The life expectancy for Nunavik, 66.7 years, is worse than for Iraq or Uzbekistan.
NunatsiaqOnline: Better housing, less disease
http://bit.ly/yt1jGL
"This one talks about the relationship between Inuit housing and disease. And that's a big part of the discussion about why Inuit don't live as long as other Canadians.
The Nunavut government's 2011 health indicators report, quietly released this November, reported that if you were born in Nunavut in 2005, you can expect to live 69.8 years. If you were born just about anywhere else in Canada, you can expect to live 80.2 years.
In Nunavik, the state of population health is even worse. This past May, the Conference Board of Canada found the life expectancy for Nunavik, 66.7 years, is worse than for Iraq or Uzbekistan.
This means that to achieve those appalling averages, the people of Canada's Arctic start dying in their 50s, in middle age, a time of life when most people elsewhere in Canada still enjoy robust health.
But until NAHO's report no one has ever attempted to bring together all the available information about overcrowded Arctic housing conditions and link it to all the available information about disease.
And the list of those diseases is breathtaking. They include tuberculosis, from which Inuit suffer the highest infection rates in Canada, as well as asthma, influenza, hepatitis, bacterial ear infections, infant lung infections, and skin diseases.
Most of those infections occur when too many people find themselves sharing too little space. Inside overcrowded houses, the microscopic bugs that produce these diseases spread easily from person to person, especially in the dry air of winter."
2 comments:
So, again, you have identified a problem but the solution seems to be the usual 'throw money at it'. Maybe the question shouldn't "Do Inuit die younger because they live in small houses" and instead ask why they live in small houses?
These are people who live so far north everything needs to be flown in or shipped in the summer. So, considering that Inuit before contact most assuredly had an even worse life expectancy, is it really our responsibility to raise them to the level of southern Canadians, especially given they can move south any time they want?
Just like Attawapiskat, the choices in living these people make have consequences. We can mitigate them but only so much, and I don't think I need to feel guilty or empty my wallet to support their choices.
The rat is right again!!
A one way ticket to YYZ solves the problem.
I do not think it has much to do with small houses.
Alcoholism, obesity, suicide are probably factors.
Diet such as lack of fresh fruit and vegetables is probably another.
Education can be a factor as well though I suspect it is more difficult to pinpoint. The sample size is probably too small to rely on any stats in the first place.
Consider that many Inuit will leave the area to live elsewhere (especially the educated ones); I suspect that the solution of building more houses is simply going to fail just like all other solutions have in the past.
We need to rid ourselves of this kind of thinking.
Post a Comment