Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeod
So these victims have been exposed to the lifestyle changes/patterns that would minimize their risk. Whether they take heed is a personal choice.
However, house fires are not fussy about the age of their victims. Young or old, it doesn't matter. I always think it is especially tragic when I read of toddlers and infants dying in house fires, since their lives are so dependent on the adults with whom they reside.
I suspect the lower number of victims of house fires is partially due to the years that smoke and CO detectors have been available at reasonable cost and, in some cases, required by code.
|
Do we need to weigh one against the other? The number of children that die in fires every year is about 800. While the number of deaths due to heart attacks and strokes is 800,000. How many adults does it take to equal one child? Just because it's tragic when a child dies doesn't mean we shouldn't value older people. And I'm sure you do; I don't doubt that.
An older person may be someone's spouse, father, grandfather, valued employee, or president of the United States. (Bill Clinton had coronary artery disease.)
I think a life is a life and all life is precious.
Do you think we should take the attitude that adults should know better, so, essentially, let them get the health they deserve? Maybe so, but who do you think will end up paying their health care tab? That's another issue we need to think about. In 2008 the total health care cost in the U.S. was about 2.4 trillion. I remember not that long ago warning people that it would soon be 2 trillion. Now the warning is that it will soon be 3 trillion in a few years. As baby boomers age, it will be 3 trillion and then 4 trillion.