Govt. Health Warnings. Should we take them with a pinch of salt?

[amateur51]

Thanks for the link to the very latest six-year old and totally meaningless 'scientific' revelations, Mr GG ...

see what you mean, scotty - nowhere near old enough and far too few contributing editors for your liking

As for meaningless ....

[scottycelt]

see what you mean, scotty - nowhere near old enough and far too few contributing editors for your liking

As for meaningless ....

Oh, do cheer up, Ams ... fancy a few pints?

[Pabmusic]

...I read somewhere in an official report that the average age of death in 1950 was 50 something. I just know that is wrong.

Quite so. The average life expectancy (at birth) for males in 1950 was about 65. You have to go back to 1900 to find an average life expectancy of about 50 for males. But that doesn't mean that hundreds died at 50, it means that infant mortality was very high and large numbers never made it to 15. Infant mortality improved throughout the century and the average life expectancy for males in the late 1930s was about 60. It's now 78 (82 for women - they have always had an extra 4-5 years).

The issue is to separate out the infant mortality factor (something the media rarely do, because it gets complicated). Basically, though, there is a difference between infant mortality in 1950 and today, but it is not great enough to explain the difference between average life expectancies of 65 and 78. Therefore, there are other factors at work - the NHS, better food, healthier lifestyles (maybe!) - but exactly what can't be identified without more data.

[Lateralthinking1]

Therefore, there are other factors at work - the NHS, better food, healthier lifestyles (maybe!) - but exactly what can't be identified without more data.

Yes, thank you Pabmusic. Some people were on the radio comparing their numbers of daily tablets. The starting point of the discussion was "I have nine, who can beat it?". Very quickly, many confessed to being on 32, 35, that sort of order, and on the NHS. My impression was that they were all in their 50s, 60s, 70s. No doubt something to look forward to!

[Pabmusic]

Yes, thank you Pabmusic. Some people were on the radio comparing their numbers of daily tablets. The starting point of the discussion was "I have nine, who can beat it?". Very quickly, many confessed to being on 32, 35, that sort of order, and on the NHS. My impression was that they were all in their 50s, 60s, 70s. No doubt something to look forward to!

I have to take three a day, but I suppose that's almost insignificant compared with numbers in the 30s.

[Dave2002]

Oops! Sorry! We're not supposed to take salt - we've been told it's bad for us. To think that wars in the Middle Ages were fought over supplies of salt!

I have suffered from salt deficiency - it's not nice. It can hit you if the weather is hot. Apparently only some tribes (were they African bush people?) have diets where they don't use salt, and they can cope as long as they never have it. If they ever introduce salt into their diet, then, like the rest of us, it becomes necessary.

I believe that I still have this from time to time, and I usually check by putting about half a teaspoon of salt into a glass, stirring it up, and then trying to drink it. If I can't taste it, then I drink the lot. Usually I feel better afterwards - considerably, and my breathing improves.

When I first had the problem of lack of salt I wondered what caused it, then my wife confessed that since we'd only recently bought a microwave oven, she'd been trying to be "healthy" and not putting any extra salt in our food. Since at that time we often had our own food, I didn't get the benefit of all the salt put in food bought at other outlets.

I do believe that excess salt can be a problem for us all, and can cause problems, but lack of it also causes problems, which is perhaps not widely known.

[Hornspieler]

When sports people and athletes get cramp, they take salt tablets.

'morning all,

HS

[Pabmusic]

I have suffered from salt deficiency - it's not nice. It can hit you if the weather is hot. Apparently only some tribes (were they African bush people?) have diets where they don't use salt, and they can cope as long as they never have it. If they ever introduce salt into their diet, then, like the rest of us, it becomes necessary.

This is accurate: http://www.bbc.co.uk/health/treatmen...thy_salt.shtml

The problem with sodium chloride is that our bodies need it, but cannot make it. That goes for bushmen (or whoever), who still need to find sources of salt. Fortunately, we need very little, and we can usually get enough from plants and animals without adding extra salt (this may be what you meant by saying some tribes don't use salt - they get enough from their usual diet). There have been archeological finds of 'salt sticks' - sticks that early humans soaked in the sea, dried in the sun and then sucked - so we've been at it a long time.

[Mr Pee]

And a brand new scare today, courtesy of the Daily Express:-

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/308456/Diabetes-warning-on-white-rice

Still, at least it makes a change from their usual headlines warning of apocalyptic weather or banging on about the late Princess Diana....

[Lateralthinking1]

And a brand new scare today, courtesy of the Daily Express:- http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/...-on-white-rice

Still, at least it makes a change from their usual headlines warning of apocalyptic weather or banging on about the late Princess Diana....

A bigger news story this week was yet another statement about antibiotics losing their effectiveness. According to the newspaper journalists, many of whom missed their true vocation and should have been producing horror films, this is imminent and people will be dying from grazed knees and strep throats.

While sensible lifestyle choices make more sense in that light, the emphasis, as always, is on ordinary members of the public being in the wrong and having to do what they are told. And, as always, the biggest culprits are the policy makers issuing the advice. They are the ones responsible for pouring antibiotics into the cattle providing our food on an industrial scale.

[salymap]

I know there is a risk with antibiotics - a relative is prescribed them repeatedly by her Dr but I haven't had any for years. However, during a recent blood test, the nurse was shocked to hear that I've been taking up to 8 Paracetamol every day for years. Has there been a warning about these then?

[amateur51]

I know there is a risk with antibiotics - a relative is prescribed them repeatedly by her Dr but I haven't had any for years. However, during a recent blood test, the nurse was shocked to hear that I've been taking up to 8 Paracetamol every day for years. Has there been a warning about these then?

I'm on the same dose, salymap and my GP does blood tests every six months for liver, kidney and thyroid function - I think the liver is susceptible to long-term paracetamol overuse.

This appeared at the end of last year ...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-15837468

but if you stick to your 8/day and get a regular liver function blood test, I should think that you'll be ok.

Always something, isn't there :erm

[salymap]

Thanks ams, I see I have averaged four a day recently so should be okay. I phoned about blood test result but they just said 'within limits' and put the phone down. no idea whether they do liver test but am on thyroxin.