Jump to content

Scientists find rich and poor are 'biologically different'


Showster
 Share

Recommended Posts

http://www.straitstimes.com/world/scientists-find-rich-and-poor-are-biologically-different

 

Scientists find rich and poor are 'biologically different'

 

A Cambodian woman offers money to beggars in Phnom Penh.PHOTO: AFP

PUBLISHEDDEC 26, 2015, 4:16 AM SGT

Hormones that are out-of-balance in poor and uneducated people may explain why they age faster and are more vulnerable to disease than their more affluent peers, a new study suggests.

 

It has long been known that less affluent folk die earlier and are "biologically older" than the rich, with those in the most affluent areas expected to live around eight years longer than those in the poorest regions, according to a report in Britain's Daily Telegraph.

 

Now, researchers at University College London (UCL) may have worked out why.

 

 

After monitoring a cohort of 1,880 British men and women since 1946, they have discovered that hormones critical to healthy ageing are significantly out of balance in poorer people by the time they reach 60-64.

 

Men with the lowest household income - defined by less than £6,000 (S$12,000) a year - had 10 per cent lower testosterone than men earning £30,000 a year or higher, reported the Telegraph.

 

Low testosterone has been linked to weight gain, loss of muscle, osteoporosis and depression.

 

In contrast, women whose parents were unskilled workers had testosterone levels 15 per cent higher than the daughters of professionals.

 

In women, too much testosterone is linked to early puberty, infertility and polycystic ovaries.

 

Those with the lowest education in both sexes also had depleted levels of insulin-like growth factor (IGF) which has been linked to poor cognitive function and an increased risk of cancer and cardiovascular mortality.

 

Women with no qualifications had 16 per less IGF than women who had degrees. For men the difference was 8 per cent less IGF, the Telegraph reported.

 

Low levels of cortisol, which can lead to heart palpitations, depression, pain and insomnia, was also seen in both men and women with the lowest education.

 

Professor Diana Kuh, of the Medical Research Council’s Unit for Lifelong Health and Ageing at UCL said the hormonal differences showed how societal factors literally "get under the skin" and affect health.

 

“We found that socioeconomic disadvantage across life, based on father’s social class and on the study member’s education, social class and income, was associated with an adverse hormone profile," she said, according to the Telegraph.

 

“These hormones are thought to work together to ensure healthy development and also have many different roles in regulating health in older age.

 

“So our findings suggest that these socioeconomic differences in hormone systems may play a role in explaining social inequalities in health as we age.

 

“Hormones may be affected by exposure across life to stress and adverse events, health problems and obesity, and unhealthy lifestyles such as physical inactivity, poor diet, and smoking.”

 

It is already known that socio-economic status  has a major impact on health, with studies showing that being poor is associated with increased risks of cardiovascular, respiratory, rheumatic and psychiatric diseases, low birth weight and infant mortality.

 

Scientists believe psychological stresses of having a less secure future, being bossed around and having lower self-esteem and less access to social support networks cause an increased rate of molecular damage, said the Telegraph. Living in an area of high crime is also thought to accelerate ageing.

 

Dr David Bann, of the Institute of Education at UCL said: “Our study shows that people from a disadvantaged background are biologically different which could explain health inequalities.

 

“These hormone levels change with age, so it could potentially explain difference rates of ageing.”

 

But if the damage is being driven by an out-of-kilter hormone system, it may be possible to fix the disparities through better education and raising the standard of living.

 

Prof Di added: “We are examining the impact of these hormone differences in explaining inequalities in physical and mental functioning in older age.

 

“We are also looking at whether socioeconomic differences in other biological systems could help explain social inequalities in how fast we age.

 

“Our findings provide further evidence of the potentially harmful effects of social disadvantage on health, suggesting that reducing inequalities could have powerful benefits in improving the health of the population and reducing health-care expenditure.”

 

The research, which was based on data from the MRC National Survey of Health and Development was published in the journal Social Science and Medicine, the Telegraph said.

↡ Advertisement
Link to post
Share on other sites

i also worry.

 

hansome men like poker gets more gals and one nite stands than the average guys.

 

average looking guys like me needs to work harder just to know them

Edited by Staff69
  • Praise 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I only know rich people live longer since they can afford state of the art medical treatment, regular check up, famous doctors and eat nutritious food lol

 

Also, normally people wear rolex tend to have better longevity, it makes the person wear it feels good and happier

  • Praise 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

and the scientist needs 2000 years to find this out? muahahahaha

 

I only know rich people live longer since they can afford state of the art medical treatment, regular check up, famous doctors and eat nutritious food lol

Also, normally people wear rolex tend to have better longevity, it makes the person wear it feels good and happier

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I only know that smoke cigars can live quite long.

