Work is good for your health?
Find a Conversation
| 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
That was quite the leap.
PumpkinAngel
The official reason for the war was the existence of WMDs. There was none and the preponderance of the evidence suggests that the lead hawks in the administration knew this full well before going to war. The claim that Iraq tried to purchase uranium from Niger has been shown to have been false information, and the administration had been informed of this, in writing, before the claim was made in the SotU address.
If you are in the army, you can't refuse to go to a specific war because you think the justification for the war is iffy. It doen't work that way.
Why was it a leap?
I haven't spent as much time sitting around message boards as other people seem to.
Was that an insult to you?
That is what I am guessing, since you haven't provided any factual evidence to any of your beliefs (despite being asked multiple times)...what else would you be basing your opinion on if not first hand knowledge?
PumpkinAngel
Exactly.
PumpkinAngel
Pages