title of website or page? YOUR HEALTH IS YOUR WEALTH Research has shown that there is a direct correlation with unequal societies and poor heatlh. The findings suggest that determining health in a society, is dependent on how wealth is distributed. Past data has indicated that there is better life expectancy where their is more equal distribution of income. The most unequal places have the highest death rates, with a small decline Policies that address equal income distribution have a large impact on health of the population.
He believes income inequality is most important explanation of social disasters. A great definition of Wilkinson’s income inequality hypothesis is, “an individual’s health is influenced not only by their own level of income, but by the level of inequality in the area in which they live.” (DeMaio 2010 p. 60). Wilkinson suggests four pathways that explain why income inequality is a social determinant of health. WILKINSON’S EVIDENCE Wilkinson hypothesizes that income makes a difference as a social determinant of health within but not between industrialized countries (DeMaio 2010, p. 61). In the areas where income matters within is referred to as “the social gradi... ... middle of paper ... ...be the focus of one study instead of being compared to countries with unequal population inequalities.
If everyone around you has similar circumstances, what will guide you into doing the opposite? Having higher income and education levels determines better health care... ... middle of paper ... ...cioeconomic status in health disparities research. Journal of the national medical association, 99(9), 1013 2. Fiscella, K., & Williams, D. R. (2004). Health disparities based on socioeconomic inequities: implications for urban health care.
Wilkinson & Pickett, (W&P) assert that society on the whole would be healthier, more successful and happier if the gap between the affluent and the poor was tightened. The ‘Spirit Level Book’, written by them in 2010, is one of the most influential books on social policy to date and it argues that not only does inequality affect the ones down the bottom of the ladder but everyone across the board. Affluent countries perform better when social indicators are more equal across society. This essay will assess the validity of Wilkinson & Pickett’s conclusions by comparing the works of authors that support similar arguments, to the work of authors who disagree with them. A comparison of these different approaches, with a critical look at what and how inequality is being measured reveals that there is no definite answer to the problems raised by Wilkinson and Pickett, although many of their statements are valid.
A closer look at the economic argument for disease prevention. Journal of the American Medical Association, 301(5): 536-538. Medical doctor Steven Woolf discusses two outcomes of using preventive care by analyzing whether preventive care sincerely addresses the economics associated with its implementation. He penetrates between two theories: prevention programs will benefit the nation by saving billions of dollars or if prevention will rarely save the US healthcare economy because of the higher costs associated with preventive care. We desire to address the potential negative outcomes of preventive care and see whether indeed we ought to implement it.
The reason could be due to the amount of support that the person is receiving. Because in the article Cohen talks about how a person with a higher social integration score have a lower mortality rate (Cohen., 1990). Individual who were more isolated had a higher risk of death (Cohen., 1990). The reason could be that the individuals who are in isolation do not have as much social support as those who are not as isolated. “Social support is measured in social integration which is defined as the most common measure of social support used in studies of physical health.” (Cohen., 1990).
The economic evaluation will establish whether the new service represents an efficient use of NHS (and societal) resources. The service can be considered cost-effective under the following conditions: (i) it saves money and generates improvements in health outcomes; (ii) it adds to costs and generates health improvements, with the incremental cost per unit of health gain considered good value relative to other uses of resources; (iii) it reduces costs and leads to a deterioration in health outcomes but the incremental cost per unit of health gain of standard management is not considered good value relative to other uses of resources. The purpose of the economic evaluation is to estimate the probability of each of these three possible outturns.
According to Thorbecke and Charumilind (2002), the crime rate may become higher since “legal wages represent the opportunity cost to crime”. Also, because the level of income has a positive and explicit correlation with the health condition, the poor’s average life expectancy may become shorter. Therefore, the income inequality is severe since it increases the wealth gap and gen... ... middle of paper ... ...013). Raising Minimum Wage Would Ease Income Gap but Carries Political Risks. Retrieved from: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/13/us/politics/obama-pushes-for-increase-in-federal-minimum-wage.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 Pethokoukis, J.
The paper first defines the key terms under discussion, i.e. global economic integration (globalisation), FDI, the world’s poorest regions, and contemporary economic integration. It then discusses the variable effects of FDI on the world’s least developed countries (LDCs). It does so by looking at the ways in which FDI supposedly encourages development (i.e., through technology spillover), and considering the problems which may arise. The paper concludes that the producing a definitive explanation of the dual implications of FDI for LDCs is made difficult – if not impossible – by the variables which arise across the national economies in question.