug:

When I was a kid, only the rich kids got braces..the rest of us just had "ordinary teeth"...not all perfectly lined up, but functional, and people did not put their hands to their faces and run into the streets when they saw us coming..

[Lucy - Claire]

81. I am British....

I only have two tiny fillings, the last one I got when I was twelve years old, I am now 33. Many of my peers have not fillings so British teeth may not always looks cosmetically prefect as the do in Hollywood but they are strong and healthy.

I think that most people in the UK know that when they are ill, they will see a doctor, go to hospital etc without worrying about insurance. The NHS has its problems but not have that weight of worry when you are diabetic or have angina. We do have prescription fees but for the elderly, the under 16's and the unemployed there is not charge.
The birth control pill is free and some essential medications are also free.

[SoCalDem]

82. Exactly.. Peace of mind is worth a LOT

Around here there are lots of people who cannot afford the money or the TIME to go to the doctor. There are millions of sick kids who go to school day after day,because Mom cannot afford to take the time off and may not have the $50-60 it will take to run the kid to the doctor..Many wait, thinking "they'll get better", and when they don't..it's a 1AM kamikaze run to the ER.

I know people who just don't fill their prescriptions, because they can;t afford it, and if they find out it's not a life threatening situation, they just don't fill it.

You are very lucky to have what you have.,.I wish we did too :cry:

[CatholicEdHead]

14. We are overworked, stressed out, unemployed

live around a car culture, eat many more processed foods, etc...

[Writer]

17. In a word: we are FAT.

Then we make every excuse in the book not to make lifestyle changes so that we can better care for our health. We take pills instead of taking PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY for our poor healths.

And we need to start being more honest with ourselves: We are fat, consumerist human beings who'd rather work ourselves to death for the McMansion than scale down and enhance our quality of life.

[pitohui]

46. been to england lately? they're FAT too

that is the cheap way out to blame the victim

i am sorry you have never traveled but before you shit on people who have done no harm to you -- inform yourself

your statement is cruel, uncalled for, and most of all, not fact-based

[Writer]

62. Oh I'm sorry, apparently I've tripped a sensitive wire with you.

It's my opinion. If you don't like it, too bad.

[rodeodance]

19. providing primary medical care is one planation--includes preventive care

Earlier studies have shown the United States does a poorer job than other industrialized countries at providing primary medical care to its citizens, particularly to those with less education and income, said Dr. Barbara Starfield, a professor of health policy and pediatrics at Johns Hopkins University.

"Countries oriented toward providing good primary care basically do better in health," she said.

Marmot offered yet another explanation for the gap: Americans' financial insecurity. Improvements in household income have eluded all but the top fifth of Americans since the mid-1970s. Meanwhile, English citizens saw their incomes improve, he said.

Robert Blendon, a professor of health policy at the Harvard School of Public Health who was not involved in the study, said the stress of striving for the American dream may account for Americans' lousy health.

"The o

[lovuian]

20. This proves that Universal Health is better and cheaper

All our system is doing is giving poor care at very high prices and destroying the healthcare system that we were once proud of... It needs to be addressed...

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

51. Actually, it doesn't prove that at all.

Because rich Americans were sicker than their British counterparts. Assuming that rich Americans have access to excellent health care, the existence of the NHS is not relevant. In fact, the authors of the study say this themselves.

[lovuian]

79. The rich Americans have the same access as other Americans

when you go into the ER in America ... they don't say Rich Americans first... sorry this system sucks for EVERYBODY,,,

[papau]

22. Study Shows Americans Sicker Than English

We spend twice as much so as to make Ins Companies rich, and end up with a lower life expectancy. - Single payer National Health anyone????

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/health/3834801.html

Study Shows Americans Sicker Than English


CHICAGO - Middle-aged, white Americans are much sicker than their counterparts in England, startling new research shows, despite U.S. health care spending per person that's more than double what England spends.

