Work is good for your health?

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Work is good for your health?
1599
Mon, 05-15-2006 - 5:25am

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/healthnews.php?newsid=43421
Working Mothers Healthier Than Full-time Housewives

Main Category: Women's Health / OBGYN News
Article Date: 15 May 2006 - 1:00am (PDT)

According to new research carried out in Britain, working mothers enjoy better health than full-time housewives. Despite the stress working mothers face by holding down a job, dealing with childcare, housework and striving to keep the family happy.

It appears that working mothers, when compared to full-time housewives, are less likely to become overweight, have a better level of health and a healthier relationship. The study also found that single mothers experience worse health than working mothers who have a partner and children.

You can read about this study in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health.

Team leader, Dr. Anne McMunn, University College London, said that women who combine work with children and marriage do seem to have better health than full-time housewives. Even though they may experience high levels of stress sometimes.

It is not a question of chicken-and-egg either. Dr. McMunn said it is the experience of work plus having a family that brings on the better health, not the fact that only healthier mothers decide to carry on working.

The researchers examined data on women born in 1946 from the Medical Research Council's National Study of Health and Development. The data registers their health from 1946 until they are 54. Women's health was examined, with the help of a questionnaire at the ages of 26 through to 54. Every decade, the questionnaire collects data on each woman's work history, whether she is/was married, has children, her height and weight.

The healthiest women were the ones who had all three of the following:

-- A Partner
-- Children
-- A job

Those reporting the worst health were stay-at-home mothers, followed by childless women and single mothers.

38% of stay-at-home mothers were obese when they reached their 50s, for working mothers the percentage was 23%.

Written by: Christian Nordqvist
Editor: Medical News Today

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2006
Tue, 05-30-2006 - 10:24am
You are exactly right. Only time will tell. And I would never let anyone try to sway my opinion or try to silence them.
iVillage Member
Registered: 01-13-2006
Tue, 05-30-2006 - 10:25am
no more than i would like all the countries of the world to be ruled by someone like gwb
Jennie
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Tue, 05-30-2006 - 10:25am

No, it has been established beyond the shadow of any doubt that Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11. This is not good enough for me or just about any thinking person at this point. What do you mean by "provided them the means"? You think Saddam gave them the planes?

It is really not my opinion. It is established fact that you are simply wrong about this.

As far as dictatorships,

1. Saddam being a dictator of Iraq in no way affects the likelihood of any other country becoming a dictatorship.

2. there are tons of dictatorships in this world, and I still do not understand how that is any of our concern. The US seems to have splendid relations with China in many ways, and last time I checked that was a dictatorship as well.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2006
Tue, 05-30-2006 - 10:26am

Why does there only have to be one reason to get rid of him? I think we killed a couple of birds with one stone.

Also, I think Clinton fudged that one up: trying to capture Bin Laden. But, that's another debate for another time.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2006
Tue, 05-30-2006 - 10:29am

Okay, Sild, let me let you go on about your day with a clear conscience that you are the winner. Believe what you want to believe and I'll believe what I want.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Tue, 05-30-2006 - 10:30am

There is no credible evidence of any kind that he did so. If the administration had such evidence, don't you think they would have trotted it out by now?

All credible people I have come across, in person and in writing, left and right, agree that Saddam did not have diddley to do with 9/11 or Islamic terrorism more generally. Like I said, I am simply stating fact here. If you choose to maintain a belief in the man in the moon or alien abductions, that is your choice. OTOH, you can hardly be surprised that others do not join in your belief.

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-13-2006
Tue, 05-30-2006 - 10:34am
clinton fudged it up - get real - gwb has spent billions of dollars and thousands of lives trying to get obl - and still is no closer than the day he started, talk about fudging something up
Jennie
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Tue, 05-30-2006 - 10:40am

Please provide a link to any source anywhere that claims Saddam harbored or trained terrorists.

<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> 

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2006
Tue, 05-30-2006 - 10:41am

Clinton didn't miss an opportunity to get him? Who was president first? I believe it was good ol' boy Clinton.

So, you get real.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Tue, 05-30-2006 - 10:42am

Do your beliefs go any deeper than Republican administration = right, Democratic administration = wrong?


Has Bush or any other Republican president ever made any incorrec decisions, IYO?

<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> 

Pages