- C J L Murray, executive directora (murrayc@who.int),
- G King, professor of governmentb,
- A D Lopez, coordinator, epidemiology and burden of diseasea,
- N Tomijima, technical officer, epidemiology and burden of diseasea,
- E G Krug, director, injuries and violence preventionc
- a Evidence and Information for Policy, World Health Organization, 1211 Geneva 27, Switzerland
- b Center for Basic Research in the Social Sciences, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA
- c Noncommunicable Diseases and Mental Health, World Health Organization, Geneva
- Correspondence to: C J L Murray
Armed conflict is a major cause of injury and death worldwide, but we need much better methods of quantification before we can accurately assess its effect
Armed conflict between warring states and groups within states have been major causes of ill health and mortality for most of human history. Conflict obviously causes deaths and injuries on the battlefield, but also health consequences from the displacement of populations, the breakdown of health and social services, and the heightened risk of disease transmission. Despite the size of the health consequences, military conflict has not received the same attention from public health research and policy as many other causes of illness and death. In contrast, political scientists have long studied the causes of war but have primarily been interested in the decision of elite groups to go to war, not in human death and misery.
We review the limited knowledge on the health consequences of conflict, suggest ways to improve measurement, and discuss the potential for risk assessment and for preventing and ameliorating the consequences of conflict.
Summary points
Conflict related death and injury are major contributors to the global burden of disease
Information systems break down during conflict, leading to great uncertainty in the magnitude of mortality and disability
The World Health Survey may provide a reliable and valid basis for assessing conflict related mortality and disability
Forecasting models may provide a plausible basis for assessing risk of conflict and thus prevention
Improved collaboration between political scientists and experts in public health would benefit measurement, prediction, and prevention of conflict related death
Assessing the public health impact of conflict
The impact of war on populations arises both from the direct effects of combat—namely, battle deaths—and from the indirect consequences of war, which may occur for several years after a conflict ends.1 Indirect effects of conflict on mortality can be formally …
Sign in
Personal subscribers, sign in here:
Article access
Article access for 1 day
Purchase this article for £20 $30 €32*
The PDF version can be downloaded as your personal record
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Reddit
Technorati
Twitter
Stumbleupon
Rapid responses
Latest Responses
The decline in the breast cancer incidence is 1.2% and it is not significant.
Published 10 February 2012
'twas ever thus
Published 10 February 2012
The value of historic human remains
Published 10 February 2012
In Praise of British Literature
Published 10 February 2012
Is real shared decision making possible?
Published 10 February 2012
Most responses
Does anyone understand the government’s plan for the NHS? (17 responses)
Published 17 Jan 2012
Bad medicine: medical nutrition (15 responses)
Published 18 Jan 2012
Shared decision making: really putting patients at the centre of healthcare (7 responses)
Published 27 Jan 2012
Why legislation is necessary for my health reforms (7 responses)
Published 1 Feb 2012
Search for evidence goes on (5 responses)
Published 17 Jan 2012