[Dark Helmet]

Strange. I have no ideas why the heck this is the case. Perhaps it could be diet, pollution, radiation or sun exposure.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060503/...ZoBHNlYwM3NTE-

[production_coordinator]

I would say it very well could be a cultural thing, compounded by very different work life.

[scaught]

The English have a higher rate of heavy drinking.

answers we can all live with.

seriously though (and to be fair, i only skimmed the article), if their basis for this is how much the US spends on healthcare per citizen, maybe we are all just a bunch of hypochondriacs who are overtreated by doctors overzealous for some $$$?

[Dark Helmet]

Originally Posted by production_coordinator

I would say it very well could be a cultural thing, compounded by very different work life.

Explain.

[Doofy]

Here's your answer kiddies: Intake of genetically modified crops and steroid-laden meat.

Of course, if the study is only looking at healthcare spending... ...the answer to that is that US hospitals are probably clean and efficient. UK hospitals are so underfunded that most of them are going tits up any time now. Not forgetting that over 5,000 people a year die in UK hospitals from virii picked up during their stay because the places are filthy holes*.

(* there's an EU law in place which requires public authorities to subcontract to the cheapest (not best) services. Thus, hospital cleaning teams are the cheapest, but not particularly the best.)

[Dark Helmet]

Personally I think it ALL has to do with diet. Kids and adults theses days drink Coke and eat MacDonalds 24/7.

[olePigeon]

It's not just the diet.

Statutory minimum annual leave plus public holidays:

UK: 28 days (four weeks + public holidays)
US: 10 days (0 weeks + public holidays)

Americans just flat out work too much and get stressed to hell; that, in combination of poor diet, is leading to horrible health.

...the United States spends more on health care than any other industrialized nation, yet trails in rankings of life expectancy.

The United States spends about $5,200 per person on health care while England spends about half that in adjusted dollars.

They're less sick, have more vacation, are just as productive, and spend half the amount of money on helath insurance. Working sometimes 60/hours a week without overtime can't be healthy for anyone.

[Millennium]

That study confuses me. On one hand, they claim that they've ruled out lifestyle choices as a possible cause, but all the possible causes they do list look like things I'd call lifestyle choices.

Personally, I don't think it's all diet-based, though that's certainly one of the biggest contributors. I believe that relative inactivity contributes at least as much, however. Many Americans just don't do as much as they used to. For all that modern conveniences have helped make our lives easier, they've also made us a lot more sedentary. A hundred years ago, you didn't see people dedicating large parts of their lives to exercise, because they didn't have to; they got plenty of it just going about day-to-day life. We don't do that so much anymore, though, and I believe this is causing problems.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by olePigeon

It's not just the diet.

Statutory minimum annual leave plus public holidays:

UK: 28 days (four weeks + public holidays)
US: 10 days (0 weeks + public holidays)

Americans just flat out work too much and get stressed to hell; that, in combination of poor diet, is leading to horrible health.

Nothing to do with work levels, I assure you. The average Brit works his/her arse off for next to nothing. A substantial number are working two or three jobs. Most have to do overtime just to make ends meet (that's paying bills, not luxuries).

[©öñFü$íóÑ]

!!!!!!!!!!!!

Me and my extra cheese, all-meat pizza.....

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet

Explain.

When my Italian teacher first moved to America, she couldn't fathom how busy Americans were. She was walking to the store when she saw a couple eating food in their car. She then realized that they had driven to the store (which she now knows is McDonald's), bought the food, then eating it at red lights...

She said that no one in Italy eats food in their car. It's just rediculous! But there they were, eating and driving at the same time. In Italy (partly because resturants are open at specific hours) you sit down and eat your lunch during lunch. You take your time. It's a social event and way to work out stress from your job. You rarely (if ever) skip lunch while working. It's seen as extremely important not only to the worker, but the employer. What good is a worker if he or she hasn't eaten anything all day and is agrivated, grumpy, and spaced out.

