Tuesday, October 25, 2016

Prevent or perish - the choice is ours


PUBLIC HEALTH OPINION   111111m1111
BY PROFESSOR STEPHEN LEEDER, EMERITUS  PROFESSOR
PUBLIC HEALTH, UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY

HPV vaccine has transformed the prevention of cervical cancer.
We eliminated smallpox and perhaps we will yet dispatch polio. The dreadful infectious diseases of childhood are  much
diminished, at least in affluent societies. These good news items about prevention are welcome.

Prevention must be safe

But prevention can readily get a bad name. The controversy over statins - resolved in their favour only recently in a massive review of randomised trials published in the Lancet - illustrates how easily preventive strategies can be blown off  course.
The late, great epidemiologist Geoffrey Rose pointed out that while taking a risk on a treatment and suffering side effects may be tolerable when you are ill, this is not so with prevention. Here, we are dealing with well people and if we place even one in 1000 in jeopardy by our preventive intervention, the red flag will be waved, publicity will follow and the intervention will likely be abandoned.

The anonymity of prevention

Prevention suffers further - from anonymity. A preventive intervention in the community, such as separating the drinking water supply from pollution or removing a 'black spot' intersection from a highway, will save lives. But who are the people whose lives have been saved? We will never know. The ·grateful patient' is
not a person whose disease has been prevented, but rather one whose life has been saved through effective treatment.
,The matter of anonymity goes.further. Consider taking a drug that lowers blood pressure. Not everyone with elevated blood pressure who does not take the medicine will suffer   a
consequence. Not everyone whose blood pressure is lowered because of treatment will get a benefit. This muddle - some treated develop problems, many untreated don't  -  diminishes the credibility of prevention. We all know smokers who lived robust lives until they were 90 and we all know people who died before age 55 who were svelte, vegetarian, non-smokers who never sat down.
It is important to understand these attributes  of prevention if  we are to work out how to give it support. Simply put, there are few votes in prevention. Think suicide. Because prevention is anonymous and unpredictable and incomplete, it is unlike new surgical units, rescue helicopters and knee replacements. It is politically  intangible.


But what to do about today's epidemics of chronic disease?

And yet. The perfectly reasonable question about our current and future disease profile is this. Given its magnitude and its clear association with where and how we live our lives, and the evidence that its incidence can change with changed environment, will we choose to offer health care endlessly to an ever-growingnumber of people who have succumbed to these chronic problems, or will we move our investment in health care, and lend our political weight, to programs that seek to prevent these problems?
I recently printed three documents about obesity. They weighed 1.8 kilograms. Two were prepared by consultancies
- McKinsey and PwC - and the other came from the World Health Organisation. McKinsey, after a thoroughgoing analysis of the prevention literature , argued pragmatically that we should develop obesity preventive strategies that contain every intervention from childhood to dotage that has even a  trace
of evidence that it works. Put prenatal and early childhood interventions with adult cooking classes and food labelling and city planning and cycleways and readily available fresh food.

Social determinants

Sir Michael Marmot, an epidemiologist from London, has given this year's Boyer Lectures on the ABC. In them he urges us to look for the 'causes behind the causes'. A Sydney University graduate, he is now president of the World Medical Association and was previously , among many other things, President of the British Medical Association as well. He argues that the enemies of good healthcare are injustice and poverty, and to do nothing about them is a dereliction of medical duty.

The AMA strikes back

Before the last election the AMA called for a national strategy for prevention, a systematic approach to supporting efforts to reduce our dependence on the towing truck service of medicine in dealing with chronic and complex diseases and to favour prevention.
We need it - urgently.
As doctors we would do well to remember our roots. Long before we had effective remedies we were all public health physicians and much kudos helped develop the status of medicine because of our preventive agility and ability.

Lots to do here, and we need the help of the community and politicians in tackling 'the causes of the  causes·.

  Published in Australian Medicine 17 October 2016 http://bit.ly/2eDwGik

Tuesday, September 27, 2016

The healing power of words

Rebuilding your personal identity after a serious relationship breakup can be like assembling a piece of IKEA furniture, argues Ethan Kuperberg in a humorous one-page article in the September 12 issue of The New Yorker titled 'How to put your Sëlf together.'  Leaving your Sëlf unattended during re-assembly "can result in injury, error, or [worst of all] poetry."  So should doctors have anything to do with this traumatic consequence called poetry?

