As far as "equality" goes, Finland is pretty financially equitable in comparison to many countries in the world. Wealth is always on a spectrum however and there are rich and poor ends, and like most places, those ends are stretching outward, whilst the skew is increasingly drawing the mass downward, whilst the rich end becomes a quickening long tail.
Normal distribution?
Whilst scrolling the Finnish news in English (there are about 5 stories a day), I came across a headline that grabbed my attention.
It is interesting to me because I use "obesity" (and health) often in my explanations about the world, because it is something that we can all visualize and probably, have all considered or struggled with in some way. The majority of people in the western world are overweight, the majority of the world have had some kind of severe health issues or know someone who has. And, the majority of the world have had to face some kind of economic hardship.
This is not even to mention all the cultural conditioning around these things.
Weirdly, this particular study was the first of its kind in Finland to look at the links between wealth and obesity. However, anecdotally from my own experience, I have witnessed the change over the last two decades as an outsider. When I came to the country, I was surprised at how "normal" people were in terms of their size. There was a healthy average, with very, very few people extremely overweight. There were also very few people who were extremely "fit" in terms of looks. The massive majority were in decent shape.
However, what is interesting, is that in a country where there is decent education for all up until about year ten and then most go on further, there are large disparities in physical outcomes still.
The obesity rate was 21 percent among boys aged 7-12 whose mothers had low educational attainment, while it was 14 percent for girls in the same category. Among boys with highly educated mothers, the corresponding figure was 11 percent, and for girls, it was six percent.
The dataset was based on 190,000 children, so it is highly reflective. And you can see, that for the boys, the difference in obesity between the low/high education was almost double for the low. And for girls, it was well over double the rate. It was similar for low educated fathers too.
And then, they also looked at the income correlation, which generally reflects the education level anyway, since the more educated, the more likely a person will hold a higher-paying role.
In low-income families, the prevalence of obesity among boys of primary school age was 17 percent and 11 percent for girls, whereas among boys from the highest-income families, the corresponding figures were 9 percent and four percent for girls.
There is a very high correlation, but this doesn't mean that the outcomes are set in stone, because not all children are overweight that come from the lower-educated, or lower-income parent backgrounds. But, the chance is much higher.
Obesity and overweight in Finland
17% of Finnish girls aged 2–6 and 27% of boys of the same age are at overweight or obese. 4% of girls and 8% of boys in this age group are obese.
Of young adults under 30, at least 35% of women and almost half of men are overweight. 19% of women and 17% of men in the same age group are obese.
Of adults over 30, 63% of women and 72% of men are at least overweight. 28% of women and 26% of men are obese. Almost one in two men and women have abdominal obesity.
That first point is quite shocking really, isn't it? that means that over 20 of children between 2 and 6 are overweight with 6% being considered obese. This is in young children. How this possible?
But as you can see, it isn't getting any better as we age and if you consider how much impact this makes on our wellbeing and costs to society, this is the epidemic that should be getting billions of dollars in funding. The prevalence of weight related illness is very, very high and is only climbing.
Facts about overweight and obesity
At least 2.8 million adults die each year as a result of being overweight or obese. In addition, 44% of the diabetes burden, 23% of the ischaemic heart disease burden and between 7% and 41% of certain cancer burdens are attributable to overweight and obesity.
We seem caught in a cultural loop, don't we? We keep normalizing being overweight as if it is natural, yet discount the actual affects it has on us, including those who are overweight. It seems that we would rather "feel okay" about being unhealthy as a society, than do the work to make us actually okay.
This isn't an easy problem to tackle, because we have developed a society that is increasingly sedentary unless we have the drive to get up and move. We have created a world where everything we want is available whenever we want it and the only way not to take the option, is through will power. We have conditioned ourselves to have to constantly require motivation and drive to stay healthy, rather than building habits and processes that keep us healthy while living a normal life.
My parents were not overweight.
They also never went to a gym. Nor did they go jogging. They just went about their day, ate "normally" and lived their life. From what I can remember, none of the parents of friends were overweight. And, the "obese" kids would be considered average by today's standards.
A lot can happen in 40 years.
With all that we know, we should be able to do better as a society, which makes me wonder why we aren't. I think it is because unhealthy people consume more and are therefore better for bottom lines and, they are easier to control. Unhealthy people are reliant on the system and therefore, always beholden to it, making them unable to break away. The best they can do is keep asking for support.
