Blog 5

           Contagion, a medical thriller, shows the possible outcomes if a brand new virus were to be discovered on earth.  Steven Soderbergh does an excellent job as director making sure the movie doesn’t become too science fiction.  Contagion was based off a fictional disease pandemic that swept across the world within a short time period.  The film highlighted many different public health specialties along with how the military is used to enact law and order in times of distress.  Unfortunately, by the end of the movie millions of people across the world died of this disease.    

            With my new understanding of public health, it was interesting to see how the CDC (federal government) sent a field analyst to supervise operations.  The CDC clearly had planned for this event.  However, the state health department didn’t seem that well prepared, which is a definite problem if something like this were to happen.  The use of military was key to stopping the outbreak.  They were able to keep people as civilized a possible given the situation.  It was also interesting to see how foreign governments and the WHO helped prevent the disease from spreading.    

            An outbreak is the start to a certain disease which is then spread throughout a given area.  The outbreak investigation is what the public health officials conduct once an outbreak of a disease is detected.  Isolation is key to preventing the spread of a communicable disease such as the one in the movie.  Quarantines keep the infected away from all the healthy people.  This makes certain that healthy people aren’t in contact with the infected, thus slowing he spread.  These terms all have to do with some aspect of the movie Contagion.  In the movie, an Outbreak of MEV-1 causes an outbreak investigation into the cause of the virus.  Once they find the cause, public health officials start trying to find a cure or vaccine to treat those infected.  Isolation and quarantines were started to keep the sick away from the healthy.  Unfortunately the medical professionals are the bridge between the two worlds, and some may succumb to the disease they are trying to stop. 

            Had Contagion been real, government officials would have had the logistics figured out to get food and water to all.  An example of this was when there was a huge line of people who needed to get food from the military; however the military didn’t have enough food which then caused a riot.  In real life, the government would have a more organized food distribution system.  Also, I noticed during the outbreak a lot of doctors abandoned their patients in fear that they would also get sick.  However in real life the federal government would provide military doctors to treat the ill.  The government would also provide personal protective gear to medical professionals so they wouldn’t be afraid to care for the sick.    

 

Blog 4

Blog 4

            The Dartmouth Atlas Project was made to “spot the places that weren’t getting enough medical care” (CITE). They found that there was a huge variety of care given for similar illnesses and therefore costs increase.  An example they gave was the percentages of children who had their tonsils removed.  The percentages ranged from 75% to 25%.   

            I believe access to healthcare is a human right.  We are all put on this earth to live a life.  Why should some people live longer than others just because of the amount of money in their bank account?  Governments ensure the safety of their citizens through funding military, why shouldn’t they protect their citizens from preventable diseases? 

            Grand Junction, Colorado has taken up a system where doctors provide medical to nearly everybody for the lowest average cost in the US.  They made sure that every person paid the same amount of money for the same procedures as others did before.  These prices were a third of the prices of different places, yet the people were healthier in Grand Junction.  Doctors in Grand Junction made this work by putting a certain percentage of their bills in a pool to cover the uninsured.  They also set up a charity clinic that receives money from local businesses and other area hospitals.  The main reason for their medical systems success is the fact that “Healthy people cost less than sick people.” 

            Seattle, Washington is another city where medical systems vary from most health systems in America.  They have accepted the idea of a Co-op, where customers own a certain business.  Patient-centered medical home is a new way to increase the quality of healthcare.  The Doctors are paid a salary, so it doesn’t matter how fast or how many patients they see. 

            Everett, Washington is another example of a different approach to healthcare.  One way this example works is the cutting of expensive non-needed procedures such as a MRI scan.  They also started prescribing generic drugs to lower the healthcare prices.  This approach

            Providence, Rhode Island is yet another example of a different approach to saving money on healthcare.  They only resort to blood transfusions only as a last resort.  A pint of blood is about $1,000.  They have save an estimated 12 million dollars within the last 3-4 years.  I never knew that blood was this expensive.  Also I assumed that open heart surgery had to be performed with a blood transfusion.   

            In Lebanon, New Hampshire, bills are paid by insurance, but they differ by allowing the patient to decide on which course of action they would like to take in their own health.  Doctors should find out what their patients want, it is call shared decision making.    

            Unfortunately, personal greed will always prevent such practices from spreading throughout the United States without the help of the government.  I believe these medical systems haven’t been adopted in the area that I live because so many doctors are scared of losing some of their profit.  Some doctors aren’t in the business of providing quality care for a low cost.  Medical practices don’t want to spend more time with each patient because many are paid by the number of patients they see. 

Blog 3

            The Frontline Special “Vaccine Wars” acknowledges a growing problem of people refusing to get vaccinated due to social media and false claims.  In general, many of the critics of vaccination claim that vaccines are the cause of autism and other learning disabilities.  However, many studies have shown that the rate of autism and other learning disabilities is about the same in children who are vaccinated and those who aren’t.  Many of the children who are vaccinated are around the age when autism becomes evident, so this may be the reason for the correlation. 

            Despite the numerous claims that vaccines are the cause of certain illnesses, I still believe that the overall positive effects of vaccination highly outweigh the negative effects of vaccination.  Once I have kids, I will still chose to vaccinate them because I know that I will be aiding in the prevention of a disease outbreak. 

            Herd immunity is the idea that having a few people not vaccinated is not worrisome due to the fact that the surrounding people are already vaccinated to the illness in question.  People who have already been vaccinated are not the ones at risk, nor will they be able to spread the disease.  Herd Immunity only works if a certain percentage of the population is vaccinated.  If too many people are not vaccinated then the protection network may break down because the large number of people not vaccinated are now at risk for a preventable disease. 

