Search

It has long been recognised that human health is indelibly shaped by a variety of factors. These include pathogens such as bacteria and viruses, but also broad-ranging social, economic and political forces operating at different spatial scales. In seeking to understand the nature and effects of these forces, two concepts have become particularly influential: the 'social determinants of health' and 'structural violence'. In this paper, we critically examine their origins, tracing their 'prehistory' and little-recognised intersections, based on searches of both concepts in PubMed and Google Scholar, and a critical reading of the range of texts our searches produced. This forms the groundwork from which we examine their similarities and differences, and their potentialities and limitations. We demonstrate that both concepts operate largely as black boxes. Their usage has thus become tied to disciplinary and methodological projects, with attendant implications for their wider usage – especially given the respective statuses of the fields of medical anthropology and social epidemiology in public health. We conclude that structural violence and the social determinants of health have both been influential in research and policy, but have struggled to effect the kinds of political change that their moral commitment to social justice promises and that further dialogue between them is required. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) are a complex category composed of five diseases and five behavioural and environmental risk factors. These are, in turn, represented by multiple constituencies and communities of expertise and interest. This fractured landscape is evidenced by and magnified through an abject lack of conferences devoted to the category of NCDs. One of the very few is the NCD Alliance Forum, most recently held in February 2020 in Sharjah, United Arab Emirates. With the first Forum held in 2015 and another in 2017, these events offer powerful insight into the key actors, advocacy strategies, debates and aspirations of those working in the 'NCD space'. Using the Forum as its object of research and analysis, this paper critically reflects on two persistent questions facing NCD advocates. First, how might NCDs be more like infectious diseases in cultivating a sense of urgency and action? Second, is NCD advocacy a 'movement' or a 'community' of loosely connected actors? Set against the emerging COVID-19 outbreak, which at the time of the Forum was limited to China and a handful of other countries, the Forum offered a unique opportunity to reflect upon the significant challenges facing NCD advocates across global north and south. COVID-19 only highlights how rising rates of NCDs have made global populations vulnerable to emerging infectious diseases. Yet, as the paper concludes, with the COVID-19 pandemic continuing to rage, the future of NCD advocacy and funding looks ever more fragile even as evidence of its need continues to grow. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Consensus is fast building in the public health community around the need to research and address the ‘industrial epidemics’ of non-communicable disease across both Global North and South. However, while it is agreed that the effects of corporate behaviour on health are serious, there have been limited attempts to map out what a ‘science’ of these interrelationships might be. To do this requires actively engaging with the ways in which corporate actors generate and shape risk behaviours, public perceptions and influence policy. Moving forward, this ‘science’ will inevitably require critical reflection on the consequences of the deepening ‘ideological schism’ within the public health community in its attitudes towards industry. To date, of all the ‘unhealthy commodities industries’, alcohol has arguably received the least empirical attention from researchers. This gap is even more significant given the growing adversity between the public health community and the industry from the national scale to that of the WHO. This paper explores the nature of the ideological schism within alcohol research and its significance for the future development both of a ‘science’ of the effects of corporate behaviour on health and the advocacy that will be needed to change future regulatory and business environments in more health-promoting ways. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

This commentary explores how household economic necessity and the public health aspirations set out in the WHO’s global strategy to reduce the harmful use of alcohol might be reconciled in the context of alcohol control in developing countries. The ‘ambiguity’ of alcohol’s role in social and economic development is clear, but, as yet, little progress has been made on how best to integrate alcohol control within development policies in low- and middle-income countries. Without this holistic thinking, alcohol control efforts are likely to be thwarted by liquor’s allure as an accessible micro-enterprise opportunity. Similarly, developmental efforts will be undermined by the severity of alcohol-related harms that now disproportionately affect middle-income countries. Drawing on the example of South Africa, this short commentary explores the complexities of controlling the supply of alcohol when its sale represents a major livelihood strategy amid conditions of high unemployment and constrained access to formal employment markets. The policy preference for closing illegal bars or shebeens in South Africa does not address the ‘causes of the causes’ of why people drink, and therefore why its sale continues to be an attractive livelihood choice. It also does little to provide alternative leisure or employment opportunities, which ultimately threatens the longer term sustainability of policy. We need to better appreciate why selling alcohol is a seductive business opportunity and the potential consequences of this for realising public health aspirations. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]