At least two overdeveloped countries on either side of the Pacific Ocean have been strenuously engaged in “healthcare debates.” But as these things often seem to go (and as various health professionals note when asked for their comment) our “healthcare debates” are really only “attempted cure debates.” The “prevention conversation” part of the deal doesn’t seem to generate the political attention it deserves.
I’m reminded of this challenging circumstance almost daily, as people invite me to meet them at a cafés around town. If I enter a café in the morning I see cases of baked goods, tempting me with their sugary tastiness. If I enter a café in the afternoon I observe that most of the said goodies are gone, presumably in lots of tummies. And I know that this circumstance is replicated in thousands of cafes throughout the overdeveloped world. I’ve heard it said that if you wanted to design a diet ripe for human inflammation, and hence for such nasties as cancer, you couldn’t end up with a much better design than we've stumbled on to in our western ways.
I’m just wondering whether we can continue to load our bodies with highly processed starches, omega-six-rich fats and the like and then get hot under the collar about “attempted cure debates?” Alternatives are possible, but we’ll need to invoke the wisdom to have the “prevention conversation.”
At the intersection of nutrition, exercise, economic development and social cohesion -- food security -- my past work among two sets of people groups in America, African American inner-city children and youth and Caucasian reveals that attempted cures will require substantial investments of time, financial resources, and patience to transform a culture of self-gratifying, impulsive consumption of "goods and services" to a culture of mutual concern and care, delayed gratification, and focus on healthy relationships that replenish resources rather than exploit them.
ReplyDeleteIn terms of food security and the families in my community (see www.shalomfarms.org, this means that families living in poverty have a taste and budget for (acculturated to) sugary, fat-laden, calorie-rich, inexpensive foods; whereas, the more affluent have the capacity(income, transportation, etc), though not always the taste, to acquire and consume organic, low-fat, tasty -- healthy -- foods.
Investing in prevention, such as food security projects, are directly correlated to decreased chronic issues such as Diabetes, obesity, heart disease, etc. They also provide venues for cultural transformation (economic, social political and religious). The result is a win-win. However, the costs and benefits of such cultural transformation (and health care costs reduction) are not often part of the equation and conversation.
I agree with Adrian that we simply must work on the side of prevention (systemic cultural transformation) rather than pouring ever-limited resources into reactionary and costly responses.
N. David Cooper
n.dave.cooper@gmail.com
At the intersection of nutrition, exercise, economic development and social cohesion -- food security -- my past work among two sets of people groups in America, African American inner-city children and youth and Caucasian reveals that attempted cures will require substantial investments of time, financial resources, and patience to transform a culture of self-gratifying, impulsive consumption of "goods and services" to a culture of mutual concern and care, delayed gratification, and focus on healthy relationships that replenish resources rather than exploit them.
ReplyDeleteIn terms of food security and the families in my community (see www.shalomfarms.org, this means that families living in poverty have a taste and budget for (acculturated to) sugary, fat-laden, calorie-rich, inexpensive foods; whereas, the more affluent have the capacity (income, transportation, etc), though not always the taste, to acquire and consume organic, low-fat, tasty -- healthy -- foods.
Investing in prevention, such as food security projects, are directly correlated to decreased chronic health issues such as Diabetes, obesity, heart disease, etc. Such projects also provide venues for cultural transformation (economic, social political and religious).
The result is a win-win. However, the costs and benefits of such cultural transformation (and health care costs reduction) are not often part of the equation and conversation.
I agree with Adrian that we simply must work on the side of prevention (systemic cultural transformation) rather than pouring ever-limited resources into reactionary and costly fixes for health care.