Speaker 1: You're listening to the Bloomberg Opinion podcast count US Saturdays
Speaker 1: at one and seven pm Eastern on Bloomberg dot Com,
Speaker 1: the iHeartRadio app, and the Bloomberg Business App, or listen
Speaker 1: on demand wherever you get your podcasts.
Speaker 2: Welcome the Bloomberg Opinion. I'm Amy Morris. This week we
Speaker 2: look at childcare, a consistent issue for working parents, but
Speaker 2: it's about to get much, much worse, and nobody seems
Speaker 2: to be doing anything about it. We're also seeing new
Speaker 2: numbers that show more women in the US are dying
Speaker 2: from alcohol. Those numbers are alarmingly high and a sure
Speaker 2: fire way to lure your employees back to the office.
Speaker 2: Feed them, but not just any meals, and not in
Speaker 2: the office or at their desks. But we begin with
Speaker 2: the latest on COVID and how the world maybe should
Speaker 2: respond to this latest uptick. Take New York, for example,
Speaker 2: where earlier this month the summer surge prompted New York
Speaker 2: health officials to warn the public about an uptick in
Speaker 2: COVID cases. New York City Health Commissioner Ashwin Wassan says
Speaker 2: it's not unexpected, but everyone does need to be aware.
Speaker 3: It's been a while since New Yorkers were getting vaccinated
Speaker 3: and boosted on mass immunity is waning.
Speaker 2: Science is working to keep up, though the FDA recently
Speaker 2: approved a formula for another booster that is expected to
Speaker 2: protect against the new dominant strain. Plus RSV and the
Speaker 2: flu are also close behind, so getting the right message
Speaker 2: to vulnerable populations may be key this fall. Let's bring
Speaker 2: in Bloomberg Opinion editor Brooks Sample brook. First, we want
Speaker 2: to explain your role here. You put together a digest
Speaker 2: of the top Bloomberg Opinion columns and you put them
Speaker 2: together in a newsletter that's available every week, totally worth
Speaker 2: signing up for. And this angle on COVID is actually
Speaker 2: included in the Theme of the Week newsletter. So before
Speaker 2: we jump into the COVID part of it, tell us
Speaker 2: about this newsletter really quick and your role there.
Speaker 3: Hi.
Speaker 4: So on the weekends, on Saturdays, we do Bloomberg Opinion's
Speaker 4: most popular columns, a bit of a roundup and a
Speaker 4: little bit about some of the podcasts and other things
Speaker 4: that we have been taken throughout the week. And then
Speaker 4: on Sundays is our Theme of the Week, where we
Speaker 4: pick one of our best topics from the week. Things
Speaker 4: that we're starting to talk about more in depth. So
Speaker 4: you know a lot of times it's based on the news,
Speaker 4: such as an election or as in this case, you
Speaker 4: know COVID, which is starting to hit our headlines again.
Speaker 4: So we go back through the week and hit our
Speaker 4: columnists that are very smart analysts who are looking at
Speaker 4: COVID the numbers, and we decided, well, that's our theme
Speaker 4: for this week.
Speaker 2: All right, Well, knowing all of that about the newsletter,
Speaker 2: let's get into the topic, which is COVID. You said
Speaker 2: that you've been seeing it pop up more in the
Speaker 2: headlines here at Bloomberg. What is the prognosis for another
Speaker 2: COVID surge? What do we need to watch for?
Speaker 4: So a lot of analysts have been looking over the
Speaker 4: past year at wastewater numbers, and you can see epidemiologists
Speaker 4: have been noticing, especially in New York City, which is
Speaker 4: very good at tracking viruses that it finds in wastewater.
Speaker 4: So people have been paying attention to that. And while
Speaker 4: we don't get the data that we got the first
Speaker 4: couple of years of COVID, there are more hospitalizations happening
Speaker 4: right now. They are happening more among children, and what
Speaker 4: our experts Lisa Jarvis and Fay Lamb are noticing, is
Speaker 4: you know, on top of the fact that you know
Speaker 4: RSV and flu came back later in the epidemic. You know,
Speaker 4: it disappeared the first year because we were so focused
Speaker 4: on COVID and because we were isolated, that helped keep
Speaker 4: those two extra viruses at bay. Well now they're back.
Speaker 4: And last year, as Faan Lisa pointed out, the message
Speaker 4: from public health officials was not always clear, so people
Speaker 4: kind of I wouldn't say gave up, but it was
Speaker 4: easier to not do anything and not get your shots.
Speaker 4: So vaccine uptake last year was not that great, especially
Speaker 4: when you were thrown Well then you should be aware
Speaker 4: of RSV. You don't forget your flu shot? Okay, when
Speaker 4: am I supposed to do all these things? There are
Speaker 4: so many rules and that exhausted people. It is surging again.
Speaker 4: It's this new variant Heiress. But thankfully it seems that
Speaker 4: the prognis was for that. It's not any more dangerous
Speaker 4: than previous variants. And what public health officials need to
Speaker 4: worry about is getting a more lucid message out there
Speaker 4: to people so that people will listen.
