Ponder as you read:
How does socio-economic status determine one’s physical health? How about one’s gender identity, how they present to the world? Do this same exercise for someone’s race, age, marital status, family size, etc….
We all want to be treated fairly. This implies that we all have an individual set of moral values, and we accept outcomes based on our actions that fit within our framework for cause and effect. When outcomes fall outside of that framework, we believe that something is unfair. Health determinates are not always based on what we can control. Some people are simply dealt a bad hand when it comes to illness. This is sometimes compounded by their access, support networks, economic social inequality to achieve wellness. Szreter and Woolcock introduce “social capital,” as an invisible currency that is pass around in exchange for receipt of wellness. Since we all have a social capital account, consider how you will trade your social capital to lend to someone in need.
Should the University of Wisconsin Madison continue to uphold the mask mandate, even after Dane County has suspended the policy?
UW Madison Professor, Michael L. Rothchild, School of Business, wrote a journal for the American Marketing Association in 1999, in one passage explaining that limiting externalities is equivalent to eliminating free choice. His example, albeit related to wearing helmets, can also be used to settle the debate on masks. More precisely is a figure, much like a truth table that supposes individuals may possess motivation, opportunity, and or ability (MOA). When considering the application of intervention, one should also think about their population’s MOA.
The most interesting conclusion from using this table is the suggestion that without ‘ability,’ education is always necessary. In public health, the goal is for the public to achieve overall well-being. The most equitable form of positive outcomes in the area of health is to share resources as well as responsibility to protect the most vulnerable. Sometimes policy is a mechanism to force change, sometimes education influences behaviors.
“Wilkinson and Marmot are right to stress that the perception of living in an unequal and unjust society can be so corrosive of social relationships that this can have tangible consequences on the health of the population,” (Szreter & Woolcock p. 662).
Despite the conversation being about the levers of behavior modification, the intangible cues we get from the careful marketing to the easier identifiable controls of governments, the practice has ability to tangibly affect public. Without empathy our streets would be filled with higher numbers of sick and poor people. Without the governmental health enforcement, there would be lapses in access to care, as the wealthiest of people consume all the life-saving care and resources. Without public education, again those without opportunities would lack basic knowledge to even understand what is missing in the health puzzle. We rely on our networks of support; we require this distribution of health care. These are the tenants of a modern society.
Author’s answer to the opening question:
Our physical health is determined in large part by our hormones, namely cortisol, adrenaline. A change in hormone secretion means a change in a behavior, and that can cause us to do things differently, and even cause us to feel pain. That is why officer involved shootings of unarmed Black men in America is a public health issue. Since, just the thought of the issue is enough to raise one’s blood pressure. Not everyone will have the same reaction however…