‘The Labour Party set up an independent inquiry to examine the issue soon after coming to power in 1997. Sir Michael was a member of that inquiry team’.
And in 2015 Sir Michael Marmot was still there advising Labour on their new ’10 year plan’….
Though Labour’s new approach to public health reflects changing times, our historic mission remains the same: to break the link between health and wealth and tackle health inequalities, so that no-‐one’s health is disadvantaged by where they live or what they earn. To be successful, our new agenda will need to be supported by the ‘health in all policies’ approach, as advocated by Professor Sir Michael Marmot.
The BBC has two causes for all the world’s ills…..’Austerity’ or ‘Brexit’.
Today we learn that an apparent fall in life expectancy ‘since 2010’ [hmmm…why does the BBC always choose that date as the baseline?] may be linked to Tory austerity policies...’miserly public spending’…no really!!! Yep….I can hardly find the strength to type this as my assets are being squeezed by Theresa May.
Rising rates of life expectancy are grinding to a halt in England after more than 100 years of continuous progress, says a leading health expert.
University College London expert Sir Michael Marmot said he was “deeply concerned” by the situation, calling it “historically highly unusual”.
He said it was “entirely possible” austerity was to blame and said the issue needed looking at urgently.
“More money does not buy better health,” says Sir Michael
Hmmm…so ‘austerity’ kills……this is the good Sir Michael’s own figures today…
This is the Office for National Statistics’…spot the difference…..
Curiously in 2015 Marmot told us that the poorest were thriving by comparison to the middle class…
“Leafy, middle” areas of England are falling behind some of the most deprived parts of the country in improving quality of life, new research by one of the world’s leading experts on public health suggests.
Analysis by Sir Michael Marmot, an authority on the effects of inequality on health, shows that while some of the poorest neighbourhoods have seen signifucant progress in recent years, other seemingly comfortable areas have effectively stagnated.
Indeed way back in 2004 he told us the prime factor in life expectancy was social standing not income…
Sir Michael believes the pattern holds true for every group in society, from politicians to those living in poverty.
He maintains that our health and how long we live is influenced to a high degree by our social standing.
‘Status syndrome’
Sir Michael calls it “Status Syndrome”, the title incidentally of his new book.
“The evidence is overwhelming. It suggests that higher society position creates good health,” he says. “People at the top of the hierarchy live longer.”
He believes this social standing may be even more important than diet and healthcare.
“People usually think it’s either medical care or smoking and diet that determine lifespan,” he says.
“These things are important, but the evidence shows that they are only part of the story.”
Sir Michael says our position in that hierarchy is influenced by two things – how much control we have over our lives and what role we play in society.
“Do they feel in control and have opportunities for full social engagement?” he asks.
Perhaps surprisingly, income appears to have very little impact.
“More money does not buy better health,” says Sir Michael
Anyone thinking that Sir Michael may be a Labour stooge?
Can you really break the link between health & wealth? Which comes first, the chicken or the egg? Does being wealthy make you have better health or does having better health make you more likely to be wealthy? It is to be noted that the lower orders smoke more than the better off. Smoking is expensive so to smoke like the lower orders takes a considerable amount of money. Perhaps they might become more healthy & wealthy if they stopped smoking.
Expert Sir Michael, may I introduce you to Thomas Sowell. Please meet up and have a chat whilst Mr.Sowell is still around (Sowell is 86 I believe), that would be interesting …
“It’s not the origins of poverty which need to be explained. What requires explaining are the things that created and sustained higher standards of living. … the entire species began in poverty … ” – Thomas Sowell
// Sorry for repeating this…
Sir Michael told us today on Jeremy Vine that:
“It’s no surprise that Grenfell Tower is located in the poorer part of the borough”
Such insights cast doubts on the man’s ability as a thinker or perhaps he thinks that way because he is a socialist?
Remind me: which party, with over 50 MPs after the 2010 Election, entered into a coalition with the Tories? And which other party, also beginning with ‘L’, managed to overspend by as much as £150 billion in one year when in power before 2010?
Also, they are talking about rates of improvement here. If I can run 100m in 11.5 seconds, there’s probably room for some improvement by training; if my personal best is already 10.2 seconds, then it will be harder to make big gains. In health terms, the decline in smoking and strenuous manual labour have caused big improvements in life expectancy but you can’t expect the same rate of improvement to be sustained once these dragons have been slayed.
and if you import people in there 20s 30s 40s from third world cesspits you dont really expect them to magically have a new life expectancy …. do you???