In 1950 Finland, the GDP was 16% higher than the average income and as of 2018, it was 21% higher. What this means is that the amount of value being generated is higher per person, but the average person is getting less of it. It might not seem like a significant difference, but if we consider it in another way, we can visualize it better, because this growth compounds.
If things were equal to begin with between two people and each was getting 100 a year, but the second was getting 5% more per year, it would take around 14.5 years for the second to be getting 200 a year, doubling the other. However, this would be increasing each year. It would look something like this.
While not at that rate, you can see how much impact it would make over the space of time. And for instance, if it was 1% more a year, it would take 72 years to double. 1950 was 73 years ago. But even if it is at 0.1%, the difference over the space of a couple generations where corporations are increasing their wealth, whilst paying less for that wealth to be created, the disparity gets large very fast, and only quickens.
Gross domestic product (GDP) is the total monetary or market value of all the finished goods and services produced within a country's borders in a specific time period. As a broad measure of overall domestic production, it functions as a comprehensive scorecard of a given country's economic health.
Economic health - not population health.
The economic alignment of the global economy is to make more money, not to increase wellbeing for all participants. It is because of this that the future of things like obesity will continue to trend upward to the point that people just can't sustain themselves and die from malnutrition. The economy however doesn't care about this, it just cares about making profits. And, because the wealthy are less likely to be affected by the same outcomes as the poor and these are the people running the companies, they don't have a huge drive to make any difference in this area.
Handouts aren't the answer to this issue and if anything, they will just exacerbate it further. It has to be a complete realignment of society to adjust daily life to better health, rather than it being a privilege for those who have the time and money to spend on it. But, it is not likely to be a top-down change, it will have to happen at the grassroots, where we as individuals decide to do something about our condition.
Our health. Our education. Our finance.
I don't know what healthy means to you, but for me, there needs to be greater personal alignment between those things in order to ensure a healthy rise in those areas. But, without health, the other two are pretty useless, aren't they? If we can't keep our kids healthy now, what is going to get compounded into society in the future?
Taraz
[ Gen1: Hive ]
Posted Using LeoFinance Alpha
The addiction to sugar is more powerful than to cocaine, I have read that in many studies carried out over the last two decades. How is this possible, well, the parents already have “sugar” in their genetic code, heh, heh, heh, heh. When the child is born, the first foods contain glucose; in other words, we are sugar consumers from the moment we are conceived.
Nowadays, the foods we eat, genetically processed, provide 200 times more gluten, hence the reason for the intolerance of many children to consume them and for us adults to suffer from diabetes, high blood pressure… And for this reason, psychologists have found no remedy and classify gluten-intolerant children as “autistic”.
It is true that many parents use sweets as a way of reassuring their children, as @videoaddiction claims, but this is not entirely true. I can't give my son any sweets after 3pm, as it's 1am, and he's still hyperactive; the sugar, instead of calming him down, energises him so much that he becomes a train wreck.
At least not here. My daughter is gluten intolerant, but they don't classify as autistic. She is also sensitive to lactose. These things might decrease as she ages.
I think the point of the "calm down" was not in the physical sense, but more as a way to pacify the child, keep them occupied and "happy" in the moment, even though later, they will likely crash and become terrors. :)
There are studies about how obesity at time of conception passes a fat gene of some sort. Will look for the study later. It is interesting.
Lithuania beat USA. I might have to buy a pizza one of these days after all.
I saw! Big win. I was pretty disappointed in the way Australia played - didn't even make it to knockouts.
2 years ago my eldest son had some fat on his sides. I think it's from a lot of sweet and starchy foods. He had too many snacks of flour and sweets. Now he eats sweets only at home and his weight has returned to normal.
That central fat tends to come from carbs. It is visceral and ends up choking the organs. Glad that he is normal now :)
This really goes back to what I was saying the other day. If the price of fresh fruits and veggies was lower, it might make a big difference. Plus you have families where both parents work one or more jobs just to meet their ends and child care is out of the question due to the high cost. The kids sit at home and aren't very active with nothing to do but be baby sat by the TV and food. It's a vicious cycle.
It definitely is a vicious cycle. I don't know if there is a single answer for it (without being draconian), but I do think that almost nothing is being done to tackle the problem. It is the ultimate, kick the can approach.
Jamie Oliver visiting South African schools in 2005 said "a meal of mutton stew with cabbage, carrots and pudding, made by three women in Soweto, as the most nutritious school meal he had ever had." Not sure of the standards today with many eating bread, if/when affordable, charities still arrange homemade food within schools ensuring one meal a day, not all.