Cuba's life expectancy is easily 80yrs old.

 

When i was in Habana more than 10yrs ago, i saw many old people.

But they look strong and they still talk with a steady voice and walk everywhere they go.

They also smoke quite a bit if cigars and drank rum.

 

So i learn lor.....

Even wearing Rolex, i also learn from Cuba's ex president and finance minister, Fidel Castro and Che Guevara.

 

Viva Cuba Libre!

  • Praise 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Always thought rich people in advance economies are killed earlier by obesity.

 

Now the theory is poor has shorter life span.

Not true, Obesity is also a big problem with the poor in developed countries.

 

Cheap carbo rich food is the main culprit.

  • Praise 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Not true, Obesity is also a big problem with the poor in developed countries.

 

Cheap carbo rich food is the main culprit.

True hah, staple food like tapioca, sweet potatoes, yam , sweet corn ,flour.

 

Think Mexican tortillas is quite carbo loaded too. Can see from the middle age señoritas.

 

However, quite different for rice. For example, can't really see obese people in Cambodia majority are small-built.

Bananas too.

I meant food made from flour and banana are cheap and carbon loaded.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So the middle income is "biologically balanced"? LoL...

 

F.O.C (full of crap). :D

To establish a clearer picture, such studies usually remove the middle group.

 

For all you know, maybe the middle income group is also a biologically distinct group. Or might even have higher / lower testosterone levels than the other two groups.

Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/politics/12-per-cent-of-car-owning-households-in-singapore-have-2-cars-less-than-3-per-cent-own-3-or-more

12% of car-owning households have 2 cars, less than 3% own 3 cars or more

SINGAPORE - There are around 471,000 households that own cars in Singapore, of which 12 per cent – or 56,520 – have two cars.

Less than 3 per cent of these households, or 14,130, own three cars or more.

Giving this breakdown in Parliament on Tuesday, Transport Minister S. Iswaran said the proportion of car ownership has been relatively stable over the years, with no major shift in demand patterns that may have driven up prices for certificates of entitlement (COEs) in recent times.

Workers’ Party MP Gerald Giam (Aljunied GRC) asked if households that own multiple cars are fuelling the rise in COE premiums, noting that “because they tend to come from higher-income households, they have the ability to pay more for their COEs”.

He also asked if the Government will consider measures to curb the demand for Category A COE from households buying their second, or subsequent, smaller car.

The COE for smaller and less powerful cars and electric vehicles ended at $90,589 in the latest tender exercise, not far from the all-time high of $92,100 recorded in January 2013. Records have been set in other categories as well in 2022.

Responding, Mr Iswaran attributed the increase in COE premiums to tight supply instead of demand.

He also warned of “unintended consequences” in the market from adjusting the system.

He noted that vehicle deregistrations are partly affected by the 10-year COE cycle, because of the historical pattern of car registrations as well as existing owners who choose to deregister or renew their existing cars’ COEs.

“On balance, I would say that it does not necessarily follow that any effort to curb car ownership beyond the first car in any household will necessarily have a dampening effect on COE prices,” he said.

Mr Giam then asked if these households add to the demand for COEs, noting that 12 per cent of households having two cars is “not a small number”.

Replying, Mr Iswaran said the percentage of households owning multiple cars has been stable over a period of time, including periods when COE prices were “not so high”.

He also pointed out that Mr Giam’s question implies that higher-income households are the ones that own multiple cars.

“I would point out that households that own multiple cars are not just those that live in private residential housing. There is a distinct proportion that live in public housing.

“We have to have a policy that is informed by data and patterns,” he added.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Car sharing only mah...becos many professionals in one household lah...

ask RadX how many car he has... he'll howlian and say 3...one right, one left and one in the middle dedicated for chiong mission...😁

  • Haha! 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 12/26/2015 at 8:15 PM, Ender said:

Cheap carbo rich food is the main culprit.

I keep reminding myself cut down on carbon.

But our diet is rice rich... eat steak too expensive. 😅

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Windwaver said:

https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/politics/12-per-cent-of-car-owning-households-in-singapore-have-2-cars-less-than-3-per-cent-own-3-or-more

12% of car-owning households have 2 cars, less than 3% own 3 cars or more

SINGAPORE - There are around 471,000 households that own cars in Singapore, of which 12 per cent – or 56,520 – have two cars.

