Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Thu, 14 Mar 2002 08:55:56 -0500 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
We all agree that lower income is, on average, associated with poorer
health. Many arguments appear to be that low income is "causing" poorer
health. We should not forget that poorer health (whether physical or mental)
often leads to lower income. Humans are complex beings (thank goodness),
which makes research such an interesting field of work. When doing research
we need to remember that "one size does not fit all" and that we need to
look at all of the determinants of health - for all segments of the
population. Reducing poverty is a laudible goal, but so is the reduction of
risky behaviours. If we didn't try to change behaviours, drinking and
driving would still be legal.
Brenda L. Coleman
-----Original Message-----
From: Dennis Raphael [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 6:35 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: paper on Public Health Units and Poverty
The point always been the "sole promotion" of lifestyle messages. None the
less
it is undeniable that the contemporary 'lifestyle' approach has pushed the
social determinants and their effects right off the public, media, social
policy, and public health -- and apparently the -- 'health promotion'
agenda.
This has happeneed in the nation that has a Health Canda web site --
together
with a menu of policy statements -- that is the envy of progressive health
promoters around the world.
The following is a slide show from Health Canada on the population health
approach. Take a look at it!
http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hppb/regions/ab-nwt/resources/present/sld001.htm
dr
Send one line: unsubscribe click4hp to: [log in to unmask] to unsubscribe
See: http://listserv.yorku.ca/archives/click4hp.html to alter your
subscription
Send one line: unsubscribe click4hp to: [log in to unmask] to unsubscribe
See: http://listserv.yorku.ca/archives/click4hp.html to alter your subscription
|
|
|