Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
1.
Lancet ; 401(10383): 1194-1213, 2023 04 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2295568

ABSTRACT

Although commercial entities can contribute positively to health and society there is growing evidence that the products and practices of some commercial actors-notably the largest transnational corporations-are responsible for escalating rates of avoidable ill health, planetary damage, and social and health inequity; these problems are increasingly referred to as the commercial determinants of health. The climate emergency, the non-communicable disease epidemic, and that just four industry sectors (ie, tobacco, ultra-processed food, fossil fuel, and alcohol) already account for at least a third of global deaths illustrate the scale and huge economic cost of the problem. This paper, the first in a Series on the commercial determinants of health, explains how the shift towards market fundamentalism and increasingly powerful transnational corporations has created a pathological system in which commercial actors are increasingly enabled to cause harm and externalise the costs of doing so. Consequently, as harms to human and planetary health increase, commercial sector wealth and power increase, whereas the countervailing forces having to meet these costs (notably individuals, governments, and civil society organisations) become correspondingly impoverished and disempowered or captured by commercial interests. This power imbalance leads to policy inertia; although many policy solutions are available, they are not being implemented. Health harms are escalating, leaving health-care systems increasingly unable to cope. Governments can and must act to improve, rather than continue to threaten, the wellbeing of future generations, development, and economic growth.


Subject(s)
Commerce , Industry , Humans , Policy , Tobacco , Government , Health Policy
2.
Obes Rev ; 22(9): e13301, 2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1249449

ABSTRACT

In 2016, the South African government proposed a 20% sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) tax. Protracted consultations with beverage manufacturers and the sugar industry followed. This resulted in a lower sugar-based beverage tax, the Health Promotion Levy (HPL), of approximately 10% coming into effect in April 2018. We provide a synthesis of findings until April 2021. Studies show that despite the lower rate, purchases of unhealthy SSBs and sugar intake consumption from SSBs fell. There were greater reductions in SSB purchases among both lower socioeconomic groups and in subpopulations with higher SSB consumption. These subpopulations bear larger burdens from obesity and related diseases, suggesting that this policy improves health equity. The current COVID-19 pandemic has impacted food and nutritional security. Increased pandemic mortality among people with obesity, diabetes, and hypertension highlight the importance of intersectoral public health disease-prevention policies like the HPL, which should be strengthened.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Health Promotion/methods , SARS-CoV-2 , Sugar-Sweetened Beverages/adverse effects , Sugar-Sweetened Beverages/economics , Taxes , Comorbidity , Consumer Behavior , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiology , Diabetes Mellitus/prevention & control , Humans , Hypertension/epidemiology , Hypertension/prevention & control , Obesity/epidemiology , Obesity/prevention & control , Socioeconomic Factors , South Africa/epidemiology
3.
Glob Health Action ; 13(1): 1810415, 2020 12 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-913066

ABSTRACT

At the time of writing, it is unclear how the COVID-19 pandemic will play out in rapidly urbanising regions of the world. In these regions, the realities of large overcrowded informal settlements, a high burden of infectious and non-communicable diseases, as well as malnutrition and precarity of livelihoods, have raised added concerns about the potential impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in these contexts. COVID-19 infection control measures have been shown to have some effects in slowing down the progress of the pandemic, effectively buying time to prepare the healthcare system. However, there has been less of a focus on the indirect impacts of these measures on health behaviours and the consequent health risks, particularly in the most vulnerable. In this current debate piece, focusing on two of the four risk factors that contribute to >80% of the NCD burden, we consider the possible ways that the restrictions put in place to control the pandemic, have the potential to impact on dietary and physical activity behaviours and their determinants. By considering mitigation responses implemented by governments in several LMIC cities, we identify key lessons that highlight the potential of economic, political, food and built environment sectors, mobilised during the pandemic, to retain health as a priority beyond the context of pandemic response. Such whole-of society approaches are feasible and necessary to support equitable healthy eating and active living required to address other epidemics and to lower the baseline need for healthcare in the long term.


Subject(s)
Communicable Disease Control/methods , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Diet , Exercise , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Urban Population , Urbanization , Betacoronavirus , Built Environment , COVID-19 , Food Supply , Health Behavior , Humans , Pandemics , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL