[kayaeb]

I said that not having 400$ is a failure of fiscal planning and doesn't indicate that the population is poor.

Declining life expectancy is not an indication that the population is poor either. Consider that obesity, which is linked to higher mortality rates, did not become an issue until the 1900s in countries that passed wealth thresholds allowing such a problem at scale. Similarly with allergies, car crash fatalities, lead poisoning in paint, any number of life-shortening effects come from wealth in a society and are counterbalanced by improving health care levels.

[salty_biscuits]

I would expect that declining life expectancy is over-represented in the poorest stratum of society (but I will look this up to be sure). It is not going to be rich kids getting anaphylaxis that are making up the numbers. Even obesity prevalence will be a function of the SES of the individual within the population. Same with drug abuse etc, etc. If these things are getting worse while economic indicators for the country overall are positive, then it shows that inequality within the country is getting worse in real ways.

[ineedasername]

I was with you on car crashes & lead paint, but how do allergies come from a wealthy society? Or do you mean that only in a wealthy society are there resources/medical infrastructure available to diagnose them?

[salty_biscuits]

It would be a reference to the hygiene hypothesis, that being too "clean" leads to lack of exposure to things we evolved to encounter in the environment (worms mostly) which causes the immune system to go a bit wrong, causing allergies and autoimmune conditions.

[ineedasername]

Ah, okay. I've heard that before but thought it was basically fringe science. My assumption has simply been that allergies always existed like this, but those with more severe ones died off very young and the concept of "allergy" somewhat non existent. I'll admit the possibility though, ever if I'm very reluctant to lump it together with more obvious wealth-associatated issues.