One of the most disturbing trends
in American public health is that women's life expectancy is shrinking in many
parts of the U.S. Women's longevity took
an unprecedented nosedive during the past decade, researchers recently
discovered, with their life expectancy tumbling or stagnating in one of every
five counties in the country.
In Connecticut, for example, New
London County saw a drop in longevity, while Fairfield and Hartford counties
saw significant jumps. The last time life expectancy fell for a large number of
American women was 1918, due to Spanish influenza.
Growing Work, Family Stress
While many scientists believe
that smoking and obesity are driving the downward spiral, a growing chorus of
experts contends that chronic stress may be a key culprit, too — especially the
stress of juggling work and family. "It's a hypothesis at this point, but
a reasonable and plausible one," said James S. House, a professor at the
University of Michigan's Institute for Social Research. Women may have gained
work opportunities over the last four decades, he said, but society has done
relatively little to help them support their increased responsibilities.
"Clearly, obesity and
smoking are things that contribute to chronic disease and reduced life
span," said Carolyn Mazure, director of Women's Health Research at Yale,
which funds interdisciplinary research on gender differences in health. "There
is really no question in my mind that stress plays a role in that algorithm,
especially for women."
Life expectancy studies show that
women's projected longevity declined or stagnated in 662 counties in the United
States — more than 20 percent of the 3,198 counties in the nation — between
1999 and 2009. The largest declines are in parts of the South, Appalachia and
the southern portion of the Midwest. Even in counties where women are living
longer, their extra years are often marred by chronic diseases or disabilities,
said Chloe Bird, a senior sociologist at the Rand Corp.
The projections for women are in
stark contrast to changes in American men's life expectancy, which had
downturns in only 167, or five percent, of the nation's counties, according to
a study by the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME) at the
University of Washington in Seattle.
In Connecticut, women's life
expectancy is 82.6 years for girls born in 2009, compared to 81.3 years in the
U.S. as a whole. Overall, the life expectancy for Connecticut women increased
1.5 years between 1999 and 2009 — slightly less than the U.S. average of 1.7
years. But within the state, there are differences. Longevity for women in
Fairfield County is the highest in Connecticut — 83.7 years, which is a longer
life expectancy than the national average, and more than two years longer than
that of Windham County (81 years).
In terms of change over the last
decade, Fairfield and Hartford counties saw the largest jumps in female
longevity, with increases of 2.2 years since 1999. At the other end of the
spectrum, women in New London lost 0.1 year over the last decade, while women
in New Haven, Litchfield and Windham saw gains lower than the U.S. average.
Ridged Schedules and No Childcare
At Harvard University, Lisa
Berkman, director of the Center for Population and Development Studies, said
challenging social conditions in the U.S. have created a "perfect
storm" that can damage women's health. Not only did women flood into the job market
over the past few decades, she notes, but the number of single parents
skyrocketed. Despite these major changes, the U.S. has created few policies to
help women handle childcare. As a result, there are "extreme stresses even
on the relatively advantaged," Berkman said.
Job stress can be particularly
damaging for employees who hold jobs with rigid hours and high demands, such as
clerical, administrative or production work, researchers have found. When
Berkman studied women stressed by work and family conflict, she found they had
more medical issues than other working women. She looked at women who worked in
elder care facilities, comparing those who had rigid and flexible job
schedules.
Women with rigid schedules were
twice as likely as women with more flexibility to have at least two risk
factors for cardiovascular disease, such as high blood pressure, high
cholesterol, being overweight or smoking, Berkman found. Another study, by
Harvard Professor Michelle Albert, concluded that women with all sorts of
demanding jobs were 38 percent more likely to have strokes, heart attacks or
cardiovascular problems, compared to women with less demanding work.
"Chronic stress may promote
earlier onset of chronic diseases," said Elissa Epel, an associate
psychiatry professor at the University of California, San Francisco, who helped
discover that such stress wears down telomeres, the protective tips of chromosomes,
which have been linked with longevity. "Chronic stress speeds up the aging
clock," Epel stated.