Speaker 2: Well, that's what I wanted to ask about. Also, you
Speaker 2: would mention fay Flam's column and the lack of control
Speaker 2: over the pandemic. You mentioned that the newsletter as well.
Speaker 2: Is that what you're referring to is that the messaging
Speaker 2: is just off.
Speaker 4: The messaging is off, absolutely, and you know, and that's
Speaker 4: not necessarily, you know, anybody's fault. You know, this is
Speaker 4: still it is a novel virus and we're only a
Speaker 4: few years into this. We don't know, we're still learning
Speaker 4: about you know what you know about things about long COVID,
Speaker 4: you know, when to get these vaccines, just how effective
Speaker 4: are the vaccines. And the whole point was always to
Speaker 4: mitigate when people did get sick, which, of course, you know,
Speaker 4: lots of people say, oh, well, you're not supposed to
Speaker 4: get it. No, it's supposed to mitigate when you do
Speaker 4: get it, things like isolation that was meant to not
Speaker 4: path spread it around to the vulnerable populations. So that
Speaker 4: message needs to be a little bit clearer, it needs
Speaker 4: to get to people more effectively. Uh. And that's you know,
Speaker 4: it's it's all about making things simpler.
Speaker 2: Now, Brooke, reiterate for us, if you don't mind, When
Speaker 2: should we be getting our next COVID booster.
Speaker 4: When you can. That is the simple message. Get your vaccines,
Speaker 4: get your boosters, your flu. The RSP is a new
Speaker 4: vaccine this year, Get them when you can.
Speaker 2: Is there a risk of getting it too early and
Speaker 2: then the effect wearing off?
Speaker 4: Some people say that, But that is mostly the fear,
Speaker 4: you know, especially you know we are more in a
Speaker 4: more anti vaxx era, so which you know that those
Speaker 4: voices are, you know, they're definitely loud. But doctor say,
Speaker 4: get your shots when you can.
Speaker 2: Okay, all right, well taken. There are those who believe
Speaker 2: that COVID is really essentially over. You don't see a
Speaker 2: whole lot of people walking around in masks anymore. Every
Speaker 2: so often, either a grocery store or some other public
Speaker 2: event or venue, you might see some folks in masks.
Speaker 2: But once people stopped masking up, it seems like it
Speaker 2: was going to be really hard to get them to
Speaker 2: start masking up again. Is that a challenge that we're
Speaker 2: going to be looking at this winter and follow Are
Speaker 2: we past that?
Speaker 4: I My personal feeling is that, you know, we might
Speaker 4: be we might have already passed that point. Now, it's
Speaker 4: funny you mentioned that I was out, like for somebody
Speaker 4: who isolated very very carefully, you know. The first couple
Speaker 4: of years, I was at Radio City Music Hall over
Speaker 4: the weekend, and obviously most people weren't masked, but I
Speaker 4: saw a lot more masks than I expected. So I
Speaker 4: think I can't tell if that's simply a New York thing. Uh,
Speaker 4: you know, certainly in you know, the more Midwest states.
Speaker 4: You know, I'm not You're not going to see that.
Speaker 4: People just are They're done with it. So you know,
Speaker 4: obviously a mask is always good, but I don't I
Speaker 4: think we're past that. People are tired of it, so
Speaker 4: you know, that's what makes the vaccines more important.
Speaker 2: Well, I wanted to follow up with that. I love
Speaker 2: it when the guest anticipates my question because everyone is
Speaker 2: sick of it, even those who believe in the boosters
Speaker 2: and don't have a problem masking, but we're all so
Speaker 2: tired of it. Pandemic pandemic fatigue is real.
Speaker 4: It is real.
Speaker 2: So what's the guidance? How do we get around that?
Speaker 4: You know, I it's it's it can be really hard
Speaker 4: when we are just bombarded with information, you know, on
Speaker 4: a daily basis, you know, not just cable news, not
Speaker 4: you know, not just Twitter, which is you know, takes
Speaker 4: a weird turn every other day, not just you know,
Speaker 4: Facebook or threads or wherever. You know, we are bombarded
Speaker 4: and it's really hard to figure out where the reasonable
Speaker 4: and right voices are when you have so much misinformation
Speaker 4: out there. So you know, and I you know as
Speaker 4: a media person that this is you know, maybe not
Speaker 4: my favorite thing to say, but you know, you know,
Speaker 4: but go on a media diet, figure out which foods,
Speaker 4: which sources are good for you. You know, which are actual, meaningful,
Speaker 4: data based voices. You know, obviously you know Bloomberg's whole thing.
Speaker 5: We are data.
Speaker 4: That is you know what we do. We're not going
Speaker 4: to be pushing anything that doesn't have the numbers behind it.
Speaker 4: So you know, that's why you know, Lisa and Fay
Speaker 4: are so important because they use data and and even
Speaker 4: then you know, they they see just how tired we are.
