Monday, September 28, 2009

The SPARK Blog Has Moved!

Please visit to view all current blog articles.


-The SPARK Team

Wednesday, September 9, 2009

Where is Health?

This was not written as a blog entry. It was written as an op-ed piece for a newspaper. However, 4 major newspapers have rejected it, but I would like someone to read it, so I am sharing it with you. I wrote this piece because even before the health reform debate devolved into a depressing spectacle of shouting and fear-mongering, almost noone was talking about how reforms might actually improve health. Use your freedom of speech to make your views known on this critical national issue.

Where is Health?

Where is health in the debate over health care reform? The mass media debate is almost completely about improving health care coverage, reducing health care costs, and paying for the increased coverage. There is a great deal of media attention to the proposed public option for insurance, and we hear a lot from hospital groups, insurance companies, and the pharmaceutical industry about what the proposals would do to their businesses. But people’s health is virtually absent from the mass media debate; an afterthought at best. Every so often there is a passing mention of prevention or enhanced primary care, but no explanation of what that might mean.

Where is health in the Congressional debates? Believe it or not, health is present in discussions of preventing disease to both control health care costs and improve the health of Americans. Did you know that in the Senate three committees are working on health reform and one of those is focused on prevention and public health? I’m guessing you did not know that. I’ve been looking for reports on their work, and I don’t find them in the mass media.

Where is health on the minds of the American people? Surprise, it’s the number one priority for health reform. A May 2009 Trust for America’s Health poll of 1014 US voters identified prevention as the top priority of six health reform proposals that included universal health care coverage and prohibiting insurance companies from denying coverage based on pre-existing conditions. What’s more, 76% of voters supported investing more money in prevention, and that included at least 70% of Republicans, Democrats, and Independents.

Why is the public debate on health care so discrepant from the public’s interest in health improvement? This is a question that needs to be answered by media organizations, but here is my guess. The debate is being driven by money, health care industry money. Hospitals, insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies, medical device makers, medical testing companies, and physician groups are the beneficiaries of the current system that spends $2 trillion annually. They are on the receiving end of the unrelenting rise in health care costs. They have something to lose if Americans become healthier, so I imagine they are sending the most letters and emails to news organizations and lobbyists to Capitol Hill. Their primary concern is the financial health of their companies, so excuse them if they don’t talk much about the health of the American people.

Who is representing the voice of the American people who want a health system that helps them stay healthy and prevent disease? Almost nobody. There are public interest groups and foundations that are trying to make their voices heard and find some scraps for prevention, but they are no match for the lobbying activities of giant health care industries. If you are one of the 76% of American voters who wants health reform to create a health system that invests much more in prevention, you are going to have to speak for yourself. Express your opinion to your representatives and to news outlets.

But as we prepare to speak our minds, let’s be clear about what prevention really is. In the health care debate, prevention usually refers to mammograms, prostate screening, and cholesterol testing. These are worthy but not at the heart of making people healthier. Prevention can summed up by “3four50”. This means that 3 behaviors (smoking, inactivity, poor diet) contribute to four leading diseases (heart disease, cancers, diabetes, and lung disease) that in turn are responsible for 50% of all deaths in the world, more in the U.S. As everyone knows, achieving those behavior changes is difficult. But, if our health system was designed to focus on preventing smoking and helping people be physically active and eat sensible portions of nutritious foods, we could prevent disease, reduce the need for health care, and control health care costs. This is our chance for true health reform. Let’s add the voice of the American people to the debate before it’s too late.

Jim Sallis

Wednesday, September 2, 2009

Honey, Please Pass the Scale?

The next time you and your spouse sit down to dinner together, take a critical look at all the food on your table. You might be sharing a pretty unhealthy meal. According to a recent study, married men and women are twice as likely to become obese as the general population. And the longer they live together, the greater the risk.

By the way, women should not think they’ll be exempt from packing on the pounds if they forgo the marriage license and simply live with the one they love. Women co-habitating with a romantic partner have a 64% greater risk of obesity. However, men co-habitating with a romantic partner have no increased risk at all—proving once again that it's really great to be born male.

The researchers, from the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill, aren’t sure why marriage might make you fat. They do note that being married does provide other health benefits, including decreased smoking and longer life. “But we also see greater weight gain than in others of the same age, and greater risk of obesity,” said Penny Gordon-Larsen, an associate professor of nutrition at UNC and co-author of the study.

According to Gordon-Larsen, when people are living together – married or not – they tend to share behaviors and activity patterns. They may chose to eat meals together, possibly cooking bigger meals or eating out more often than they did when they were single, and may watch TV together instead of going to the gym or playing a sport. Gordon-Larsen said that in subsequent interviews with both romantic partners, they found that couples who lived together for more than two years (especially those who were married) were most likely to display similar weight/obesity patterns and physical activity behaviors.

The UNC researchers suggest that, just as spouses share unhealthy behaviors, they could learn to share healthy behaviors. Would the couple that runs together be as likely to stay together as the couple who shares a late night venture out for Mexican food and margaritas?

I think there's another factor at play here. Prior to marriage, we watch what we eat, exercise more, take better care of ourselves -- trying to look better and attract a mate. Then, when the romantic chase is over we say our mutual, "I do's," people become complacent and let themselves go. Too bad. It should be about health -- and not being more physically attractive.

Why don't you "weigh in" on this topic? How many of you have noticed a similar pattern -- weight gain after marriage or co-habitating? What do you think contributes to it?

-Paul Rosengard

This article adapted from Cathy Arnst, "Marriage Makes You Fat" in Business Week magazine.