All hidden added extra's by manufacturers, sold over the counter via highly processed foods, is wherein the problem lies. Both working many do not go home to make a meal from scratch. Many of our people suffer obesity today who simply cannot afford a balanced meal.
Strange fact many of our shack dwellers prefer to purchase street vendor food to fancy restaurants, preferring homemade taste they are familiar with, not cheaper!
School lunches are for the most part, pretty good here. At least it is a decent meal once a day for some of these kids who might not be getting it at home. However, Smallsteps is lucky in this respect - she eats very well - better than her parents.
I can imagine that the street food is pretty great there!
Teaching young school going children how to eat right, keep away from snacks rather have a fruit goes a long way.
Street food sold varies in taste, texture, cultural backgrounds, simply delicious!
Man, you do have a way to explain complex things in simple ways for everyone to understand. Good work.
Perhaps we should add (although I don't if it is a thing in Finland, It would seem it is) the influence of the wealthy in politics. Perhaps some corporation doesn't want this trend to change, because it's good money to have uneducated people so they can eat all the adictive shit you are selling to them. So you fill a few pockets with money, masking it as campaign donations and there you go. It's even a science to calculate flavor in order to make the brain sustantial slaves to your product. As long there are big bags influencing that I don't think anything is going to change. You would have to go on a massive self consciousness trip to change it personally and since that hurts like hell (despite the infinite rewards) we can't expect most people to do it... unless, early education.
Is like that phrase says "It's easier to grow healthy children than to mend broken adults" and the trend you explain seems to agree with it. The problem just worsens as they grow. Add some mindfullness, some meditation and some REAL philosophy (This meaning NOT JUST learning about how a few people thinked but more about how to think on our own) and the amount of brainwash and food addiction will drop extremelly. What the minister of education is doing? Perhaps what's most profitable. But I would argue it's most profitable to a nation everyone's wellbeing because taxes are bigger with healthy people willing to take risks. So... why isn't it done? because is not profitable to corporations. That or... ignorance. But I wonder if that is still a thing in this year and age.
The trick is explaining it in a way that I can understand it. I am simple! :D
The food industry is one thing - the Pharmaceutical Industry is something completely different. In a place like Finland where healthcare is heavily subsidized, the sicker people are, the more governments will pay for their medications and treatments. It is a multi trillion dollar industry.
The lessons kids really need, they aren't getting.
Indeed. THis is what the entire government does.
It’s all fun and games until one is hit with the consequences of not taking care of there health. Sadly pointing out effects of something that people enjoy like junk food when all is well is noise. Until one gets to the point of wanting to reverse it because of sickness.
Unfortunately it’s corporations at play here us well. Like we complain about web 2 and how they still our information to make profit from them while we loose out. So is the fight of junk and bad food they are heavily marketed and made dead cheap to benefit the corporates and we are left to wallow in the consequences and addictions.
Things that are bad for us, tend to be convenient in the short term - whether it be the ad revenue model of web2, fast food, entertainment industry...
I think the problem is the woke generation. They believe in handouts. And it's not sustainable. We all know George soros does it for fun and he meddles in every generation as a change of marker in that region. But once he dies so does the handouts which are given in politicial spectrum to woke generation. I don't think it would end well for them. And for us for that matter.
I don't know much about Soros, but there will always be powerful forces in a centralized system that can influence outcomes.
This is a very interesting topic to discuss. I think weight has been compared with wealth even in the olden times. But in those days, I think it was in reverse; the wealthy are the ones that are usually overweight/obese, while the poor are the ones who are underweight. I've even read of stories where the middle class parents sometimes fatten their daughter up to make themselves look wealthier and more enticing to a potential rich partner.
What I also find interesting is that I think the weight and wealth connection also differs with the country's wealth. In Finland, which is a first world country, the poor are more than likely to be obese than the poor. But in the Philippines, which is a third world country, the rich are the ones more likely to be obese, while the poor are severely malnourished. It would appear that in first world countries, intelligence and education are the bigger determining factor, while in third world countries, it is the actual available resources.
Comparing the past and the present foods, I think we have a lot more processed food now than back then. There is more sugar in a lot of foods as well. I've read an article that our fruits, which are supposed to be healthy, have undergone so much selective breeding that they have become too sweet. Some zoo animals are actually having problems with them.
As for people exercising or moving a lot, today's technology has made it less appealing. In the old days, there weren't much entertainment available. You had to go out and meet with friends to play. With the internet, PC, and smartphones, a lot of entertainment is available that going outside becomes a hassle. Technology is working against us in getting our weight down most of the time.
