......Also...a major share of our soaring health care costs are due to the "habits" of our own people....The data at the CDC clearly shows that fully 1/3rd of our total health care costs are due to Obesity. And now, the largest increases in recent years are being caused by the Opioid Epidemic that is sending more and more addicts to the hospitals. Between our greedy health care system, and the stupidity of our own people, I don't give it more than a decade before health care costs are completely out of control.
Smoking also remains a healthcare concern. Between obesity, substance abuse and smoking, healthcare costs will continue to soar with the issues of diabetes and cancers. The U.S. is the snack capital of the world. We lead every country with the production of junk food, including sweets, like: cookies, candies and ice cream, not to mention fast food.
As for substance abuse and especially the opioid crisis that we have already beaten to death and as long as people have money and access to these toxic chemicals, there is little hope that we will be able to put the brakes on their use in the near future.
Booze is cheap, legal and easy accessible, which makes shutting that down an almost impossibility. My wife’s brother, who is a Marine (retired), came from a fine family, but got hooked on booze, got diabetes, lost both legs and ended up in a VA nursing home and died from a stroke at 58 y/o.
We are our own worse enemy with not taking care of ourselves physically. I once read in a self-help magazine that people should only worry about the things that they can control. Well, here’s our chance to make that adage true for each of us by controlling our diet with what we put in our mouth. Avoid sugar, carbs, alcohol and illicit drugs, get some sunshine, fresh air, a little exercise and enjoy a good nutrition, and we should all live to be 100.
JMO
It's not that simple. And what about those who are born sick or with rare medical conditions that worsen with age?
Actually, Oldman, I can deny that a large segment of the population can do a better job of "taking" care of themselves when they are younger.
Actually, Oldman, I can deny that a large segment of the population can do a better job of "taking" care of themselves when they are younger.
The poor, the working poor, and the lower middle "class" are the largest segments of our population. At these income levels, they cannot afford the type of diet you speak of. They rely on carbs, potatoes are cheap, to keep their families fed. In addition, I remember saying to my husband, how great it was that many fast food places have a 1 dollar menu.
The five dollar boxes are also great! One of those can be split between three small children, or two older adults. But, unfortunately, lots of children still go to bed hungry, as do older adults. Lots of people still eat out of the garage behind restrautants-both fast food and fine dining.
I am happy for anyone that can attend many social functions, and eat. I am happy for anyone who can eat. Children in our area attend the social function called school. They get free school lunch. During the summer they go hungry. Feeding stations are now set up in certain parks in poorer areas so a child can at least have one meal a day.
I suppose since these children are joined by other children; this could be considered a social function. Food stamps? A single person in our area gets 128 dollars in food stamps a month. Our food banks have been known to run out of food. I could go on.
It is unrealistic to think "younger people" can eat a better diet IMO. A lot of younger people are unable to eat at all.