>>11228169... but aren't infectious diseases highly correlated with poverty? Many vectors are eliminated with infrastructure development and there are far greater chances that you'll get treatment if get one while living in a rich region.
Of course, if you're getting infected at an early age you're probably getting fucked up aswell. It's likely a self-amplifying mechanism, but I imagine the fact that you're poor in the first place is more likely to get you infected than the other way around.
I guess what I'm asking is, if you're poor aren't you both more likely to get worse education (even if, in title, you're equal to somene rich) and get an infectious disease? And that, in turn, gets your kid poor, sick and uneducated again?