Finally, as for the Government funding and priority, people getting sick is unfortunately very good for funding. With the recent pandemic, we've seen how big pharma companies have skyrocketed their earnings. Governments were giving vaccines for free, but we know there are some deals behind close doors. Hospitals were charging exorbitant amount of fees. Insurance companies are still making money. More people getting sick, means more money for the medical field, who has a big pull in the government. In the end it is the regular citizens that are suffering again.
Yep. Now they are the ones who work the most hours and run the most marathons.
Yes. There is a division depending on "type of country" but even that seems to be changing in many places. THe middle class is getting fatter around the middle.
And, they make money from the ill every year, pandemic or not. For instance, in the US 280,000 people die directly every year from obesity related illness. Then, how many are hanging on, medicated?
When I came to UK I had weird observation that clients of Iceland supermarket chain are more obese than people who shop at for example Sainsbury's.
Then I realized that Iceland is cheaper and it attracts people with less income. It kind of makes sense as cheaper products are less "organic" and treated with cheaper/worse chemicals.
And, there tends to be more packaged foods in these places, rather than "close to fresh".
I (for better or worse) eat a lot of nuts and I have always found it interesting that salted nuts are cheaper than natural. Doesn't that require more processing?
Salt makes them last longer I think ;) or maybe allows them to use lower quality nuts as salt will kill the taste🤔🙃
I would go with the lower quality nut argument - that is what I have assumed :)
One interesting thing here is unsalted butter is twice the price of salted. However, they have the same shelf-life! :D
I’ve always found it ironic that some nations struggle with obesity while in other parts of the world people try to survive from starvation. Apart from climate change the global food supply should be on top of every nation leaders list. Main problem is that eating healthy tends to be expensive. Why is that lol. I just don’t get this world.
Resource distribution is very bad in this economy.
But, how can it be more expensive if that is where all the demand is? Cut out all the useless crap we produce and prices have to come down.
You've raised some thought-provoking points about obesity, health, and societal trends. It's true that obesity and related health issues are significant challenges in many parts of the world, and the implications are profound not only for individuals but also for society as a whole.
The interplay between economic factors, lifestyle choices, and health outcomes is complex. As you mentioned, there's a growing concern about the normalization of unhealthy lifestyles and the impact on overall well-being. It's essential to address these issues holistically, considering not only individual choices but also the broader societal and economic forces at play.
Promoting healthier lifestyles, improving access to nutritious food, and encouraging physical activity are important steps. Education and awareness play a crucial role, but systemic changes are also needed to create an environment where health and well-being are prioritized.
Your emphasis on grassroots efforts and individual responsibility for health is valid. It often takes a collective effort to drive change and address these challenges comprehensively. Hopefully, as awareness continues to grow, there will be more concerted efforts at all levels to tackle the obesity epidemic and promote healthier living.
Thank you for sharing your insights on this important issue!
The problem is, there is more money in promoting illness, than there is in promoting health. We as people should demand better, but in order to do so, we would have to stop focusing on the irrelevant.
Exactly my point
I have noticed that low educated parents give sugary foods and drinks such as chocolate and juice to their kids almost everyday, if they are economically okay. This is another way to keep the kid quite and calm, after giving smartphone or tablet to their hand.
It is a cluster of behaviors, isn't it? Then there is also the higher likelihood that the parent is overweight too, so there are likely example expectations set also. And, if parents have been raised this way (which they increasingly are), it all seems "normal".
This might also be related to this mindset;
yep. This could be it too. I hear the "we only had takeout once a month" kind of statements, as if that was a bad thing.
The more I read articles like this, the more I want to live on some hippy commune where we grow our own food, raise livestock, create crafts and music, and dance under the stars. There are far too many people with the wool over their eyes at this point.
Teaching in underfunded schools is such a tragedy. The food choices for these students are awful. So much is terribly processed so it is no wonder that they have short attention spans and poor educational outcomes. They are running on poisoned fuel and that is likely the one "full" meal they are getting during the school day, as food at home is inconsistent at best.
I don't know what it is like in the US, but the school food guidelines are relatively good for the school lunch and snack meals. It is all hot food, normally fish and potatoes, or some pasta and the like. It isn't the "fast food" I see from the US ... in movies... so that might not be the reality.
A commune would be alright - but 24/7, I think I would get annoyed with people!
