Click Here!

  eMJA     The Medical Journal of Australia

Home | Issues | eMJA shop | Classifieds | Contact | More... | Topics | Search | Login | Buy full access   

Editorials

Open invitation from the International Poverty and Health Network to all healthcare professionals

Help reduce the burden of ill-health due to poverty

MJA 2000; 172: 356-357

The International Poverty and Health Network (IPHN) was created in December 1997, following a series of conferences organised by the World Health Organization with the aim of integrating health into plans to eradicate poverty. The network's formation was a response to the evidence of the persistent and growing burden of human suffering due to poverty. We invite others to join the endeavour.

Around 1.3 billion people live in absolute, grinding poverty, on less than $1 per day.1 This is despite the overall substantial growth of the world economy, which doubled over the 25 years before 1998 to reach $24 trillion. Of the 4.4 billion people in developing countries, nearly three-fifths lack access to sanitation, a third do not have clean water, about a fifth lack access to healthcare of any kind, and a fifth do not have enough dietary energy and protein.

Economic disparities both within and between countries have grown. In about 100 countries, incomes are lower in real terms than they were a decade ago.2 By 1995, the richest fifth of the world's population had 82 times the income of the poorest fifth. The world's 225 richest people have combined wealth equivalent to the annual income of the poorest 2.5 billion people in the world (nearly half of the world's population).1 At the same time, the world is facing a growing scarcity of renewable resources from deforestation, soil erosion, water depletion, declining fish stocks, and lost biodiversity. The impact of these problems will be felt most by poor populations.

Despite overall dramatic increases in life expectancy over the last century, healthcare professionals should be concerned about growing inequalities in health and wealth.3 The precipitous decline in life expectancy in Eastern Europe, particularly in Russia, is a graphic example of how health may deteriorate as societies face sudden social and economic change accompanied by growing poverty. Even among prosperous nations, there are many examples of growing socioeconomic inequalities in health over the past 20 years.4 Health inequalities in Britain have recently been declared the worst ever.5

In Australia, socioeconomic inequalities in health are also significant. For the period 1985-1987, death rates were consistently highest for those living in the most socioeconomically disadvantaged areas.6 This pattern was evident for both males and females and in each of the three age groups studied (0-14 years, 15-24 years, and 25-64 years) and was observed for all-cause mortality and selected causes of mortality. Despite overall declines in mortality rates between 1985-1987 and 1995-1997 for most conditions, the differentials observed in the earlier period were still evident a decade later. For example, during 1995-1997, infants and children living in the most disadvantaged areas experienced the highest mortality rates for perinatal conditions and sudden infant death syndrome, and for injury and poisoning. Similarly, men and women aged 25-64 years residing in the most disadvantaged areas experienced the highest death rates for all-cause mortality, for specific causes such as circulatory, respiratory and digestive system diseases, and for selected causes such as coronary heart disease and stroke, motor vehicle accidents and pneumonia/bronchitis.

Although deaths of Indigenous Australians contribute substantially to the higher death rates in the most disadvantaged areas, they are unlikely to be the sole cause of these differentials, particularly in the cities. Rates of premature death (deaths before age 65) are consistently highest for those living in the most socioeconomically disadvantaged areas of the capital cities and other major urban centres (population 100 000 or more) (Box).7 This pattern is evident in both 1985-1989 and 1992-1995 and for all-cause mortality and selected causes of mortality. Death rates for males and females, as well as for most major causes, increase for each quintile of socioeconomic status of area (from the lowest rates in the highest socioeconomic status areas to the highest rates in the lowest socioeconomic status areas). Disturbingly, the gap between the rates in the most well-off and in the most disadvantaged areas has also increased.

Internationally, in the 20th century, development has usually been equated with economic growth, but the link between economic prosperity and health, a key component of human development, is not automatic. A recent World Bank study showed that income improvement contributed only about a fifth of the decline in mortality between 1960 and 1990.8 Education of women and the generation and use of new knowledge were more significant factors. Recent work in Canada and elsewhere shows that the early years of child development are also important contributors to health inequalities.9

The International Poverty and Health Network is a worldwide network of people and organisations from health, business, non-government organisations and government who seek to influence policy to protect and improve the health of the world's poor, particularly the poorest in all countries. The network urges that a balance must be struck between social development and growth in income; between the human and financial dimensions of poverty; and between redistribution and market reforms. Our aspiration is to achieve a balance between biomedical and social approaches; between population-based health development and a response to individuals; between prevention of disease, promotion of health, and treatment; and between physical and mental health.

