My Rip on Health Disparities Research

A few days ago, I gave my final lecture in my epi class, partly an overview of social epidemiology, and partly a rip on health disparities research.

The short version:

Identifying and describing health disparities:

- is a great way to get grant money.

- seems like a great way to raise awareness-

--- in order to mobilize greater resources to address the problem &

--- in order to mobilize members of the 'target population' to take preventive action.

- can be demoralizing to the 'target population'.

- can induce feelings of helplessness in the 'target population'.

- can make ill health seem inevitable & expected in the 'target population',

--- potentially reducing the urgency for action.

- describes the result, not the causes-

--- if you believe genetics is the cause, the existence of health disparities supports that notion

--- if you believe lifestyle is the cause, the existence of health disparities supports that notion

--- if you believe racism is the cause, the existence of health disparities supports that notion.

- don't identify potential public health actions to address health disparities

Furthermore, the almost exclusive focus on adverse health disparities:

- is demoralizing to the 'target population'.

- enhances the sense of social distance between the 'target' and 'majority' populations.

- obscures the true picture of a mixture of adverse health disparities, health similarities and advantageous health disparities.

Ignoring advantageous health disparities

- blinds us to the possibility of understanding the mechanisms for these advantages

--- which could lead to more effective public health measures built upon those mechanisms to address the adverse health disparities

--- or could lead to building on those mechanisms to improve the health of populations other than the 'target population', including the 'majority' population.