I remember outtakes from an episode of Rick Steves (he's a travel show host) and he was talking about France and taking tours down the Riviera. He had such a hard time trying to get any of the French workers to do anything during lunch time. They could be in the middle of a shoot, when it's lunch time, they all stop what they're doing and have lunch. Rick's producer made the mistake of "demanding" that they finish the shoot. The guys looked up at her and effectively said, "Screw you, buddy, it's lunch time. I'm not doing a f*ckin' thing until I have my lunch." Rick explained that the guy wasn't trying to be rude, but his producer wasn't exactly nice either. Plus, in France, they take their lunches very seriously. Just like Italy, it's important to both the employee and the employer that they're working with a good lunch.

[Dark Helmet]

Originally Posted by olePigeon

It's not just the diet.

Statutory minimum annual leave plus public holidays:

UK: 28 days (four weeks + public holidays)
US: 10 days (0 weeks + public holidays)

Americans just flat out work too much and get stressed to hell; that, in combination of poor diet, is leading to horrible health.

I dunno, working too hard doesn't give you skin cancer or diabetes. Also even though many people GO to work they do very little when they are there.

In fact other counties have people who work many many more hours for much less pay and they are healthier.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by olePigeon

Italian...
...French...

Don't be confusing the Italians and the French with the British just because we're all in Europe. Most Brits do not have a proper sit-down lunch.

British culture is almost identical to American culture. But without the fun bits.

[Dakar]

Originally Posted by olePigeon

It's not just the diet.

Statutory minimum annual leave plus public holidays:

UK: 28 days (four weeks + public holidays)
US: 10 days (0 weeks + public holidays)

Americans just flat out work too much and get stressed to hell; that, in combination of poor diet, is leading to horrible health.

Just think how many people here put off eating, exercise, or sleep just because of a lack of time?

[production_coordinator]

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet

Explain.

I would say that the American's work longer hours... American companies hire less people to do the same job... and Americans are less prone to seek preventative healthcare.

A byproduct of long work hours is generally poor diet... and who knows about mental health issues.

I don't want to speak for anyone else, but if you work 40 hours a week in the US... most people say "that's all?"

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by Doofy

Don't be confusing the Italians and the French with the British just because we're all in Europe. Most Brits do not have a proper sit-down lunch.

No, I'm not. I'm just showing how busy America is compared to some other countries.

Originally Posted by Doofy

British culture is almost identical to American culture. But without the fun bits.

But do you guys drive an SUV to work, the motor scooter to the door, then the Segway around the office?

[production_coordinator]

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet

In fact other counties have people who work many many more hours for much less pay and they are healthier.

The study didn't compare "other countries" to the US or England, it compared the US to England. And showed a clear difference regarding health.

My quick answer would be:
- We work longer hours.
- We have less vacation.
- Our diets aren't all that good (McDonalds generation)

[Dark Helmet]

Originally Posted by olePigeon

No, I'm not. I'm just showing how busy America is compared to some other countries.

You're saying that American's work more and for less money then China?

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by olePigeon

No, I'm not. I'm just showing how busy America is compared to some other countries.

OK.

Originally Posted by olePigeon

But do you guys drive an SUV to work, the motor scooter to the door, then the Segway around the office?

No. Those sound like fun. We don't do fun here.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by production_coordinator

My quick answer would be:
- We work longer hours.

No, you don't.

Originally Posted by production_coordinator

- We have less vacation.

Yes, possibly. Although the usual idea of "vacation" in the UK is spending the week doing the jobs around the house which you didn't have time for during the rest of the year because of your three jobs.

Originally Posted by production_coordinator

- Our diets aren't all that good (McDonalds generation)

Listen up folks... ...get it in your heads that it's nothing to do with "fast" food or McDonalds. It's to do with the quality of produce.
You guys are filling yourselves with all kinds of crap because you actually let Monsanto and the like take control of your food supplies. There's much less GM food available in the UK and even then there's a huge organic movement which requires that the food hasn't had any chemicals anywhere near it.

I won't buy US produced apples, for example, because most of the time even the organic ones have been sprayed with all kinds of chemical crap (and bits of dead animal) to make them look nice.

Not forgetting that the UK has the highest percentage of vegetarians anywhere in the first world. Something like 10%.

It's not what you eat. It's the quality of what you eat. Click my sig for details.

