Read this yesterday. I think they didn't figure in all the "new" ailments. In my dad's day they dumped things into very broad diagnoses. Now every little ache, pain, etc. is its own illness.

We go to the Dr more. We don’t smoke as much. We live longer.

Remember, unless we look it up, (I didn’t) we aren’t reading the study, we are reading a MSM report on the study. I think the MSM has an agenda- Everything is bad now. And it doesn’t matter who the President is, it cuts across politics. The MSM does it because it gets them clicks. But why does it get them clicks?

Our lives are mostly miracles by historic standards, why is there to much unhappiness about it? (Rant over.)

misterhub wrote: »

The study is conveniently linked within the article. If you choose read it, that is on you, not the media.

Seems to be behind a paywall for a significant sum. But while I’m nitpicking look at the link and then look at the article. The link says it’s about “poorer-health.” That’s the work of someone looking for clicks. That is not the title of the article or the study.

But the point I’m trying to make is the fact that more people are living with chronic conditions or multiple chronic conditions doesn’t necessarily translate in to poorer health for boomers. There needs to be some accounting for the people who didn’t drop dead of heart attacks at 60 oe younger because of a lifetime of smoking. Same for cancer survival. If I had been diagnosed with bladder cancer in 1972 instead of 2012, I’d likely be dead by now.