A higher rate of Americans tested positive for diabetes and heart disease than the English. Americans also self-reported more diabetes, heart attacks, strokes, lung disease and cancer.

The gap between the countries holds true for educated and uneducated, rich and poor.

"At every point in the social hierarchy there is more illness in the United States than in England and the differences are really dramatic," said study co-author Dr. Michael Marmot, an epidemiologist at University College London in England.<snip>

[One_Life_To_Give]

23. More like lifestyle differences

Diabetes and heart disease and strokes are linked to diet and obesity.

[papau]

24. I see Environmental reasons - and a Congress owned by Corporations that

does not pass harsh laws on cleanup or liability or preventive regulation because a few deaths or sick folks must not impact the bottom line.

[One_Life_To_Give]

26. For Lung Disease and Cancer

I agree with you.

But I don't see the link to diebetis or hardening of the arteries.

[papau]

29. hardening of the arteries sounds like lifestyle, but diabetes has a

number of causes.

[One_Life_To_Give]

30. Yes and No

While Diabetes has several causes/risk factors
studies reveal that genetics, obesity, fetal history, lack of activity, a diet high in fat and stress, all may play a role in the development diabetes.

The ones not directly related to lifestyle are all aggravated by lifestyle.

There may be an Environmental/Chemical pollutant cause. But the effects of any such possibility will be difficult to discern. Given the number of primary risk factors to which our population is already exposed to. Specifically obesity and diet.

Quoted text from http://diabetes.about.com/od/type2diabetes/a/type2causes.htm for Type 2 which represents 90-95% of cases.

[Mel]

25. not so fast

<snip>The researchers crunched numbers to create a hypothetical statistical world in which the English had American lifestyle risk factors, including being as fat as Americans. In that model, the researchers found Americans still would be sicker.</snip>

<snip>"Countries oriented toward providing good primary care basically do better in health," she said.

Marmot offered yet another explanation for the gap: Americans' financial insecurity. Improvements in household income have eluded all but the top fifth of Americans since the mid-1970s. Meanwhile, English citizens saw their incomes improve, he said.

Robert Blendon, a professor of health policy at the Harvard School of Public Health who was not involved in the study, said the stress of striving for the American dream may account for Americans' lousy health.

"The opportunity to go both up and down the socioeconomic scale in America may create stress," Blendon said. Americans don't have a reliable government safety net like the English enjoy, Blendon said.</snip>



We need Universal Health Care for all and if we don't do it, it's will only going to get worse!

[One_Life_To_Give]

27. Wouldn't be across the board

If we accept Marmot's explantation. We would expect to see the lower classes doing worse than the British while the upper classes had parity.

In Blandon's observation. Keeping up with the Jones's, is a lifestyle issue.

[daleo]

32. There is a theory that inequality effects health throughout the population

So that countries that have more equitable income distributions have healthier populations at all income levels. I guess the idea is that inequality causes stress, even for those who are well off. It may be that they simply can't insulate themselves entirely from the other classes, so they share the increased stress indirectly (e.g. family, friends, fear of crime, social friction, etc). There is some evidence in support of this. If you google GINI index and health, you will get plenty of links.

[NorthernSpy]

76. yes, and this effect may also be the source of the height gap

Europeans are getting taller. Americans aren't -- and we may actually be getting shorter with each new generation. And this remains true even if you exclude data for Asians and Latinos (who are shorter on average than whites) consider only whites.


http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?040405fa_fact

[daleo]

78. Yes, I have heard of that

Thanks for the link. It looks like a good article.

I wonder how Canada and the U.S. "stack up" on this measure, given that Canada has a somewhat more equitable distribution of wealth than the U.S.?

[pitohui]

47. yes the Brits smoke more

funny to see anyone arguing that lifestyle differences cause THEM to be healthier than us

sounds like a GOP or libertarian plank!

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

57. That won't fix the problem.

However, Britain's universal health-care system shouldn't get credit for better health, Marmot and Blendon agreed.

