Jump to content
  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.

Tory Country


Section_31
 Share

Recommended Posts

Just a coincidence I am sure;

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-51619608

 

Life expectancy among women living in the poorest communities in England has declined since 2011, says a report warning of growing health inequalities.

Overall, life expectancy growth has stalled over the past decade - for the first time in 100 years.

Health Secretary Matt Hancock said there was "still much more to do".

The largest decreases were seen in the most deprived areas of north-east England, while the biggest increases were in the richest parts of London.

Similar trends can be seen right across the UK, the report said.

The report, by Prof Sir Michael Marmot, one of the country's leading experts on health inequalities, comes 10 years after he first published data on the growing gap between rich and poor, and between north and south, in England.

"England has lost a decade," Prof Marmot said, calling the damage to the nation's health "shocking".

"If health has stopped improving, that means society has stopped improving."

His follow-up report, after a decade of austerity, finds the picture has got worse.

It highlights:

stalling life expectancy for men and women in England since 2010

 

the more deprived the area, the shorter the life expectancy

 

among women in the poorest 10% of areas, life expectancy fell between 2010-12 and 2016-18

 

people in poorer areas spend more of their lives in ill health than those in affluent areas

 

the amount of time people spend in poor health has gone up across England since 2010

 

cuts in funding in deprived areas and areas outside London were larger and affected those areas more

 

 

The report says some local authorities and communities have been good at tackling health inequalities, and the government now needs to build on these successful examples.

Its other recommendations include:

 

developing a national strategy for reducing inequalities in health, led by the prime minister

 

early intervention in children's lives to reduce child poverty

 

reduce low-paid and insecure work

 

ensure a healthy standard of living for all

 

invest more in deprived and 'ignored' areas

 

"The evidence is clear and the solutions are there - what is needed is the will to act," said the chief executive of the Health Foundation, Dr Jennifer Dixon.

She said child poverty, Sure Start Children's centres and in-work poverty, were areas that needed immediate investment.

Shirley Cramer CBE, chief executive of the Royal Society for Public Health, said: "If the new government wants to show it can walk the talk on 'levelling up' for the regions and groups that have been left behind, it must begin by paying more than mere lip service to the reality of the deep and entrenched health inequalities across the UK."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

Yes, it's almost as if you don't need to agree with everything a groundbreaking woman says or does to celebrate her achievements.

 

 

Maybe we should celebrate the Nazi party's achievement in creating the Autobahn and forget all that other stuff

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, viRdjil said:

How do you mean?

 

Just a comment about fraternising with people who advocate Jewish genocide.

 

Nobody's pretending that Astor's views are okay by modern standards, but they were pretty typical back then.

 

Karl Marx held some similarly horrendously racist opinions too, never brought up here, I wonder why.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

Just a comment about fraternising with people who advocate Jewish genocide.

 

Nobody's pretending that Astor's views are okay by modern standards, but they were pretty typical back then.

 

Karl Marx held some similarly horrendously racist opinions too, never brought up here, I wonder why.

Let’s hope that the next leader of the Lib Dems isn’t a homophobic bigot, eh? Or a terrorist sympathiser. Or somebody who works for a terrorist promoting company. 
 

It’s all so fucking tedious and pathetic. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

Just a comment about fraternising with people who advocate Jewish genocide.

 

Nobody's pretending that Astor's views are okay by modern standards, but they were pretty typical back then.

 

Karl Marx held some similarly horrendously racist opinions too, never brought up here, I wonder why.

Nancy Astor was a Nazi sympathiser *because* she hoped they would help eradicate the Jews and the Left... I mean sure yeah would’ve been typical for a Nazi at the time. 

I’ve been quite open about the freedom for anyone here to be partisan. So please don’t feel like I’m pressuring you to change your views. 
 

Also FYI l, Karl Marx was jewish himself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

Let’s hope that the next leader of the Lib Dems isn’t a homophobic bigot, eh? Or a terrorist sympathiser. Or somebody who works for a terrorist promoting company. 
 

It’s all so fucking tedious and pathetic. 

 

You've missed the point, entirely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

No, I don’t think so. You’ve been beating the same drum for years and now want it to work differently. 

 

I mean, I think there's a difference between hanging out with genocidal people in the 21st century, and hanging out with them in the 1930s. But that's not really what this is about. This is about the far left and their attempt to airbrush pioneering women from history because they're not of that tradition. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

I think there's a difference between hanging out with genocidal people in the 21st century, and hanging out with them in the 1930s.

Of course there is, I mean those in the 30s actually murdered 6 million people (most of them Jews) mate, as opposed to the ones being butchered. Yikes, not your best SD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...