Posted on 07/18/2015 5:54:07 AM PDT by Olog-hai
The National Institute of Aging, an agency within the National Institutes of Health, has awarded $597,759 in taxpayer funding to the University of Washington to study LGBT aging and health.
The study, titled “Older Adults in Vulnerable Communities: Health and Quality of Life over Time,” will examine “the determinants of health impacting LGB older adults to assess change in health and quality of life (QOL) over time.”
According to Karen Fredriksen-Goldsen, project leader for the grant, “Currently there are more than 2.4 million LGBT older adults and we estimate that by 2030 this population will account for more than 5 million elders.”
“To reduce health disparities it is imperative to identify groups at risk of disparities and to determine the modifiable factors impacting their health and quality of life. Lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) older adults have been identified as an at-risk, under-investigated, and under-served health disparate population,” the NIH grant abstract stated. …
(Excerpt) Read more at cnsnews.com ...
Mental defectives get health problems from perverse living. Study complete.
The NIH wastes a ridiculous amount of money funding junk studies. It needs to be completely disbanded.
No this study will not simply prove that LGBT lifestyles are unhealthy. It will prove that they are a disadvantaged group that needs to be funded with tax dollars. Someday you will be able to just say that you are LGBT and you will get a lifetime of Social Security Disability payments. It will be as though we the taxpayers are the “John” paying the LGBT people as our prostitutes.
I was wondering why they didn't round off the number to $600,000 or $595,000. Then it occurred to me...
A strange number like that is meant to give the impression that some actual thought and analysis went into the process, rather than a number having been pulled out of thin air.
The Canadians did a study on this, finding that homosexuals lived on average 20 year shorter lives than heterosexuals.
The primary causes were:
* higher rates of drug and alcohol abuse, including overdose death
* high rates of STDs that could kill
* greater rates of obesity in the women, hurting life expectancy and health
And then there’s the fact that homosexual unions are more unstable than shacked up heterosexual couples, with only a fraction of homosexual “unions” lasting five years, and those that do have extra-marital affairs as a state of affairs. Without that stability of a partner, you get worse mental health and a live in partner not as invested in your health.
“Nobody loves you when you are old and gay.”
“$597,759”
That’s a lot of Preparation H.
‘zackly.
How many billions have been spent pumping them full of outrageously expensive medicine to get them to their “golden years”? Where is an account of that for less than 2% of the population?
I strongly question that number. There were approximately 242 million adults in 2013; the "gay" population accounts for at most 2% of that, so less than 5 million "gays" total. They certainly aren't ALL going to be over age 65 by 2030.
Calculating this a slightly different way, using the 2010 estimate of 40.3 million people over age 65, we come up with (40.3 million x 0.02), or about 800,000 "gays." Even if you double that number to account for all of the other non-"gay" letters in the LBGT(alphabet) acronym, it still does not add up to over 2.4 million.
People who fudge numbers should not be awarded grant money to fund their study. How can the results of a study based on fraud and deception possibly be reliable?
Excellent question that no one seems to have answered satisfactorily.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.