Dear Helen,

It was interesting to know some of the statistical
figures you mentioned. As far as equity in health is
concerned I guess it's a problem, which is
maltifactorial and universal. Bottom line is that
inequity in wealth might be the  biggest confounding
for inequity in health. So the
stakeholders/stockholders of wealth can make a
difference in the health sector but they will only do
so if the wealth distribution remains the same. Is it
possible?

--- helen white <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Health promotion focuses on achieving equity in
> health. These statistics
> show what problems we face in health promotion. The
> National centre for
> Social and Economic modelling (NATSEM) report found
> the wealthiest 10 % of
> Australians have 43% of the nations total wealth and
> the top 50% of
> Australians have 90% of all wealth. Not as bad as
> the USA where 20% of the
> population control 85% of all wealth.
>
> Although research is an important factor the worlds
> biomedical advances are
> skewed disproportionately to the rich. In 1998
> global spending on health
> research totalled $70 billion US but just $300
> million was dedicated to
> HIV/Aids and about $100 million to malaria research.
>
> Helen White
> MPH Sydney
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo! Messenger
http://im.yahoo.com