By Karen and Erica

We have written about the third demographic dividend, which gave whose of us who are Boomers about two decades more of living than people a century ago. Not only do we live longer, we live healthier during those extra years. Advances in public health in the middle of the last century were responsible—advances like the eradication of polio.

But now, shockingly, life expectancy in our country is dropping.

Why?

One reason is because we no longer invest in public health—as was horrifyingly apparent during the COVID pandemic. You can’t stop the global reach of inhospitable bugs, but in 2020 we should have had immediate access to tests. And to masks. And we should have come into a predicted pandemic with a robust national health system. Instead, the tests were botched, we watched YouTube to figure out how to make masks ourselves, and a compromised health system allowed millions to sicken and die.

That needs to change—in part because that another pandemic will come is also predicted. One reason people live in groups is to share responsibility for responding to societal threats. Public health initiatives give effect that social obligation. Everyone in the country has an interest in maintaining the health of the community, regardless of other interests we might have as individuals. Especially as health deficits have wide consequences, like lost years of education for our children.

Public health is usually a really good investment.

Health protection interventions, which would include vaccinations, have saved $34 for every $1 spent on them, according to the review. But not every vaccine has a positive return. For example, in years for which the flu vaccine is a poor match for the actual influenza types that are circulating, the return on investment can be as low as -21, meaning that it costs $21 to save $1.

In years for which the vaccine matches the disease well, the return on investment can be as high as 174. Such a high return occurs because of all the disease and death prevented.

Even legislative interventions can make big differences, with a median rate of return of 47. That’s because they are relatively cheap and can target behavior at a national level. An example would be a tax on sugar-sweetened beverages (with a possible rate of return of 55).

We’re not doctors or politicians or scientists. So why are we writing about public health? Here are a few reasons:

• We don’t want our children to benefit less from public health advances than we did.

• We just spent two of our remaining years living in fear of COVID, having our lives upended by what COVID did to our relatives and friends, and by suffering the social restrictions COVID imposed on all of us. We don’t want that to happen again.

• Women who’ve been around for a while have useful perspectives on life.

  • We know that none off us is self-sufficient.

  • We also know that everyone benefits from a healthy community.

  • And we know you don’t get something for nothing.

It’s not that complicated. With each passing year we are more aware of the wonderfulness of being alive. We know our extra years come from public health advances. We want to make sure the government invests to give those extra years, and more, to our children. And we are willing to pay for it.

We hope you agree.