Influence of Society and Politics on Health Essay Answer

Introduction

 Health equity and inequality, is about the differences in access to healthcare and health status that exist between various groups within a population. Although the UK has a publicly funded National Health Service (NHS) intended to give universal access to medical treatment, the reality is much more complicated. Health disparities frequently disproportionately affect socially and economically disadvantaged populations, exposing the complex web of cultural and political causes (Government of the UK, 2022). Health disparities develop against the backdrop of society. Living conditions, career possibilities, education, and socioeconomic status all have a significant impact on both individual and societal well-being. A closer look at these elements reveals the structural inequities that influence health outcomes (World Health Organization, 2018). Lower-income people commonly face barriers to accessing appropriate healthcare, wholesome food, safe housing, and education, which together increase their vulnerability to health problems. The link between societal stratification and health inequalities is obvious and reflects how political choices affect how opportunities and resources are distributed across the nation (McMaughan et al., 2020).

The complicated interplay between politics, societal institutions, and health outcomes stands as a crucial focus point for thorough analysis in the rich tapestry of modern civilizations. The relationship between society and politics and health disparity and unfairness has received considerable attention, and nowhere is this more apparent than in the United Kingdom (McCartney et al., 2019). The differences in health outcomes across the UK's population have emerged as a critical lens through which to explore the interconnection of these elements as the country struggles with the difficulties of a quickly changing social landscape and a dynamic political arena. Equally important in influencing health disparities is the UK's political climate. Health disparities are an example of the power relations between the government and its people because policies and governance systems can either exacerbate or reduce them ((Paavola, 2017). Budget allocations for healthcare, welfare policy modifications, and austerity measures all have noticeable effects on health outcomes. Additionally, political choices might favour some populations' views over others', leading in unequal access to health-related information and services (Harris et al., 2017).

The understanding that health disparity is not a single issue but rather an intersectional one highlights the complex dance between society and politics in the UK. As a result of the compounding health disparities that frequently affect marginalised groups based on race, ethnicity, gender, age, and disability status, societal prejudices and political choices play a significant role in these disparities. While there has been progress in recognising and resolving these disparities, tearing down the ingrained institutions that support them remains a difficult task (The Health Foundation, 2022). The essay will discuss the complex elements that contribute to these discrepancies as we examine the impact of society and politics on health disparity and inequity in the UK among coronary heart diseases population. This analysis aims to offer insight on the complex mechanisms that define the health landscape of the country, from examining the influence of socioeconomic stratification on health outcomes to examining the role of policy decisions in amplifying or reducing these disparities. In addition to this, a greater understanding of how cultural and political forces might be mobilised to untangle the problem of health inequality and pave the path for a more equitable future by separating the threads that bind these complex concerns together.

Inequalities in Health Outcome

Coronary heart disease (CHD) is a sobering illustration of how diverse populations can experience the same health outcomes, highlighting the enduring disparities that characterise the UK's healthcare system. Despite substantial healthcare breakthroughs, there are still big differences in the incidence, prevalence, and treatment of CHD among different demographic groups (National Institute of Health, 2022). This section digs into data demonstrating these disparities in health, looking at the interplay between socioeconomic status, ethnicity, and location to determine different CHD outcomes. Socioeconomic status is one of the main factors influencing health disparities in relation to CHD. According to one's income, level of education, and line of work, there is a distinct gradient in the occurrence of CHD and the results. The statistics from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) showed a worrying trend: those who live in the UK's most impoverished areas have a much higher chance of dying early from CHD than people who live in more affluent areas. This discrepancy emphasises how social and economic circumstances have a significant impact on cardiovascular health (Khan et al., 2022). In the UK, ethnicity has a significant impact on CHD outcomes. The existence of racial differences in CHD prevalence and treatment are common. For instance, people from BAME groups frequently have a higher risk of having CHD and the risk factors that go along with it (Goff, 2019). 

South Asian ancestry are more likely to develop diabetes and hypertension, both of which are risk factors for CHD. Additionally, they frequently develop CHD earlier in life, which results in a heavier lifetime disease burden (Shah et al., 2022). Geographical location also plays a role in the UK's health disparities in CHD outcomes. According to data from Public Health England, certain areas of England, particularly the north, have higher rates of hospital admissions and mortality due to CHD. These variations show how social variables, healthcare access, and regional policies interact in complex ways. Due to obstacles in early detection and intervention, residents of locations with scarce healthcare resources or little access to preventive programmes may have higher CHD risks (Disler et al., 2020). When it comes to sustaining or reducing CHD-related inequities, access to healthcare services is crucial. People from underprivileged origins face obstacles while trying to get timely and efficient care (Thompson et al., 2019).The best management of CHD may be hampered by lengthy waiting times, difficulty obtaining specialised services, and budgetary limitations. Additionally, the closure of medical facilities in some impoverished regions makes these inequities worse and results in an uneven allocation of care resources (Riegel et al., 2022). Significant behavioural and lifestyle choices are involved in CHD inequalities.