Both said it might explain better health for low-income citizens, but can't account for better health of Britain's more affluent residents.

Marmot cautioned against looking for explanations in the two countries' health-care systems.

"It's not just how we treat people when they get ill, but why they get ill in the first place," Marmot said.

[area51]

28. This is "startling"?

Not if you realize that the Brits have universal healthcare & we don't. In the states, if you get sick & don't have the money, you just fscking die. We are a barbaric nation.

[Vinca]

31. Then there's that pesky preventive care . . .

if you have insurance you're likely to have a huge deductible and put it off. If you don't have insurance, like me, you don't even consider it. There's a reason the U.S. is far down the longevity list (after Bosnia).

[0007]

33. 'Tis a milk job anyway you look at it

[womanofthehills]

36. Eat organic & make a garden

If you shop at organic food stores like I do you will see how much better looking and healthy the people in organic stores look than the people shopping at regular grocery stores. I live way out in the country but travel one and a half hrs to organic grocery stores in Albuquerque each week. This year I'm also making my garden bigger. I decided to totally not eat anything genetically engineered - corn syrup, un organic soy or any corn product that is not organic and my digestion is so much better.
Pesticides will also do in your health big time. They have added chemicals to keep the bugs livers from detoxifying the pesticides and they effect your liver too. They also build up in your body fat. Americans use too many chemicals and eat a lot of disgusting food. One gift the US has given Cuba is refusing to send them pesticides - thus Cuba is filled with organic farms. Prince Charles also has organic farms.

[frankenforpres]

104. correlation not causation

i look healthy and i often shop at the organic grocery store, but it doesnt make up the majority of my grocery shopping

[JackDragna]

37. I think this goes deeper than corn syrup, exercise..

..or any other single factor. Much of our problem stems from our sickening level of poverty. Every go to a grocery store and see how much processed food a certain amount of money would get you vs. how much fresh food it'd get you? The difference is appaling. If I got all the fruits and veggies I wanted, my food bill would be ridiculous. When I buy processed food, however, I can get enough food calories to feed Africa for a year. The poor cannot afford to eat well.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

52. Actually, the article appears to say...

...that economics are not a factor, because over all economic groups the disparity is similar. I think it's more cultural than economic.

[The Backlash Cometh]

38. Have you ever been over there?

They actually have communities. Not just real estate.

[depakid]

72. Excellent point

social capital (and communities) are positively corellated to all sorts of health outcome measures.

[Comadreja]

39. Stress, consumerism and social isolation

Americans don't know who their neighbors are. This is counter to our nature.

[eridani]

40. Don't blame obesity--Brits are pretty much as fat as Americans

British data

http://www.archive.official-documents.co.uk/document/doh/survey96/ehch7.htm

Overall, 61% of men and 52% of women were either overweight (BMI over 25 but below 30 kg/m2) or obese (BMI greater than 30 kg/m2). A greater proportion of men (45%) than women (34%) were overweight, but a slightly lower proportion of men (16%) than women (18%) were obese.

American data

http://www.obesity.org/subs/fastfacts/obesity_US.shtml

1988 to 1994, 56.0%
1999 to 2000, 64.5

[pitohui]

48. thank you -- a poster who has actually been to britain!

i knew i couldn't be the only one!

[eridani]

49. Actually, I haven't--just looked up the statistics on both countries

We're all, as a population, US and Brits alike, relatively fat. Therefore, that can't be the explanation.

[Mr Creosote]

50. I'm somewhat confused

The thread started talking about England, but has now switched to Britain. I imagine that if the Scots were extracted from those stats then the English (and Welsh) are less fat than Americans. But we're catching you up!

[eridani]

95. Sorry, couldn't easily find stats on just the English

Most of the Google stuff comes up with British data on obesity, not further broken down.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

55. A couple of observations on obesity.

1) Just because you are obese does not mean you never exercise. Even obese people in the UK get more exercise than their American counterparts, simply due to the nature of UK cities and towns requiring more walking than towns in the US.

