Why are British elderly dying before their time.

Yes Eleothan. I think he is explaining why the town centre is mostly boarded up. ie not so much because there is no money about but because the money that there is is going to the four supermarkets.

Re the 'grub club', I had bread and jam for my tea when I was a child. I had had a cooked meal at school so that was reckoned to be enough. People often ate the cooked dinner at midday. Either at home or, the children, at school.

jingl thanks for bringing that to my attention. Interesting to have another perspective on this.,

Since Granjura did her series of posts about the wonders of statins and the scaremongering (her words) of all of those who responded by pointing out the well documented and well authenticated evidence that they are not necessarily Gods gift to man, she has made response.

She has sung these paeans to statins before and castigated all those who dare to query her unquestioning belief in the medical advice she has received.

It would be nice to hear from her that she can accept that we can agree to differ on this subject and that there are deep divides in the medical community itself on this subject and that while she absolutely stands by her own opinions those who disagree with her are not ignoramuses unable to understand medical literature , nor are we scare mongering, we are merely reflecting the divided opinions that exist around statins.

Anything else feels patronising.

jingle I've just read the comment by "chunky" and am not quite sure what he is getting at when he says the article only concentrates on the negatives. Does he feel it is a positive to have four large supermarkets and a shopping outlet when most of the high streets are "dead"?

Other than the women who have made valiant efforts to set up a community centre in Waundeg, I find it difficult to see any "positives", especially when it's reported that the suicide rate in Wales rose by 30% between 2009 and 2011.

Jess I agree a very sad article.
But I wonder whether simply replacing the jobs that have been lost in the heavy industries is sufficient?
I have a friend the same age as us who grew up in the valleys. She went to university and never went back to Wales to live. She said that none of her friends who had been given the opportunity to leave, through state education, had gone back either.
Is this an unintended consequence of higher education, that communities become polarised when all the bright young people leave and don't come back?

Government in a huff today because the Cardinal has criticised welfare cuts. They, the govt, claim that they are helping huge numbers of poor people "transform their lives.
I am so fed up with the word "reforms" I'm off to complain to BBC news that they are not using a more neutral term such a "changes".

Anyone read the comment underneath that article by "chunky"?

Same in the North East, JessM.
Just listening to the local radio. There is the largest rate of malnutrition in the country in the north east. All pit villages or redundant steel towns. At least in Northumberland they have been doing opencast and then getting rid of the pitheaps. Durham and Darlington health trust is handing out protein drinks to people. It's appalling.
How has it happened? Why have we allowed it to happen?

That article is horrifying - the contrast is especially weird for me, as the next suburb to where I live in Ipswich, Queensland Australia, is called Ebbw Vale. This was a mining, woollen industry and railway area, just like the part of West Yorkshire I came from. Our mines are closed, and the woollen mills too, but we are near enough to Brisbane for most people to have work.

Actually, the article reminds me of the problems with poverty and lack of education in Aboriginal areas. Money has been thrown at the problems, but not much has worked, and despair is endemic. My own feeling for both areas, here and Wales, is that the authorities must listen to the locals, not just pretend to listen - really try to understand them and their problems. And the children must be a priority, especially their education, even if it means subsidising boarding school places, or pushing children into educational excellence, with really good teachers.

Areas of poverty, verging on absolute poverty, are just not acceptable in rich countries like Britain and Australia. Shame on the politicians. Shame on them, because they are the only ones with the power and the money to effect change.

That makes desperate reading, Jess. Thanks for highlighting it.

Yes agree Flick we are abusing (raping) the benefits now!!!

Too many digging their own graves with their knife and fork.

I do wonder to what extent the longevity of our generation is based on the careful nutrition of our childhood years.

I was a 'war baby', we do not hear that word banded around very much now, it is all baby boomers and generation X. For about 10 years our nutrition and food intake was controlled by rationing and off ration foods were usually things like fruit or vegetables, which many people grew for themselves, which are the food we are constantly being urged to eat now.

I suspect that childhood nutrition sets the mould for adult health, even if we are careless about self nurture later and having been carefully nourished as children, we are raping the benefits now

www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-23028078

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-23028078

Just read this article about poverty and depression in the Welsh valleys and made me think about this thread. For years there has been a steady rise in life expectancy. What should we make of a sudden downturn? Is it just a blip or is it the beginning of a new trend. The gains in the past have resulted, I believe, from reduction in infections, modern drugs etc keeping older people alive who would have otherwise died, and a decline in smoking. Underlying this was increasing affluence. In the last 3 years the poor have got poorer - read the article before you disagree with this. It would not be surprising if their mortality was declining. Combine this with unhealthy lifestyles and it is easy to see that we could have reached the top of the curve for increased life expectancy - at least for now.

