The Washington Post
A silent crisis in men’s health gets worse
Across the life span -- from infancy to the teen years, midlife and old age -- boys and men are more likely to die than girls and women
By Tara Parker-Pope and Caitlin Gilbert
April 17, 2023 at 11:29 a.m. EDT
A silent crisis in men’s health is shortening the life spans of fathers, husbands, brothers and sons.
For years, the conventional wisdom has been that a lack of sex-specific health research mainly hurts women and gender minorities. While those concerns are real, a closer look at longevity data tells a more complicated story.
Across the life span — from infancy to the teen years, midlife and old age — the risk of death at every age is higher for boys and men than for girls and women.
The result is a growing longevity gap between men and women. In the United States, life expectancy in 2021 was 79.1 years for women and 73.2 years for men. That 5.9-year difference is the largest gap in a quarter-century.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/wellness ... ket-newtab
This was fed right to the top of my internet browser homepage. Right to the top.
Since this was published in The Washington Post, it would seem these statistics are somehow not serving the elite.
The first thing that comes to mind is an episode of the Brady Bunch from about 50 years ago where one of the kids is advised to say,
"Something suddenly came up."
Why is the Washington elite suddenly concerned about the health of men?
Is war imminent and the health of young men who are needed to serve as cannon fodder suddenly a concern?
Is the diminishing work force and the fact that many men evidently can no longer see their way through their 60s or even their 50s in the workforce suddenly a concern?
Is the fact that too many men are or may be leaving widows and orphans behind suddenly a concern?
"Something suddenly came up?"
Because, as a man, I know for a fact that the elites have no concern whatsoever for my health, or the health of any common man. They've proven that over and over and over again and, as the title of the article admits, have been silent while I have witnessed friends in crisis.
Every branch of the military is struggling to make its 2022 recruiting goals, officials say
With a record low number of Americans eligible to serve, and few of those willing to do it, this "is the year we question the sustainability of the all-volunteer force,” said an expert.
June 27, 2022, 3:30 AM CDT
By Courtney Kube and Molly Boigon
The pool of those eligible to join the military continues to shrink, with more young men and women than ever disqualified for obesity, drug use or criminal records. Last month, Army Chief of Staff Gen. James McConville testified before Congress that only 23% of Americans ages 17-24 are qualified to serve without a waiver to join, down from 29% in recent years.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/military/e ... -rcna35078
Higgenbotham wrote: Sat Dec 03, 2011 2:00 pm
I'm going to make a novice attempt to define the difference between the beginning of a Dark Age and a typical fourth turning crisis era.
First attempt: A Dark Age is defined as the social and political breakdown of a regional or world hegemonic power which creates a power vacuum for which there is no clear and immediate successor.
A lack of military recruits resulting from a 77% failure to meet basic standards is clearly indicative of a social and political breakdown that has the potential to create a power vacuum.
That's just one issue, though. One example of something less clear and less discussed is is the Marine Corps' Force Design 2030 which some feel will reduce readiness and flexibility to respond.
The divestitures proposed and underway to support FD 2030 have weakened the Marine Corps’ combined arms capabilities and threaten to significantly impair Marine Corps’ capabilities to meet worldwide contingency response. The tanks, cannon artillery, engineers, and short-range attack aviation seen as less relevant today are all outgrowths of General Thomas Holcomb’s reimagination of the Marine Corps that Wood rightfully points to as making profound contributions to the victory in World War II. FD 2030 will turn back the clock and return the Marine Corps to a pre-World War II force incapable of conducting large-scale operations. The Marine Corps must be able to respond to a wide range of contingencies and always succeed when tasked, if it is to continue its 247-year history of unparalleled service to the nation. What advocates of FD 2030 propose will ultimately result in an increasingly irrelevant Marine Corps, not its transformation into a force that is adequately prepared to act and serve in the twenty-first century.
https://nationalinterest.org/feature/fo ... nce-205734