2) There's a difference between becoming obese from eating at McDonald's every day and becoming obese from eating Yorkshire puddings constantly. There's a hell of a lot less godawfulness in most of the fattening foods I've seen over here.

I guess what I'm saying is that not all obesity is equal.

[hedgehog]

58. I think that's a brilliant statement because I've often thought the same!

LOL

Seriously though, we've spent the last twenty years learning that not all fats are the same and not all sugars are the same. Back in 1979, if you'd said that partially hydrogenated vegetable oil or high fructose corn syrup are harmful, you'd been labeled a quack! I think we still have a lot to learn about different body types and definitions of exactly what is harmful excess weight. Realizing that there is a difference between the apple and pear body types is just a baby step.

[Writer]

63. Ah. Thank you for your reasoned response.

Apparently I'm not supposed to comment on fat Americans if I've never been to England, according to other posters in this thread. :shrug: :eyes:

That said, being a Murkin like I am, another issue I'd probably add to this is that Americans love to blame institutions for their issues. It's never our own habits/lifestyles. It's always the fast food industry, the 10-hour/day job on the other side of town so we can afford the 3000 sq. foot house that we HAVE to have, etc. My cousin was very overweight, and being a southern girl, shoveled down deep-fried protein and carbs. It never was her fault. Never. So, of course, she resorted to stomach surgery to drop weight. She even actively GAINED MORE WEIGHT so that she would be morbidly obese and her insurance company would pay the hospital bill. And although she eats significantly less with her new stomach, guess what she eats? Deep-fried protein and carbs.

Genetics. I understand that this issue exists, but can genetics explain the entire rise in obesity among children? Adults? Have we all suddenly mutated into fat-prone homonids? I don't think so.

I can't attest for what Englishmen eat. I do think, however, that there is something to be said for being a little hefty yet healthy, and being irresponsibly obese and risking diabetes. That's what we are more inclined to do on this side of the ocean.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

64. It's all very American.

The land of extremes. :)

[Writer]

65. Well I don't know if "extremes" is the operative word...

it's this expectation that Americans have that we always can improve our mass: whether it be food intake, financial intake, or land/stuff intake.

We like our "stuff" in 'Murka.

So maybe "size" is the operative word. :)

[NorthernSpy]

69. I'm really starting to wonder whether you read the article

The discrepancy in disease prevalence between Britons and Americans remains even when obesity is factored out.



One more time, just so you don't miss it:

The discrepancy in disease prevalence between Britons and Americans remains even when obesity is factored out.


You complained:

Apparently I'm not supposed to comment on fat Americans if I've never been to England, according to other posters in this thread.

Please. You know perfectly well that nothing -- besides whatever sense of fairness and concern for fact that you may possess -- stands in the way of you scapegoating fat people for the difference in health between Americans and the British. The real problem with your musings is that they are mostly irrelevant and contrary to the evidence, because you've yet to acknowledge this one critical finding regarding the issue at hand:

The discrepancy in disease prevalence between Britons and Americans remains even when obesity is factored out.


From Nature:

People in the healthiest, high-income and education bracket in the United States have comparable rates of heart disease and diabetes as those in the sickest, low-income group in England, the study shows.

The differences were so great that at first "it seemed implausible", says James Smith of the RAND corporation in Santa Monica, California, and senior author of the Journal of the American Medical Association study1. "We did not expect to find this."

The explanation doesn't seem to be down to the facts that Americans are fatter or that the British drink more alcohol, the researchers say. When they ran their health data through a model to make both groups have equivalent levels of obesity, smoking and drinking, the health differences only lessened slightly.

http://www.nature.com/news/2006/060501/full/060501-3.html

[Writer]

70. Forgive me if I decide to comment outside the context of the article!

I did read the article, thank you very much. And yes, there are proven links between obesity and diabetes and heart disease.