Granjura, my husband refused to go on statins. He was type one diabetic, and was being treated for high blood pressure because of the diabetes. His cholesterol level was four, but because the guidelines said that diabetics should have statins, he was always told he should go on them by every medical person he met.
He said that his brother had suffered from side effects, and was told that the only real side effect was muscle pain. As he had been in pain for 15 years since he fell off a ladder and fractured his spine, he assured them that he really did not want any more pain.
He died two years ago from a brain tumour, aged 65. Nothing to do with the statins.

Granjura, can you tell me where I said "most people" because I cannot find it. What I can find is me writing about my experience and the experiences of people I personallyknow who have given up on statins. That is not most people.

PS
I should also mention that she has full medical examinations every six months because of the transplants, and they all show perfect health, so it isn't as if she is under any illusions about her health and her heart.She works hard too, as both a translator and as a tutor in computer systems for the blind. She has been totally blind since the age of 8.Her name is Anne Robertson. Here is some of her work:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/macvisionaries/kVFnmig8lqQ

My anti-statin stance is based on the research done by medical professionals working in the field. It is also based on the dreadful side effects my brother and my husband suffered when taking them. They both stopped. Then my scientist brother-in-law did some in depth research when they were prescribed for his wife, my sister, as a preventative measure.

He wanted to be careful because she is a transplant recipient: she had a liver and kidney transplant in 2001. What he found out horrified him: I won't go into it now, but this
www.amazon.com/The-Great-Cholesterol-Con-Disease/dp/1844546101
book by Malcolm Kendrick has a great deal of information.
She never took any statins, and now, 13 years after the transplant is in perfect health at the age of 62.

I'm not convinced by them

I agree Flickety.
Granjura it is certainly not scaremongering to suggest that statins may do more harm than good and I find it more than a little suspicious that NICE has decided that doctors should recommend them for even patients who are at low risk of heart disease and stroke.
Dr Briffa says this

"The numbers of people who need to be treated with statins for one (person) to benefit are big, and many more people will have adverse effects than who benefit. These are the facts, and it’s about time people some people were straight with them."

Granjura the jury is out on statins. Just as there are many doctors who are total believers on statins there are an equal number who run from unsure to anti statins, particularly where cholesterol levels are only just over the threshold. Doctors make mistakes, that is why medical insurance is so high. Doctors succumb to fashion, circumcision and tonsillectomies were all the rage when I was a child. Try and get either operation done now, it is almost impossible.They are as professionally flawed and fallible as any other person in their work.

You are lucky not to have side effects. DH tried two or three statins, all made him unwell. We have a friend awaiting an urgent liver transplant. The main reason for it is that it took doctors 5 years to realise that the medical problems he was having were caused by the statins, by which time his liver was seriously damaged and when another problem developed as well, and there is probably cause and effect, the only effective treatment was a transplant. Rather puts one off statins when a close friend is so dreadfully injured by them, even though reason tells one that damage this serious is rare.

The pharmaceuticss industry has a lot invested in statins, they are cheap to make and immensely profitable and think of profits if they can sell them to more and more people in more and more countries. When I see a bandwagon rolling, I make a hasty exit. They always run off the road eventually.

DD1 is a self employed midwife ( that's normal in Germany) and sees her cases a in their own homes. She doesn't think the increase in age at death will continue. Diat from birth on is not always the best now and she thinks that the generations from the 30s, 40s and 50were better nourished than people born today.
Of course you then have the well educated that know about food and have the discipline not to feed their babies on sweets, coke,chocolate and chips.
presumably they will continue to live longer.

More than eight million people in the UK take statins daily and experts say that if five million more took them heart attacks and stroke would be cut by 10,000 a year, saving 2,000 lives.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/health/413772/Statins-really-do-save-your-life-New-study-ends-pill-safety-fears

My one fear is to have a stroke, having seen the devastating effect it has had on friends. So I am grateful for statins.

Of course, Eloethan, statins or any other drugs should not be taken if not necessary. But, as said, for some people, due to inherited genes and a history of heart attacks, or who have other medical conditions and raised cholesterol, they can be and are, life-savers. And such comments as seen on this thread and others, could stop those who would benefit, from taking them- to their demise.