 |
 |
Alex I don't think the evidence you cite supports your (I suspect already arrived at) conclusions. Leaving aside that the study uses a very special cohort, the authors themselves conclude that "the scope for reducing health inequalities related to social position in this and similar populations is limited unless many smokers in lower social positions stop smoking". So, if the authors are right, we ought to be testing whether effectual behaviour change interventions can be implemented among lower socio-economic groups in order to find out whether or not health inequalities can be reduced through these means. But I've said enough. Everyone is free to reach their own conclusions. You may take the rest of the weekend off.... Best, Adam ________________________________ From: The Health Equity Network (HEN) on behalf of alex scott-samuel Sent: Sat 2/28/2009 10:04 PM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: Tackling health inequalities: the need to refocus upstream just to make my argument absolutely clear Adam... we don't really know if altering personal lifestyle behaviours (even if it is a morally appropopriate thing to do) will or will not narrow long term health inequalities I'm saying that we do now know - Gruer et al's data make it clear that altering personal lifestyle behaviours will not narrow long term health inequalities It might (smoking is a big killer after all, and smoking prevalence differences by income are large), but it might not (if, for example, people give up smoking but still die relatively young from a different income-related risk factor). So, we don't know and I'm saying we do know - once again, Gruer's data suggest strongly that people giving up smoking WILL still die relatively young from a different income-related risk factor Alex Please access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic communications disclaimer: http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/secretariat/legal/disclaimer.htm