As far as your thinly veiled insults that I'm "scapegoating" fat people, I think I'll ignore that. As far as the discussion at hand is concerned, in the US we do not eat correctly. We do not exercise regularly either. For this reason many of us are overweight and according to this article, less than healthy. How is that somehow wrong or disagreeable? It's not what we want to hear, that's why. It's much easier for us to cast blame than to perform some self-examination into our lifestyle and culture.

Additionally, you apparently didn't read my post in its entirety. Here - I'll do you the favor and quote from that post, albeit in a less obnoxious manner than you have:

"I can't attest for what Englishmen eat. I do think, however, that there is something to be said for being a little hefty yet healthy, and being irresponsibly obese and risking diabetes. That's what we are more inclined to do on this side of the ocean."

[NorthernSpy]

74. again: the discrepancy remains *even after factoring out obesity*

I did read the article, thank you very much. And yes, there are proven links between obesity and diabetes and heart disease.

None of these links you allude to explain the discrepancy in disease prevalence between the populations in the study.

As far as your thinly veiled insults that I'm "scapegoating" fat people, I think I'll ignore that.

It's not an insult. And it's not veiled. It's a forthright characterization of the gist of your remarks. A fair characterization, I'll add.

As far as the discussion at hand is concerned, in the US we do not eat correctly. We do not exercise regularly either. For this reason many of us are overweight and according to this article, less than healthy.

Again, the study points out that even after controlling for obesity, the difference in disease prevalence remains.

Why is it so hard for you to acknowledge that? Could it be that American society's obsessive hyper-focus on "lifestyle" and "personal responsibility" as the great gushing fountains of Health might actually somehow be a source of harm?

How is that somehow wrong or disagreeable? It's not what we want to hear, that's why. It's much easier for us to cast blame than to perform some self-examination into our lifestyle and culture.

Actually, we Americans hear precisely that all the time, nonstop. From this study, we heard something startlingly different. We learned that affluent white Americans -- our most fitness-conscious demographic -- are no better off healthwise than British proles.

Me, I think the lifestyle-harpies have some explaining to do.

[Writer]

80. ...

[pitohui]

86. they do have much explainin to do, northernspy

i began to be suspicious years ago when i got on an organic whole-grain kick and noticed that while i prepared all of the food and ate the same thing in larger portions than my husband, he continued to gain and gain while i stayed the same size i was at age 14

the old calorie/exercise routine plainly doesn't work for a lot of people

most people you meet who are thin are either naturally fortunate in their physiology (like me) or they have to devote a soul-destroying amount of time to controlling their intake of food and working out, my husband has a real job, he can't devote 4 hours a day to working out like uma thurman

it is now determined that he has metabolic syndrome and his glucose levels are being controlled v. well and he has as a side benefit actually lost quite a bit of weight by cutting out carbs -- sadly, the meter revealed that fruit and whole grains including my beloved favorite brown rice have to be severely restricted

so all the time i was growing, cooking, preparing a "healthy" diet i was killing him

we have been lied to

and, yes, i'm damn angry abt it, damn angry

the lifestyle nazis want to take away all the joy of living and yet what they promise in return -- a long, healthy life -- turns out to be completely untrue at least for some physiologies

we just don't know enough to make the kind of claims that the "eat right" preachers make, unless you are monitoring your levels every day you have no idea if that backyard raised organic fruit is doing good or real harm

i do suspect that if we brainwash people every day w. the concept "it's all your fault," then maybe we are creating some sort of stress or self-fulfilling prophecy that impacts people's health in a negative fashion, we are literally teaching people to visualize that they are killing themselves every time they drink a cola or a latte, that probably can't be healthy

otherwise i'm flummoxed to understand this study

[eridani]

96. The link between diabetes and obesity is the same genetics--

--causing both. However, being genetically insulin resistant in a society where there is enough to eat is like having sickle cell anemia in a society outside the malaria belt--what was once a useful trait turns lethal.

If hospitals quit testing for PKU, there would be a serious outbreak of brain damage in young kids, but no underlying changes in genetics. The environmental factors behind the increase in obesity are mostly outside of anybody's personal control--work hours and stress, giving in to the pressure to diet (yo-yo dieting rearranges fat so that more of it is the diabetes-inducing intraperitoneal fat), urban design discouraging walking and biking, etc.

You are also leaving class privilege out of it. I have a well-paid professional job which includes good health insurance, and a discount health club in the basement of my building. True, I could choose not to take advantage of it and it would be my fault if I didn't, but it's the structure of my class situation that makes the choice available to me in the first place. Having lived on much less at other times in my life, I am damned well NOT going to join the snotty complacent chorus of my peers ragging on poor fat women with three crappy jobs who just don't seem to have the willpower to go jogging in their dangerous neighborhoods at 11PM.

Brits don't make better personal choices than we do; they just live in a less unequal society in cities and towns where walking in the course of daily life is easier to do.

[eridani]

94. Agreed, that's part of it

I think that the real biggie is universal health care. And that societies with less difference between the top and bottom income levels are healthier in all respects, rich and poor alike.

[kestrel91316]

41. That's because we have such a GREAT health care system, and also

because we are the GREATEST NATION IN THE WORLD.

Don't mess with America.

[leftofthedial]

44. and many of us have no insurance

our health care system is disgraceful

[pitohui]

45. SICKER? we're DYING!

a month doesn't pass w.out learning a friend in her 40s or 50s has died

[depakid]

71. "It's something of a mystery,"

LOL. I don't think so.

It's called access to primary and preventative care.

[closeupready]

73. LOL - Good one!

:hi:

[NorthernSpy]

75. access to care likely explains *some* of the difference for poor...

... and working class populations.

But hark ye to this: affluent, upperclass Americans are no better off healthwise than underclass Brits. Rich Americans have plenty of access to care.


http://www.nature.com/news/2006/060501/full/060501-3.html

[depakid]

87. Of course, there are other things going on

But lack of primary and preventative medicine will be ever growing factors... as more and more Americand end up with junk insurance.

My point really was that this is no surprise at all... anyone who's read the literature over the past two decades or who doesn't live inside the bubble of American exceptionalism can tell you all sorts of reasons why this is.

Such as lower stress lifestyles, smaller GINI coefficient (more income equality) and the British have higher social capital, because more people live in communities- as opposed to socially isolating suburbs.

Micheal Marmot lays it all out in the second edition of his excellent book, the Social Determinants of Health:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0198565895/qid=1146681302/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_2/104-0742766-1735950?s=books&v=glance&n=283155

and the WHO has had an ongoing project to try to educate people about it for several years!

http://www.who.int/bulletin/volumes/84/4/interview0406/en/

Here's their publication: "The Solid Facts."

http://www.who.dk/document/e81384.pdf

[Cha]

83. Maybe their food on the

whole is better than Fast Food Nation?

[pitohui]

84. their food is the same or worse

their traditional food is so bad it's scary but most do just eat fast food, same as we have here, the usual macdonalds, starbucks, etc, w. some chains added in of their own, grocery store prices are so high by american standards i'm amazed anyone bothers to eat at all frankly!

we love england for many things but her lovely food is not one of those things

[eridani]

97. What?!? No fish and chips anymore? n/t

[Megahurtz]

85. People Here Aren't Drinking Enough LOL!!!

[JoFerret]

88. NHS Baby boomer Brits grew up

Baby boomer Brits grew up with the National Health Service. They had orange juice as babies and morning milk in school. They were screened as children and immunized. Their mothers had pre-natal care and they had regular medical attention at school. Everyone had health insurance and preventive medicine. Doctors came to the house when they were children and visiting nurses dispensed advice and health care in the home and school. The older ones were children when sugar was rationed. All of them were exposed to the potential health benefits of Marmite (!) and a steady diet of baked beans on toast.