To our ears poetry is foreign although in other times and places it was familiar. It is not the language of business, politics or science.  Instead it links to art, drama, sculpture, and music, especially to song.  It enables feelings of love and loss, of ecstasy and sadness not easily otherwise expressed to find a voice. The contrast of prose and poetry is incomplete and prose can of course be brilliant as a vehicle to carry these feelings.  Also, overlap occurs between prose and poetry, and 'prose poetry' follows. But poetry has unusual strength for this communication.

Because there are many forms of poetry - long and short, rhyming (simple or complicated), tightly disciplined or free, inscrutable or accessible, concrete or abstract - there are many definitions, none entirely satisfactory. Despite the variety in poetry and its definitions, several common features can make it attractive to doctors.

First, poetry can express our deep feelings when patients or family or friends suffer and die. It enables these feelings to be explored, articulated and shared without the heavy transactional processes of prose. Doctors whose encounters with death and suffering are common and profound use poetry to express their feelings. Patients and carers do likewise.

Second, poetry can enable the expression of achievement - liberation, cure, safe birth, the lifting of depression - that are not enumerated in key performance indicators that tend to reflect processes and financial efficiency expectations of the clinician. It can share an elemental connection to love and happiness that bypasses the bureaucracy of measurement and computation.

Third, poetry reveals deep things about the shy poet and his or her subject that he or she would find difficult otherwise to share, uncovering the soul in its naked austerity.  Not all doctors are extroverts, not all express their feelings openly. They may be more comfortable speaking from behind the veil of poetry.

It is a mistake to think that poetry is simply random jottings that require little effort. In fact, it is an art form that carries its own discipline like learning a musical instrument. I have benefitted from membership in a poetry writing group that meets each week with an expert tutor to share poetry and critique one another's efforts.  I have come to enjoy the way poetry makes me consider and savour each word, and the fellowship of poets from different backgrounds. It is rich in metaphor, analogy and simile and light on description, depending more on evocation, suggestion and impression. 

The great Irish poet Seamus Heaney had a brilliant talent for turning words, like diamonds, through ten or more degrees allowing the light to diffract into new colours, astonishing the reader with their novelty. Take for example the first stanza, especially its brilliant last line of his poem 'The Sharping Stone':

In an apothecary's chest of drawers,
Sweet cedar that we'd purchased second hand,
In one of its weighty deep-sliding recesses
I found the sharping stone that was to be
Our gift to him. Still in its wrapping paper
Like a baton of black light I'd failed to pass.

Poetry allows me to search my mind for interpretations of events and people that are not immediately obvious.  Others might access these insights through meditation, but for me, sitting at the laptop with no more than the germ of an idea of the poem and then watching it emerge, expands my understanding of those events and people.

The Scandinavian Nobel laureate poet Tomas Tranströmer suffered a devastating stroke in 1990, leaving him hemiplegic and without speech.  His recovery was gradual and never complete, but he returned to playing the piano with his left hand. He returned to writing short poems.  I wondered about his experience - lived as it were from the inside.  So I wrote a poem, beginning with the confusion and disorientation of the acute phase of his CVA, as he might have experienced it. I tried to use his voice, his style, for this purpose. One snippet of this quite long poem, The Stroke of One, reads:

In a flash my spirit
was caught like a fish in a net,
my flesh pulled and spun
through an unfamiliar deep.

I do not claim that this poetic exploration was helpful to anyone, least of all Tranströmer, but I feel differently about the stroke experience as a result.  Maybe that makes me a better person to understand strokes in others or in myself if I were to suffer this fate.  You can find the complete poem on my poetry blog Stephenleeder.blogspot.com.au along with others from recent years.

Although I do not have the epidemiological evidence, it is said that poets are miserable people who often end their lives by suicide. The search for meaning and interpretation that underlies much poetry can be a manifestation of human alienation or depression.  But as a counterweight, read Shakespeare's sonnets or the Psalms of Degrees.  

