6 ms·

Longest sustained rise in people too sick to work since 1990s, says thinktank

51 points by webmaven 3y ago

SirMaster 3y ago
In my opinion, not enough people are exercising or eating healthy. How do you get more people do both?
- throwaway5959 3y ago
  In the US, stop requiring them to work for health insurance so they can take a few months off between jobs to recharge.
  - chomp 3y ago
    I’m pretty sure that would only help the mid-upper classes that can afford the nest egg to take a sabbatical like that. Exercise and eating healthy (read: cooking) in our modern society requires leisure time, which has mostly been eradicated for the lower classes.
    - loa_in_ 3y ago
      Which, coincidentally, is part of the problem
    - datavirtue 3y ago
      I can make just about anything I want faster, cheaper and with far less drama than food delivery or a drive-through trip (and a hell of a lot cheaper). I find your comment confusing.
  - klyrs 3y ago
    I'd be pretty happy if restaurant employees were incentivized to stay home while infectuous, rather than risk getting fired.
  - nradov 3y ago
    I'm all for decoupling health insurance coverage from employment, but there is no evidence that taking extended time off work results in better health outcomes.
    - throwaway5959 3y ago
      It would help if people could use it to change their diet and exercise habits. A lot of people stress eat.
      - datavirtue 3y ago
        The eat mindlessly, leaping from one lump of refined carb and saturated fat to another.
  - listenallyall 3y ago
    People aren't batteries, recharging isn't really a thing. Except for LinkedIn influencers, people don't come back from time off, whether a week or 3 months, with great vigor and propensity to work hard. Inertia kicks in, it takes time to ramp back up.
    - craftkiller 3y ago
      That seems irrelevant to the discussion. The question[0] was about how to get people to exercise and eat healthy, not how to get people to provide more value to their employers. [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39801885 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39801885
- morkalork 3y ago
  You're not going to get much traction with advertising the benefits and education oriented campaigns. Most of the time, if someone doesn't already have a habit of exercising, you're probably not going to be successful at getting them to start. They're busy with the rest of their lives. What you've gotta do is trick them into it. Just sneak a little exercise into their daily routines without them noticing. You do that by making them live in walkable cities.
- LorenPechtel 3y ago
  That is rarely going to cause disability.
- scherlock 3y ago
  Stop subsidizing corn production. Invest in making fruits and vegetables cheaper. Encourage development that includes high walkable and bikable aspects while minimizing driving aspects.
  - faeriechangling 3y ago
    I find it fascinating how fixated people are on the demand side of this issue. If everybody made "healthy choices" tomorrow, they would starve because there aren't even enough healthy foods on the shelves. I don't get how a country can criminalise drugs but subsidise HFCS. HFCS has to kill around the same amount of people as fentanyl does.
aerostable_slug 3y ago
It would be interesting to see how they attempt to correct for malingering (or if they do at all).
- faeriechangling 3y ago
  I have a different take. This article is talking about the rise of those on disability benefits. Parents are incentivised to portray their children as disabled for benefits, and schools are incentivised to do the same for extra funding and lower standards being applied to them. I think most people apply for benefits likely believe they're genuinely sick and disabled, since being on benefits is not a pleasant life by design. Oh yeah, and with rising obesity and paternal/maternal age generally getting later and later I would be unsurprised if there was an increasing rate of actual disability. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Factitious_disorder_imposed_on_another https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Factitious_disorder_imposed_on...
  - LorenPechtel 3y ago
    But the parents/schools get the benefit from things which simply impair, especially things without a definitive test for their existence. A bunch of brain function issues come to mind. I'm sure such things are overdiagnosed, both amongst the poor (for the benefits) and the rich (for the aid in getting into elite colleges.) However, such overdiagnosis will not keep them out of the labor pool.
    - faeriechangling 3y ago
      A person and the people around them being told over and over about how they struggle more than most people and being held to lower standards creates a self-fulfilling prophecy, especially if this occurs in childhood during the key developmental period. The stigma can also have real consequences on employment even if the diagnosis is fictitious.
      - illwrks 3y ago
        I 100% agree. I know someone that works in a school with children that have special education needs. I was talking with them several months ago and they said majority have genuine issues but they suspect some children have just been ruined by their parents. Their opinion was the children are very capable and as able as any normal child but have self-labelled as having 'special needs' because their parents have told them that from a young age. It didn't make sense to me until I then was told that by doing so the parents could claim various benefits, be a stay at home 'carer' etc. Such wasted potential.
black_13 3y ago
[dead]
billy99k 3y ago
It also could be because people masked up all the time and stayed home for long periods of time. New viruses came out and they were never exposed to it. Now, many are getting exposed to lots of new viruses all at the same time now that covid is over and the symptoms are much worse.
- doubleg72 3y ago
  What new viruses are you referring to?
  - 10u152 3y ago
    All the mutations of the normal cold/flu etc.
    - pyinstallwoes 3y ago
      Ah yeah, that damn yearly thing everyone used to get.
reify 3y ago
what is the point of this drivel? The number of working-age adults economically inactive due to ill health rose from 2.1 million in July 2019 to a peak of 2.8 million by October 2023, before falling slightly to 2.7 million in December 2023, the foundation reported. so a rise of 600,000 people too ill to work. maybe covid has something to do with that figure. The real reason for the scary "WARNINGS". Labour and the Conservatives have promised a tough stance on benefit claimants. Earlier this month the shadow work and pensions secretary, Liz Kendall, said there would be “no option of a life on benefits” under a future Labour government as she outlined plans to support young people to find work or training. according to the ONS. The Office Of National Statistics. Economic inactivity is: People not in employment who have not been seeking work within the last 4 weeks and/or are unable to start work within the next 2 weeks. nothing new here: Same old bullying of the ill and the unemployed.