Speaker 4: So that's why you know, they say, simple, simple messaging.
Speaker 4: You know, that's what we need. We don't need, you know,
Speaker 4: the CDC telling us one thing one day and then
Speaker 4: oh they got new information, now they tell us another thing.
Speaker 4: That's the only thing the CDC is doing They're dealing
Speaker 4: with data as it comes, so that can be hard.
Speaker 4: So take a deep breath, get the simple message, get
Speaker 4: your vaccine when you can, and realize COVID is not over.
Speaker 4: You know, we are going to be with it forever.
Speaker 2: I wanted to ask where the CDC is with this.
Speaker 2: You may have just answered that that they're going to
Speaker 2: be giving you messages as they get the data. Are
Speaker 2: we anticipating fresh messages coming up in the fall?
Speaker 4: I would imagine so, especially with the triple deemic, which is.
Speaker 2: Triple demic sounds wait, hold, let me just stop you
Speaker 2: for a second. That sounds so dag scary. But I
Speaker 2: know what you mean. You're talking about the flu, RSV
Speaker 2: and COVID, but it does sound really intimidating.
Speaker 4: And it is, especially when you know my son and
Speaker 4: I each got the flu last year and I managed
Speaker 4: to get COVID for a third time last year, and
Speaker 4: it's like, well, you know, I'm just physically exhausted. So
Speaker 4: I have learned. I'm getting it as soon as it
Speaker 4: comes out this year.
Speaker 2: Bloomberg Opinion editor Brooks Sample. You can sign up for
Speaker 2: that newsletter, by the way, at Bloomberg dot com. Slash Opinion.
Speaker 2: Now coming up, we'll look at a perennial problem for
Speaker 2: working parents, available affordable childcare. They just could be coming.
Speaker 2: Got a heads up for you. You're listening to Bloomberg Opinion.
Speaker 1: You're listening to the Bloomberg Opinion podcast. Catch us Saturdays
Speaker 1: at one and seven pm Eastern on Bloomberg dot com,
Speaker 1: the iHeartRadio app and the Bloomberg Business app, or listen
Speaker 1: on demand wherever you get your podcasts.
Speaker 2: You're listening the Bloomberg Opinion. I'm maybe Morris and as
Speaker 2: summer comes to an end, summer camp is also ending.
Speaker 2: Parents are now on the hunt for more childcare arrangements.
Speaker 2: This has always been a challenge. This is nothing new,
Speaker 2: but things may be about to get much worse. Bloomberg
Speaker 2: Opinion columnist and labor economist Katherine Edwards joins us Now
Speaker 2: and Catherine, you have referred to this in your column
Speaker 2: on the Bloomberg Terminal as an economic calamity that is approaching.
Speaker 2: How bad can this get?
Speaker 6: We don't know because we've never done this before. During
Speaker 6: the pandemic, a lot of industries were in trouble because
Speaker 6: of the unique concerns of the pandemic, and so we
Speaker 6: helped them, right.
Speaker 3: We helped the.
Speaker 6: Shipping and logistics industry. We helped the airline industry. We
Speaker 6: also helped the childcare industry. And unlike say airlines were shipping,
Speaker 6: the childcare industry was not functioning well before the pandemic began.
Speaker 6: It has been a failure of a business model and
Speaker 6: market failure for a long time. And so the government
Speaker 6: came in to help prop up this industry. And those
Speaker 6: funds are about to run dry, and all of the
Speaker 6: problems that were there before it started are still there.
Speaker 6: So the economic calamity that I'm referring to is that
Speaker 6: on September thirtieth, the final remaining American Rescue Plan funds
Speaker 6: that have been propping up the childcare sector are expiring.
Speaker 6: It has reached over eighty percent of providers and nearly
Speaker 6: ten million children, And it's a figot. It's turning off.
Speaker 2: Do they want it to turn off? I mean, are
Speaker 2: they trying to save money? Are they saying, Okay, let's
Speaker 2: go back to the way things were happening.
Speaker 6: It's hard to pinpoint where the lack of collective action
Speaker 6: in Congress comes from over the past two decades. What's
Speaker 6: remarkable to me is that you know, many governors. The
Speaker 6: way that this money was distributed is the American Rescue
Speaker 6: Plan gave grants to states to spend in their states. Right,
Speaker 6: and so here here's a bunch of money from the
Speaker 6: federal government.
Speaker 3: You know where in your local.
Speaker 6: Economy, which areas need these funds. They've been distributed in
Speaker 6: all kinds of ways to all kinds of providers. So
Speaker 6: for a childcare center, the average amount of money that
Speaker 6: they got was one hundred and forty thousand dollars. Right,
Speaker 6: it's not necessarily a small amount of money for a
Speaker 6: center based care. Those governors have in turned gone back
Speaker 6: to Congress and said, we need more money. This money
Speaker 6: is propping up our economy. This money is a good investment.
Speaker 6: We want additional funds to support childcare in our states.
Speaker 6: I have I know that certain members of Congress are interested.
