4 ms·
"The reasons for the difference are not clear, although the authors point out that cities like New York often have aggressive anti-smoking policies and make it
by jpwagner 10y ago
"The reasons for the difference are not clear, although the authors point out that cities like New York often have aggressive anti-smoking policies and make it harder for people to eat trans fats, and drink sugary sodas—which are implicated in common diseases like obesity and diabetes"
Anti-smoking in NYC is ~14 years old and the sugary-soda crackdown is less than 4 years old. How can these policies be proven to contribute to life-span data?
- LanceH 10y agoWhile the policies may not be causative, the attitudes which allowed these bills to pass may have been present for much longer.
- VLM 10y agoGentrification pushes out poor people, therefore you can ban things poor people like without backlash, and naturally fewer poor people means fewer sick people, if most financial problems come from medical expenses and medical expenses mostly come from sickness, then making it hard for poor/bankrupt people to live there will naturally result in the remainder being healthier on average. I would theorize the demographics of NYC are anything but constant. Or it could be a bias toward authoritarianism naturally results in health, although the cause and effect on that one is a bit fuzzy. The obesity rate in NYC is about 1 in 3 but in Denver its about 1 in 5, and Denver isn't X% more authoritarian than NYC.