Cycling UK Forum

The latest figures show 2.8 million people in the UK on long-term sick and unable to work. I presume the figure excludes the rich (who don't need to work), pensioners (over 67), full-time parents and students. I also presume it it excludes those who are actually unemployed but able and willing to work. So these are relatively young people (i.e. not older people in their seventies hoping but unable due to ill-health to take on say a part-time job). Again I presume that the figure also excludes people who have had say a serious accident and are on the road to recovery.

So my question is, is this figure significant? Could it be a reflection of the poor state of cycling in the country? Is it a result of people not doing enough Michael Mosley Just One Things? Is it diet? Is it exercise? I would have thought that industrial illness and disease are far less than they were. Is it the failure of the National Health Service to achieve higher levels of health?

My own focus now I'm 70 tends to be health in older age when of course there are other issues and any measure of health is something to be celebrated. So I'm wondering what is going on. BTW while there are no doubt a few malingerers in this figure, I firmly believe that nearly all are genuine and deserving of government support.

Any views or perspectives on this?

Yes. Reducing the burden of both physical and mental ill health should be a part of all national policies. And big economic gains are available.

And many of the required interventions won't look like "healthcare".

Jonathan

ANalysis here (not sure if this is exactly the same dataset)

https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlab ... 2019to2023

Another graph.
It is what is says it is, so does exclude all other reasons for “economic inactivity”.

The increase since 2019 is so steep that I find it hard to believe that it’s entirely down to “lifestyle factors” coming home to roost, and it possibly needs to be looked at it in context of multiple things, for instance: demographic bulge meaning that we have a higher than historical proportion of 55-64yo; health service overstretch and cuts, causing people to wait “forever” for treatments; the psychological (and possibly physiological) impact of the pandemic; etc.

Yes, the numbers are indeed signficant. In addition to this sudden increase in long-term sickness there have been an unexpectedly high number of excess deaths which have continued long after Covid infections fell, including in the young. This is not isolated to the UK, it appears around the Western world.

Looking at the chart above, a steady increase appears through 2019, before falling slightly before the Covid period of 2020, which itself falls back only to take off with a more aggressive rise from around May 2021.

I see the Guardian noted around a year ago that claims had doubled through 2022, with teenagers the fastest rising age group claiming disability benefits.

Biospace wrote: ↑5 Feb 2024, 2:16pm Yes, the numbers are indeed signficant. In addition to this sudden increase in long-term sickness there have been an unexpectedly high number of excess deaths which have continued long after Covid infections fell, including in the young. This is not isolated to the UK, it appears around the Western world.

Looking at the chart above, a steady increase appears through 2019, before falling slightly before the Covid period of 2020, which itself falls back only to take off with a more aggressive rise from around May 2021.

I see the Guardian noted around a year ago that claims had doubled through 2022, with teenagers the fastest rising age group claiming disability benefits.

re emboldened

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lane ... 1/fulltext

The causes of these excess deaths are likely to be multiple and could include the direct effects of Covid-19 infection,1 acute pressures on NHS acute services resulting in poorer outcomes from episodes of acute illness,4 and disruption to chronic disease detection and management.5 Further analysis by cause and by age- and sex-group may help quantify the relative contributions of these causes.

The excess deaths numbers almost look like a “long tail” from the pandemic, don’t they?

Report on BBC today about poor health among small children too - you get the impression that as a nation we’ve got “less well” overall since 2019.

Two more groups of people that I think are excluded from "long-term sick" are the disabled (AFAIK) and another what must be huge group of people who are ill enough to find work difficult but are not ill enough to get signed off (especially given what seem to be quite harsh hurdles to leap over:

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2024/ ... uk-pension

This obviously affects many of those women who were expecting a pension at 60 and never got it but it still leaves the fact that many are sick even if still having to work.

This means that the 2.8 million figure is not only strictly restricted to those who are too ill to work on a long term basis (so that is a big number) but must also be a huge under-estimate as it excludes (as the Guardian article points out) all those people in say their fifties and sixties who struggle with ill-health but still work. We also don't know AFAICS the number of people who are rich enough to not work (or can just about manage financially without working) but couldn't even if they wanted to.

My social circle nowadays tends to be people of my own age group, so past working age (and the ones I see are fit and active enough to get out and be seen) and younger people of my daughters' generation. This means I don't have much contact with those probably most affected.

Nearholmer wrote: ↑5 Feb 2024, 2:27pm The excess deaths numbers almost look like a “long tail” from the pandemic, don’t they?

