Tackling Inequalities - consultation on a plan for delivery states that, 'at the turn of the 21st century, opportunity for a healthy life is still linked to social circumstances'. The General Household Survey provides data to examine such socio-economic differences in reported ill health.

Tables 7.4-7.6 show that respondents living in households whose reference person had a manual occupation (manual households) were more likely than those in non-manual households to report a longstanding illness, a limiting longstanding illness or restricted activity in the last two weeks, but the difference was not statistically significant for all age groups.

• 38% of males and 35% of females in manual households reported a longstanding condition, compared with 28% and 29% respectively in non-manual households. The difference between manual and non-manual households was found in all groups by age and gender, with the exception of women aged 65 and over, for whom the difference was not statistically significant.
• 23% of males and 22% of females in manual households reported a limiting longstanding illness, compared with 14% and 17% respectively of those in non-manual households. The differences between people in manual and in non-manual households were statistically significant for all age and sex groups shown, with the exception of females under the age of 16.
• 16% of males and 17% of females from manual households reported restricted activity in the 14 days before interview, compared with 12% of males and 14% of females from non-manual households. Amongst people of different age groups, the difference was not significant in the younger age groups (0-15 and 16-44).

There is evidence to indicate that there is some under-reporting of longstanding illnesses by people in manual social classes. In an analysis of the 1984-5 Health and Lifestyles Survey data, Blaxter found that people belonging to a non-manual social class were more ready to declare a chronic condition, even if it was not functionally troublesome or accompanied by symptoms. Respondents in manual social classes, particularly men, were likely to say they had a named disease only if it was actually troublesome; this was particularly true for mental disorders.

Our Healthier Nation argued that ‘being in work is good for your health’ and stated that joblessness had been clearly linked to poor physical and mental health. Among GHS respondents, the unemployed were more likely than those in work to report a longstanding illness, disability or infirmity, but the difference was not statistically significant. This may, in part, be due to the small sample sizes in the unemployed group.

The prevalence of both chronic and acute sickness was highest among economically inactive respondents. The difference was most pronounced for limiting longstanding conditions; 46% of men and 37% of women in the economically inactive group reported a limiting illness, compared with 10% of working men and 11% of working women, and 12% of unemployed men and 18% of unemployed women. The difference between economically inactive and working respondents, and between the economically inactive and the unemployed, was statistically significant across all age groups.