Extra healthy years or just extra years? What can we know from the data we have on the island of Ireland?

As life expectancy continues to rise, the prevalence of chronic conditions is increasing in our society. However, we do not know if the extra years of life gained are being spent with disability and illness, or in good health. Furthermore, it is unclear if all groups in society experience their extra years of life in the same way. This report examines patterns of health expectancies across the island of Ireland, examining any North-South and socio-economic differences as well looking at differences in data sources. The older population (aged 65 or over) on the island of Ireland is growing and becoming a larger percentage of the total  population. Republic of Ireland Census 2011 revealed that 12% of the RoI population was aged 65 or over (CSO, 2012), and Northern Ireland Census 2011 revealed that 13% of the NI population was aged 65 or over (NISRA, 2012). By 2041 the population aged 65 or over is projected to reach 22% in RoI and 24% in NI (McGill, 2010). It is unclear, however, if this increasing longevity will be enjoyed equally by all strata of society.

Address by Michea¡l Martin to the Conference - Legislating for Tobacco Free Society

Thank you Chairman I would like to extend a warm welcome to our keynote speakers, David Byrne of the European Commission, Derek Yach from the World Health Organisation, and Paul Quinn representing Congressman Marty Meehan who sends his apologies. When we include the speakers who will address later sessions, this is, undoubtedly, one of the strongest teams that have been assembled on tobacco control in Europe. The very strength of the team underlines what I see as a shift – a very necessary shift – in the way we perceive the tobacco issue. For the last twenty years, we have lived out a paradox. It isn´t a social side issue. I make no apology for the bluntness of what I´m saying, and will come back, a little later, to the radicalism I believe we need to bring – nationally – to this issue. For starters, though, I want to lay it on the line that what we´re talking about is an epidemic as deadly as any suffered by human kind throughout the centuries. Slower than some of those epidemics in its lethal action, perhaps. But an epidemic, nonetheless. According to the World Health Organisation tobacco accounted for just over 3 million annual deaths in 1990, rising to 4.023 million annual deaths in 1998. The numbers of deaths due to tobacco will rise to 8.4 million in 2020 and reach roughly 10 million annually by 2030. This is quite simply ghastly. Tobacco kills. It kills in many different ways. It kills increasing numbers of women. It does its damage directly and indirectly. For children, much of the damage comes from smoking by adults where children live, study, play and work. The very least we should be able to offer every child is breathable air. Air that doesn´t do them damage. We´re now seeing a global public health response to the tobacco epidemic. The Tobacco Free Initiative launched by the World Health Organisation was matched by significant tobacco control initiatives throughout the world. During this conference we will hear about the experiences our speakers had in driving these initiatives. This Tobacco Free Initiative poses unique challenges to our legal frameworks at both national and international levels; in particular it raises challenges about the legal context in which tobacco products are traded and asks questions about the impact of commercial speech especially on children, and the extent of the limitations that should be imposed on it. Politicians, supported by economists and lawyers as well as the medical profession, must continue to explore and develop this context to find innovative ways to wrap public health considerations around the trade in tobacco products – very tightly. We also have the right to demand a totally new paradigm from the tobacco industry. Bluntly, the tobacco industry plays the PR game at its cynical worst. The industry sells its products without regard to the harm these products cause. At the same time, to gain social acceptance, it gives donations, endowments and patronage to high profile events and people. Not good enough. This model of behaviour is no longer acceptable in a modern society. We need one where the industry integrates social responsibility and accountability into its day-to-day activities. We have waited for this change in behaviour from the tobacco industry for many decades. Unfortunately the documents disclosed during litigation in the USA and from other sources make very depressing reading; it is clear from them that any trust society placed in the tobacco industry in the past to address the health problems associated with its products was misplaced. This industry appears to lack the necessary leadership to guide it towards just and responsible action. Instead, it chooses evasion, deception and at times illegal activity to protect its profits at any price and to avoid its responsibilities to society and its customers. It has engaged in elaborate ´spin´ to generate political tolerance, scientific uncertainty and public acceptance of its products. Legislators must act now. I see no reason why the global community should continue to wait. Effective legal controls must be laid on this errant industry. We should also keep these controls under review at regular intervals and if they are failing to achieve the desired outcomes we should be prepared to amend them. In Ireland, as Minister for Health and Children, I launched a comprehensive tobacco control policy entitled “Towards a Tobacco Free Society“. OTT?Excessive?Unrealistic? On the contrary – I believe it to be imperative and inevitable. I honestly hold that, given the range of fatal diseases caused by tobacco use we have little alternative but to pursue the clear objective of creating a tobacco free society. Aiming at a tobacco free society means ensuring public and political opinion are properly informed. It requires help to be given to smokers