BACKGROUND: Worldwide biomedical and social research is providing evidence on the personal requirements for health and well-being. Assessment of the minimum personal costs entailed in meeting these requirements is important for the definition of 'poverty'. Barriers to health must arise if income is below this level. We demonstrate the principle of such assessment for people aged 65 years plus without significant disability living independently in England. METHODS: Current best evidence on the needs for healthy living was derived for nutrition, physical activity, housing, psychosocial relations/social inclusion, getting about, medical care and hygiene. We used conclusions of expert reviews, published research and where necessary, our judgement. This knowledge was translated into presumptively acceptable ways of living for the specified population. Current corresponding minimal personal costs were assessed from familiar low cost retailers/suppliers or, where unavoidable, from national data on the expenditure of low-income older people. RESULTS: Minimum income requirements for healthy living, MIHL, for this population in England is 50% greater than the state pension. It is also appreciably greater than the official minimum income safety floor (after means testing), the Pension Credit Guarantee; that will also have to meet any extra costs of disability. CONCLUSION: Objective evidence-based assessment of MIHL now is practicable but not presently as a basis of health and social policy in the UK or elsewhere apparently. Such assessment could also be an operational criterion of poverty and society's minimum income standards. The results suggest that inadequate income currently could be a barrier to healthy living for older people in England.
BACKGROUND: Worldwide biomedical and social research is providing evidence on the personal requirements for health and well-being. Assessment of the minimum personal costs entailed in meeting these requirements is important for the definition of 'poverty'. Barriers to health must arise if income is below this level. We demonstrate the principle of such assessment for people aged 65 years plus without significant disability living independently in England. METHODS: Current best evidence on the needs for healthy living was derived for nutrition, physical activity, housing, psychosocial relations/social inclusion, getting about, medical care and hygiene. We used conclusions of expert reviews, published research and where necessary, our judgement. This knowledge was translated into presumptively acceptable ways of living for the specified population. Current corresponding minimal personal costs were assessed from familiar low cost retailers/suppliers or, where unavoidable, from national data on the expenditure of low-income older people. RESULTS: Minimum income requirements for healthy living, MIHL, for this population in England is 50% greater than the state pension. It is also appreciably greater than the official minimum income safety floor (after means testing), the Pension Credit Guarantee; that will also have to meet any extra costs of disability. CONCLUSION: Objective evidence-based assessment of MIHL now is practicable but not presently as a basis of health and social policy in the UK or elsewhere apparently. Such assessment could also be an operational criterion of poverty and society's minimum income standards. The results suggest that inadequate income currently could be a barrier to healthy living for older people in England.
Authors: Andrés Martínez-Medina; Sonia Morales-Calvo; Vicenta Rodríguez-Martín; Víctor Meseguer-Sánchez; Valentín Molina-Moreno Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-09-15 Impact factor: 4.614