Gap in Illness Rates Between Rich and Poor New Yorkers Is Widening, Study Shows

NY Times ^ | September 28, 2007 | SARAH KERSHAW

[neverdem]

The gap between the health of New Yorkers living in poverty and those with higher incomes has widened since the early 1990s, according to a survey released yesterday. It found that residents of poor neighborhoods in the city are experiencing alarming rates of diabetes and steady increases in other chronic illnesses like heart disease, while other residents have seen slower increases or even declines.

Health disparities are not new, but experts say the report by the city comptroller, William C. Thompson Jr., sharply underscores a greater gulf.

It also shows a costly and dangerous trend in health care today: preventable and manageable chronic illnesses are rapidly rising among low-income uninsured residents and are often not treated until they escalate to crises.

However, the report also showed that hospitalizations for asthma, a scourge of poorer neighborhoods, have plummeted and that infant mortality rates have also declined, as a result of aggressive community health campaigns.

City health officials have also recently reported success in reducing gaps in life expectancy, heart disease deaths and access to cancer screening.

“We will continue working to reduce disparities and help all New Yorkers live longer, healthier lives,” according to a statement released by the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene.

Still, the contrast between rich and poor neighborhoods in the rate of serious and deadly diseases portrayed in Mr. Thompson’s report was stark, according to data covering a 15-year period, 1990 to 2005.

Adult-onset diabetes, known as Type 2 diabetes, has skyrocketed at all but the highest income levels, with an 82 percent increase in hospitalizations in all 42 New York areas defined by the survey over the 15-year period. But in 2005, the increase in the city’s poorest areas — Hunts Point-Mott Haven; High Bridge-Morrisania; Crotona-Tremont; East Harlem; Williamsburg-Bushwick; Central Harlem; and East New York...

[SSS Two]

Enter race ethnicity chronic disease illness genetic predisposition into a search engine like Yahoo, Google, etc. and see what you find. Don't go to any hit, just the ones with credibility.

First, I must say that I'm more than a little uncomfortable that you equate items such as race and ethnicity with being poor. While I'm sure that a correlation exists, I'd prefer to look at poor Americans rather than race or ethnicity when evaluating this article. However, for the sake of simplicity, I will stipulate for the moment that race and ethnicity are appropriate proxies for low income.

The first quality hit (warning: .pdf) using the search terms you provided was from the Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology (diseases of the kidney). The article indicates that black Americans survive chronic kidney disease longer than white Americans due to a "different genetic makeup". Therefore, a disproportionate number of Americans suffering from end stage renal disease are black Americans.

I'm sure drawing conclusions from the first Google hit is far from scientific. But it certainly casts doubt on your theory that blacks (a proxy for the poor) are genetically inferior to whites.

[SunkenCiv]

Anything about the high cost of living indoors in NYC?

[neverdem]

First, I must say that I'm more than a little uncomfortable that you equate items such as race and ethnicity with being poor.

You have it backwards like the other sociologists, confusing correlation of income with the causation or outcome of illness. I couldn't recall the term last night. It's called whole genome association. In the future, I'll try to save it as the keyword wholegenomeassn.

Whole Genome Association Studies

Genome 2.0

Study Finds Evidence of Genetic Response to Diet

Study Finds Genetic Key to a Kind of Glaucoma

Global variation in copy number in the human genome

We are long past the Mendelian genetics that I learned long ago.

[neverdem]

I'm sure drawing conclusions from the first Google hit is far from scientific. But it certainly casts doubt on your theory that blacks (a proxy for the poor) are genetically inferior to whites.

I missed that statement. That's your conclusion, not mine. All I conclude is that there are differences in genetic predisposition that the politically correct want to ascribe to latent racism in the medical profession or socioeconomic status. I don't buy that stuff. When you study medicine and genetics, as I have, the differences leap off the pages you read.

These idiotic conclusions were reinforced by the first reports from the human genome project that we were all basically the same. Another erroneous conclusion was that 97 percent of our DNA was junk because it was noncoding DNA for recognized proteins. We don't know what we don't know.

[momincombatboots]

Additionally the famous danish study conducted revealed that overweight moms produces overweight babies and overweight teenage girls. This trend will continue in magnitude until our bodies figure it out. I am so tired of everyone blaming fast food, health insurance. Truth is fat begets fat begets fatter. I know this change was evident when I returned stateside after four years.

[VOA]

bump

[VOA]

bump

[Steamburg]

But, Her highness in their dialect, so they can better understand being subjects.