A brand new report has found that women living in northern England live for two years fewer than those living in the south.
The report, by Health Equity North, found that whilst women can expect to live to around 81.2 and 81.3 years in the north-east and north-west, the life expectancy rises for those in the South.
Women living in the south-west and south-east meanwhile can expect to live to 83.9 and 83.8 with those in the south-west living the longest of any women in the UK. In London, women’s life expectancy is around 83.6.
The report comes as focus intensifies on the UK’s overall health after the country’s life expectancy was branded a “national disgrace”.
The report, titled Women of the North, highlighted that women living in northern England had higher rates of long-term illnesses, and chronic illnesses and were more likely to have worse mental health.
Speaking to the Times on the report, executive director of Health Equity North Hannah Davies said: “Our report provides damning evidence of how women in the north are being failed across the whole span of their lives.
“Over the last ten years, women in the north have been falling behind their counterparts in the rest of the country, both in terms of the wider determinants of health and…inequalities in their health.”
Whilst attention may turn to fixing this inequality between north and south, the UK’s average life expectancy has been widely criticised weeks after a change of government. The UK has dropped from having one of the best life expectancies in the G7 to one of the worst.
Discussing the UK’s plummet, Dr Peter FitzGerald warned: “This is a shameful drop of quality care, and it should be a national disgrace that our healthcare provider has failed us so badly.
“Japan is leading the way in healthcare testing. It has the highest life expectancy of all G7 nations, and it routinely tests for far more than we do in the UK.
“Major benefits for them have included a massive 25 per cent fall in diabetes rates among those at risk of developing the disease.”
Dr FitzGerald added that one of the ways the burden on the NHS could be relieved was by investing in “preventative measures” that will make the health service “far more effective and therefore far better value for money for the taxpayer”.