![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
A New York Times article on just how dramatically different we live today vs. our Civil War ancestors, including rate and age of onset of chronic diseases. Read it while you can -- NYTimes goes behind walls.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/30/health/30age.html
The article favors the Barker hypothesis: nutrition and health in the first three years (conception to 2 years old) makes a big difference. A Dutch famine in 1944, and the 1918 pandemic, are taken as big datapoints. People such as Robin Hanson claim that there's little correlation between health spending and health; things like this might help explain why. I note that "socialist" policies could still be pragmatically justified, but the emphasis would be less on heart surgery for all and more on childhood nutrition and health care for all.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/30/health/30age.html
The article favors the Barker hypothesis: nutrition and health in the first three years (conception to 2 years old) makes a big difference. A Dutch famine in 1944, and the 1918 pandemic, are taken as big datapoints. People such as Robin Hanson claim that there's little correlation between health spending and health; things like this might help explain why. I note that "socialist" policies could still be pragmatically justified, but the emphasis would be less on heart surgery for all and more on childhood nutrition and health care for all.