This is a UK article, and I'm going to post a UK-centric, male-centric comment (as a UK-based man), but I suspect my comment applies to both genders, and to man

This is a UK article, and I'm going to post a UK-centric, male-centric comment (as a UK-based man), but I suspect my comment applies to both genders, and to many health systems around the world. I don't doubt exercise is extremely valuable, and that everyone should be following the advice in TFA. However, I am starting to think that lifestyle recommendations are a way for a public health system to wash its hands of its responsibility to actually, proactively care for people. As in: “Well, we're sure you can make changes on your own to improve your health, so just go and do your bit while we quietly neglect to do ours". Yes, you should exercise, and eat right, and not drink too much, and sleep right, and not stress too much. You should do as much as you reasonably can in all these areas. But if you're looking to "defy depression, disease and early death", you'd also better learn a bit about the way your health system operates, and the common issues it is inclined (presumably for cost reasons) to ignore. I've written in past comments about thyroid conditions, which are a big deal, and can easily go undiagnosed for a long time (due, basically, to cost-driven neglect). I'm becoming aware of more issues: 1) Testosterone: I’m a middle-aged man and I’ve been complaining to my GP for months about feeling weak while exercising, and about sleep disruption. I’ve been doing my own reading, and have just discovered that hypogonadism (inadequate testosterone levels) is incredibly common amongst middle-aged men: “Hypogonadism affects ap­proximately 40% of men aged 45 or older, although less than 5% of these men are actually diagnosed and treated for the condition” [1]. Even discounting the fact that the author of this article declares that he consults for pharma companies, that’s a staggering statistic. So why given my symptoms do I have to ask my GP to check my testosterone levels, rather than him having ordered the test months ago? 2) Prolactin: it seems a very significant fraction of the population (e.g. 6-25% of the U. S. population) have pituitary tumours, forty percent of which produce prolactin [2], which is a sex hormone. There’s evidence that people whose prolactin levels are in the upper normal of the physiological reference range, suffer from insulin resistance [3] and have significantly increased risk of mortality [4]. Oh, and prolactin stimulates the immune system and high levels are associated with autoimmune diseases [5]. I had a test done for prolactin levels recently (I requested some tests to check for hypopituitarism), and levels came back quite high but in the normal physiological range (see above, of course). GP response: “no problem, levels are normal”. Which is true, in that I appear to be suffering from quite normal disease that the health system intends to do nothing about. Bottom line: Do your homework, folks. View your health service as a resource, a gateway to services. When it comes to chronic conditions and diseases of old age, you (or nobody) are the principal investigator. [1] http://www.bcmj.org/articles/testosterone-deficiency-practical-guidelines-diagnosis-and-treatment http://www.bcmj.org/articles/testosterone-deficiency-practic... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prolactinoma#Epidemiology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prolactinoma#Epidemiology [3] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28384295 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28384295 [4] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22843444 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22843444 [5] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16411065 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16411065