[Dark Helmet]

Originally Posted by Doofy

Not forgetting that the UK has the highest percentage of vegetarians anywhere in the first world. Something like 10%.

Ya i heard that also. I believe it started when they had the mad cow scare.

[Dakar]

Fast food is still the worst quality food in the US.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally Posted by production_coordinator

The study didn't compare "other countries" to the US or England, it compared the US to England. And showed a clear difference regarding health.

My quick answer would be:
- We work longer hours.
- We have less vacation.
- Our diets aren't all that good (McDonalds generation)

That study seems a bit fishy to me. Classifying people who are still alive as having hypertention, heart disease, etc. makes the assumption that those diseases are being diagnosed at the same rates in both countries. Is that necessarily the case?

Here is an alternative: The study indicates that the US pays more for health care. Is it possible that means middle class Americans go to the doctor more (and thus pay more health care expenses) than middle class Britons? If so, one might expect more people to be diagnosed with diseases like high blood pressure. You have to see a doctor to be diagnosed, and so you have to account for the different treatment rates. If you don't control for those kinds of variables, the result is meaningless.

Take a personal example. My mother died at age 63 of a preventable heart attack in the UK. She relied on the NHS, but the fact is, she died in large part because she went undiagnosed. The doctor said she had angina, but in fact, she had suffered a minor heart attack previously but received no decent treatment. She also went untreated for artereal disease, and so she dropped dead one day in her late middle age. That is one way not to show up in the statistics of middle aged people with hypertension and heart disease. I'm sure there are other possibilities -- but you get the drift.. You can't assume that a low number of diagnoses means a low level of incidence of disease. Whether or not you are diagnosed depends on whether your doctor and medical system is adequately alert to the problem. People seem to understand this when the disease is something faddish like ADD, but the same would apply to anything that has to be diagnosed in order to be statistically measured.

Part of the problem here is that groups like the AMA have well-established political stances that cause them to embark on these kinds of sloppy studies. It's a classic example of finding what you set out to prove. In this case, it is obviously that UK style socialized medicine (which the AMA has advocated for years) is better. I know nobody who has used the UK NHS and have experienced the alternative of private medice (which middle class Americans usually have) who would agree.

Oh, and don't get me started on the British diet. Healthy? Ha! Only if chocolate and crisps are health food.

[Dark Helmet]

In all honesty has there ever not been some sort of survey that shines a bad light on something were would rather discuss on how there is some conspiracy or error in the poll?

Can we just accept them as accurate and discuss the cause?

[Doofy]

Simey speaketh the truth - the incidents reported vs the actual incidents could be a factor.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet

In all honesty has there ever not been some sort of survey that shines a bad light on something were would rather discuss on how there is some conspiracy or error in the poll?

Can we just accept them as accurate and discuss the cause?

No, because if they aren't accurate, pretending that they are accurate doesn't make them accurate.

[Doofy]

After Simey added:

Originally Posted by SimeyTheLimey

Oh, and don't get me started on the British diet. Healthy? Ha! Only if chocolate and crisps are health food.

It's not the contents of the British diet I'm referring to. It's the ingredients.

The average Brit might still go down to McD's and shovel a Big Mac or two into him for dinner, but it's a Big Mac which hasn't been pumped full of growth hormone. And the fries will be from natural potatoes, not genetically modified crop.
Heck, half the stuff which goes into rearing your cows and crops has been banned here. That should say it all.

[Dark Helmet]

Originally Posted by SimeyTheLimey

No, because if they aren't accurate, pretending that they are accurate doesn't make them accurate.

Unless you have a study that proves this one wrong or have done a study of your own you have no merit.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally Posted by Doofy

After Simey added:



It's not the contents of the British diet I'm referring to. It's the ingredients.

The average Brit might still go down to McD's and shovel a Big Mac or two into him for dinner, but it's a Big Mac which hasn't been pumped full of growth hormone. And the fries will be from natural potatoes, not genetically modified crop.
Heck, half the stuff which goes into rearing your cows and crops has been banned here. That should say it all.

And the beef will be infected with BCE.