Over the next few years supporters of the network will strive to reduce the burden of ill-health due to poverty by:

  • engaging in strategic discussions with the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, the World Health Organization and national governments to ensure that health is put at the centre of development. We urge health impact assessments of all policies;

  • promoting action for health locally, regionally and nationally by working with sectors such as education, business, agriculture and transport;

  • building the evidence base on effective interventions that reduce inequalities in health and on how improved health can reduce poverty;

  • facilitating exchange among healthcare professionals in North and South about effective ways of working;

  • ensuring that education programs for healthcare professionals include information on the impact of socioeconomic inequalities on health and what they can do to reduce these inequalities;

  • encouraging healthcare professionals to work with local communities to improve the health of the poorest; and

  • monitoring trends in health inequalities and using the data to influence policy.

We invite others to join us in this endeavour. Why not you?

Iona Heath
General Practitioner, and Chair Intercollegiate Forum on Poverty
and Health, Royal College of General Practitioners, London, UK

Andy Haines
Professor, Department of Primary Care and Population Sciences
Royal Free and University College Medical School, London, UK

John Glover
Director, Public Health Information
Development Unit, University of Adelaide, SA

Diana Hetzel
Senior Researcher, Public Health Information
Development Unit, University of Adelaide, SA

For more information, please contact the International Poverty and Health Network (IPHN). Tel: +44 207 539 1570. Fax: +44 207 539 1580.
(Roger Drew) Email: drew.rAThealthlink.org.uk

  1. United Nations Development Programme. Human Development Report 1998. New York: Oxford University Press, 1998.
  2. United Nations Development Programme. Human Development Report 1996-97. New York: Oxford University Press, 1997.
  3. McCally M, Haines A, Fein O, et al. Poverty and ill health: physicians can and should make a difference. Ann Intern Med 1998; 129: 726-733.
  4. Whitehead M, Diderichsen F. International evidence on social inequalities in health. In: Drever F, Whitehead M, editors. Health inequalities. Office of National Statistics, London: The Stationery Office, 1996.
  5. Yamey G. Study shows growing inequalities in health in Britain. BMJ 1999; 319: 1453.
  6. Turrell G, Mathers CD. Socioeconomic health inequalities in Australia. Med J Aust 2000. In press.
  7. Glover J, Harris K, Tennant S. A social health atlas of Australia. Adelaide: Public Health Information Development Unit, University of Adelaide. In press.
  8. Wang J, Jamison D, Bos E, et al. Measuring country performance on health: selected indicators for 115 countries. Washington DC: World Bank, 1999.
  9. Mustard JF. Early years of development are important contributors to health inequalities [letter]. BMJ 1999; 319: 319.

    ©MJA 2000
    Make a comment

    Home | Issues | eMJA shop | Terms of use | Classifieds | More... | Contact | Topics | Search

    The Medical Journal of Australia    eMJA  


    Readers may print a single copy for personal use. No further reproduction or distribution of the articles should proceed without the permission of the publisher. For permission, contact the Australasian Medical Publishing Company.
    Journalists are welcome to write news stories based on what they read here, but should acknowledge their source as "an article published on the Internet by The Medical Journal of Australia <http://www.mja.com.au>".

    <URL: http://www.mja.com.au/> © 2000 Medical Journal of Australia.
    We appreciate your comments.


Association between death rates and socioeconomic disadvantage* in major urban centres in Australia

There is clear evidence in Australia of an association at the small-area level between high premature death rates and socioeconomic disadvantage, both for deaths from all causes (Figure) and from most selected causes. These associations are generally evident not only between the most advantaged (Quintile 1) and disadvantaged (Quintile 5) areas, but also at each of the intervening levels. The following figures are limited to comparisons for the capital cities and other major urban centres (population 100000 or more). Similar data are being collated for non-metropolitan areas.For male residents aged 15-64 years, the differential in death rates between Quintile 1 and Quintile 5 increased, from 1.53 times higher in the most disadvantaged areas in 1985-1989 to 1.76 times higher in 1992-1995. The increase for females was from 1.30 times higher in 1985-1989 to 1.40 times higher in 1992-1995. Box 1
In the 15-64 years age group, increases in the differential in death rates for selected causes of death between the most well-off and the most disadvantaged areas were:

  • all cancers: increased from 1.14 to 1.28 times higher;
  • lung cancer: increased from 1.53 to 1.93 times higher;
  • circulatory system diseases: increased from 1.55 to 1.94 times higher (despite an overall decline in death rates of 40%);
  • respiratory system diseases: increased from 1.79 to 2.41 times higher; and
  • accidents, poisonings and violence: increased from 1.42 to 1.53 times higher.

*Socioeconomic disadvantage is measured by the Index of Relative Socio-Economic Disadvantage, Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1991 Census.
Back to text