Left behind: the legacy of hurricane Katrina
BMJ 2005; 331 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.331.7522.916 (Published 20 October 2005) Cite this as: BMJ 2005;331:916All rapid responses
Rapid responses are electronic comments to the editor. They enable our users to debate issues raised in articles published on bmj.com. A rapid response is first posted online. If you need the URL (web address) of an individual response, simply click on the response headline and copy the URL from the browser window. A proportion of responses will, after editing, be published online and in the print journal as letters, which are indexed in PubMed. Rapid responses are not indexed in PubMed and they are not journal articles. The BMJ reserves the right to remove responses which are being wilfully misrepresented as published articles or when it is brought to our attention that a response spreads misinformation.
From March 2022, the word limit for rapid responses will be 600 words not including references and author details. We will no longer post responses that exceed this limit.
The word limit for letters selected from posted responses remains 300 words.
Did someone once say, "I have been poor and I have been rich and rich
is better".
While wanting to live and contribute to a utopia (as we all must do (apart
from Aldous Huxley, I suppose)), is the constant highlighting of the
adavantages of being wealthier not a bit of a no brainer. Is that not why
we all get up in the morning to make money: to make sure we have a better
life? How do health policies aimed at more equality in health outcomes
deal with the fact that since sophisticated economies began, the
dominating factor has been to make money to make one's life better (or at
least believe it will make one's life better)? Can you address health
inequalities without questioning the very basis of all societies?
Competing interests:
None declared
Competing interests: No competing interests
David Atkins is almost right. “The healthcare sector alone” cannot
eradicate poverty. It cannot even contribute to this noble cause. “What it
would take to create more equitable and healthier communities in New
Orleans” and elsewhere is not “infrastructure for public health” or
“health insurance”.
It is universally true that wealth promotes healthcare. Conversely,
healthcare does not promote wealth, except among healthcare workers. The
United Kingdom is a case in point. In spite of free access to healthcare
for over half a century, an estimated 17% of the population remains below
the poverty line.
What public health schemes promote is burgeoning healthcare budgets
of sometimes dubious benefit, and the medicalisation of social problems.
The poor need money, not medicine.
Competing interests:
None declared
Competing interests: No competing interests
Thinking More Deeply About Health Disparities
In their editorial, “Left Behind: The US Hurricane Puts the Health
Effects of Poverty and Race in Plain View” (BMJ 2005; 5: 440), Atkins and
Moy ask Americans to think more deeply about how to create more equitable
and healthier communities. Their six strategies for better health care
might indeed improve overall health in communities of all sorts, but they
would do little to narrow race and class disparities in health.
Although health disparities within nations are still routinely
attributed to differences in wealth and social status, health scientists
have noted for decades that differences in material resources and access
to health care cannot explain three remarkable facts about group
disparities in health: (a) disparities are ubiquitous, regardless of
country, health system, decade, disease, organ system involved, and
treatability of disease, (b) health is better at successively higher
levels of socioeconomic status, even beyond the level of resources
required for good health and health care, and (c) health disparities
increase when health information and medical care become more widely
available (as happened, for instance, when the media alerted the public to
the dangers of smoking and when Great Britain instituted free national
health care in the 1950s).1
Investment in better health care matters, of course, and it raises
average levels of health in all groups. But it simultaneously creates
greater variation (disparities) in health, because some individuals are
better able to capitalize on the new resources. Health literacy research
and related studies have shown that an individual’s mental resources are
critical for effectively exploiting available care. Persons who learn and
reason poorly practice healthy behaviors less often, seek less preventive
care (even when free), know fewer signs and symptoms of disease, and
adhere less effectively to treatment regimens. Good health also depends in
large part on apt self-care: preventing illness and injury, and exercising
independent judgment in the daily self-management of chronic diseases such
as diabetes and hypertension.
A seminal study of health literacy in two urban hospital outpatient
populations (N=2659) found, for example, that 26% of patients did not
understand information about when a next appointment was scheduled and 42%
did not understand the directions for taking medicine on an empty
stomach.2 Another found that half of insulin-dependent clinic patients
with “inadequate” health literacy did not know the signs of high blood
sugar, low blood sugar, or what to do about them.3 The US Department of
Education’s 1993 National Adult Literacy Survey (NALS) documented very
large race and class differences in success at performing comparably
elementary reading and reasoning tasks in daily life.4
Epidemiologists point to variation in both exposure and
susceptibility in explaining patterns of disease. So, too, do health
disparities depend on differences in both access to care and relative
ability to exploit it. Reducing health disparities therefore requires not
just making health care more equally available, but also reducing the
cognitive hurdles which, for many individuals, stymie its effective use.
1.Gottfredson LS. Intelligence: is it the epidemiologists’ elusive
“fundamental cause” of social class inequalities in health?
J.Pers.Soc.Psych 2004; 86: 174-199.
2.Williams MV, Parker RM, Baker DW, Parikh NS, Pitkin K, Coates WC,
Nurss JR. Inadequate health literacy among patients at two public
hospitals. JAMA 1995; 274: 1677-1682.
3.Williams MV, Baker DW, Parker RM, Nurss JR. Relationship of
functional health literacy to patiernts’ knowledge of their chronic
disease. Arch.Int.Med. 1998; 158: 166-172.
4.Kirsch IS, Jungblut A, Jenkins L, Kolstad A. Literacy in America: a
first look at the results of the National Adult Literacy Survey, 1993.
Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
Competing interests:
None declared
Competing interests: No competing interests