  Ok. nbsp;  Thesis. nbsp;  Help.  Please.  I'm writing about the community of Panya's conceptualisation of well- being,  'the good life',  xingfu,  development etc. nbsp;  Most of them said health was necessary to have a good life. nbsp;
 I said why?  They said because if you are healthy you can earn a living.  So -  if I want to track the change in wellbeing for the community,  should I be tracking the change in health or in ability to earn a livelihood ?  Because the strange thing is that now the government gives them a yearly payout from the national park gate takings,  so even if they are unhealthy they still have a better livelihood than 90%  of the county.
nbsp; nbsp;
 Why would they value that so much if it's mostly unnecessary now?
nbsp;
 Either they value health intrinsically and just made up the livelihood thing because they thought I wanted something else;
 or they don't trust that the government provision will last;  or they think the government provision is not enough.  It's too complicated for me to explain.
nbsp;
 I guess I should track health too,  even if its just because that's what they told me and I should trust and believe their opinion,  at least for values- based analysis.
nbsp;
 Hmmm.
nbsp;
 I wonder if there is anyone who has researched Tibetan views on health before.
nbsp;
 That may give me a better understanding.  &
nbsp;
