chop2chip
Well-known member
Depends on whether the leaflets are fireproof.
As long as the people are informed that they have more teeth than the people in the South.
Depends on whether the leaflets are fireproof.
If the blue states were as well off as the stats say people wouldn't be moving to the red states in droves.
Blue state stats are not believable.
It would be accurate information. A preciously rare thang.As long as the people are informed that they have more teeth than the people in the South.
If the blue states were as well off as the stats say people wouldn't be moving to the red states in droves.
Blue state stats are not believable.
It would be accurate information. A preciously rare thang.
I’m sure people live longer in California. People in the South eat like ****.
Though I struggle to understand why Karen Bass and Gavin Newsom deserve credit for the weather and food culture of California.
I’m sure people live longer in California. People in the South eat like ****.
Though I struggle to understand why Karen Bass and Gavin Newsom deserve credit for the weather and food culture of California.
Possibly.
Rural areas alos have poor access to medical care for the most part. Driving 45-60 minutes to a hospital can be a death sentence.
sounds like an excuse to me
Possibly.
Rural areas alos have poor access to medical care for the most part. Driving 45-60 minutes to a hospital can be a death sentence.
There are also large state level differences in public health policies. But I suppose we are precluded from considering the possibility that some blue state policies might be worthy of emulation.
California food/exercise culture and weather hasn't changed much relative to Oklahoma and Texas since 1980. If we are to account for the growing divergence in life expectancy since 1980 that would not be where I would start.
Nor has New York food/exercise culture and weather. But keep tryin'. (you deserve a dropped g for joining the yahoo club)
I've actually lived in an area with no local hospital vs living 15 minutes from a top 100 hospital.
i have a little experience with this, BL.
Nor has Utah, Idaho, Montana, etc.
thang is...you are referring to something (backwardness and its miseries) that could account for the differential in health outcomes...but it seems to be to account for the growing differential in health outcomes you would need to build a case for growing backwardness (i'm all in on that argument but i'm not sure y'all are)
Plus there are rural blue states (hello Vermont) that have done quite well on basic health metrics such as life expectancyTrue, but access to goods and services is also a differentiator in quality of life on its own. For all the benefits of rural life, there are also benefits to city life. One of which is that you’re less likely to die because the only Emergency Room in your county is shut down.
It is a blue state red state thing. The widening of the differential in health outcomes since 1980. The research suggests that differences in public policy is the explanation. There is an interesting paper that looks at counties near where Ohio, Pennsylvania and New York intersect. It looks specifically at lung cancer and state policy regarding messaging about smoking. The outcomes are more or less what you would expect. Multiply that across a variety of diseases and policies and you get 5 years more of life in state with good policies as opposed to one with bad policies.
Plus there are rural blue states (hello Vermont) that have done quite well on basic health metrics such as life expectancy