[muriel_volestrangler]

92. By George, I think you've got it!

It must be the Marmite! :evilgrin:

[JoFerret]

93. Without a doubt

It's full of salt but... all those excellent B-vits.

[Megahurtz]

103. Salt is Actually Good for You.

A lot of people don't really realize it.

[JoFerret]

108. It's not about the Marmite

...but the National Health Service and national health care and welfare systemn from which middle aged Brits benefitted as children in spite of the poverty and austerity of the post war years.

[zara]

89. over medicated fatties with poor healthcare, no safety net, high stress

: ( in the USA!

[Raine]

90. Who wouldn't be sick when

you have a half-wit like chimp and his thugs in control of your country. x(

[sweetheart]

91. The will to stay alive

Listen everyone, i got something to say, "Its
better to burn out than to fade away"

- the kurgan - highlander

[Seabiscuit]

98. Face it: we just friggin' eat too much (and not just fast food).

We're a nation of gluttons.

Ever been to Disneyland lately? I've never seen so many huge asses and bellies slowly waddling around blocking sidewalks and pathways in my life outside of Disneyland.

[dmallind]

100. Many contributing factors

I grew up in England. Lived there 22 years.

Diet is worse - FAR FAR less obsessing over carbs this and protein that. No panicking over milk or corn syrup to speak of. Deep fry everything, mostly in beef lard, sugary sweets, veggies boiled so all the nutrienst curl up and die.

Alcohol intake - especially bulk beer intake with its higher calories - far higher again. A "binge" drinker here (3 UK pints for a grown man!) is a normal lunchtime or truly lightweight evening session for a significant portion of the population.

Smoking? about the same. Low 20s in both cases.

Obesity? Close. America is a bit ahead, but not by a whole hell of a lot. Bear in mind obesity is self-defined

Exercise? In most cases Brits do more low-level lifestyle type exercises - lots more walking etc - but far less of a "gym" culture.

Nobody KNOWS what the reason is but there's pretty strong inferences that it's not because Brits obssess over their diet and exercise more than we do. Far and away the opposite.

A few people have mentioned stress, and I think they may be on to something, but stress can also come from endless panicking and worry about your weight and your nutrition and so on.

Perhaps worrying less about your health is better for it?

[Seabiscuit]

105. The main difference in the study was weight.

Middle-aged Americans are more obese than the British on average. More than compensates for the fact that the Brits drink more.

IOW, WE EAT TOO MUCH!!!

You really ought to take a look around Disneyland someday. Really, the amount of superfluous fat cells floating around there is downright FRIGHTENING!

[NorthernSpy]

106. wrong! the health discrepancy remained *even after factoring out obesity*

You think that the sight of fat people out in public is "frightening".

Whatever. You're entitled to your own opinion.

But you're not entitled to your own facts. Your insistence that obesity eplains the discrepancy in disease prevalence between the the American and British populations directly contradicts the findings of the study, and your claim that "the main difference in the study was weight," is pure invention on your part.

In other words, you are wrong, period.


From Nature:

People in the healthiest, high-income and education bracket in the United States have comparable rates of heart disease and diabetes as those in the sickest, low-income group in England, the study shows.

The differences were so great that at first "it seemed implausible", says James Smith of the RAND corporation in Santa Monica, California, and senior author of the Journal of the American Medical Association study1. "We did not expect to find this."

The explanation doesn't seem to be down to the facts that Americans are fatter or that the British drink more alcohol, the researchers say. When they ran their health data through a model to make both groups have equivalent levels of obesity, smoking and drinking, the health differences only lessened slightly.

http://www.nature.com/news/2006/060501/full/060501-3.html

[dmallind]

110. True

In other words the obesity difference has only a slight impact on health differences.

