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, 06-06-2006 - 10:17am
No, yawn, that you feel the need to come in and rescue people as if that will give her opinion more support that you are siding with her.
iVillage Member
Registered: 06-27-1998
Tue, 06-06-2006 - 10:17am

I'll give you one thing,

PumpkinAngel

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2006
Tue, 06-06-2006 - 10:19am
Sure, and it supports your viewpoint! How convenient!
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2006
Tue, 06-06-2006 - 10:20am
Why do you never support a claim that you have made?
iVillage Member
Registered: 06-27-1998
Tue, 06-06-2006 - 10:21am
< >>

PumpkinAngel

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Tue, 06-06-2006 - 10:23am

I doubt they can all be so phenomenally incompetent on the same question at the same time as to miss a connection between Saddam and 9/11. I also have friends who are experts on the Middle East in some way or another, but mostly diplomats and they all vouch for the validity of the conclusion.

Again, why do you cling to a belief in such a connection? What makes you think that there was such a connection?

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2006
Tue, 06-06-2006 - 10:24am

It's useless debating with you. It's either "irrelevant" or "personal" when you don't want to answer the questions.

I'll take the Fifth on the rest of your posts then too.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Tue, 06-06-2006 - 10:25am
Again, please tell me what supports your viewpoint?
iVillage Member
Registered: 06-27-1998
Tue, 06-06-2006 - 10:26am

<>


Well, since I am not a great leader of this country which was my statement...????

PumpkinAngel

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2006
Tue, 06-06-2006 - 10:26am

"I also have friends who are experts on the Middle East in some way or another, but mostly diplomats and they all vouch for the validity of the conclusion."

Of course you do. Someone on here always has "friends" that are personally connected to the debate at hand. So, how can I argue with someone who has "inside" information?

Why didn't you mention your "friends" when you first started posting. You know what's exactly going on then!

Pages