not enough to have a cat apparently.
Hold up…do people think that “healthcare” is a viable alternative to proper diet and exercise?
Is THAT why Americans see “healthcare” as a human right?!
I mean, every alternative to the garbage food we have is too expensive :/ been eating some baked kale with salt myself tho lately, super tasty, would recommend.
And people generally don’t take good care of themselves. We’re more likely to give our pets medicine than ourselves. But most Americans do not exercise anywhere close to what they should as well.
Idk. They did get rid of home economics in schools so nobody really knows cooking unless they were personally interested in it or had a parent teach them.
That was my reaction. I support universal healthcare but damn… comics like this make me think maybe we don’t deserve it.
“You can’t afford healthcare” has a big brother named “You’re already paying for healthcare monthly, but you can’t afford all the copays”
I’m paying for the insurance, but the nearest in-network provider taking new patients is a 90 minute drive. Is that a cousin to “You can’t afford healthcare”?
That sucks. I went to the closest ER and it was in network but I could only receive care from a different provider on the far side of the city. Its a 40 min bike ride, granted not as bad as 90 mins but why does heath insurance skimp on actually providing needed coverage to local networks
Ours is going up $100/mo next year
Self care and health care don’t substitute but complement each other. I think.
Me: “I landed a new job with good health care coverage! I can finally go to the doctor!”
Doctor: “You should improve your diet and exercise more.”
It’s not just you thinking so it’s literally truth. What’s the first thing doctors want you to do?
Stop helicoptering, put my clothes back on, and just sit in the chair?
They never told me that, seemed to always be alright with it.
To be fair, that wasn’t a doctor’s office. You still make an excellent point.
They always told me it’s small, but no one’s called it zero dimensional before, you savage.
You’re supposed to take care of yourself regardless bro
The actual payoff is that it makes you feel better and keeps you feeling better for longer.
Why go through the trouble to avoid sugar, when I can just shoot some insulin twice a day and have my leg amputated at age 45? /s
…and then you drop at 57 for something nobody could see coming. 😁 You pick which immunodeficiency, neurodegenerative or oncological problem.
1000 push-ups a day ain’t gonna save you from dementia.
Then again, people are living well into their nineties…but given what I’ve seen, I’m not so sure they feel better, regardless of their exercise regime, past or present.
It’s a wiggly world, friend. 🤝
1000 push-ups a day ain’t gonna save you from dementia.
Maybe not excessive pushups specifically, but healthy food and sane amounts of exercise HAVE been shown to decrease the risk or lessen the severity of aging related diseases, most cancers, and more.
It’s not a panacea and sometimes you still get the shit sandwich of unpreventable disease or accidents or whatever, but treating your body and brain like you want to keep them ABSOLUTELY makes you more resilient towards all sorts of unforeseeable maladies.
Wow, this is so true. I’m going to stop maintaining my relationships because anyone I know could get hit by a bus tomorrow. I’m also done with that stupid coursework, because what if I suffer a catastrophic brain injury that makes me forget everything I learned? I’m going to go rob a bank because the police could come and frame me for murder any day now. And I think I’m going to go jump off a cliff because death comes for us all anyway.
Sage advice, raoul.
Where in does my post does it say, “WARNING: Sage Advice. To be taken literally. Do not take with snark, sarcasm or facetiousness.”
Relax. You’ll live longer. 🤝
Retarded take. Full on.
Mh father has this take too, makes me want to make a neck swing.
This is basically the same as saying that you should not get a job because one day you might win the lottery.
Work IS for suckers. ❤️
From my experience 60’s is the thing. 50’s happen but its real rare (death or disability) but it becomes not so rare in 60’s and if you make it through 70’s your really lucky. 80’s are kinda a miracle and anyone making it past 90’s and into triple digits gets at least a local tv spot.
You know we exercise and eat well in countries that do have “free” healthcare too right? And you have noticed that richer people tend to live healthier lives too, no?
richer people tend to live healthier lives too, no?
YMMV. Richer people tend to have access to more amenities that can improve their health. But there’s something of a selection bias. You don’t see mega-millionaire celebrities like Chris Farley and John Candy or music celebrities like Amy Winehouse or Kurt Cobain around anymore because the Hollywood lifestyle caught up with them.
Cocaine kills plenty of rich people.
Celebrities are under a unique pressure that most rich people are not, which is generally non conducive to a long life.
Talk to any lawyer. Alcohol, more than coke, tends to be their poison. But as a profession, near universally, its a trainwreck.
Meanwhile, doctors smoke like chimneys. Software developers love their ket and mushrooms. God only knows what investment bankers are using.
I wouldn’t call it unique. Just easy to toss out names everyone is familiar with.
I used to say the same thing. Then they dismantled the NHS to the point that using that free healthcare is so difficult and so inept at diagnosing things on time, that the only thing you have left is exercise.
I hope it does not happen to you
That’s not the point, at all. People, and rich people especially, live healthier lives because it improves your quality of life dramatically, especially as you age. If you are expecting to rely on healthcare to save you from a shitty lifestyle, you will die long before your time regardless.
Precisely, additionally we’re collectively too poor for healthcare unless we do our best to reduce the need for it in the first place. That’s why many countries in the EU for example are trying to regulate people away from unhealthy behaviour. Healthcare costs are already disproportionately burdened by the workforce while those who benefit are people on their last legs, since your guaranteed necessary care (at least in the Finnish system). That’s why there have been talks to lax the guarantees of the healthcare system for e.g. people over 80, who cause almost the majority of all costs.
The society is planning on the basis that I’ll be a productive worker until 69,5 years old – that’s the recommended age for starting my government backed pension. Good luck making it that far without a rigorous focus on one’s health.
What do you mean lax the guarantees for people over 80? Just screw them, they worked for us, now let them rot and die? Lax it for alcoholics and people who at least had some choice!
They did not really work for us, but purposely built a pension system where they paid in about 10-13 % of their income towards the pensions, while reaching pension age between 60-65. That, and a public health sector that prioritises urgent care over preventative, meaning there’s insane queues for anyone who can wait as their health issues pile up – since they’re not in immediate risk of death. Most urgent care gets used by pensioners, leading to the budget not being enough for anything else.
My generation pays 24 % of all income as a pension contribution before all other taxes, pension age will be between 68-70 and the system still doesn’t have enough money and there’s pressure for increasing contributions even further. Still the current retirees have the audacity to complain if someone tells them they had it easier. The pension system was designed as an insurance, instead of everyone’s payments being invested. I have practically zero trust I’ll ever see a single cent of the money I put in.
Most of the ones responsible for actually building the welfare state are already dead, or close to dying. The ones I’m talking about are their children who chose to ignore all the problems they were presented with (like the ballooning costs of pensions and healthcare, and shrinking generations), and are now whining when the next generation doesn’t want to pay for all their mistakes.
The main reason I’m so fed up with the current retirees in Finland is, that there’s been insane amounts of austerity for years now – but the austerity measures never affect pensions as they’re treated as an earned benefit. Without any thought toward the fact that the first generations to actually “save” their pension in full (i.e. contributing enough) were those born in 60’s and 70’s, not the ones who are currently retired. Also the choices etc. are already taken into account, you don’t get a new liver if you’re an alcoholic and things like that.
Free healthcare won’t save you from getting stroke at 40 years old, and this coming from a country with free healthcare but heart disease being one of the leading cause of death in the country.
People always tell me that they smoke and eat unhealthy because they don’t want to live forever, and they somehow think it makes them sound hard af. My mom died of lung cancer and my dad is overweight as hell. Neither of these things seems fun.
Free healthcare won’t save you from getting stroke at 40 years old
It won’t save you from the stroke but it will warn you of the symptoms and risks, then offer you useful advise on how to avoid the condition as it approaches.
And, for those who have family that have endured a stroke at a relatively young age (my mom suffered one in her late 40s), you’ll discover its not a death sentence. You need immediate, highly professional short term care. And then you need a long term recovery plan, typically with some cocktail of pharmaceuticals to expedite it. Finally, you need regular checkups to prevent it from recurring. My mom’s currently in her late 70s, no obvious evidence of the condition, and she’s had a full, happy life since that very terrifying experience. A big part of that was access to professional health care.
Even with affordable health care, which is the norm outside the US, you would still want to eat healthy and exercise.
Also health care won’t be affordable for long if everyone just decides to indulge in unhealthy food and stops exercising
It actually will since old people cost the most. If you don’t live to old age you’re actually saving the system money.
Not I. I get more discouraged the less society tries. If society is not going to try why should I.
I get more discouraged the less society tries.
I haven’t seen a single prevailing trend within “society”. Its a cacophony of behaviors and opinions and organizations.
This is literally the capitalist argument against universal healthcare: “if everyone would get free healthcare, nobody would take care of themselves anymore, and costs would skyrocket”
When in reality, what you can do with exercise and eating healthy against many expensive conditions is only very little.
You can still get an expensive condition despite living a healthy lifestyle. This comic is bullshit.
You live a healthy lifestyle so you can get a better quality of life. So you don’t get out of breath by walking up a flight of stairs, so you have energy to go out after work when you’re 40, so you get to play with your grandchildren when you’re 70, so you don’t have to wither away in a nursing home when you’re 80.
"Abstaining from heavy drinking, eating unhealthy foods, smoking and womanizing may not make you live longer…
…but it’ll sure seem like it."
Recalled as best as possible from unremembered source. 🤷♂️ Sosumi
What you can do is limited, but the impact on your quality of life can be huge, especially at old age.
And the truth is that if people actually see their doctors regularly they are more likely to develop healthy habits.
If you see a doctor once a year you’re probably going to catch problems early on, when they are easier and cehaper to treat.
Part of me wonders, if the government just bought out a bunch of gyms and made them free for public use. Would the additional people now using the gyms and living healthier save the government long term on healthcare?
You’re basically describing a park. And we have tons of parks all over the country. They are regularly full of people going out to use them for exercise and entertainment. Idk if there’s a correlation between “distance from a public park” and “health outcomes of local residents”. But they’re attractive amenities that people tend to enjoy, even without a numerical cost-savings figure you can use to justify their expense.
Maybe, I do think there’s a difference. A gym exists solely for exercise and clearly people prefer to use them over parks and I assume the health return for time spent is greater for dedicated gyms.
Maybe, I do think there’s a difference.
There are parks with full blown gym setups in them. All body weight exercises and resistance machines, for practical reasons. But they exist.
Not really where I live. In my experience those kinds of parks are in rich outer suburban areas
…swing and a miss with the lesson.
here in Poland we had a soviet joke about how “Soviet Union courageously solves problems simply unheard of in the Western world”, you can say something similar about US now, like “United States cowardly fails to solve problems simply unheard of in other developed countries”
Exercising because you cannot afford healthcare offers the illusion of control, but it won’t solve the problem