Less than 3 per cent of these households, or 14,130, own three cars or more.

Giving this breakdown in Parliament on Tuesday, Transport Minister S. Iswaran said the proportion of car ownership has been relatively stable over the years, with no major shift in demand patterns that may have driven up prices for certificates of entitlement (COEs) in recent times.

Workers’ Party MP Gerald Giam (Aljunied GRC) asked if households that own multiple cars are fuelling the rise in COE premiums, noting that “because they tend to come from higher-income households, they have the ability to pay more for their COEs”.

He also asked if the Government will consider measures to curb the demand for Category A COE from households buying their second, or subsequent, smaller car.

The COE for smaller and less powerful cars and electric vehicles ended at $90,589 in the latest tender exercise, not far from the all-time high of $92,100 recorded in January 2013. Records have been set in other categories as well in 2022.

Responding, Mr Iswaran attributed the increase in COE premiums to tight supply instead of demand.

He also warned of “unintended consequences” in the market from adjusting the system.

He noted that vehicle deregistrations are partly affected by the 10-year COE cycle, because of the historical pattern of car registrations as well as existing owners who choose to deregister or renew their existing cars’ COEs.

“On balance, I would say that it does not necessarily follow that any effort to curb car ownership beyond the first car in any household will necessarily have a dampening effect on COE prices,” he said.

Mr Giam then asked if these households add to the demand for COEs, noting that 12 per cent of households having two cars is “not a small number”.

Replying, Mr Iswaran said the percentage of households owning multiple cars has been stable over a period of time, including periods when COE prices were “not so high”.

He also pointed out that Mr Giam’s question implies that higher-income households are the ones that own multiple cars.

“I would point out that households that own multiple cars are not just those that live in private residential housing. There is a distinct proportion that live in public housing.

“We have to have a policy that is informed by data and patterns,” he added.

 

this one talk like no talk. 

  • Haha! 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Windwaver said:

https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/politics/12-per-cent-of-car-owning-households-in-singapore-have-2-cars-less-than-3-per-cent-own-3-or-more

12% of car-owning households have 2 cars, less than 3% own 3 cars or more

SINGAPORE - There are around 471,000 households that own cars in Singapore, of which 12 per cent – or 56,520 – have two cars.

Less than 3 per cent of these households, or 14,130, own three cars or more.

Giving this breakdown in Parliament on Tuesday, Transport Minister S. Iswaran said the proportion of car ownership has been relatively stable over the years, with no major shift in demand patterns that may have driven up prices for certificates of entitlement (COEs) in recent times.

Workers’ Party MP Gerald Giam (Aljunied GRC) asked if households that own multiple cars are fuelling the rise in COE premiums, noting that “because they tend to come from higher-income households, they have the ability to pay more for their COEs”.

He also asked if the Government will consider measures to curb the demand for Category A COE from households buying their second, or subsequent, smaller car.

The COE for smaller and less powerful cars and electric vehicles ended at $90,589 in the latest tender exercise, not far from the all-time high of $92,100 recorded in January 2013. Records have been set in other categories as well in 2022.

Responding, Mr Iswaran attributed the increase in COE premiums to tight supply instead of demand.

He also warned of “unintended consequences” in the market from adjusting the system.

He noted that vehicle deregistrations are partly affected by the 10-year COE cycle, because of the historical pattern of car registrations as well as existing owners who choose to deregister or renew their existing cars’ COEs.

“On balance, I would say that it does not necessarily follow that any effort to curb car ownership beyond the first car in any household will necessarily have a dampening effect on COE prices,” he said.

Mr Giam then asked if these households add to the demand for COEs, noting that 12 per cent of households having two cars is “not a small number”.

Replying, Mr Iswaran said the percentage of households owning multiple cars has been stable over a period of time, including periods when COE prices were “not so high”.

He also pointed out that Mr Giam’s question implies that higher-income households are the ones that own multiple cars.

“I would point out that households that own multiple cars are not just those that live in private residential housing. There is a distinct proportion that live in public housing.

“We have to have a policy that is informed by data and patterns,” he added.

 

It's the car sharing and grab/gojek companies driving up COE Premiums. Like how the Taiwanese say it, you know even if you think with your knees. I am surprised WP asked an irrelevant question. 

↡ Advertisement
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...