The last assignment for a class of mine titled “Enhancing Community Engagement” tasked me with writing and submitting a Letter to the Editor of a local paper.
It seems as though the money is all in pharmaceuticals, so it makes sense for companies to pursue that avenue. I like how you emphasized “pharmaceutical companies are already attempting this feat and more power to them”. It’s easy to paint big pharma as a villain, but the truth is there are people suffering right now and for them to find a “cure” would help many people that are suffering. However, it would be an extremely valuable social investment to find avenues to lower the likely hood of ever getting Dementia/Alzheimer’s in the first place. The only challenge is who’s gonna pay for it? (More of a rhetorical question)
I do think public opinion is changing on healthy lifestyles and our knowledge of nutrition and exercising is improving. I also think the education provided to architects, designers, and engineers is somewhat changing to create more livable and healthy spaces and cities. And generally a push for a more eco-friendly way of living will in turn push people to be more active. It is difficult, however, to try to change the way people live/eat/commute/vote/spend.
Trying to find ways to prevent disease rather than treat disease when discussing societal habits is a fickle thing - yet the conversation is necessary.
Steve, you are so spot on with your comments. In the past I realized that although my personal interests are in upstream prevention, it’s ignorant of and insensitive to the population already living with a disease. I’m all for a miracle dementia pill, if it’s equally available and affordable.
As far as the cost of preventing dementia and other diseases, I don’t know the answer. (check out the “power of prevention” link at the end of the post, if you haven’t already). It would certainly require funding up front, but I would imagine the returns in the future from a healthier population would far outweigh those initial costs. It feels like a tired argument to make against pharmaceutical companies “keeping people sick” in order to keep their profits, but it makes me wonder about a larger question of why we’ve allowed certain industries to be for-profit at all? I suppose that answer would have to do with the difficulty of pursuing true benevolence and the Peoples’ best interests (which public health absolutely should strive for) within the confines of an inherently capitalistic system.
A lot of what we’ve talked about in my foundations of public health class touched on your comment of “changing the way people live/eat/commute/vote/spend”. We know the leading causes of mortality (heart disease, cancers, stroke, dementia/Alzheimer’s, etc.), we know quite a bit about the behaviors and other factors that lead to those mortalities (smoking, drinking, poor diet, sedentary lifestyle, etc.), but we understand far less about WHY people make choices and the belief systems that influence those choices. Lots of cognitive bias and misinformation floating around…
Thanks for reading and sharing your thoughts, Steve :)
Kyle - I LOVE so many things about this post and appreciate that you took a topic that I don’t feel I’ve connected with and made it incredibly relevant to my every day. Thank you for shining a light on the issue and detailing your “why”!
It seems as though the money is all in pharmaceuticals, so it makes sense for companies to pursue that avenue. I like how you emphasized “pharmaceutical companies are already attempting this feat and more power to them”. It’s easy to paint big pharma as a villain, but the truth is there are people suffering right now and for them to find a “cure” would help many people that are suffering. However, it would be an extremely valuable social investment to find avenues to lower the likely hood of ever getting Dementia/Alzheimer’s in the first place. The only challenge is who’s gonna pay for it? (More of a rhetorical question)
I do think public opinion is changing on healthy lifestyles and our knowledge of nutrition and exercising is improving. I also think the education provided to architects, designers, and engineers is somewhat changing to create more livable and healthy spaces and cities. And generally a push for a more eco-friendly way of living will in turn push people to be more active. It is difficult, however, to try to change the way people live/eat/commute/vote/spend.
Trying to find ways to prevent disease rather than treat disease when discussing societal habits is a fickle thing - yet the conversation is necessary.
Thanks for your piece!
Steve, you are so spot on with your comments. In the past I realized that although my personal interests are in upstream prevention, it’s ignorant of and insensitive to the population already living with a disease. I’m all for a miracle dementia pill, if it’s equally available and affordable.
As far as the cost of preventing dementia and other diseases, I don’t know the answer. (check out the “power of prevention” link at the end of the post, if you haven’t already). It would certainly require funding up front, but I would imagine the returns in the future from a healthier population would far outweigh those initial costs. It feels like a tired argument to make against pharmaceutical companies “keeping people sick” in order to keep their profits, but it makes me wonder about a larger question of why we’ve allowed certain industries to be for-profit at all? I suppose that answer would have to do with the difficulty of pursuing true benevolence and the Peoples’ best interests (which public health absolutely should strive for) within the confines of an inherently capitalistic system.
A lot of what we’ve talked about in my foundations of public health class touched on your comment of “changing the way people live/eat/commute/vote/spend”. We know the leading causes of mortality (heart disease, cancers, stroke, dementia/Alzheimer’s, etc.), we know quite a bit about the behaviors and other factors that lead to those mortalities (smoking, drinking, poor diet, sedentary lifestyle, etc.), but we understand far less about WHY people make choices and the belief systems that influence those choices. Lots of cognitive bias and misinformation floating around…
Thanks for reading and sharing your thoughts, Steve :)
Kyle - I LOVE so many things about this post and appreciate that you took a topic that I don’t feel I’ve connected with and made it incredibly relevant to my every day. Thank you for shining a light on the issue and detailing your “why”!