One Of My 5 A Day?

[squirrel_hunter]

As the government is wanting us to easy the burden on the NHS by eating more healthier it got me wondering...

I'm sat here about to open another can of Strongbow. Does this count towards my 5 A Day, or if not how many will I have to drink?

[tigersaw]

another 4?

Originally Posted by squirrel_hunter

As the government is wanting us to easy the burden on the NHS by eating more healthier it got me wondering...

I'm sat here about to open another can of Strongbow. Does this count towards my 5 A Day, or if not how many will I have to drink?

Of course it does... its`s apple isn`t it?? just have another 4 and that`s your 5 a day sorted

You have to have one of each fruit.

How about
Apple Cider
Pear Cider
Glass of Wine (Grapes)
Peach Schnapps
Cointreau (Orange)

5 a day!

Or 4 chocolate oranges washed down with a Magners!

Slight derail, but any economists out there able to answer me whether it really is in the economy's best interest for us to be healthier? Unless immortality is attainable then I'm of the impression that it's actually in the economy's best interest for us all to die about thirty seconds after we retire? Whatever we die of, whether it be tobacco fuelled cancer or potassium deficiency related to five-a-day non compliance don't we all take a good couple of years at the end of our time to die in a fairly expensive way? A healthy lifestyle surely just moves that end date onward 5/10/20 years but is never going to actually erase the end date. And surely all we're doing (from a pure economics view) during those extra years is draining more money from the economy?

Originally Posted by MiniMatt

Slight derail, but any economists out there able to answer me whether it really is in the economy's best interest for us to be healthier? Unless immortality is attainable then I'm of the impression that it's actually in the economy's best interest for us all to die about thirty seconds after we retire? Whatever we die of, whether it be tobacco fuelled cancer or potassium deficiency related to five-a-day non compliance don't we all take a good couple of years at the end of our time to die in a fairly expensive way? A healthy lifestyle surely just moves that end date onward 5/10/20 years but is never going to actually erase the end date. And surely all we're doing (from a pure economics view) during those extra years is draining more money from the economy?

yup, that's why the pension age should be changed.

[the_lone_wolf]

Originally Posted by squirrel_hunter

As the government is wanting us to easy the burden on the NHS by eating more healthier...

nice to see you didn't burden the public school system too much then

Originally Posted by the_lone_wolf

nice to see you didn't burden the public school system too much then.

I notice you didn't burden it too much either!

Nice to see that you were having a kip during grammar and punctuation.

Originally Posted by MiniMatt

Slight derail, but any economists out there able to answer me whether it really is in the economy's best interest for us to be healthier? Unless immortality is attainable then I'm of the impression that it's actually in the economy's best interest for us all to die about thirty seconds after we retire? Whatever we die of, whether it be tobacco fuelled cancer or potassium deficiency related to five-a-day non compliance don't we all take a good couple of years at the end of our time to die in a fairly expensive way? A healthy lifestyle surely just moves that end date onward 5/10/20 years but is never going to actually erase the end date. And surely all we're doing (from a pure economics view) during those extra years is draining more money from the economy?

Recent figures show that smokers and drinkers have lower lifetime health costs. Acute care for cancers and cirrhosis are cheaper than long-term care for age related illnesses like dementia