FALLING DEATH RATE.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19906, 28 September 1926, Page 13

FALLING DEATH RATE.

AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND. On tile occasion of the reading of a paper by ivfr L. B. Golden, A.1.A., of Wellington, at a meeting 01 actuaries in Sydney, an interesting discussion took, place regarding the tact that the rates of mortality were shown by the paper to be lower in New Zealand than in Australia (states the Wellington livening Post), it was pointed out by more than one of the speakers that thougn there was a tendency in several countries to exhibit a falling death-rate, the mortality of New Zealand was lower than elsewhere. Australia, though show, ing higher rates than New Zealand, was improving at a faster rate than New Zealand. . The president. Mr Latham, considered that these facts should put the Australians upon their pride to hasten the improvetnent. „ Mr A. T. Travers', F.1.A.. of Wellington. who was present, taking the part of advocatus diaboli, pointed out that mortality tables were not strictly a measure of vitality, but rather of the interplay of the two forces vitality and environment, taking the latter expression to mean all the things working against vitality. Contrasting the improved mortality rate among Europeans when they came to Australia, he said the European environment was much more severe. There they had had the most severe of all environments —namely, contact with other races by way of war, economic struggle, and disease. Europe facilitated all these things in a superlative degree, and consequently the European populations had generally a large reserve energy which, upon transference to Australia and New Zealand, where there were no other populations to struggle with or to rub against, and where there was ease, wealth, and room, manifested itself at once in the guise of a reduced rate of mortality. The historic troubles of the European peoples, particularly the armed struggles, had not only made Europeans tough, but had transferred upon them the supreme gift of organisation, which they at once commenced to use in these colonies to make the environment still easier by means of drainage boards, doctors, water supply, etc., thus further lowering the death-rates. But, he asked, could a force thus display itself without loss? Was it not like a cyclist free-wheeling downhill? This was the paradox confronting us in these lands. We gained our power out of suffering, and now we were bound to do all we could to eliminate suffering, which was the very mainspring of our strength; and to keep alive as many of the unfit as possible. These would breed back into the race. If requested, Nature would produce a man who could only exist by the aid of props —doctors and the like —and were we sure that we were not heading in this direction? Therefore, Mr Traversi said he did not know whether to praise New Zealand or Australia. In New Zealand few were born, and many of them were kept alive; few were called and many were chosen; and in Australia the chosen were not quite so many. Which of the two merited the laurel from the sublime arbiter, Nature?