Speaker 6: I have not seen anything like, you know, a bill
Speaker 6: or movement or a plan. Certain legislators have put forward
Speaker 6: various kind of proposals, but we're not talking about it
Speaker 6: on the news every night.
Speaker 2: I thought maybe the hang up would be on the
Speaker 2: state end of it, Like maybe you have some red
Speaker 2: state Republicans who maybe don't want to dip back into
Speaker 2: that pot. But it sounds like from what you're saying,
Speaker 2: pretty much any governor who is able to benefit from
Speaker 2: this is saying, yeah, we need the help, and the
Speaker 2: hang up is on the federal level.
Speaker 3: I don't think so.
Speaker 6: I think the hang up is on the I think
Speaker 6: it's a red blue hang up because I'm not sure
Speaker 6: how many Republican governors have asked. I would have to check.
Speaker 6: Here's where talking past each other works, right, And this
Speaker 6: is why this policy is not moving forward. You have
Speaker 6: economists and child development experts saying this is an absolute
Speaker 6: when investment. It's helping families at the very start of
Speaker 6: their kind of life. Invest in children, put them into
Speaker 6: early childhood education, help them get ready for school, help
Speaker 6: with preschool exposure, give them things like a constant diet
Speaker 6: that would help families who are struggling with food and security,
Speaker 6: and put them into childcare centers to get them ready
Speaker 6: for preschool.
Speaker 3: This has really long dividends for the children.
Speaker 6: At the same time, it also if you have free childcare,
Speaker 6: it frees up the parents to have basically whatever labor
Speaker 6: market activity they want. Maybe it's more, maybe it's less,
Speaker 6: but it's often that women want to work more.
Speaker 3: That has huge.
Speaker 6: Dividends in the economy because you're adding workers, so you're
Speaker 6: investing in the next generation, You're investing in the current workforce,
Speaker 6: you're investing in the labor supply.
Speaker 3: All of this is good.
Speaker 6: The other side comes back with, you want the government
Speaker 6: to raise our children. And every time I've written about childcare,
Speaker 6: every time I've spoken about childcare, every time that I
Speaker 6: have talked about the economic dividends to childcare investment, someone
Speaker 6: says to me, you want the government to raise our children.
Speaker 2: How do you argue back against that. That's such a
Speaker 2: blanket statement.
Speaker 6: Well, I would say that it's wholly inaccurate, although of
Speaker 6: course I never say it quite appointedly to people's faces,
Speaker 6: because I'm, you know, a proper Southern girl.
Speaker 3: I we try to be polite.
Speaker 6: Sure, What I say to people is that the vast
Speaker 6: majority of women of mothers are working even when they
Speaker 6: have children under six. This is not something that the
Speaker 6: government has decided parents should do. It's something that parents
Speaker 6: have told the government they.
Speaker 3: Want to do.
Speaker 6: The majority of children are in childcare before they start school.
Speaker 6: That means the majority of parents want to put their
Speaker 6: kids into a childcare center. So what you're saying is that,
Speaker 6: you know, parents make this decision that doesn't matter if
Speaker 6: the government helps them. That means the government's controlling them.
Speaker 6: So I kind of go back to it's on parents
Speaker 6: to decide. If there's free childcare, you don't have to go,
Speaker 6: but if there's inaffordable, if there's unaffordable child care, you
Speaker 6: can't go. So you're you're letting a market failure make
Speaker 6: a decision for families rather than having family and enabling
Speaker 6: families to make the decision themselves.
Speaker 2: How did families manage this before the pandemic? Can't they
Speaker 2: just go back to what they were doing before all
Speaker 2: these funds were flowing.
Speaker 6: Childcare industry lost about a third of its workforce at
Speaker 6: the start of the pandemic and it has still not
Speaker 6: recovered it. So even if we just told families, you know,
Speaker 6: go back to what you were doing, there would be
Speaker 6: families who would lose childcare. And in the same time,
Speaker 6: many of these businesses were going to close because they
Speaker 6: did not have sustainable income that were kept open in
Speaker 6: part because of these federal funds. So families before the pandemic,
Speaker 6: you know, they did what families have been doing for decades.
Speaker 6: When it comes to childcare, they either you choose not
Speaker 6: to have it because they can't afford it, they work less,
Speaker 6: and they have fewer children. I mean, the relationship between
Speaker 6: childcare investments have two very clear outcomes, which is that
Speaker 6: one it increases fertility and people have more children when
Speaker 6: they can afford more children. And two, it helps women
Speaker 6: go to work they want to work. I mean, there's
Speaker 6: not like there's going to be a government agent at
Speaker 6: the childcare drop off saying, oh, I see you dropped
Speaker 6: off little Johnny. Now get to your job. I mean,
Speaker 6: it's still your choice about what you do.
Speaker 3: This is America.
Speaker 6: You could choose to drop off your kids and go
Speaker 6: to work, choose to drop off your kids and not
Speaker 6: go to work. What we don't have now is a
Speaker 6: choice for families that enables them to do what it
Speaker 6: is they want to do, because right now the market
Speaker 6: is deciding who gets childcare, and it's people who are
Speaker 6: high income in urban centers.
