Here's what you said, verbatim:

"The average UK household in 1950 would be in abject poverty according to modern definitions.
No car, no TV, no double glazing, no central heating, basic food still on rationing. But the population was far healthier."

You were quite clearly comparing then with NOW. No getting away from that, Iains. My point was that we were clearly not "far healthier" then according to quite a number of criteria. When you pressed me on it with a typical insult I provided you with example figures comparing then with now (I selected 1940 instead of 1950 but the point stands firm). I could have provided figures for any of the other factors I mentioned too. I don't doubt that wartime rationing might have had unintended beneficial consequences. But it is wrong to say that we were far healthier. We were not, not by a long chalk.

"Aye, we 'ad it tough, shared t'chemical bog at bottom of garden wi' twenty other 'ouses, 'ad nobbut thin gruel an' stale 'ovis crust every night fer us tea, us dad whipped us ter sleep every night wi' 'is belt, and it never did me no 'arm..."

Yes it bloody did. Give over.