This paper investigates age variations in foreign-born vs. native-born mortality ratios in an international comparative perspective, with the purpose of gaining insight into the mechanisms underlying the so-called migrant mortality advantage. We examine the four main explanations that have been proposed in the literature for the migrant mortality advantage (i.e., in-migration selection effects, out-migration selection effects, cultural effects, and data artifacts), and formulate expectations as to whether they should generate an increase, a decrease, or no change in relative mortality over the life course. Using data from France, the US and the UK for periods around 2010, we then examine typical age patterns of foreign-born vs. native-born mortality ratios in light of this theoretical framework. We find that these mortality ratios vary greatly by age, with important similarities across migrant groups and host countries. The most systematic age pattern we find is a U-shape pattern: at the aggregate level, migrants often experience excess mortality at young ages, then exhibit a large advantage at adult ages (with the largest advantage around age 45), and finally experience mortality convergence with natives at older ages. The explanation most consistent with this pattern is the “in-migration selection effects” explanation. By contrast, the “out-migration selection effects” explanation is poorly supported by the observed patterns. Our age disaggregation also shows that migrants at mid-adult ages experience mortality advantages that are often far greater than typically documented in this literature. Overall, these results reinforce the notion that migrants are a highly-selected population exhibiting mortality patterns that poorly reflect their living conditions in host countries.

L5 radicular pain related to an epidural gas-containing pseudocyst is described in a 62-year-old female. Transient resolution of radicular pain was observed after CT-guided gas aspiration. Recurrent radicular pain led to surgical treatment; after operation the radicular pain disappeared.

We investigate the difference in homeownership rates between natives and first-generation immigrants in France, and how this difference evolves over the 1975-1999 period, by using a large longitudinal dataset. We find that the homeownership gap is large and has increased. Entries into the territory have a large negative effect on the evolution of homeownership rates for immigrants. Although entrants have on average better education than people staying in the territory for the entire period (i.e. stayers), they are younger and thus at an earlier stage in the wealth accumulation process. They are also located in large cities, where the homeownership rate is lower, and the returns to their characteristics are lower than those for stayers. Leavers have a positive effect on the evolution of homeownership rates for immigrants because they have a low access to homeownership and they exit the country. But this effect is only one-third that of entrants. For stayers, we show that returns to characteristics change in favor of immigrants, which is consistent with assimilation theories. However, among stayers who access homeownership, immigrants end up in owned dwellings that are of lesser quality than natives.

Cet article analyse la mobilité géographique des immigrés par rapport à celle des natifs en tenant compte des départs du pays d’accueil. Alors que la mobilité résidentielle de la plupart des natifs s’effectue au sein du territoire national, une proportion importante d’immigrés le quitte pour leur pays de naissance ou un pays tiers. Mais ces flux d’émigration sont souvent occultés, tant par l’approche rétrospective habituellement adoptée pour l’étude de la mobilité résidentielle, qu’en raison du manque de données adaptées pour mesurer les sorties du territoire. Ce travail se distingue en proposant une analyse du taux de départ des communes françaises, quelle que soit la destination. Dépassant la dichotomie entre migration interne et migration internationale, cette approche intégralement fondée sur un suivi individuel offre une mesure générale de la mobilité incluant l’émigration. Ce travail est mené à partir de l’exploitation d’un large panel administratif constitué de recensements exhaustifs et de l’état civil. Représentatif de la population, il permet un suivi systématique des trajectoires individuelles sur le territoire métropolitain français entre 1968 et 1999, tout en demeurant représentatif de l’ensemble de la population. La mobilité des immigrés se révèle nettement plus élevée que celle habituellement mesurée de façon rétrospective : elle est de 30 % à 50 % supérieure à celle des natifs. Un quart à un tiers des immigrés observés à un recensement donné ont quitté le territoire français au bout de 7 à 9 ans.