The food from US schools is the worst of the worst processed garbage from most of my experiences. And sadly, that is what the students gravitate to eat. They would pass on the salad bar and fresh fruit served with their meal. But processed chicken nuggets, flimsy burgers, and greasy grilled cheeses were student favorites. I wouldn't touch anything from our school cafeteria that wasn't whole food. Big Yikes on US school food! It is just another way of keeping poor people poor with awful food choices. Don't even get me started on how badly the few kids whose parents sent them in with homemade meals were mocked and ridiculed even though they had much better food options than their peers. Truly heartbreaking!
This might be an interesting overview:
https://www.oph.fi/en/education-and-qualifications/school-meals-finland
We have guidelines in the US too, but they are minimal and our food & drug administration is weak. All of the worst, toxic, agro-industrial companies make the cheapest food possible for these poor schools to buy.
In the United States a lot of our health and wealth is tied together with our cultural emphasis on driving a car to get anywhere (even if its a 5 minute walk!). People would rather sit in gridlock traffic for hours just to uphold the American ideal of the "freedom" of owning a car.
In reality, if they hopped on a bike, they could fly past all the traffic and be home much faster and with a great workout!
Unfortunately, a lot of cities either have no infrastructure for bikes or the infrastructure that is present is not safe.
Instead of paying $4.3 trillion a year on healthcare, maybe we could use some of that to build bike paths and teach people how to bike to work safely? Crazy idea, I know
It is similar in Australia (or was when I was there) as the distances are large and cars are necessary for many people. However, not all. It has changed in Finland too though. Twenty years ago only a handful of my friends had a car - now all do, whether they need it or not. Everyone used to walk - now they are on those damned escooters.
This is something that is pretty good in Finland. Most roads have a pedestrian and bikepath next to it.
Nowadays most of the people suffer from various health problems. Actually in our countries where the adulteration in food is high and many people are suffering from health problems due to various tempting foods. Although all educated or uneducated people have faced such problems.
Which do you think is more likely to be overweight in your country?
In my country it is more the one who has more contact is more likely to occupy a position with a good income.
Even if it is a good-for-nothing, useless one.It is obvious that education makes people less obese because they are already aware of the consequences and the diseases they bring with them.
It would be good for your country to start doing something before it gets out of hand.
Here in Colombia everything is done late ....
En mi país es más el tiene más contacto es más probable que ocupe un puesto con buenos ingresos
Aunque sea uno inútiles bueno para nadaEs obvio que la educación hace que las personas sean menos obesas porque ya tiene conocimiento de las consecuencias y sus derivadas enfermedades que traen
Sería bueno que tú país comienze hacer algo antes que se le salga de la manos
Aquí en Colombia todo se hace tarde....
I think that this is part of the world of government today. Do everything late, so it looks like something is being done. Being preemptive comes with too many questions that things have to be done and how to do them.
It will still be late.....😂🤣😭😂🤣😭
I was thinking the same, moving to UK. Some people here are huge, by my native country standards, while in my country rarely was a fat person in my generation. But I remember as children going out once per month, for a restaurant meal, which by the way was quite healthy by today standards. No fast food, maybe 2 pizza per year, an icecream here and there. Rarely going to the cafe to have a cake, again, on my birthday, maybe. If I was behaving. We were out playing footbal and games morning til dusk. If I was more than one hour on PC, mom was coming to switch it off. Different habits.
And yes, fat people back then are considered average now.
It seems like overweight is going to be an issue and I think being healthy is better. It puts less stress on the economy too because there are less health problems. The only thing is that it's not that convenient to do so and people tend to not care about their diets too much. There is only so much time in the day and I think the health issues will only get worst as they age more.
There's really something to be said for the convenience of the modern world. The more 'progressed' we are, the less we do in our lives - and the fatter and unhealthier we get. I did read that the life span of Americans is on the decrease - yet you'd think because of the advances in health/medicine, life expectancy would be higher.
I think it's absolutely unconsciounable that cheap food is not good food - cheap white bread, cheap beans, cheap bacon - and good, organic, whole food is expensive, and only for those with fat wallets to enjoy.
Slow food has been the answer for a long time - but that doesn't fit the lives we're expeccted to live - fast, and tied to consumer economies.
Your conspiracy theory seems sound.
I hate the saying 'money does not buy happiness". It does buy comfort and flexibility which are huge inputs for happiness
The best way to stay healthy is to get a puppy….. they need to walk minimum 10 km a day. Rain, sleet or snow… especially in the snow…. I have never been healthier.
This is Lola asking me for another walk. 3rd time today.
10km a day! That is a lot.
We do at least 3 walks of 3.3 Km each … but early morning and late evenings to avoid the heat. She definitely prefers the winter months….