Report on BBC today about poor health among small children too - you get the impression that as a nation we’ve got “less well” overall since 2019.

Absolutely, yes. Are you suggesting they're mostly deaths because of a Covid 'infection'?

It's upsetting to see such young children in the news for the reasons they are, today.

There are few incentives to keep yourself healthy - indeed it can be an expensive business - e.g. eating decent food. On the other side we are bombarded with junk food adds and promotions.

Public information programmes don't work. People don't like being told what to do or being made to feel guilty about their lifestyle.

If any government was serious about this (and they bloody well should be) they would devise ways to financially incentivise healthy living. It could be cost-neutral to the country, certainly in the mid/long term. Anything else is just wind.

BBC R4 Tim Spector on relation of diet to illness https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m001vs7d

Nearholmer wrote: ↑5 Feb 2024, 1:24pm Another graph.

IMG_3117.jpeg

It is what is says it is, so does exclude all other reasons for “economic inactivity”.

The increase since 2019 is so steep that I find it hard to believe that it’s entirely down to “lifestyle factors” coming home to roost, and it possibly needs to be looked at it in context of multiple things, for instance: demographic bulge meaning that we have a higher than historical proportion of 55-64yo; health service overstretch and cuts, causing people to wait “forever” for treatments; the psychological (and possibly physiological) impact of the pandemic; etc.

if you weighted that against population growth, there was more off sick at the turn of the century

^^^

I’m not at all sure you’re right, although turning it into per-capita numbers does alter the ‘feel’.

What it doesn’t alter is that is got better, then got worse again very steeply.

Based on their GDP data, the biggest economies in the world in 2023 were the United States, China, Japan, Germany, and India. In addition to these countries, the United Kingdom, France, Italy, Canada, and Brazil were also among the top 10 GDP countries.

You are of course correct.All governments fudge this issue.People in their 60's plus approaching retirement.Also the stalwart carers are getting a raw deal.They exist on soup and baked beans.But why? .Are there reasons.Are these reasons good?

Note the UK is no longer in the 60's where USA,Germany and UK dominated industrial production.All nice things need to be paid for.The reason taxes are so high ?.A good proportion of tax goes to service UK debt interest.The IMF were wary of a UK (2024 electoral tax give away for partly this reason.

China has a high ranking .Made in China now delivers eg the best world quality EV Cars (50% of world market) 70% of high quality batteries,same for solar batteries.The C919 airliner will undercut the Boeing 737 in a decade (China also make top class bicycles(75% by world volume).It does raise the Chinese living standards.This can only be a good thing,at the cost of state subsidy.

Simply put UK PLC rightly does not want to add to debt and Labour who will probably be next agrees as well.

toontra wrote: ↑5 Feb 2024, 2:40pm There are few incentives to keep yourself healthy - indeed it can be an expensive business - e.g. eating decent food. On the other side we are bombarded with junk food adds and promotions.

Public information programmes don't work. People don't like being told what to do or being made to feel guilty about their lifestyle.

If any government was serious about this (and they bloody well should be) they would devise ways to financially incentivise healthy living. It could be cost-neutral to the country, certainly in the mid/long term. Anything else is just wind.

It would most likely be better than cost neutral, in the longer term or perhaps even less. Istr the reduction in 'heart attacks' and other acute events shortly after smoking was prohibited inside pubs in Scotland was remarkable.

Sadly, heart disease, heart failure and strokes have seen a marked upwards trend in the last 3 or 4 years and even more concerningly, this has happened in younger age groups.

Nearholmer wrote: ↑5 Feb 2024, 2:45pm ...
What it doesn’t alter is that is got better, then got worse again very steeply.

Very steeply. Does anyone know if there been this sort of serious fall in health and rise in excess deaths after other 'pandemics'? I would expect excess deaths to be significantly lower than average after a novel illness has swept through a population, for example.

Biospace wrote: ↑5 Feb 2024, 3:56pm
Very steeply. Does anyone know if there been this sort of serious fall in health and rise in excess deaths after other 'pandemics'? I would expect excess deaths to be significantly lower than average after a novel illness has swept through a population, for example.

I've no idea what historic data there is in pandemics, but there are for sure strong drivers to increase mortality after covid:

- covid is systemic, damaging multiple organs. You might expect infection related issues to impact mortality.
- impact on health services from backlog of untreated illness
- impact of lockdown on mental health
- impact of lock down on obesity.

etc.

I agree that covid selectively killing the most vulnerable might be expected to have the opposite effect I've zero indict into what would be predicted as the net effect.