0
We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Editorial |

On Death and Money History, Facts, and Explanations

Angus Deaton, PhD1
[+] Author Affiliations
1Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey
JAMA. 2016;315(16):1703-1705. doi:10.1001/jama.2016.4072.
Text Size: A A A
Published online

Extract

The finding that income predicts mortality has a long history. Nineteenth-century studies include Villermé1 on Paris, France, in 1817, Engels2 on Manchester, England, in 1850, and Virchow3 on Upper Silesia in 1847 through 1848. Modern analyses include the Whitehall study of British civil servants, whose status was measured by income,4 as well as similar findings for other European countries.5 Indeed, the mortality gradient by income is found wherever and whenever it is sought. Virchow’s statement3,6 that “medicine is a social science, and politics is nothing but medicine at a larger scale” has lost none of its resonance. By contrast, the medical mainstream, looking back to Koch rather than Virchow, emphasizes biology, genetic factors, specific diseases, individual behavior, health care, and health insurance.

Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?

First Page Preview

View Large
First page PDF preview

Figures

Tables

References

CME
Also Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
Please click the checkbox indicating that you have read the full article in order to submit your answers.
Your answers have been saved for later.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Submit a Response
ZIP Codes As Powerful Predictors
Posted on April 12, 2016
Mat Reidhead
Missouri Hospital Association
Conflict of Interest: Missouri Hospital Association
This research helps inform and expand on the growing body of evidence of the pervasive links between health, longevity and sociodemographic status. It reinforces the evidence of a strong, if not deterministic relationship between one’s community and health outcomes, further supporting the notion that an individual’s ZIP code can be more predictive of health than their genetic code.

Recently released research from the Hospital Industry Data Institute and Missouri Hospital Association illuminated the pernicious relationship between diabetes, geography and sociodemographic status in communities throughout the state. Although statewide in nature, some of the most compelling differences were found in the state’s metros. This included two communities within the St. Louis area where a distance of ten miles leads to opposite ends of the socioeconomic spectrum, and marks a difference of 18 years in expected longevity.

Because of various barriers to access, many residents in low-income communities have limited health care choices. They rely on safety net hospitals across the continuum of care — primary to quaternary. This new research will be foundational to understanding the social complexities under which health care providers work to balance the idiosyncratic needs of a society and its implications for healthy life years.

Safety net providers should not be penalized for treating patients with the disease of poverty. The systems used to risk-adjust for this comorbidity are inadequate and the incentive programs designed to rate the quality of care delivered to low SDS populations could harm the institutions doing the most to bend the curve toward value. This could further impose perverse incentive structures around a system that is already stacked against society’s disadvantaged, reducing access further and deepening the chasms of wellness and life currently found between communities separated by miles, but worlds apart for health.

Link to HIDI research: http://bit.ly/1VIJ0Jw

Link to St. Louis area infographic: http://web.mhanet.com/userfiles/com.mha/image/Sociobiologic_Diabetes_STL_1500x3882___Source.png
Health Inequity in India
Posted on May 3, 2016
Professor Dr Pranab Kumar Bhattacharya, Dr Sumana Mukherjee; Subrata Majumdar , Upasana Bhattacharya, Rupak Bhattacharya Ritwick Bhattacharya,
Professor of Pathology, Calcutta School of Tropical Medicine, Kolkata-700073, West Bengal, India --- Now Professor of Pathology at Murshidabad District Medical College, Berhampore, Station Road
Conflict of Interest: None Declared

In India, 63 million people sink into poverty yearly due to unaffordable health cost in paradoxical health care system, since independence 1947. In 1950, central government designed national health programme. Severe variations amongst states economic development, social & religious conditions, familial income inequities, political governance and willing led wide disparities in access to health services and population health. India initially accepted public sector led model, where services were free to all, emphasizing rural health care, when private sectors were limited to general practioners and charity run hospitals . It was pyramidal structure connected PHCs to S-D to district to government run tertiary medical colleges. Since 1947 economic planning regarded health expenditure was non-productive, poorly recorded. Public health needs to meet health of expanding population particularly in areas of stroke, CVD, cancer, diabetes, respiratory diseases, mental illness, suicide, HIV, tropical and infectious diseases and other chronic diseases and stressed health system beyond their capacity and private sectors proliferated, large corporate hospitals opened in urban aggregation and non engagement with primary health care providers, do not provide basic essential health care to largest sections of rural, suburban population & these are centres of all kinds of malpractices. Unaffordable for most Indians, with weak regulatory system, failing to set and enforce quality, cost standard inadequate, inappropriate, unethical care & cure. Health insurance available to small proportions of workers and when poverty level is very high i.e. 10% of health care expenditure is out of pocket spending.

All these are because economist & policy makers do not recognize health as essential for economic development and health is not a legislated right in India. NRHM focuses on maternal & child health. No attention is even paid to communicable, non-communicable, tropical & mental diseases which lead to largest death & disability in India. In 2012-2017 planning Government of India focussed & recommended increased public finances from 1% of GDP to 2.5% of GDP through toy funding supplemented by ESI & EPJ & free provision of essential drugs & diagnostics and referral system. India must address the enactment of right to health through parliamentary legislation and allow the state what services that the right should translate into welfare scheme. India & West Bengal must engage community care instead of mushrooming growth of private care. Improvement of public care & cure, improvement of quality health care personnel, Generalists, Specialists, nurses, GDAs, shortfalls & more training institutions.

HEALTH EXPENDITURE VALUE
 Per Capita (US $) 61
 Percentage of GDP 4
 Amount of pocket private health expenditure 86
 Public services(% of total) 33
 Percentage of population insured in 2015 17 (Government 12%+ employee 3%+ individual 2%)
 No of Physician per 1000 population in 2015 7
 Life expentancy at birth 66
 Annual no. of death per 1000 population 17
 No. of infant death per 1000 live birth 8
 No. of death per 1000 live birth in 2014 41
 No.of maternal death per 100000 live birth in 2014 190
Submit a Response

Multimedia

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

24,826 Views
1 Citations
×

Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

See Also...
Articles Related By Topic
Related Collections
PubMed Articles
Jobs
brightcove.createExperiences();