            Vaccinations are different from other types of personal health decisions because some people aren’t too keen on preventing something that they believe is no longer existent.  Prior to the internet, parents would have to go into a medical school campus to find testimonials of negative effects of disease.  Now however, all it takes is a simple web search of the vaccine in question.  Low and behold, the negative opinions of the vaccine are going to be very evident because of the emotional appeal that the writers put into it.  I believe it is ultimately the parents’ decision on whether or not their child should be vaccinated.  I also believe that the government should educate the public about how important vaccinations are. 

            The main reason that people tend to be scared of vaccinations is because of popular media exploits.  People become terrified of the vaccinations because their child’s overall health is the most important thing to them.  Some people believe that because humans have lived for hundreds of thousand for years prior to the first vaccine that the human body is sufficient enough alone to fend off disease. 

            Public health officials should publicize the benefits towards society if everyone were to be vaccinated.  They should also show how only a small fraction of people who have received the vaccine had adverse reactions.  I would have the government spend money on movie productions to implant little public health messages within the text.  Movies like Contagion and Outbreak demonstrate to the public how real outbreaks of lethal diseases could be and how the only way to stop there spread is to vaccinate others.                 

Blog 2

                A public health study was conducted in Japan on women whose husbands had smoked.  This study was to see if there was a true risk of lung cancer for “passive smoking” or as we call it today “second-hand smoking.”  Many things were taken into consideration before publishing the findings.  The public health officials compared average mortality among similar women who live similar lifestyles and found that the annual mortality for lung cancer was 8.7 per 100,000; these women’s husbands didn’t smoke or smoked very little.  However, the wives of husbands that did smoke had a much higher risk of developing lung cancer.  A wife of a husband who smoked more than twenty cigarettes per day had a morality rate from lung cancer of 13.14 per 100,000 deaths.  An even more disturbing finding is that Wives whose husbands work in agriculture had a mortality rate of 18.40 per 100,000.  The average mortality rate for women whose non-smoking husbands who worked in agriculture were 9.54 per 100,000; which is still higher than wives of non-agricultural workers.  As exposure elongated (woman lived longer), the more likely they would die from lung cancer (29.60/ 100,000 for women older than 60).  The P value of .00097 showed that the mortality was not due to chance, but to a certain reason.  In conclusion they showed that passive smoking resulted in nearly one half to one third of deaths compared to active smokers.

            These findings are very affective at showing the public that there is a clear correlation between dying of lung cancer or other lung maladies and living with a heavy smoker.  With the health of others now in mind smokers may now slow or stop their smoking in front of family members.  It also allows the government to have data to support non-smoking in public places laws because it proves harmful to others and not just oneself.

            The advantage of this study was the use of graphs and tables after the print.  Often times readers of a document like to look at pictures to accurately gauge the data presented.  Like I said before, this study will allow governments to implement  non-smoking laws in public places, which will lower non-smokers risk of lung cancer.   

            Schneider wrote about cause and effect in Chapter six of his book.  With this knowledge, I feel that second-hand smoking does, in some cases, cause lung cancer or other lung diseases.  This is because so much data was taken in this study.  They tested women from all walks of life to find their different risks of dying from a lung disease or cancer.  The researchers also showed that the results are not due to chance.   

Blog #1

            This article was published to spread awareness of a public health problem known as binge drinking among women.  The statistic that only 37.9% of high school women drink seems actually lower than in reality.  23,000 deaths due to alcohol overuse are way too high for women, alone, within the years 2001-2005.  This study also showed how higher educated women tended not to drink as much.  This is most likely due to a higher socio-economic status, in which they may have not been subjected to alcoholism as much as their poorer counter-parts. However, the study also points out how binge drinking was more prevalent in households with annual incomes greater than $75,000, which would contradict my previous claim.  The study also shows that as girls aged, the percentages of binge drinking also rose.  This is most likely due to the girls hanging out with older people who may be of age and can supply the alcohol.  This data was based off of self-report tests that didn’t take into account college campuses and military bases which may be a reason for the low percentages that I noticed before. 

            Binge drinking is a public health issue because of its negative effects on the population.  Binge drinking accounts for way too many deaths in America for under aged women.  I personally know of too many people who have had to get their stomachs pumped due to binge drinking.  Unintended pregnancies due to being too drunk to make correct decisions are a reality that must be faced.  All decisions made while under the influence of alcohol are usually poor.  Unfortunately, sometimes these decisions lead to death of the person drinking or the death of others as a result of this intoxicated persons actions. 

            The high number of deaths among women surprised me, but the incidence rate of regular alcohol consumption seems rather low.  As with all self-report data, the researcher needs to be aware of data inaccuracies.  Surveys given to high school girls may be taken as a joke, thus flawing the data. 

            First of all no matter what the government tries to do, there will always be underage drinking.  A nationwide campaign to show the negative effects of alcohol needs to be put in place.  An example of a campaign would be something like the cigarette commercials showing the long term negative effects of smoking such as lung cancer or emphysema.  The “guide to Community Preventative services” is taking the wrong approach.  Raising the price on alcohol will do nothing.  People will always buy alcohol because of the popular belief that drinking is “cool.”  Another way the government can interfere would be to limit the amount of alcohol consumption on TV.  They have done a good job of limiting smoking on TV, why can’t they take that approach towards alcohol also?  Another example of illogical thinking is the Florida approach.  One cannot but a 30-rack of beer because it’s outlawed with the hope of reducing underage parties.  The reality that people wishing to drink can now buy two 20-racks which equal 40 beers.  Now there can be an even bigger party.                        

What is a “T-test?”