Speaker 2: Parents being inconvenienced is one thing, and parents not having
Speaker 2: a choice is another. But your column takes us beyond
Speaker 2: the household into the labor market. What this could portend
Speaker 2: as more people lose that option of childcare, with.
Speaker 6: The caveat that the government has never supported this industry
Speaker 6: so much. Therefore, the government's never taken this much help
Speaker 6: away at the really seeing it coming. The estimates are
Speaker 6: that it could be around three million spots that are
Speaker 6: lost in the economy because centers have to close. Now
Speaker 6: there are centers that remain open. About half of them
Speaker 6: reported that they would immediately raise prices, and then kind
Speaker 6: of the other half have said something like cut staff,
Speaker 6: wages or benefits, which which could lose both of those
Speaker 6: could could lead to reduced spots because you have staffing issues,
Speaker 6: or reduce spots because fewer people can afford them. So
Speaker 6: it's there's no good version of what happens after we
Speaker 6: cut off these funds. It's just some version of bad.
Speaker 6: Maybe it's the bad that we already have to a
Speaker 6: lesser degree. Maybe it's you know, three million parents leaving
Speaker 6: the workforce in the month of October. Maybe it's a
Speaker 6: diffuse effect that takes six months to find out. I'm
Speaker 6: kind of the notion that, you know, we're not going
Speaker 6: to feel it. You know, it's not going to be
Speaker 6: a bang, it's going to be a whimper. Right that
Speaker 6: it's that instead of having three million people walk off
Speaker 6: the job at the start of October, we're just we're
Speaker 6: going to lose parents in every industry, in every occupation,
Speaker 6: in every state, in every locality, and we'll lose them
Speaker 6: in such a diffuse way that we won't really see
Speaker 6: that they're gone. We'll just feel the same type of
Speaker 6: pressure points that we felt in the tight labor market
Speaker 6: of the past two years.
Speaker 2: Bloomberg Opinion columnist and labor economist Catherine Edwards joining us now.
Speaker 2: Don't forget We're available as a podcast on Apple Spotify,
Speaker 2: are your favorite podcast platform, and coming up. Death by
Speaker 2: alcohol impacting more women more than ever before, more women
Speaker 2: dying from alcohol. We're gonna look at what's going on.
Speaker 2: This is Bloomberg Opinion.
Speaker 1: You're listening to the Bloomberg Opinion podcast. Catch us Saturdays
Speaker 1: at one and seven pm Eastern on Bloomberg dot Com,
Speaker 1: the iHeartRadio app, and the Bloomberg Business App, or listen
Speaker 1: on demand wherever you get your podcasts.
Speaker 2: This is Bloomberg Opinion. I'm Amy Morris. New data show
Speaker 2: that more US women are dying from alcohol than ever before.
Speaker 2: Part of the problem pushing that boozy woman's rose all
Speaker 2: day lifestyle, and when you compare the numbers between women
Speaker 2: and men, you might be surprised at what you find.
Speaker 2: Let's get details now from Bloomberg opinion columnist Lisa Jarvis.
Speaker 2: She covers biotech, healthcare, and the pharmaceutical industry, and she's
Speaker 2: been looking into this. Lisa, tell us about how women
Speaker 2: are dying from alcohol. Are you talking about liver damage,
Speaker 2: alcohol poisoning, drunk driving? Like, what is the study telling you?
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's all of those things.
Speaker 5: So it's liver damage and alcohol related accidents, you know,
Speaker 5: So it kind of covers the gamut. But what we're
Speaker 5: seeing is that, especially when it comes to midlife, that
Speaker 5: women in their thirties and forties in particular are drinking
Speaker 5: more and it's having real consequences. That there used to
Speaker 5: be a fairly substantial gap between kind of problematic drinking
Speaker 5: men and women, and that gap is narrowing.
Speaker 2: Let's get into that when you do compare women who
Speaker 2: drink to men who drink. When you say the gap
Speaker 2: is narrowing, what are the numbers? What are you seeing?
Speaker 6: Right?
Speaker 5: So, especially during the pandemic, we saw precipitous rise and
Speaker 5: alcohol related deaths among women between twenty eighteen and twenty twenty,
Speaker 5: deaths among women went up fifteen percent per year each
Speaker 5: across those three years.
Speaker 3: Men pass a lot.
Speaker 2: Hold, let's not go past that fifteen percent higher year
Speaker 2: to year.
Speaker 5: Yeah, that's a lot, I mean, I think, and later,
Speaker 5: I'm sure we'll unpack some of the reasons that that
Speaker 5: might be happening. But you know, deaths among men were
Speaker 5: rising too. Everybody was drinking more, people were having a
Speaker 5: tough time. But it does just seem like women are
Speaker 5: catching up essentially to men's patterns, which is not completely unexpected.
Speaker 3: You know. One of the things that's happening is that
Speaker 3: as we.
