"HEALTH IS WEALTH."

Press, Volume LXVI, Issue 20056, 11 October 1930, Page 8

"HEALTH IS WEALTH."

The Committee's Slogan.

The slogan for this year's Health Week—-"Health Is Wealth"—may have become trite and hackneyed, like many another common saying, but it still retains its original and intrinsic truth. It is still the case that health can be transformed into coin, or currency, or lands and property, and the general application of the saying is not invalidated by the fact that some geniuses, despite chronic ill-health, have acquired wealth. But they did so in spite of, and not because of, ill-health. However, it is not necessary to interpret the terms of the slogan too liter- i ally. Obviously it is intended to convey that health is a most desirable thing, and wealth is mentioned as another desirable thing to emphasise the desirableness of health. The Health Week slogan, in fact, might be placed in the same category of pro- ! verbial philosophy as the Biblical saying: "Wisdom is better j than rubies, and all the things that may be desired are not to be compared to it." "Health is Wealth" probably is a version of the proverb: "Health is better than wealth," in which the desirableness of health is even more strongly emphasised than it is by the slogan. No doubt intended for the tardy, hesitant bachelor is the other proverb: A good wife and health Are a man's best wealth. Other common sayings assert: "Health without wealth is half a sickness," and "Health is not valued till sickness comes." From another angle the testimony of statistics may be adduced to support' the claim that "Health is wealth." The expenditures by Governments on Departments of Health surely indicate that the health of the community is of the highest value, otherwise their budgets for health services could not be justified. Take, for instance, the Ministry of Health, with its jurisdiction over England and Wales. For. the year 1929-30 the financial provision made for expenditure by this Department reached a total of £21,228,664. There is a separate Board of Health for Scotland, and its estimated expenditure, for the same period, was £3,099,518, making a grand total for England, Wales, and Scotland of £24,328,182. The functions of the Ministry of Health are much wider than, and its activities differ from the New Zealand Department of Health. The English Department, for instance, when set up in 1919, took over all the powers and duties of the Local Government Board; it is concerned also, amongst other matters, with the Insurance Commission and the Welsh Insurance Commission. Compared with the expenditure on health services in England, Wales, and Scotland, the expenditure on the New Zealand Department of Health appears quite modest, even when compared on a population basis. The actual expenditure in the year 1929-30 was £247,250, and the estimated expenditure for 1930-1 is £240,000. Probably it would be correct, for the purposes of comparison with the expenditure in Great Britain, to include certain other expenditure by the State in New Zealand on health services. The following table sets out the estimated expenditure for the current financial year and the actual expenditure during last financial year on those services: Estimates. Spent. 1930-31. 1929*30. £ £ Health Department .. 240,000 247,250 Mental Hospitals 310,000 307,040 Subsidies to Hospitals and charitable institutions 695,000 732,457 Totals .... _ M .. £1,245,000 £1,286,747 Many readers, no doubt, will be astonished to find that the subsidies paid to hospitals and charitable institutions exceed by such a large amount the expenditure on the HealthiDepartment. The loss to industry as represented by the working days lost as the result of; the sickness, accident, or injury of the worker is another strong proof that "Health is Wealth." Some statistics on this important matter were obtained during the census of 1926, and though the Government. Statistician in publishing them does not claim that they are exhaustive or complete, the figures are certain of interest as indicating the time lost from the causes mentioned. "From the summary showing the aggregate number of working days lost," the Government Statistician remarks, "an enormous wastage is apparent. Those cases returning'answers to the unemployment queries give an aggregate of nearly 8 million days lost in the year 1925. If the same ratio were applied to all cases the figure would approach 21 million days." A table relating to those actively engaged in some occupational pursuit-shows that in 1925 male workers lost 3,5.21,000 hours, and female workers 581,000 hours owing to sickness, accident, or injury, either received in the course of or otherwise than in the course of employment. Sickness or injury , was responsible for more ttiqri h-ilf of the total, and according to the returns sickness or injury received in the course of employment e-tilled greater effects than sickness or injury received otherwise.