Come on! It's not like you to buy into myths like the "growth hormones make you a mutant" myth. That is really just EU hysteria, not dissimilar (though with even less justification) as the US hysteria that still bans any British products containing beef. These things are used primarily as disguised protectionism.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Doofy

After Simey added:



It's not the contents of the British diet I'm referring to. It's the ingredients.

The average Brit might still go down to McD's and shovel a Big Mac or two into him for dinner, but it's a Big Mac which hasn't been pumped full of growth hormone. And the fries will be from natural potatoes, not genetically modified crop.
Heck, half the stuff which goes into rearing your cows and crops has been banned here. That should say it all.

"It all" meaning "that Europeans are irrationally afraid of plants that are slightly different from the ones they have"?

[Dark Helmet]

On a side note some schools are pulling non-diet soda's out of schools:

http://www.cnn.com/2006/HEALTH/diet.....ap/index.html

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by SimeyTheLimey

And the beef will be infected with BCE.

True.
Good job I only eat mushroom McD's.

Originally Posted by SimeyTheLimey

Come on! It's not like you to buy into myths like the "growth hormones make you a mutant" myth. That is really just EU hysteria, not dissimilar (though with even less justification) as the US hysteria that still bans any British products containing beef. These things are used primarily as disguised protectionism.

I might be a capitalist but I'm nutso about food purity. I'm dead against anything artificial (GM or growth hormones). Not because the EU says so either (actually, they don't - they've recently authorised GM crops) 'coz I hate the EU.

To me, it just doesn't seem right to be messing with our food sources like we do. It's one of those things we can't put back in the box if we mess up. I have no proof but I'm positive that our messing with food sources is a major cause of illness.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by Chuckit

"It all" meaning "that Europeans are irrationally afraid of plants that are slightly different from the ones they have"?

No. More like "most Europeans would rather not mess with their food supplies for the sake of giving some faceless corporation a bit of extra profit".

[Chuckit]

Right, as though no Brits anywhere in history have ever selectively bred or hybridized plants to improve them in some way that's good for profits. Is such messing with the food supply even illegal today?

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by Chuckit

Right, as though no Brits anywhere in history have ever selectively bred or hybridized plants to improve them in some way that's good for profits.

Not by sticking fish genes in them, that's for sure.

There's a bit of a difference between selective breeding and gene splicing.

[production_coordinator]

Originally Posted by Doofy

No, you don't.

Ummm, yes we do. [I'm sure you will change the subject after this]

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/...n1460246.shtml
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/439595.stm

Please feel free to show me a study clearly showing the English working longer hours than the Americans.

Originally Posted by Doofy

Yes, possibly. Although the usual idea of "vacation" in the UK is spending the week doing the jobs around the house which you didn't have time for during the rest of the year because of your three jobs.

And what do you think we are doing? In the end, you still average more vacation.

Originally Posted by Doofy

Listen up folks... ...get it in your heads that it's nothing to do with "fast" food or McDonalds. It's to do with the quality of produce.
You guys are filling yourselves with all kinds of crap because you actually let Monsanto and the like take control of your food supplies. There's much less GM food available in the UK and even then there's a huge organic movement which requires that the food hasn't had any chemicals anywhere near it.

I won't buy US produced apples, for example, because most of the time even the organic ones have been sprayed with all kinds of chemical crap (and bits of dead animal) to make them look nice.

Not forgetting that the UK has the highest percentage of vegetarians anywhere in the first world. Something like 10%.

It's not what you eat. It's the quality of what you eat. Click my sig for details.

Pure conjecture.

[CharlesS]

Originally Posted by Doofy

I might be a capitalist but I'm nutso

Quoted for emphasis.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by production_coordinator

Ummm, yes we do. [I'm sure you will change the subject after this]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/439595.stm

That's complete BS. That figure shows the UK working 36 hours a week. I don't know anyone who does 36 per week - it's more like 50 for most people.

Originally Posted by production_coordinator

Pure conjecture.

No it ain't.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by CharlesS

Quoted for emphasis.

If you can't contribute to the thread without asking me to kick your ass (like you just did), then shut your mouth.