As with art, drama and music, there is room for the expression of great happiness in poetry. The process of poetic reflection mines happiness from our unconscious like precious ore - it is free and for our pleasure!

Published in Australian Doctor 28 September 2016  http://bit.ly/2cBvJqm

Monday, April 18, 2016

Taxing times ahead as sugar falls from favour

The UK’s latest budget brought down by the chancellor, George Osborne, last month contained a surprise proposal to tax soft drinks containing added sugar.
It was a tough budget and this proposal did nothing to promote Osborne's popularity. So why did he and the government decide to take such steps?
The move comes a year after the WHO released an update of its recommendations on sugar intake for adults and children.1
It says both should reduce their intake of free sugars by roughly half to less than 10% of their daily calories.
But to accrue the most health benefits, the guidance adds, this figure should actually be as low as 5%. That's the equivalent of just 25g, or six teaspoons, a day.
The reason soft drinks have become the focus of this is because they contain heaps of sugar. A 355mL can of cola has about 30g or seven teaspoons of sugar.
Furthermore, the UK's consumption of sugar is high compared with other developed nations.
According to an article in British newspaper the Independent, the average person in the UK receives around 16-17% of their calories from sugar, compared with 11-15% in the US and 7-8% in Hungary and Norway.
The UK's proposed levy will see soft drinks containing more than 5g of sugar per 100 mL taxed at a rate of 18 pence (GBP) a litre and those containing over 8g taxed at 24 pence (GBP) a litre.2 The proposals are due to come into force in 2017/18 and the funds used to support sport for children.
Earn CPD Points: Nutrition through the ages
Critics point out that many drinks other than soda contain lots of sugar; fruit juice and flavoured milk to name two. But despite what the critics say, sugar taxes — although not perfect — do work.
Several systematic reviews of the evidence (both modelled and real life) have shown that taxing sugary drinks reduces their purchase and consumption.
Hungary and Norway both tax sugary drinks, as do France, Chile and Mexico, which is the country best known for implementing the public health move.
Mexico implemented its soda tax in 2014, and after just 12 months saw a 12% reduction in purchases of these drinks, with the largest declines among low socio-economic households.
This coincided with a 4% increase in the purchase of untaxed drinks, mainly bottled water.3
Soda companies argue that these taxes are regressive, hitting the poor and vulnerable the hardest. But if the less well-off save their money by buying less fizz, they may switch to fruit juice and flavoured milk — which, unlike fizz, have nutritional value — or spend a little more on food.
‘Big Soda' is prepared to fight hard to stop such taxes, as the residents of Berkeley, California, discovered two years ago when it first announced plans to introduce such a tax.
The beverage industry spent US$2.4 million trying to stop the city from passing legislation on the issue. However, despite its efforts, the tax did come into force in November 2014.
This should act as a warning to the UK Government should prepare for a long battle, rather like the one waged in Australia over plain packaging of tobacco.
And what about Australia? Should we follow suit on taxing soft drinks?
Well, the writing should already be on the wall if you look at our collective consumption of sugar.
Australia ranks 11th in the international league chart of per capita sugary drink consumption, according to Euromonitor International.
Two-thirds of the Australian population are overweight or obese, and in the 2011/12 Australian Health Survey, more than half of Australians exceeded the WHO recommendations for added sugar, with sugary drinks the main culprit (21.4%).4
The Australian Obesity Policy Coalition, which has a focus on law reform to prevent obesity, says 85% of Australians would support a tax on sugary drinks if the revenue were used to support childhood obesity programs.
Given the international evidence of effectiveness, the Coalition has called on the government to add a levy of 20% to fizz.
It will be interesting to see whether, in light of the UK's move, Australia will follow suit.


Professor Leeder is professor of public health and community medicine at the Menzies Centre for Health Policy and School of Public Health, University of Sydney.
Ms Downs is an Earth Institute post-doctoral fellow in nutrition policy and an affiliate of the Menzies Centre for Health Policy.

Published in Australian Doctor 13 April 2016 http://bit.ly/1YEfw0O

Election timing fuss distracts from real issues




Published in Australian Medicine 4th April 2016 http://bit.ly/1Wc9Egq

Rural health: the continuing challenge


Published in Australian Medicine 21 March 2016 http://bit.ly/22JKw0B