The current paranoia over anyone with excess poundage is a little excessive. You have to dig very deep into a lot of these obesity studies to find that "300% increase in risk of X" is often a change from a .0001 probability to a .0003 probability. It's like buying three lottery tickets instead of one increases your "risk" of winning by 300% too.

Try to find out what longevity difference obesity has and you'll find that only in cases of extreme obesity (290lbs plus on NORMAL frame people - I'm close to that but as a serious weightlifter in my younger days I am by no means normally built - in fact at zero - yes zero % body fat I would still be "obese" according to the normal weight charts) and only then when this obesity was lifelong setting in around 20 IIRC did it have an impact of more than a couple of years on lifespan.

No being enormously fat is not as healthy as being of moderate weight - but that would be a strawman objection to my point. My point is that unless you are enormously fat for an enormous part of your life, the impact on mortality is not all that, well, enormous.

[toopers]

101. On top of all this other stuff about unsafe foods in the US . . .

who the hell wants to eat English food anyway?

[dmallind]

102. Good point (although a bit outdated/stereotypical)

For one thing British cooking has in the last decades adopted a lot of the best of the Commonwealth cusines. The most popular dish in Britain is now, broadly speaking at any rate, curry.

For another thing all the same packaged "unhealthy" (what is the life expectancy now compared to when people ate local/organic only?) foods are available in both countries, again at least broadly speaking. My nephew, for some insane reason, got a taste for Twinkies when he was here and I send him some every now and again as they have not reached the UK, and true some of the meat spreads and pickled chutneys popular in the UK have only a toehold here. That said, every kind of processed packaged food is available in both places, from the same candy bars to the same microwave pizza to the same fast food, and it's eaten in pretty much the same ratio and pretty much the same amount. You can't lump Britain in with the rest of Europe in their relative disdain for US packaged food (and I think that disdain in the rest of Europe is fading quickly too). They eat the same packaged crap, plus more fried foods at home, plus more beer at the pub.

[toopers]

107. Lighten up, Francis . . .

It was just a joke!

[dmallind]

109. Well I am overweight so I probably should lighten up but...

.....did I seem offended? Certainly wasn't - just offering some info. I don't take offense at things like that - essentially since like almost all stereotypes it contains a grain of truth. Certainly any cuisine that can produce haggis, black pudding and tripe is not exactly up there with the all time greats after all.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

111. Krugman's column today is about that study

He concludes that for the lower income groups, it's better access to preventive medicine, and for the higher-income groups, it's less stress, since Brits work less than Americans and tend (not entirely) to live in more stable communities. (Remember the story about the 9.000-year-old skeleton that was discovered in a cave in England and was found through DNA testing to be related to a current resident of the nearest town?)

[jeffrey_X]

112. It's pretty simple....

pop/soda + fast food + artificial sugars and sweetners + too much red meat + too much dairy + too many prescription drugs to counter the previous items = major health problems

[geniph]

113. You can be overweight and healthy, IF you exercise

but if you're overweight and sedentary, you're a heart attack or diabetic coma waiting to happen. Most of the English folks I know are walkers; it's partly that things are more set up for pedestrians there (and closer together) and partly the cost of gas, but a lot of it is cultural; it's just unthinkable in a lot of suburban American communities to WALK to the store or have the kids WALK to school, or WALK for entertainment, as so many British people routinely do. Even if they're walking to the pub to throw back a few pints, they're walking - still healthier than their American counterpart, stopping at the bar while driving home.

I really think the walking has more to do with it than anything else. My late father-in-law, no matter how fat he got (and he was well north of 300 lbs most of the time), was perfectly healthy when he was walking every day. It's when he got sedentary that he sickened and died. Same thing with my late mother-in-law - as soon as she got so heavy that she took to a wheelchair and stopped moving around, she sickened and died.

The human body was not meant to be sedentary, and it does not deal well with it.

And unquestionably preventative care early in the course of a disease will keep people much healthier than trying to deal with established illness, and national health care has a significant advantage over the NO health care that 40% of Americans have.