The Widening Life Expectancy Gap

Interestingly, a couple weeks ago the NYT was talking about the widening Life Expectancy Gap in America. It was noticed in 1982. Actually, according to CDC there was something like this going on in 1900 too.

We don't have 2 Americas as John Edwards said 4 years ago. It's more like 8.

"The life expectancy gap has been increasing since 1984. According to the study, disparities in life expectancy are caused not by commonly-blamed factors such as poverty, infant mortality, violence, HIV/AIDS, and lack of health insurance, but rather by chronic noncommunicable diseases. Five factors are most deadly: tobacco, alcohol, obesity, high blood pressure, and elevated cholesterol."

Where you live and how much you make is a major indicator of how long you will live, but most people already know that. I think it's interesting that academia and policy makers promote the idea that you can't know something for sure until you prove it.

JDWolverton's diary:

Like it really took Isacc Newton or Einstein to explain the gist of how gravity works.

Educational snobbery aside, it is nice when some researcher gets around to proving what the average person in the street already knows. You live longer when you don't have to worry about your medical expenses. We know the uninsured cannot get care on demand despite the anti-universal health care establishment meme. Multiple studies (this one reported in 2003) point out that poor people don't get health care when they need it.

"This study contradicts a common belief that the uninsured can always get care when they need it—and do so for free. Substantial proportions of respondents in all settings had difficulty paying for care, and nearly half went into debt in order to obtain care. Federal, state, and local governments need to consider comprehensive ways of ensuring affordable care for all, such as expanding public health insurance programs and adequately funding safety-net institutions. Unfortunately, in the near future there is likely to be less funding rather than more to spend on health care for the poor and uninsured. In this environment, incremental responses to alleviating the financial burdens of the uninsured need to be explored."

So why is the NYT so late to the party? This life expectancy gap has been documented for years. True, it's been portrayed as a black/white issue, but up until now, the economic portion of the equation has been glossed over by the mainstream media. Wealth and poverty influence lifestyle, time for exercise and food choices that affect health status. Wealthier people have the ability to pay for products and services that poor people do themselves or do without. The 8 Americas report suggests that where you are poor also influenced your health. It's better to be poor in South Dakota than to be poor in Washington D.C.

The concurrent history of being poor and also a minority partially obscured poverty's effects on health status. A meta analysis The census bureau's data from 1900 This study reported lsser reductions in mortality in low income neighborhoods as compared to higher socioeconomic groups from 1969-2000. The poorer neighborhoods didn't always show a correlation with a greater minority representation.

Nancy Krieger has been looking at how poverty affects mortality and morbidity for years. In essence, if you are poor, you have a difficult time staying healthy. Her work history goes on for nearly 20 years with the same message, but health care policy in the U.S. hasn't addressed the inequities in health care that her work has identified.

It's not just the poor, it's people living at 2-3 times the poverty rate (aka the working poor). Look at figure 33 of this presentation. This shows that 40% of people who make less than $50,000 per year with a High-Deductible Health Plan has either delayed or avoided getting needed treatment. 26% of those making less than $50,000 per year with a comprehensive health plan also delayed or didn't get the care they needed. Figure 32 is illuminating. It shows the percentage of people with common chronic conditions that follow their treatment plans. The highlight of this graph shows that only 43% of people with both arthritis and a consumer driven health plan (the Republican answer to our health care woes) strongly/somewhat agree that they follow their treatment plans. Without Universal Health Care more and more people will routinely put off getting the care they need.

The "Consumer Driven" health care plans promoted by Republicans will not address these issues. In one sense the consumer driven health plan and the high-deductible health plans will be effective in reducing overall health care expenditures, but it won't be because people will be more savvy in selecting the health care they receive. It will lower expenditutres because people won't be able to pay for their care. The net result of this head in the sand driven policy will likely be a further expansion of the Life Expectancy Gap - with the working poor getting the short end of the stick.

I read nyceve's diary yesterday and she, as usual, is right on the money. McCain (aka McBush) will give us 4 more years of a failed health care non-policy. A failed health care policy that will further increase the Life Expectancy Gap. A failed health care policy that will allow more people to become uninsured. A failed health care policy that will kill and maim people. A failed health care policy that needs to be changed. We deserve better.

Source: By DailyKos - More reference at eMaxHealth about Life Expectancy Gap in USA.

Comment and add to the story without registration, but keep the comments meaningful please. Links are not accepted.