Heavy drinking does the body no favors. It can lead to weakened heart muscle and irregular heart rhythms, as well as dementia, cancer and stroke. But could drinking just a little be heart healthy? The science is unsettled. While some research suggests that moderate drinking (up to a drink a day for women and up to two for men) is linked with lower rates of cardiovascular disease, the research does not prove cause and effect, Gianos cautions. For example, it could be that people who drink regularly take time to relax with loved ones, and that may be what is providing the heart benefit.

The great positive impact of public health programs is widely acknowledged. Due in part to the policies and actions developed through public health, the 20th century registered a decrease in the mortality rates for infants and children and a continual increase in life expectancy in most parts of the world. For example, it is estimated that life expectancy has increased for Americans by thirty years since 1900,[54] and worldwide by six years since 1990.[55]
Products and services offered are underwritten by All Savers Insurance Company, Golden Rule Insurance Company, Sirius International Insurance Corporation, United States Fire Insurance Company, Health Plan of Nevada, Inc., Oxford Health Plans (NJ), Inc., UnitedHealthcare Benefits Plan of California, UnitedHealthcare Community Plan, Inc., UnitedHealthcare Insurance Company, UnitedHealthcare Life Insurance Company, UnitedHealthcare of Colorado, Inc., UnitedHealthcare of Alabama, Inc., UnitedHealthcare of Arkansas, Inc., UnitedHealthcare of Florida, Inc., UnitedHealthcare of Georgia, Inc., UnitedHealthcare of Kentucky, LTD., UnitedHealthcare of Louisiana, Inc., UnitedHealthcare of the Mid-Atlantic, Inc., UnitedHealthcare of the Midlands, Inc., UnitedHealthcare of the Midwest, UnitedHealthcare of Mississippi, Inc., UnitedHealthcare of New England, Inc., UnitedHealthcare of New York, Inc., UnitedHealthcare of North Carolina, Inc., UnitedHealthcare of Ohio, Inc., UnitedHealthcare of Oklahoma, Inc., UnitedHealthcare of Pennsylvania, Inc., UnitedHealthcare of Washington, Inc.
Jump up ^ Bump, Jesse B. (19 October 2010). "The long road to universal health coverage. A century of lessons for development strategy" (PDF). Seattle: PATH. Retrieved 10 March 2013. Carrin and James have identified 1988—105 years after Bismarck's first sickness fund laws—as the date Germany achieved universal health coverage through this series of extensions to minimum benefit packages and expansions of the enrolled population. Bärnighausen and Sauerborn have quantified this long-term progressive increase in the proportion of the German population covered by public and private insurance. Their graph is reproduced below as Figure 1: German Population Enrolled in Health Insurance (%) 1885–1995.

In 2013 a state funded private care insurance was introduced ("Private Pflegeversicherung").[37] Insurance contracts that fit certain criteria are subsidised with 60 Euro per year. It is expected that the number of contracts will grow from 400,000 by end of 2013 to over a million within the next few years.[38] These contracts have been criticized by consumer rights foundations.[39]
The meaning of health has evolved over time. In keeping with the biomedical perspective, early definitions of health focused on the theme of the body's ability to function; health was seen as a state of normal function that could be disrupted from time to time by disease. An example of such a definition of health is: "a state characterized by anatomic, physiologic, and psychological integrity; ability to perform personally valued family, work, and community roles; ability to deal with physical, biological, psychological, and social stress".[7] Then in 1948, in a radical departure from previous definitions, the World Health Organization (WHO) proposed a definition that aimed higher: linking health to well-being, in terms of "physical, mental, and social well-being, and not merely the absence of disease and infirmity".[8] Although this definition was welcomed by some as being innovative, it was also criticized as being vague, excessively broad and was not construed as measurable. For a long time, it was set aside as an impractical ideal and most discussions of health returned to the practicality of the biomedical model.[9]
×