SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Every study ranking nations by health or living standards invariably offers Scandinavian social democracies a chance to show their quiet dominance. A new analysis published this week—perhaps the most comprehensive ever—is no different. But what it does reveal are the broad shortcomings of sustainable development efforts, the new shorthand for not killing ourselves or the planet, as well as the specific afflictions of a certain North American country.
Iceland and Sweden share the top slot with Singapore as world leaders when it comes to health goals set by the United Nations, according to a report published in the Lancet . Using the UN's sustainable development goals as guideposts, which measure the obvious (poverty, clean water, education) and less obvious (societal inequality, industry innovation), more than 1,870 researchers in 124 countries compiled data on 33 different indicators of progress toward the UN goals related to health.
The massive study emerged from a decade-long collaboration focused on the worldwide distribution of disease. About a year and a half ago, the researchers involved decided their data might help measure progress on what may be the single most ambitious undertaking humans have ever committed themselves to: survival. In doing so, they came up with some disturbing findings, including that the country with the biggest economy (not to mention, if we're talking about health, multibillion-dollar health-food and fitness industries) ranks No. 28 overall, between Japan and Estonia.
[...]
The voluminous work that went into the paper may make measuring the UN goals on health seem even more daunting: The researchers were able so far to evaluate just 70 percent of the health-related indicators called for by the UN.
It may not be pretty, but "we have no chance of success if we can't agree on what's critical," said Linda Fried, dean of the Mailman School of Public Health at Columbia University.
(Score: 2) by Snotnose on Sunday September 25 2016, @01:35AM
I'm 58. I feel the fart of the century coming on now.
Um, I mean. What's your point? Lots of influential people made their name before hitting 30. The running consensus is they do something good, get laid, have a kid or 3, decide 100 hour workweeks aren't all that good after all, and fade to black.
Or hit 21 and discover beer. I choose the first scenario, it's up to you which is more likely.
When the dust settled America realized it was saved by a porn star.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 25 2016, @01:54AM
Well, squirting out worthless crotch fruit isn't all that good either, and pales in comparison to the importance of significantly increasing humanity's understanding of the universe. There will always be plenty of people having children, plenty of people partying like morons, and plenty of people erroneously equating having a good memory with being a genius for the foreseeable future; what we really need is for truly intelligent people to live up to their potentials.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 25 2016, @02:41AM
> Well, squirting out worthless crotch fruit isn't all that good either, and pales in comparison to the
> importance of significantly increasing humanity's understanding of the universe.
You sound like a sheldon cooper wannabee. Except not only will you produce no children, you aren't going to contribute one iota to humanity's understanding of anything either.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 25 2016, @03:38AM
You sound like a sheldon cooper wannabee.
Are you the cretin who keeps running around comparing people to Sheldon Cooper or accusing them of being wannabes, or are there seriously multiple people who do this?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 25 2016, @07:47PM
Well, he clearly doesn't want to be stephen hawking, else he wouldn't be posting here.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Sunday September 25 2016, @08:22AM
Young whipper snapper - GET OFF MY LAWN :)