Having Few Friends is Dangerous to your Health

Here's a good incentive to turn off your TV and go make real friends.

[C]lose relationships with children and other relatives had very little impact on how long you live, but people with the most friends tended to outlive those with the fewest by 22 percent. Better yet, a clinical review of nearly 150 studies found that people with strong social ties had a 50 percent better chance of survival, regardless of age, sex, health status, and cause of death, than those with weaker ties. . . . In fact, according to the researchers, the health risk of having few friends was similar to smoking 15 cigarettes a day, and more dangerous than being obese or not exercising in terms of decreasing your lifespan. Keep in mind that means real friends. Not Facebook friends or Twitter followers.

For more, here's the full article from Inc.

Continue ReadingHaving Few Friends is Dangerous to your Health

Disrupting the Healthcare System

This morning I attended a conference titled “Disruption and Innovation in Healthcare 2.0“ at Washington University in St. Louis. I was humbled at how well informed and nuanced the speakers were. They included Alex Gorsky (CEO of Johnson and Johnson), I certainly learned a lot. My main concern is that the ability to understand the complexity of the health care system is well beyond the ability of most people. The simplistic positions of our politicians are a great disservice to our country. For example, it is absolutely clear that our health care system is NOT a functional market, meaning that the Ayn Rand/Free-Market conservatives are deceiving us when they claim that all we need to do is “get government off our backs” to fix healthcare. I admire that progressive politicians are calling for universal access (something that almost all developed countries have, but not the U.S.). That said, how do we square that universal access with the need to incentivize future innovations, in addition to ongoing care? Any big changes to the current system could have disasterous ramifications.

The stakes could not be higher. To the extent we are tempted to implement broad new changes, we need to keep in mind (as one of today’s speakers said), “This is not a dress rehearsal. It’s the real deal.”

[On the right] Johnson and Johnson CEO, Alex Gorsky

The speakers somberly delivered the following shocking information: There is currently no payment model for many current (and anticipated) extremely expensive curative therapies. Thus, people who can be CURED of horrific diseases will languish under the status quo because we can’t figure out how to give them more than palliative treatment, even when palliative treatment is sometimes more expensive in the long run. I dare you to read previous sentence a few times and then shrug and try to convince yourself that we, as a country cannot do better.

Here’s another fact was mentioned several times today: 75% of our health care budget is the result of bad choices made in early life by individual Americans. Preaching at people to get their act together shouldn’t offend reasonable people. For instance, urging that children should eat healthier food should be applauded, even though some conservatives ridicule Michelle Obama’s urgings in that direction. But what about more? To what extent should we, must we, put some skin in the game for people who are actively self-destructing their bodies? I think we need to seriously look at some low-hanging fruit and make some people uncomfortable for their own well being and for the greater good of the United States. The overall health of the United States is most definitely a public good. The ill-health of any of us affects all of us.

These issues are ultra-complex, highly nuanced, in addition to being critical important. Anyone pretending otherwise should be promptly yanked off the political stage.

Here’s more information about this event. It was being video-recorded and hope that it will be made available to anyone interested in these issues. “2nd Annual Olin Business School Healthcare Symposium: 'Disruption and Innovation in Healthcare 2.0'

Continue ReadingDisrupting the Healthcare System

Why Flu Shots Rarely Match the Current Flu, and Why You Should Get One

As any science guy recognizes, evolution is a fact of life. If an environment is inhospitable to a population, that population dwindles and another prevails. Flu shots are designed every year to prevent the premier emerging strains that are likely to become dangerous, either through virulence in the body, or…

Continue ReadingWhy Flu Shots Rarely Match the Current Flu, and Why You Should Get One

On the Link Between Alcohol and Breast Cancer

In 2018 Stephanie Mencimer of Mother Jones published a truly sobering article that deserves repeated attention:"Did Drinking Give Me Breast Cancer? The science on the link is clear, but the alcohol industry has worked hard to downplay it."

The statistics would be difficult to ignore, if they weren't downplayed by those who find these numbers inconvenient to an activity they enjoy:

Researchers estimate that alcohol accounts for 15 percent of US breast cancer cases and deaths—about 35,000 and 6,600 a year, respectively. That’s about three times more than the number of breast cancer cases caused by a mutation of the BRCA genes, which prompted Angelina Jolie, who carries one of the abnormal genes, to have both her healthy breasts removed in 2013. . . . But alcohol-related breast cancer kills more than twice as many American women as drunk drivers do. . . . [A] woman who consumes two to three drinks a day has a lifetime risk of about 15 percent—a 25 percent increase over teetotalers. By comparison, mammography reduces the death rate from breast cancer by about 25 percent. “Alcohol can undo all of that at about two drinks a day,” [Harvard Epidemiologist Walter] Willett says.

In addition to increasing the risk of breast cancer, the CDC reports that drinking increases the risk of cancer to the mouth, throat, larynx, esophagus, colon, rectum and liver.

Continue ReadingOn the Link Between Alcohol and Breast Cancer

Resisting Wars of Discretion Could Save Lives at Home

Our belief in war as a solution to our foreign policy issues, despite the lack of clear objectives and confirmatory metric of "success," is hemorrhaging the U.S. budget. Where are the voices of politicians demanding that we justify this annual military spending by pointing to real life successes?

In the meantime, many Americans are going bankrupt in an effort to get the necessary medical care to stay alive (2/3 of all bankruptcies). Others simply give up and die.

Continue ReadingResisting Wars of Discretion Could Save Lives at Home