Speaker 5: Have more income equality, as we have more equality and education,
Speaker 5: women are catching up in other ways.
Speaker 3: Is to other ways to which includes drinking habits.
Speaker 2: Well, Lisa, is this something that we can lay at
Speaker 2: the doorstep of the pandemic one more thing we can
Speaker 2: blame the pandemic for? Or are there some other issues
Speaker 2: here too?
Speaker 3: Oh, there's definitely more to it that we're not seeing.
Speaker 5: It's been an ongoing pattern that kind of accelerated during
Speaker 5: the pandemic when it came to deaths. But you know,
Speaker 5: I think one researcher I spoke to said, really, what
Speaker 5: we're looking at is women who are highly educated. And
Speaker 5: if you look at she looked at two different cohorts
Speaker 5: of women from you know, decades ago to women more recently,
Speaker 5: and you know, I think that the percentage has gone
Speaker 5: up significantly of women who have a college education that
Speaker 5: gives them more income. And the other thing that's happening
Speaker 5: that is a very important shift is women are delaying
Speaker 5: the time when they get married and have children. And
Speaker 5: that has always had a protective effect. It doesn't mean
Speaker 5: that there's something wrong with waiting to have kids. It
Speaker 5: just means that you spend more years before you kind
Speaker 5: of pause some of the habits that you developed maybe
Speaker 5: in college or in your twenties.
Speaker 2: I was actually going to ask about that if it
Speaker 2: matters if you're married or if you're a mom.
Speaker 5: Yeah, I mean, so we've seen data over the years
Speaker 5: in both men and women that when they go through
Speaker 5: big life transitions, you know, essentially getting married and having kids,
Speaker 5: that the habits improve. But there's a larger cohort of
Speaker 5: women now who are spending more time without those kind
Speaker 5: of you know, so called protective effects. So that basically
Speaker 5: is putting in a greater risk for problematic drinking.
Speaker 3: And I think one of the.
Speaker 5: Things that is important to say is that I'm not
Speaker 5: sure the message is being delivered to women that actually,
Speaker 5: you know, drinking is tougher on our bodies than it
Speaker 5: is for men. The same amount of alcohol has a
Speaker 5: tougher effect on our bodies and greater health consequences, unfortunately
Speaker 5: or fortunately, but they discon tolerate more alcohol because of biology.
Speaker 2: We are talking with Bloomberg opinion columnist Lisa Jarvis about
Speaker 2: some new numbers that show more women dying from alcohol
Speaker 2: related deaths in the US than ever before, which is
Speaker 2: really I don't know that seems so alarming some of
Speaker 2: those numbers that you quoted, Lisa, you also mentioned how
Speaker 2: this can start early. What are we seeing among college
Speaker 2: age women.
Speaker 5: Right, so this I find especially disturbing. So, first of all,
Speaker 5: note that teenagers, and this is good news. Over the
Speaker 5: last decade or two decades, rates of alcohol consumption among
Speaker 5: teenagers has been declining. But one thing that's happening again
Speaker 5: is that this gap is narrowing between boys and girls
Speaker 5: men at that age and when they get to college.
Speaker 5: We're now seeing more women for the first time in
Speaker 5: participating in binge drinking than men who are college age.
Speaker 5: And so even though the levels are lower, women are
Speaker 5: starting to surpass men and they're more often drinking, the
Speaker 5: reporting having had a drink in the last thirty days
Speaker 5: than men who.
Speaker 3: Are college age.
Speaker 5: And so you know, all of this kind of can
Speaker 5: carry over into your twenties when you continue that behavior.
Speaker 3: You know as an adult.
Speaker 2: I have to ask if this has to do with
Speaker 2: income level as well. I remember college, I didn't participate
Speaker 2: in being's drinking, not because I'm square, but because I
Speaker 2: was broke and alcohol is expensive. Is it a not
Speaker 2: as expensive now? B Do we have kids in college
Speaker 2: who have more access to finances? I mean, what's the
Speaker 2: X factor here?
Speaker 5: You know, that's a good question because alcohol is expensive,
Speaker 5: and that's something that researchers told me that one of
Speaker 5: the connections between midlife women and alcohol is that they
Speaker 5: can afford it. You know, they can go out and
Speaker 5: have cocktails after work because they're in the workplace, they're
Speaker 5: in more advanced careers, and that really is the segment
Speaker 5: where we're seeing the problem.
Speaker 2: When you were looking through this study, what stood out.
Speaker 5: One of the things that stood out to me was
Speaker 5: just the very simple idea that a lot of women
Speaker 5: aren't getting the message that drinking can be dangerous, that
Speaker 5: lower levels of drinking than they probably realize can be
Speaker 5: dangerous for them, and it's a slippery slope. And so,
Speaker 5: you know, I think a lot of researchers I talked
Speaker 5: to mentioned the idea that there tends to be a
Speaker 5: bias when a woman goes to a doctor and their
Speaker 5: doctor asks them about their drinking habits. The way that
Speaker 5: the question is asked sort of makes it difficult for
Speaker 5: them to give an honest answer or even say they
Speaker 5: drink at all, which doesn't give an opportunity to intervene.