[CharlesS]

Originally Posted by Doofy

If you can't contribute to the thread without asking me to kick your ass (like you just did), then shut your mouth.

Someone has no sense of humor, I think.

Anyway, I'm not particularly worried about getting my ass kicked by some guy on the Internet.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by CharlesS

Someone has no sense of humor, I think.

Yes, I agree. Whoever it was who came up with the lame "quoted for emphasis" in the last few posts has no sense of humour. If he had, he might have said something amusing instead of the lame-ass comment he came out with. Don't give up the day job dude.

[moodymonster]

I don't anyone who works 36 hours a week either - aside from students working part time, and they work less. Most work 40+ that I know - no point pushing it too hard .

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by CharlesS

Anyway, I'm not particularly worried about getting my ass kicked by some guy on the Internet.

Oh. And you're an idiot. What if someone really was nutso and decided to turn up at Ash Grove Avenue to kick your ass, as requested?

[CharlesS]

Originally Posted by Doofy

Oh. And you're an idiot. What if someone really was nutso and decided to turn up at Ash Grove Avenue to kick your ass, as requested?

That info is out of date, and hasn't been my current address for years. Nice try, though.

And you're in the UK. I think you'd have to be extremely nutso to go to the great expense of paying for an impromptu international flight just to kick someone's ass for a post on the Internet that just said "Quoted for emphasis".

Relax. It was a joke.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by CharlesS

And I think you'd have to be extremely nutso to go to the great expense of paying for an impromptu international flight just to kick someone's ass for a post on the Internet that just said "Quoted for emphasis".

Of course. I never said I was going to kick your ass, I simply suggested that you'd asked me to.

Originally Posted by CharlesS

Relax. It was a joke.

Stick a smiley in there the next time.

[CharlesS]

Originally Posted by Doofy

Stick a smiley in there the next time.

When something is sufficiently obvious, it doesn't need a smiley. You're taking things way too seriously.

To get back on topic, it seems, although Americans may be sicker overall, the British may have much higher blood pressure levels...

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally Posted by Doofy

That's complete BS. That figure shows the UK working 36 hours a week. I don't know anyone who does 36 per week - it's more like 50 for most people..

You mean you don't know anyone who works part time? Working hours per capita includes the average of both full and part time workers, and probably the unemployed as well (since the unemployed are part of the per capita figure). That is why the average figure for the population as a whole is below the average figure for full time workers.

Of course, that begs more statistical questions. If, say, France's unemployment rate is a little over double that of the US, how does that affect the working hours of a typical working person as reported in statistics that measure working hours per capita? Is there that much more leisure for people with jobs, or are the figures being skewed by a large number of people who work zero hours per week? Or conversely, does the increased number of Americans who work from home, are self-employed, or on the other hand, who are part-time or flex-time workers make the statistics seem higher than they really are for the average person who is in a traditional full-time job? I don't know the answer, but neither will anyone based just on working hours per capita as a yardstick. That number just doesn't tell you.

Not that I don't think it is accurate to say that Europeans on average work fewer hours than Americans. Having lived on both sides of the pond I am quite sure that is so. But I think too often people jump on statistics without asking obvious questions first.

I like the 1999 BBC article though:

But despite working shorter hours, European countries show similar rates of economic growth over the past decade to the US.

This is called "whistling in the wind."

[production_coordinator]

Originally Posted by Doofy

That's complete BS. That figure shows the UK working 36 hours a week. I don't know anyone who does 36 per week - it's more like 50 for most people.

And it has americans at 37.8... and I don't know... bla bla bla.

Funny, I show you studies showing that Americans work longer hours that their English counterparts... and that's your response?

I'm still waiting for your links to studies showing the English work the same or more hours than Americans.

[production_coordinator]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Workweek

Here is a nice graph of the OECD information. It clearly shows that the US work nearly 120+ more hours per year than their UK counterparts.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by CharlesS

When something is sufficiently obvious, it doesn't need a smiley. You're taking things way too seriously.

Originally Posted by CharlesS

To get back on topic, it seems, although Americans may be sicker overall, the British may have much higher blood pressure levels...

See, I told you we were stressed from overwork.