 People from lower socioeconomic origins are more prone to participate in unhealthy habits including smoking, eating poorly, and not exercising, all of which are significant risk factors for CHD. Broader socio economic concerns, such as the lack of availability to wholesome food options and secure recreational areas, frequently have an impact on these behaviours. Therefore, interventions that encourage healthier lifestyles in underprivileged communities must be a part of initiatives to alleviate CHD inequities (Tchicaya et al., 2018). It is indisputable that there are continuing health disparities in coronary heart disease in the United Kingdom due to a complex interplay between socioeconomic, racial, regional, and healthcare access determinants. A multimodal strategy that incorporates regulatory reforms, fair healthcare access, culturally considerate outreach, and focused educational programmes is necessary to overcome these discrepancies (European Commission, 2021). The United Kingdom may work towards a more equitable distribution of cardiovascular health and ultimately pave the way for a healthier future for all of its residents by recognising and addressing the structural variables that underpin these discrepancies.

Difference in the Outcome is Unfair

Health disparities that are based on socioeconomic position, ethnicity, and location do initially seem unfair since they systematically penalise some segments of the population. To comprehend the complex web of causation, historical background, and systemic elements that contribute to these inequities, more in-depth examination is necessary (O'Neil et al., 2020). Recognising the underlying injustices that have allowed these health disparities to persist over many generations is at the core of the problem. For instance, socioeconomic position and access to resources like healthcare, work prospects, and education are closely related. People from lower socioeconomic backgrounds are far more susceptible to diseases like CHD when they have limited access to nourishing food, safe housing, high-quality education, and preventive healthcare services. In this situation, it is possible to view the disparities in health outcomes as the product of unjust social and economic structures that disproportionately benefit some sections of the population (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine2017). When evaluating the fairness of health disparities, the historical background must be taken into consideration. Numerous marginalised groups, especially those with ties to racial or ethnic minorities, have been subjected to systematic exclusion, discrimination, and unequal access to opportunities for many decades.

Disparities in health outcomes are a result of this history's legacy of disadvantages, which can last for decades. Because these groups frequently begin from places of historical disadvantage, it is far more difficult for them to achieve the same level of health and well-being as their more fortunate counterparts. This is where the unfairness resides (D'Anna et al., 2018). The idea of social determinants of health emphasises how unfair these inequities are even more. In addition to individual choices, the settings in which people live, work, and play have an impact on their health. Health outcomes are greatly influenced by a variety of variables, including socioeconomic position, work opportunities, education, and community support. It is difficult to argue that the resulting health disparities are just when people are unable to obtain these determinants because of structural constraints (Islam, 2019). Societies have a moral obligation to provide fair health outcomes for all of their people from an ethical perspective. According to the ideals of justice and fairness, people shouldn't suffer disadvantages because of factors beyond their control, including their ethnicity or social status. These ideas are incompatible with health inequities, which result from systemic and structural issues (Tulchinsky, 2018).

In order to address unjust health outcomes, institutions and governments have a responsibility to play. Policies that deal with the underlying causes of inequality, such as spending on targeted outreach programmes, affordable housing, and healthcare, can help level the playing field. Societies can show a commitment to fairness and justice in health by actively working to eliminate the systems that support imbalances (Saunders et al., 2017). It is true that the variations in health outcomes, particularly with regard to coronary heart disease, might be characterised as "unfair." The historical setting, socioeconomic determinants of health, structural injustices, and ethical issues all work together to highlight how unfair these discrepancies are by their very nature. Individual agency and responsibility are important, but it's important to understand them in the context of the wider structural hurdles that prevent some groups from achieving their full potential (Roszkowska, P & Melé, 2021). Consolidated efforts are required to address systemic injustices and guarantee that everyone has an equal opportunity to lead healthy lives in order to truly eliminate the unfairness of health disparities.

Societal Influences in CHD

The larger socioeconomic context in which people live has a significant impact on coronary heart disease (CHD), which is not just a product of personal lifestyle decisions. Several sociocultural variables influence the onset and progression of CHD, affecting both its prevalence and outcomes (Mannoh et al., 2021). First is socioeconomic inequality has a big impact on CHD in society. Lack of access to healthcare, poorer housing conditions, and less educational possibilities are all related to lower socioeconomic status. These elements can result in higher stress levels, unhealthy habits, and increased exposure to CHD risk elements such poor food, inactivity, and smoking (Leonard et al., 2017). Second is environmental effects of urbanisation include sedentary lifestyles, elevated pollution levels, and diminished access to green places. These elements may affect levels of physical activity, respiratory health, and stress, all of which are associated with an increased risk of CHD (Bhatnagar, 2017). Third is economic and societal variables influence the accessibility of wholesome meals. In places with little availability of fresh produce, whole grains, and healthy fats, people frequently turn to less expensive processed foods that are rich in unhealthy fats, sugars, and sodium. These eating habits raise the risk of diabetes, hypertension, and obesity, all of which are risk factors for CHD (Said et al., 2018).