to break the addiction. It demands that people are protected against environmental tobacco smoke and children are protected from any inducement to experiment with this product. Over the past year we have implemented a number of measures which will support these objectives; we have established an independent Office of Tobacco Control, we have introduced free nicotine replacement therapy for low-income earners, we have extended our existing prohibitions on tobacco advertising to the print media with some minor derogations for international publications. We have raised the legal age at which a person can be sold tobacco products to eighteen years. We have invested substantially more funds in health promotion activities and we have mounted sustained information campaigns. We have engaged in sponsorship arrangements, which are new and innovative for public bodies. I have provided health boards with additional resources to let them mount a sustained inspection and enforcement service. Health boards will engage new Directors of Tobacco Control responsible for coordinating each health board´s response and for liasing with the Tobacco Control Agency I set up earlier this year. Most recently, I have published a comprehensive Bill – The Public Health (Tobacco) Bill, 2001. This Bill will, among other things, end all forms of product display and in-store advertising and will require all retailers to register with the new Tobacco Control Agency. Ten packs of cigarettes will be banned and transparent and independent testing procedures of tobacco products will be introduced. Enforcement officers will be given all the necessary powers to ensure there is full compliance with the law. On smoking in public places we will extend the existing areas covered and it is proposed that I, as Minister for Health and Children, will have the powers to introduce further prohibitions in public places such as pubs and the work place. I will also provide for the establishment of a Tobacco Free Council to advise and assist on an ongoing basis. I believe the measures already introduced and those additional ones proposed in the Bill have widespread community support. In fact, you´re going to hear a detailed presentation from the MRBI which will amply illustrate the extent of this support. The great thing is that the support comes from smokers and non-smokers alike. Bottom line, Ladies and Gentlemen, is that we are at a watershed. As a society (if you´ll allow me to play with a popular phrase) we´ve realised it´s time to ´wake up and smell the cigarettes.´ Smell them. See them for what they are. And get real about destroying their hold on our people. The MRBI survey makes it clear that the single strongest weapon we have when it comes to preventing the habit among young people is price. Simple as that. Price. Up to now, the fear of inflation has been a real impediment to increasing taxes on tobacco. It sounds a serious, logical argument. Until you take it out and look at it a little more closely. Weigh it, as it were, in two hands. I believe – and I believe this with a great passion – that we must take cigarettes out of the equation we use when awarding wage increases. I am calling on IBEC and ICTU, on employers and trade unions alike, to move away from any kind of tolerance of a trade that is killing our citizens. At one point in industrial history, cigarettes were a staple of the workingman´s life. So it was legitimate to include them in the ´basket´ of goods that goes to make up the Consumer Price Index. It isn´t legitimate to include them any more. Today, I´m saying that society collectively must take the step to remove cigarettes from the basket of normality, from the list of elements which constitute necessary consumer spending. I´m saying: “We can no longer delude ourselves. We must exclude cigarettes from the considerations we address in central wage bargaining. We must price cigarettes out of the reach of the children those cigarettes will kill.” Right now, in the monthly Central Statistics Office reports on consumer spending, the figures include cigarettes. But – right down at the bottom of the page – there´s another figure. Calculated without including cigarettes. I believe that if we continue to use the first figure as our constant measure, it will be an indictment of us as legislators, as advocates for working people, as public health professionals. If, on the other hand, we move to the use of the second figure, we will be sending out a message of startling clarity to the nation. We will be saying “We don´t count an addictive, killer drug as part of normal consumer spending.” Taking cigarettes out of the basket used to determine the Consumer Price Index will take away the inflation argument. It will not be easy, in its implications for the social partners. But it is morally inescapable. We must do it. Because it will help us stop the killer that is tobacco. If we can do it, we will give so much extra strength to health educators and the new Tobacco Control Association. This new organisation of young people who already have branches in over fifteen counties, is represented here today. The young adults who make up its membership are well placed to advise children of the dangers of tobacco addiction in a way that older generations cannot. It would strengthen their hand if cigarettes move – in price terms – out of the easy reach of our children Finally, I would like to commend so many public health advocates who have shown professional and indeed personal courage in their commitment to this critical public health issue down through the years. We need you to continue to challenge and confront this grave public health problem and to repudiate the questionable science of the tobacco industry. The Research Institute for a Tobacco Free Society represents a new and dynamic form of partnership between government and civil society. It will provide an effective platform to engage and mobilise the many different professional and academic skills necessary to guide and challenge us. I wish the conference every success.

Just the tonic

This leaflet discusses daily drinking guidelines and the health implications for women of too much alcohol.

Ecstasy can cause brain damage

This poster informs about the dangers of Ecstasy stating: 'Medical research proves that Ecstasy can cause brain damage. Deny it all you like, but you know it won't wash'.

Immunisation for babies just after their first birthday

This booklet provides the facts about the vaccines babies will receive just after their first birthday: the first MMR vaccine and the PCV and Hib/Men C booster vaccines.

Report of an audit of child protection research in Ireland 1990-2009.

A total of 190 research documents were identified in line with the criteria agreed between the researchers and the CAAB, and are included in the audit. The key findings from the analysis of the audit are as follows:    - Research identified in the audit has tended to focus on child protection and the child protection system generally, as well as sexual abuse. This research has primarily been undertaken by clinicians and academics, and spans across sectors.   - Over half, (110 or 58%) of the research falls under the heading of policy/practice reviews/analysis. This is further reflected in the fact that the research most commonly focused on operating procedures, followed by practice issues and the policy framework, both in studies with a single focus and those with multiple foci.   - The most common type of publication was peer reviewed article (74 or 39%), with commissioned research accounting for just 7% (13). This is in line with the findings that 68% (128) of commissioning/publishing bodies and 74% (139) of research bodies were in the academic sector.   - The research published and/or commissioned by the statutory sector follows the pattern found in the audit generally, with the most common type of study being policy/practice review/analysis (27 or 48%) and the most common focus being operating procedures (22 or 39%).   - Information sources rarely incorporated primary research with children, with only 14 studies (8%) citing direct contact with children and young people. Information on children was more commonly gathered from case files, professionals and family members.   - The topics covered in the identified research were very wide-ranging but closely related to the primary subject area (type of abuse) and the sector in which the research was located.   One conclusion stated that: There is a shortage of child protection-focused research on the factors that cause and perpetuate child abuse, such as homelessness, addiction, parental mental illness and domestic violence. The need for material on these areas is demonstrated by the nature and scale of reports to the child protection system and the removal of some children from their families into out of home care as a result of the above mentioned adversities.This resource was contributed by The National Documentation Centre on Drug Use.

Does income inequality cause health and social problems?

Key points• The literature shows general agreement about a correlation between income inequality and health/social problems. • There is less agreement about whether income inequality causes health and social problems independently of other factors, but some rigorous studies have found evidence of this. • The independent effect of income inequality on health/social problems shown in some studies looks small in statistical terms. But these studies cover whole populations, and hence a significant number of lives. • Some research suggests that inequality is particularly harmful beyond a certain threshold. Britain was below this threshold in the 1960s, 1970s and early 1980s, but rose past it in 1986–7 and has settled well above it since 1998–9. If the threshold is significant it could provide a target for policy. • Anxiety about status might explain income inequality’s effect on health and social problems. If so, inequality is harmful because it places people in a hierarchy which increases competition for status, causing stress and leading to poor health and other negative outcomes. • Not all research shows an independent effect of income inequality on health/social problems. Some highlights the role of individual income (poverty/material circumstances), culture/history, ethnicity and welfare state institutions/social policies. • The author concludes that there is a strong case for further research on income inequality and discussion of the policy implications.This resource was contributed by The National Documentation Centre on Drug Use.

Mental health and growing up factsheet. Drugs and alcohol - what parents need to know.

Information about drugs and alcohol - what parents need to know: information for parents, carers and anyone who works with young people. About this leaflet This is one in a series of leaflets for parents, teachers and young people entitled Mental Health and Growing Up. These leaflets aim to provide practical, up-to-date information about mental health problems (emotional, behavioural and psychiatric disorders) that can affect children and young people. This leaflet offers practical advice for parents, teachers and carers who are worried that a young person is misusing drugs or alcohol. Why do I need to know about a young person using drugs or alcohol? Many young people smoke, drink alcohol and may try drugs. It is important you are aware of this and do not ignore it as a time when they are just having fun or experimenting. It doesnââ,‰"¢t take much for the young people to soon lose control and to need help to recover from this problem. How common is it? By the age of 16, up to half of young people have tried an illegal drug. Young people are trying drugs earlier and more are drinking alcohol. What are the different types of drugs which cause problems? The most commonly used, readily available and strongly addictive drugs are tobacco and alcohol. There are numerous others that can be addictive. Alcohol and cannabis are sometimes seen as ââ,¬Ëogatewayââ,‰"¢ drugs that lead to the world of other drugs like cocaine and heroin. Drugs are also classed as ââ,¬Ëolegalââ,‰"¢ andââ,¬Ëoillegalââ,‰"¢. The obviously illegal drugs include cannabis (hash), speed (amphetamines), ecstasy (E), cocaine and heroin. Using ââ,¬Ëolegalââ,‰"¢ drugs (like cigarettes, alcohol, petrol, glue) does not mean they are safe or allowed to be misused. It just means they may be bought or sold for specific purposes and are limited to use by specific age groups. There are clear laws regarding alcohol and young people. For more detailed information on various drugs, their side-effects and the law, see ââ,¬ËoFurther Informationââ,‰"¢ at the end of the factsheet. Why do young people use drugs or alcohol? Young people may try or use drugs or alcohol for various reasons. They may do it for fun, because they are curious, or to be like their friends. Some are experimenting with the feeling of intoxication. Sometimes they use it to cope with difficult situations or feelings of worry and low mood. A young person is more likely to try or use drugs or alcohol if they hang out or stay with friends or family who use them. What can be the problems related to using drugs or alcohol? Drugs and alcohol can have different effects on different people. In young people especially the effects can be unpredictable and potentially dangerous. Even medications for sleep or painkillers can be addictive and harmful if not used the way they are prescribed by a doctor. Drugs and alcohol can damage health. Sharing needles or equipment can cause serious infections, such as HIV and hepatitis. Accidents, arguments and fights are more likely after drinking and drug use. Young people are more likely to engage in unprotected sex when using drugs. Using drugs can lead to serious mental illnesses, such as psychosis and depression. When does it become addiction or problem? It is very difficult to know when exactly using drugs or alcohol is more than just ââ,¬Ëocasualââ,‰"¢. Addiction becomes more obvious when the young person spends most of their time thinking about, looking for or using drugs. Drugs or alcohol then become the focus of the young personââ,‰"¢s life. They ignore their usual work, such as not doing their schoolwork, or stop doing their usual hobbies/sports such as dancing or football. How do I know if there is a problem or addiction? Occasional use can be very difficult to detect. If the young person is using on a regular basis, their behaviour often changes. Look for signs such as: ïâ?s§ unexplained moodiness ïâ?s§ behaviour that is ââ,¬Ëoout of character' ïâ?s§ loss of interest in school or friends ïâ?s§ unexplained loss of clothes or money ïâ?s§ unusual smells and items like silver foil, needle covers. Remember, the above changes can also mean other problems, such as depression, rather than using drugs. What do I do if I am worried? If you suspect young person is using drugs, remember some general rules. ïâ?s§ Pay attention to what the child is doing, including schoolwork, friends and leisure time. ïâ?s§ Learn about the effects of alcohol and drugs (see websites listed below). ïâ?s§ Listen to what the child says about alcohol and drugs, and talk about it with them. ïâ?s§ Encourage the young person to be informed and responsible about drugs and alcohol. ïâ?s§ Talk to other parents, friends or teachers about drugs - the facts and your fears and seek help. If someone in the family or close friend is using drugs or alcohol, it is important that they seek help too. It may be hard to expect the young person to give up, especially if a parent or carer is using it too. My child is abusing drugs. What do I do? ïâ?s§ If your child is using drugs or alcohol, seek help. ïâ?s§ Do stay calm and make sure of facts. ïâ?s§ Don't give up on them, get into long debates or arguments when they are drunk, stoned or high. ïâ?s§ Donââ,‰"¢t be angry or blame themââ,‰?othey need your help and trust to make journey of recovery. Where can I get help? You can talk in confidence to a professional like your GP or practice nurse, a local drug project or your local child and adolescent mental health. They can refer your child to relevant services and they will be able to offer you advice and support. You may also be able to seek help through a school nurse, teacher or social worker. You can find this information from your local area telephone book or council website, or ask for the address from your health centre. [For the full factsheet, click on the link above]This resource was contributed by The National Documentation Centre on Drug Use.

Life Expectancy and All Age All Cause Mortality Monitoring (Overall and Health Inequalities) - Update to include data for 2007

The latest annual update on life expectancy data and all age all cause mortality rates, with data updated to 2005-07, which are used to monitor progress against Department of Health targets for overall life expectancy in England, and for the gap in life expectancy between the areas with the worst health and deprivation indicators (the Spearhead group) and the England average, was released on 13th November 2008 according to the arrangements approved by the UK Statistics Authority.

Alzheimer's Disease Biomarkers, 2009

This report gives a comprehensive and up-to-date review of Alzheimer's disease biomarkers. Recent years have seen significant advances in this field. Whilst considerable effort has focused on A�_ and tau related markers, a substantial number of other molecules have been identified, that may offer new opportunities.This Report : Identifies 60 candidate Alzheimer's (AD) biomarkers and their associated studies. Of these, 49 are single species or single parameters, 7 are combinations or panels and 4 involve the measurement of two species or parameters or their ratios. These include proteins (n=34), genes (n=11), image-based parameters (n=7), small molecules (n=3), proteins + genes (n=2) and others (n=3). Of these, 30 (50%) relate to species identified in CSF and 19 (32%) were found in the blood. These candidate may be classified on the basis of their diagnostic utility, namely those which i) may allow AD to be detected when the disease has developed (48 of 75†= 64%), ii) may allow early detection of AD (18 of 75† = 24%) and iii) may allow AD to be predicted before the disease has begun to develop (9 of 75†= 12%). † Note: Of these, 11 were linked to two or more of these capabilities (e.g. allowed both early-stage detection as well as diagnosis after the disease has developed).Biomarkers: AD biomarkers identified in this report show significant diversity, however of the 60 described, 18 (30%) are associated with amyloid beta (A�_) and 9 (15%) relate to Tau. The remainder of the biomarkers (just over half) fall into a number of different groups. Of these, some are associated with other hypotheses on the pathogenesis of AD however the vast majority are individually unique and not obviously linked with other markers. Analysis and discussion presented in this report includes summaries of the studies and clinical trials that have lead to the identification of these markers. Where it has been calculated, diagnostic sensitivity, specificity and the capacity of these markers to differentiate patients with suspected AD from healthy controls and individuals believed to be suffering from other neurodegenerative conditions, have been indicated. These findings are discussed in relation to existing hypotheses on the pathogenesis of the AD and the current drug development pipeline. Many uncertainties remain in relation to the pathogenesis of AD, in diagnosing and treating the disease and many of the studies carried out to identify disease markers are at an early stage and will require confirmation through larger and longer investigations. Nevertheless, significant advances in the identification of AD biomarkers have now been made. Moreover, whilst much of the research on AD biomarkers has focused on amyloid and tau related species, it is evident that a substantial number of other species may provide important opportunities.Purpose of Report: To provide a comprehensive review of important and recently discovered candidate biomarkers of AD, in particular those with potential to reliably detect the disease or with utility in clinical development, drug repurposing, in studies of the pathogenesis and in monitoring drug response and the course of the disease. Other key goals were to identify markers that support current pipeline developments, indicate new potential drug targets or which advance understanding of the pathogenesis of this disease.Drug Repurposing: Studies of the pathogenesis of AD have identified aberrant changes in a number of other disease areas including inflammation, diabetes, oxidative stress, lipid metabolism and others. These findings have prompted studies to evaluate some existing approved drugs to treat AD. This report identifies studies of 9 established drug classes currently being investigated for potential repurposing.Alzheimer’s Disease: In 2005, the global prevalence of dementia was estimated at 25 million, with more than 4 million new cases occurring each year. It is also calculated that the number of people affected will double every 20 years, to 80 million by 2040, if a cure is not found. More than 50% of dementia cases are due to AD. Today, approximately 5 million individuals in the US suffer from AD, representing one in eight people over the age of 65. Direct and indirect costs of AD and other forms of dementia in the US are around $150 billion annually. Worldwide, costs for dementia care are estimated at $315 billion annually. Despite significant research into this debilitating and ultimately fatal disease, advances in the development of diagnostic tests for AD and moreover, effective treatments, remain elusive.Background: Alzheimer's disease is the most common cause of dementia, yet its clinical diagnosis remains uncertain until an eventual post-mortem histopathology examination is carried out. Currently, therapy for patients with Alzheimer disease only treats the symptoms; however, it is anticipated that new disease-modifying drugs will soon become available. The urgency for new and effective treatments for AD is matched by the need for new tests to detect and diagnose the condition. Uncertainties in the diagnosis of AD mean that the disease is often undiagnosed and under treated. Moreover, it is clear that clinical confirmation of AD, using cognitive tests, can only be made after substantial neuronal cell loss has occurred; a process that may have taken place over many years. Poor response to current therapies may therefore, in part, reflect the fact that such treatments are generally commenced only after neuronal damage has occurred. The absence of tests to detect or diagnose presymptomatic AD also means that there is no standard that can be applied to validate experimental findings (e.g. in drug discovery) without performing lengthy studies, and eventual confirmation by autopsy.These limitations are focusing considerable effort on the identification of biomarkers that advance understanding of the pathogenesis of AD and how the disease can be diagnosed in its early stages and treated. It is hoped that developments in these areas will help physicians to detect AD and guide therapy before the first signs of neuronal damage appears. The last 5-10 years have seen substantial research into the pathogenesis of AD and this has lead to the identification of a substantial number of AD biomarkers, which offer important insights into this disease. This report brings together the latest advances in the identification of AD biomarkers and analyses the opportunities they offer in drug R&D and diagnostics.��

Mortality target monitoring (life expectancy and all-age all-cause mortality, overall and inequalities)

The latest annual update on life expectancy data and all age all cause mortality rates, with data updated to 2006-08, which are used to monitor progress against Department of Health targets for overall life expectancy in England, and for the gap in life expectancy between the areas with the worst health and deprivation indicators (the Spearhead group) and the England average, was released on 5th November 2009 according to the arrangements approved by the UK Statistics Authority. �� The key points from the latest release are: �� - The overall life expectancy and all age all cause mortality (AAACM) trends for both males and females are broadly on course to deliver the target of 78.6 years for men and 82.5 years for women by 2010 (2009-11). �� - In 2006-08, life expectancy at birth in England continued to increase for both males and females, and reached its highest level on record at 77.7 years for males and 81.9 years for females. �� - Three-year average AAACM rates for England have fallen in each period since 1995-97. �� - In 2006-08, average life expectancy at birth in the Spearhead Group was 75.8 years for males and 80.4 years for females, having increased in each period since 1995-97. �� - However, England average life expectancy at birth has increased more quickly over this period, and, in 2006-08, the relative gap ��� i.e. percentage difference - in life expectancy at birth between England and the Spearhead Group was wider than at the baseline for the target (1995-97) for both males and females. �� - For males the relative gap was 7% wider than at the baseline (compared with 4% wider in 2005-07), for females 14% wider (compared with 11% wider in 2005-07).�� �� Therefore, the target to narrow the life expectancy gap between the Spearhead Group and the England average, by at least 10% by 2010, remains challenging.��Three-year average AAACM rates for the Spearhead Group have fallen in each period since 1995-97 for both males and females. Download Mortality target monitoring (life expectancy and all-age all-cause mortality, overall and inequalities): update to include data for 2008 (PDF, 683K)Download pre-release access list (PDF, 10k)��

Health Inequality Profiles 2008 - All age, all cause standardised vs. EoE

DSRs (with CIs) for All age, all cause mortality 2001-03 to 2005-07, by gender, for Counties/UAs, County quintiles, County 80/20 standardises - as in previous years - against East of England Census 2001 population.

Immunisation for babies just after their first birthday (English and translations)

This booklet provides the facts about the vaccines babies will receive just after their first birthday: the first MMR vaccine and the PCV and Hib/Men C booster vaccines.