Speaker 3: You know.
Speaker 5: So, I think there's a lot of societal things that changes,
Speaker 5: our cultural nerves change where women are drinking more often
Speaker 5: and that's accepted. There's not on the other end, kind
Speaker 5: of a public health message that matches that.
Speaker 2: Oh, by the way, you can drink more, but it's
Speaker 2: going to do more damage than you realize. And here's
Speaker 2: what's at risk exactly.
Speaker 5: You know, one researcher who you know, she studies substance
Speaker 5: use disorder, told me that she's had her own doctor
Speaker 5: ask her you don't drink, do you and it rang
Speaker 5: alarm bells with me because I feel like I've had
Speaker 5: that when I was, you know, younger, the way the
Speaker 5: question was posed to you, because that doesn't make you
Speaker 5: want to say, well, of course they do, and here's
Speaker 5: how much you know.
Speaker 3: Instead it makes you want to say no, of course,
Speaker 3: I don't drink.
Speaker 5: Framing really matters, And there have been studies that show
Speaker 5: that the way that doctors discuss this topic with women
Speaker 5: is different on how they discuss it with men, and
Speaker 5: that makes it again hard to intervene because especially at
Speaker 5: a point when a woman might be just slipping towards
Speaker 5: a spot where it becomes dangerous for their health.
Speaker 2: Is there also something to be said about the advertising
Speaker 2: and the marketing of this now, because it's only been
Speaker 2: fairly recently that I've noticed, and you know, I know
Speaker 2: I live in a box or a bubble or whatever,
Speaker 2: but I've noticed the whole rose all day lifestyle, more
Speaker 2: wines or affordable I mean, like that's what's been marketed
Speaker 2: to us.
Speaker 3: It is one hundred percent being marketed to us.
Speaker 5: And you go to the store, there's a whole display
Speaker 5: of rose, the kind of rise of the hard Seltzer,
Speaker 5: the white claw, but you know, I was at a
Speaker 5: concert this weekend. There are probably three beers on tap
Speaker 5: and six kinds of hard seltzer that someone could you know, fruit, fruity,
Speaker 5: heard seltz someone could choose from. One researcher mentioned to me,
Speaker 5: you know that it reminded her of the kind of
Speaker 5: Virginia slim era of trying to convince women to smoke.
Speaker 3: And it gave me chills, because I think that's true.
Speaker 5: And we saw what happened when you know, this kind
Speaker 5: of glamorous lifestyle is proposed as being you know, smoking
Speaker 5: was part of being a modern woman, and now drinking
Speaker 5: is being marketed to us as being a you know,
Speaker 5: fun modern woman, and that's that's can have deadly consequences.
Speaker 2: And so before we get emails from people who are like, oh,
Speaker 2: you're so square, Oh drinking is just a wonderful way
Speaker 2: to relax, YadA, YadA, YadA, you're not saying don't drink.
Speaker 2: What you're saying is just know what the consequences are
Speaker 2: if you imbibe too much or try not to.
Speaker 3: That's exactly right.
Speaker 5: I mean, I think I did a column on Dreyja
Speaker 5: January after trying to damp January.
Speaker 3: Myself, and I think just really.
Speaker 5: Be more aware of the health consequences, whether that's cardiovascular disease,
Speaker 5: liver inflammation, cancer that you know women unfortunately bear, you know,
Speaker 5: kind of deeper burden on, but also just sort of
Speaker 5: examining what your habits are and who's trying to push
Speaker 5: you to drink more. You know, someone is profiting from that,
Speaker 5: and I do think it's worth women being aware of that.
Speaker 2: Bloomberg Opinion columnist Lisa Jarvis covers biotech, healthcare and the
Speaker 2: pharmaceutical industry. This is Bloomberg. It has been nearly two
Speaker 2: years since Corporate America reopened and employers are still struggling
Speaker 2: to get everybody to come back to the office. But
Speaker 2: you know what, maybe if you feed them that'll be
Speaker 2: an effective lure. Let's see what Allison Schreeger thinks of that.
Speaker 2: She's a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering economics. She joins me, Now, Allison,
Speaker 2: when you're talking about feeding the workers, you're not talking
Speaker 2: about fast food pizza in the lunch room. You're talking
Speaker 2: about a proper hot lune lunch. Take your time, sit down.
Speaker 2: Maybe the napkin is made of a cloth as opposed
Speaker 2: to paper. How is this going to work?