Fourth is lack of work-life balance, stressful workplaces, and societal pressures can all lead to long-term stress. Long-term stress is associated with risk factors for CHD such as unhealthy behaviours, high blood pressure, and inflammation (Kivimäki & Steptoe, 2018). Moreover, social variables influence who has access to healthcare services, including prompt medical interventions and preventive care. Marginalised groups are more likely to have undiagnosed or poorly treated CHD risk factors due to limited access to healthcare. Social media use and advertising exposure can affect eating decisions. The aggressive promotion of unhealthy diets and sedentary habits can help to create CHD risk factors (Partridge et al., 2017).

Societal factors significantly contribute to the development and maintenance of health disparities in CHD outcomes. The mentioned societal factors contribute to disparities in CHD prevalence, management, and results between various groups within a population are a result of various factors. Socioeconomic disparities and inequalities lead to unequal access to resources, which affects the results of CHD. People from lower socioeconomic origins are more susceptible to CHD because they have less access to high-quality healthcare, wholesome diets, and secure neighbourhoods. Disparities in incidence and results are a result of this. Disparitie (Schultz et al., 2018). Chronic stress may be a factor among ethnic communities who endure discrimination or social exclusion, raising their risk of CHD. In addition to influencing food habits and health views, cultural influences can also have an impact on CHD results (Hussain et al., 2021).

Societal variables, such as healthcare infrastructure and environmental conditions, play a role in these differences. People in underserved areas might not have access to timely interventions and preventative care, which has a negative impact on outcomes. Social context shapes behavioural decisions that affect the course of CHD. diverse groups of the population have diverse degrees of physical activity, dietary quality, and smoking rates according to cultural norms, advertising, and resource availability (Goodyear et al., 2021).

Social elements that affect access to knowledge and medical care include public health efforts and healthcare policies. People who have less access to healthcare and health education are less likely to properly manage risk factors, which has a negative impact on CHD outcomes (Magnani et al., 2018). The impact of these factors is especially clear in the disparities in CHD outcomes that have been noted. As these sociocultural factors largely contribute to differences in CHD incidence, management, and outcomes among various groups within the population, addressing them is necessary to reduce health inequities.

References

Bhatnagar A. (2017). Environmental Determinants of Cardiovascular Disease. Circulation research, 121 (2), 162–180. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.117.306458

Bidadanure, J. U. (2019). The political theory of universal basic income. Annual Review of Political Science, 22 , 481-501. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-050317-070954

Centres for Disease Control and Prevention. (2020). Smoke free Policies Reduce Smoking. https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/secondhand-smoke/protection/reduce-smoking.htm

D'Anna, L. H., Hansen, M., Mull, B., Canjura, C., Lee, E., & Sumstine, S. (2018). Social Discrimination and Health Care: A Multidimensional Framework of Experiences among a Low-Income Multiethnic Sample. Social work in public health, 33 (3), 187–201. https://doi.org/10.1080/19371918.2018.1434584

Disler, R., Glenister, K., & Wright, J. (2020). Rural chronic disease research patterns in the United Kingdom, United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand: a systematic integrative review. BMC Public Health, 20 (1), 770. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-020-08912-1

Dye, B. A., Duran, D. G., Murray, D. M., Creswell, J. W., Richard, P., Farhat, T., Breen, N., & Engelgau, M. M. (2019). The Importance of Evaluating Health Disparities Research. American Journal of Public Health, 109 (S1), S34–S40. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2018.304808

European Commission. (2021). Improving access to healthcare through more powerful measurement tools. https://health.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2021-10/measuring_access-to-healthcare_en_0.pdf

Gentilini, U., Grosh, M., Rigolini, J., & Yemtsov, R. (Eds.). (2019). Exploring universal basic income: A guide to navigating concepts, evidence, and practices. World Bank Publications. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=00XEDwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PT12&dq=universal+basic+income&ots=HbWCQegO1q&sig=6d5u6zrLheSgzfXc_rNA7Cj__KM

Gibson, M., Hearty, W., & Craig, P. (2018). Universal basic income: A scoping review of evidence on impacts and study characteristics. Edinburgh: What Works Scotland. http://whatworksscotland.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/WhatWorksScotlandBasicIncomeScopingReview1210FINAL.pdf

Goff, L. M. (2019). Ethnicity and type 2 diabetes in the UK. Diabetic Medicine, 36 (8), 927-938. https://doi.org/10.1111/dme.13895

Goodyear, V. A., Wood, G., Skinner, B., & Thompson, J. L. (2021). The effect of social media interventions on physical activity and dietary behaviours in young people and adults: a systematic review. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 18( 1), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-021-01138-3

Government of the UK. (2017). New Change4Life campaign encourages parents to ‘Be Food Smart’. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-change4life-campaign-encourages-parents-to-be-food-smart

You Might Also Like:-

Medical Thesis Wrting Help

Interesting Nursing Thesis Topic Ideas for Students