In May 2009, the World Health Assembly called on national governments to politically commit to tackle health inequities and to embrace the principles outlined in the final report of World Health Organization’s (WHO) Commission on Social Determinants of Health (CSDOH). In my last post, Healthy Policies looked at a recent Lancet debate over who owns [...]

Two major health inequality reports were recently released, one in the UK and the other in the US. This is the final post in a series which seeks to better understand the health perspective of these reports. Understanding variations in how health inequality research is pursued is important because health perspectives can undermine attention to the broader determinants of health inequalities and hinder the development of healthy public policies. While the true policy implications of the reports remain to be seen, the difference in health perspectives of the two reports is astounding.

Building Healthy Policies: The latest in research, events, and blogging from across the world.

Last week and just days apart, two major reviews of health inequalities were released, Fair Society, Healthy Lives in the UK and County Health Rankings in the US. Understanding variations in how health inequality research is pursued is important because research which emphasizes an individualized model of health undermines attention to the broader determinants of health and the development of healthy public policy.

A major report published last week arms the UK with an evidence-based strategy for reducing health inequalities over the next 10 years. Commissioned by the government, the report, Fair Society, Healthy Lives, outlines six essential policy objectives.