Food, Exercise, Smoking, Family
Care
Some studies suggest that women
are more likely than men to soothe themselves by eating, the Rand Corporation's
Bird said. They may also be more likely to reduce exercising so they can
fulfill their work and family obligations, she said.
Work and family demands also can
increase the amount of stress hormones surging through women's bodies, Bird
said. Women do not experience the same decline in stress hormones as men during
lunch breaks or after work, since they often use those hours to deal with
family issues. Stress can affect health in two distinct ways. There may be
physiological changes, due to excess stress hormones, like cortisol. But it
also may cause women to change their behaviors, cutting out such healthy
activities as exercise, or indulging in smoking or overeating.
Mazure, of the Yale School of
Medicine's center on Women's Health Research, was among a cadre of researchers
who began studying the impact of stress on women's health in the 1990s. Even as
studies have shown that stress is closely tied to depression, cardiac disease
and other chronic illnesses in women, "we know a fraction of what there is
to know" about gender differences, she said.
Among the ongoing studies at the
Yale center is one examining gender differences in the neurobiological pathways
involved in smoking — an attempt to explain why nicotine replacement therapies
used for quitting have not been as effective for women as for men.
IHME analyzed the new mortality
data by age, sex, and county, from 1989 to 2009. Across U.S. counties, life
expectancy in 2009 ranged from 66.1 to 81.6 years for men, and 73.5 to 86.0
years for women. From 1989 to 2009, life expectancy for men improved by 4.6
years on average, but only by 2.7 years for women. The 2009 longevity numbers
also show a growing gap between women living the longest lives and those living
the shortest. In Collier, Fla., women live 85.8 years on average. In McDowell,
W. Va., they live to be 74.1. That's an 11.7-year gap. In 1989, the gap was 8.7
years.
U.S. Fares Worse Internationally
International data show that
American women are faring worse than their counterparts in other countries.
While 50-year-old women in the U.S. had the 11th-longest life expectancy among
industrialized nations in 1980, their international ranking plummeted to 21st
by 2006. Data from 2010 show American women's life expectancy at 80.8 years,
compared to the world's highest life expectancy for women in Japan, 85.7 years,
and 84.4 years for women in France.
Overall, American women were
extending their longevity at a much slower pace than women in other countries,
even though the U.S. was spending much more than other nations on medical care.
The National Research Council became so concerned about these international
health trends that it convened a 15-member panel to examine seven possible risk
factors, including smoking, obesity, social inequality and the U.S. health care
system.
Last year, it concluded that
smoking played a major role, accounting for 78 percent of the life expectancy
gap between American women and those from industrialized countries in 2003.
American women began smoking later than men, which experts say may explain why
women now have more smoking-related illnesses. Obesity also played an important
role, the panel concluded.
Shortly after the report was completed,
Berkman, who served on the panel, said she realized the committee had made a
glaring omission. "It hit me like a sledgehammer," she said. The
panel had not evaluated the impact of work stress, let alone work-family
stress, on life expectancy. Now, Berkman is leading a new study, funded by the
National Institute on Aging, which explores the effects of stress on women's
health and possible interventions. Berkman doesn't think it's a coincidence
that American women began suffering from more health problems after they
entered the workforce in greater numbers. As American women began working more
after World War II, their fertility remained the same, as did the paucity of
work-family accommodations.
That's a contrast to some
European countries, where women received more government support to deal with
their dual roles or decided to have fewer children. In France, where women have
the second-highest life expectancy in the world, childcare options are
plentiful, and women with three or more children are eligible for up to 24
weeks of paid maternity leave. In Italy, where female life expectancy also
remains high, the fertility rate has dropped in recent decades.
Both Berkman and House
acknowledge that smoking and obesity clearly hurt female life expectancy. But
they say they may be consequences of women's stress — not the primary driver of
what's harming women. House's current research suggests that smoking may
explain only about 10 to 25 percent of women's health decline. "Women are
taking care of lots of other people, and they are not taking care of
themselves," he said.
Source: New America Media
Please share
No comments:
Post a Comment