51 points by webmaven 3y ago

SirMaster 3y ago

In my opinion, not enough people are exercising or eating healthy. How do you get more people do both?

throwaway5959 3y ago
In the US, stop requiring them to work for health insurance so they can take a few months off between jobs to recharge.
- chomp 3y ago
  I’m pretty sure that would only help the mid-upper classes that can afford the nest egg to take a sabbatical like that. Exercise and eating healthy (read: cooking) in our modern society requires leisure time, which has mostly been eradicated for the lower classes.
  - loa_in_ 3y ago
    Which, coincidentally, is part of the problem
  - datavirtue 3y ago
    I can make just about anything I want faster, cheaper and with far less drama than food delivery or a drive-through trip (and a hell of a lot cheaper). I find your comment confusing.
- klyrs 3y ago
  I'd be pretty happy if restaurant employees were incentivized to stay home while infectuous, rather than risk getting fired.
- nradov 3y ago
  I'm all for decoupling health insurance coverage from employment, but there is no evidence that taking extended time off work results in better health outcomes.
  - throwaway5959 3y ago
    It would help if people could use it to change their diet and exercise habits. A lot of people stress eat.
    - datavirtue 3y ago
      The eat mindlessly, leaping from one lump of refined carb and saturated fat to another.
- listenallyall 3y ago
  People aren't batteries, recharging isn't really a thing. Except for LinkedIn influencers, people don't come back from time off, whether a week or 3 months, with great vigor and propensity to work hard. Inertia kicks in, it takes time to ramp back up.
  - craftkiller 3y ago
    That seems irrelevant to the discussion. The question[0] was about how to get people to exercise and eat healthy, not how to get people to provide more value to their employers. [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39801885 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39801885
morkalork 3y ago
You're not going to get much traction with advertising the benefits and education oriented campaigns. Most of the time, if someone doesn't already have a habit of exercising, you're probably not going to be successful at getting them to start. They're busy with the rest of their lives. What you've gotta do is trick them into it. Just sneak a little exercise into their daily routines without them noticing. You do that by making them live in walkable cities.
LorenPechtel 3y ago
That is rarely going to cause disability.
scherlock 3y ago
Stop subsidizing corn production. Invest in making fruits and vegetables cheaper. Encourage development that includes high walkable and bikable aspects while minimizing driving aspects.
- faeriechangling 3y ago
  I find it fascinating how fixated people are on the demand side of this issue. If everybody made "healthy choices" tomorrow, they would starve because there aren't even enough healthy foods on the shelves. I don't get how a country can criminalise drugs but subsidise HFCS. HFCS has to kill around the same amount of people as fentanyl does.

aerostable_slug 3y ago

It would be interesting to see how they attempt to correct for malingering (or if they do at all).

faeriechangling 3y ago
I have a different take. This article is talking about the rise of those on disability benefits. Parents are incentivised to portray their children as disabled for benefits, and schools are incentivised to do the same for extra funding and lower standards being applied to them. I think most people apply for benefits likely believe they're genuinely sick and disabled, since being on benefits is not a pleasant life by design. Oh yeah, and with rising obesity and paternal/maternal age generally getting later and later I would be unsurprised if there was an increasing rate of actual disability. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Factitious_disorder_imposed_on_another https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Factitious_disorder_imposed_on...
- LorenPechtel 3y ago
  But the parents/schools get the benefit from things which simply impair, especially things without a definitive test for their existence. A bunch of brain function issues come to mind. I'm sure such things are overdiagnosed, both amongst the poor (for the benefits) and the rich (for the aid in getting into elite colleges.) However, such overdiagnosis will not keep them out of the labor pool.
  - faeriechangling 3y ago
    A person and the people around them being told over and over about how they struggle more than most people and being held to lower standards creates a self-fulfilling prophecy, especially if this occurs in childhood during the key developmental period. The stigma can also have real consequences on employment even if the diagnosis is fictitious.
    - illwrks 3y ago
      I 100% agree. I know someone that works in a school with children that have special education needs. I was talking with them several months ago and they said majority have genuine issues but they suspect some children have just been ruined by their parents. Their opinion was the children are very capable and as able as any normal child but have self-labelled as having 'special needs' because their parents have told them that from a young age. It didn't make sense to me until I then was told that by doing so the parents could claim various benefits, be a stay at home 'carer' etc. Such wasted potential.

black_13 3y ago

[dead]

billy99k 3y ago

It also could be because people masked up all the time and stayed home for long periods of time. New viruses came out and they were never exposed to it. Now, many are getting exposed to lots of new viruses all at the same time now that covid is over and the symptoms are much worse.

doubleg72 3y ago
What new viruses are you referring to?
- 10u152 3y ago
  All the mutations of the normal cold/flu etc.
  - pyinstallwoes 3y ago
    Ah yeah, that damn yearly thing everyone used to get.

reify 3y ago

what is the point of this drivel? The number of working-age adults economically inactive due to ill health rose from 2.1 million in July 2019 to a peak of 2.8 million by October 2023, before falling slightly to 2.7 million in December 2023, the foundation reported. so a rise of 600,000 people too ill to work. maybe covid has something to do with that figure. The real reason for the scary "WARNINGS". Labour and the Conservatives have promised a tough stance on benefit claimants. Earlier this month the shadow work and pensions secretary, Liz Kendall, said there would be “no option of a life on benefits” under a future Labour government as she outlined plans to support young people to find work or training. according to the ONS. The Office Of National Statistics. Economic inactivity is: People not in employment who have not been seeking work within the last 4 weeks and/or are unable to start work within the next 2 weeks. nothing new here: Same old bullying of the ill and the unemployed.