Speaker 7: Well, I'm sort of taking inspiration from the French model,
Speaker 7: where it's actually a workplace benefit that you get a
Speaker 7: sort of meal tickets to use at a local restaurant,
Speaker 7: so you actually, in the middle of the day, leave work,
Speaker 7: go to a restaurant, maybe with your coworkers, sit down,
Speaker 7: have a proper meal, maybe a glass of wine, and
Speaker 7: then go back to work. People get enough meal tickets
Speaker 7: to go every workday of the week. I normally thought
Speaker 7: that was sort of silly because I was a solid
Speaker 7: at the desk kind of person. I like an efficient
Speaker 7: I'm also an economist to understand money's fungible. So if
Speaker 7: you're getting money for sit down lunch, that's money you're
Speaker 7: not getting for your salary. I'd rather have the money.
Speaker 7: But I really am starting to think, you know, with
Speaker 7: this whole problem of getting people back to the office,
Speaker 7: and I think it's important people get back to the office,
Speaker 7: that maybe this is something we should try.
Speaker 2: Does it boost morale? How does a proper meal have
Speaker 2: an impact that maybe other things wouldn't.
Speaker 7: First of all, I think we're struggling from lack of connections.
Speaker 7: So it gets you to sit down and have lunch
Speaker 7: with other people, which is good. Also, as I said,
Speaker 7: it's sort of nice and novel. I mean, who has
Speaker 7: lunch in the middle of the day like an a restaurant.
Speaker 7: I mean, it is kind of special. And you know,
Speaker 7: I got a lot of emails from people talking about
Speaker 7: all the perks they've gotten over the years and how
Speaker 7: even if it was like a really fancy, well paid job,
Speaker 7: how little things like this really made the difference. And
Speaker 7: I mean, also it's a proper sit down lunch. You
Speaker 7: kind of have to commit to it, which means you
Speaker 7: have to commit.
Speaker 4: You know.
Speaker 2: And you did also mention that you're imagining people maybe
Speaker 2: eating lunch together, socializing, collaboration, perhaps even with your own colleagues,
Speaker 2: who if you're still working from home, you haven't actually
Speaker 2: eyeballbed them in a while, except maybe over zoom. That
Speaker 2: could also lead to what more projects, a better relationship,
Speaker 2: a better work environment.
Speaker 7: Well, I mean, one of the reasons I don't I'm
Speaker 7: worried about work from home is I agree that we
Speaker 7: can technically do our jobs remotely, like the actual tasks,
Speaker 7: but you know, you know, we're not particularly a well
Speaker 7: socialized environment yet for having everyone be at home what's
Speaker 7: important is culture, and is connection and teamwork, So is
Speaker 7: it having lunch with your colleagues is important. I've actually
Speaker 7: had two jobs where we were forbidden from eating at
Speaker 7: our desks. One actually was in France. We did have
Speaker 7: a cafeteria because is a big enough workplace. It was
Speaker 7: at the OECD. I was completely awkward about it too,
Speaker 7: because I mean, I think people I also heard from
Speaker 7: people who feel like a little undersocialized or introverts, so
Speaker 7: this would be awkward, and it being at a French
Speaker 7: workplace is very awkward because no one spoke to me.
Speaker 7: But it's still it was good for me. Did sort
Speaker 7: of get it was a nice break connections. And the
Speaker 7: other one was actually a finance job in Texas where
Speaker 7: the owner of the company, the CEO, just felt very
Speaker 7: strongly that it was important to have people take a
Speaker 7: break and connect. And I have to say, in both
Speaker 7: those jobs, I would have said, oh, this is so inefficient,
Speaker 7: I'd rather be at my desk, But it actually in
Speaker 7: some ways did improve my efficiency because it was a
Speaker 7: nice break and it did force me to interact with people.
Speaker 2: It seems like there'd be a loss of productivity or
Speaker 2: somehow it would be more inefficient to get food that
Speaker 2: sit and socialize maybe for an hour, maybe a little
Speaker 2: bit longer. It seems like there would be a loss
Speaker 2: of productivity.
Speaker 7: No, certainly, if you're on a busy project, you know
Speaker 7: it feels a little stressful. But I mean in some
Speaker 7: ways it might refresh you and you might go back
Speaker 7: to the workplace recharge. And is it Also there is
Speaker 7: this idea that if you are connecting with your colleagues
Speaker 7: and you've better connections with them, part of your efficiency
Speaker 7: is working well with others and part of a team.
Speaker 7: And if it strengths thens that, Si said, I'm not
Speaker 7: going to go so far as the French and say
Speaker 7: we have to do this every day. Sure, once you
Speaker 7: twice a week and you know you don't have to
Speaker 7: have wine at every meal.
Speaker 2: Absolutely well, it sounds like a really great idea. Allison,
Speaker 2: thank you so much for joining us.
Speaker 7: Well, I hope it catches on.
Speaker 2: Alison Schreeger is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering economics and
Speaker 2: that does it for this week's Bloomberg Opinion. We are
Speaker 2: produced by Eric Mullow and you can find all of
Speaker 2: these columns on the Bloomberg terminal. We're available as a
Speaker 2: part podcast on Apple, Spotify, or your favorite podcast platform.
Speaker 2: Stay with us. Today's top stories and global business headlines
Speaker 2: are just ahead. I'm Ammy Morris, and this is Bloomberg.