SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The American lifespan declined slightly in 2015, according to a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report based primarily on 2015 death certificates:
Life expectancy in the United States has declined for the first time in more than two decades. Data from the National Center for Health Statistics showed a drop for men from 76.5 years in 2014 to 76.3 in 2015, and from 81.3 to 81.2 for women. The preliminary figures show rises in several causes of death, especially heart disease, dementia and accidental infant deaths.
Life expectancy last fell during the peak of the HIV/Aids crisis in 1993. It has improved slightly but steadily in most of the years since World War Two, rising from a little more than 68 years in 1950. It also fell in 1980, after a severe outbreak of flu. Overall life expectancy for men and women is now 78.8 years, a decrease of 0.1 year from 2014.
[...] The death rate for cancer has gone down 1.7%, which is significant as cancer is the second-biggest cause of death, causing almost as many fatalities as heart disease. But it seems that fast-developing research into cancer treatments, as well as campaigns on public education and early detection, are having an impact.
But do they account for the effect of fake deaths?
Mortality in the United States, 2015 (PDF)
An anonymous coward sent in an article from The Atlantic covering the same news.
(Score: 1) by Francis on Saturday December 10 2016, @11:16PM
Sigh, this again. Another post by you where you make up elaborate stories trying to prove a point and only succeed in making yourself look foolish.
You don't need to look up the ingredients in bananas, steaks, cabbage and things of that nature, just eat a reasonable variety of it and you probably never have to worry about vitamin deficiency. That's what our ancestors did. Now, compare that with the "foods," and I do use the word loosely, that show up in the grocery store. They're heavily processed to remove nutritional content not considered important. There's tons of fat, protein, sugar, salt and other things that make it taste good, but leave out a lot of the other stuff like the vitamins and minerals that are also extremely important.
As far as the food supply, up until recently, the only things you had to worry about were food poisoning and getting enough. But, now we've got poor people that are fat. How on earth, do you explain that other than by the food being compromised?
As far as the vacation and sick time goes, you do realize that there are more than 2 people in the US, right? Some people don't get paid sick time and vacation and they're a large part of why the life expectancy is going down. But, you also have people who technically have leave, but can't use it because they are afraid of losing their job when the layoffs come or not getting their promotion. I'm not really sure how you could think that everybody's benefits package is the same. But, because there is no legally guaranteed leave time, a large number of people either don't get it or can't take it. Compare that with most of Europe where it's a right and you do get to take it, that's embarrassing. There's no reason for us to not do it.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday December 11 2016, @07:35AM
Another post by you where you make up elaborate stories trying to prove a point and only succeed in making yourself look foolish.
Funny how you were the one doing that with your imaginary tales of how all Americans don't get days off, and are afraid to take those days off because they'll get fired. I guess we really do need to monkey with the food supply then.
Now, compare that with the "foods," and I do use the word loosely, that show up in the grocery store.
Bananas, steak, and cabbage shows up in grocery stores too. And you'll find that these foods have more weird junk in them than many processed foods do (which often tend to be some simple combination of a few basic low cost, calorie-dense ingredients and a few chemically pure seasonings).
As far as the food supply, up until recently, the only things you had to worry about were food poisoning and getting enough. But, now we've got poor people that are fat. How on earth, do you explain that other than by the food being compromised?
How about a combination of genetics, eating too much, and not exercising enough?
As far as the vacation and sick time goes, you do realize that there are more than 2 people in the US, right? Some people don't get paid sick time and vacation and they're a large part of why the life expectancy is going down. But, you also have people who technically have leave, but can't use it because they are afraid of losing their job when the layoffs come or not getting their promotion. I'm not really sure how you could think that everybody's benefits package is the same. But, because there is no legally guaranteed leave time, a large number of people either don't get it or can't take it. Compare that with most of Europe where it's a right and you do get to take it, that's embarrassing. There's no reason for us to not do it.
Ok, now it's just a few people with this problem. Here's my take on this. We don't need this supposed right. People with this problem already have adequate remedies, up to and including moving on to another job or asking their employer for some time off. Why should I have government regulations nanny people when people can defend themselves? It's just another silly social justice thing.
(Score: 2) by rondon on Monday December 12 2016, @03:10PM
Its not a silly social justice thing. The evidence, which you said you respect, says that vacation and sick leave help people lead healthier, happier, more productive lives.
Do you actually respect the evidence?
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday December 12 2016, @06:32PM
The evidence, which you said you respect, says that vacation and sick leave help people lead healthier, happier, more productive lives.
Evidence also "says" that people on vacation and sick leave, aren't working, which is a huge unproductive aspect which you just happen to not mention. To claim that the result is a net benefit requires subjective assertions about what is more valuable. And ultimately, you ignore that people choose to work jobs with low vacation and sick leave allowances. I doubt it is because they want to be less healthy and happy.
(Score: 2) by rondon on Wednesday December 14 2016, @01:48PM
I think, if you measure the annual productivity of a person with sick leave and vacation versus the person without, that you would find the person who has and uses those benefits is more productive. Unfortunately, I don't have a citation handy for that so maybe I have mis-interpreted some research that I have read.
Secondly, I know that when I worked a job that did not provide those benefits, it wasn't a choice. I chose to get those benefits as soon as I possibly could, but the folks offering me my first few jobs simply did not offer those benefits. So you saying that people are choosing to work those jobs implies that they have better choices - anecdotally, I did not when I was in that situation.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday December 14 2016, @04:01PM
I chose to get those benefits as soon as I possibly could
Exactly.