Gender and health promotion: A multisectoral policy approach

Women and men are different as regards their biology, the roles and responsibilities that society assigns to them and their position in the family and community. These factors have a great influence on causes, consequences and management of diseases and ill-health and on the efficacy of health promotion policies and programmes. This is confirmed by evidence on male–female differences in cause-specific mortality and morbidity and exposure to risk factors. Health promoting interventions aimed at ensuring safe and supportive environments, healthy living conditions and lifestyles, community involvement and participation, access to essential facilities and to social and health services need to address these differences between women and men, boys and girls in an equitable manner in order to be effective. The aim of this paper is to (i) demonstrate that health promotion policies that take women's and men's differential biological and social vulnerability to health risks and the unequal power relationships between the sexes into account are more likely to be successful and effective compared to policies that are not concerned with such differences, and (ii) discuss what is required to build a multisectoral policy response to gender inequities in health through health promotion and disease prevention. The requirements discussed in the paper include i) the establishment of joint commitment for policy within society through setting objectives related to gender equality and equity in health as well as health promotion, ii) an assessment and analysis of gender inequalities affecting health and determinants of health, iii) the actions needed to tackle the main determinants of those inequalities and iv) documentation and dissemination of effective and gender sensitive policy interventions to promote health. In the discussion of these key policy elements, we use illustrative examples of good practices from different countries around the world.

Global change and health - the good, the bad, and the evidence

Debates over the merits and demerits of globalisation for health are increasingly polarised. Conclusions range from globalisation being essentially positive for health, albeit with a need to smooth out some rough edges, to one of utter condemnation, with adverse effects on the majority of the world's population. Anyone wading into this debate is immediately confronted by seemingly irreconcilable differences in ideology, opinion and interests. Both camps agree that global changes are occurring, and with them many of the determinants of population health status. While some skepticism persists about whether “globalisation” has value beyond being a fashionable buzzword, most agree that we need better understanding of these changes. Two difficult questions arise: (i) What are the health impacts of these changes; and (ii) how can we respond more effectively to them? To move beyond the stand-offs that have already formed within the health community, this paper reviews the main empirical evidence that currently exists, summarises key points of debate that remain, and suggests some ways forward for the research and policy communities. In particular, there is need for an informed and inclusive debate about the positive and negative health consequences of globalisation.

Sustainability and health : supporting global ecological integrity in public health

Radical changes in the biosphere and human interaction with the environment are increasingly impacting on the health of populations across the world. Diseases are crossing the species barrier, and spreading rapidly through globalized transport systems. From new patterns of cancer to the threat of global pandemics, it is imperative that public health practitioners acknowledge the interdependence between the sustainability of the environment and the sustainability of the human species.* Why are issues of global and local sustainability of increasing importance to the public's health?* Why do issues of sustainability require new practices within the professions of public health?* How can future and current public health practitioners develop those new practices?Drawing on scientific evidence of global and local environmental changes, Sustainability and Health offers a thorough background and practical solutions to the overlapping issues in environment and health. It examines potential and existing responses to global and local environment and health issues, involving individuals, community, industry and government. The authors introduce a range of emerging conceptual frameworks and theoretical perspectives, link IT and epidemiology and explain how scoping can link program design, delivery, data collection and evaluation in projects from their very beginning. Public health practitioners need to be able to manage health issues that cut across environmental, economic and social systems and to develop the capacity for leadership in facilitating change. Incorporating learning activities, readings, international case studies and an open learning approach, this is a valuable resource for students of public and environmental health, as well as medical, environmental and health science professionals.

Health promotion and health education in schools : trends, effectiveness and possibilities

This report involved an extensive literature review as well as discussions with ten leading school health and traffic safety education researchers and practitioners. The findings of the report show that despite health promotion and health education activities occurring in all Victorian schools, school health related initiatives could be improved by focusing on cognitive outcomes and involving appropriate components of Health Promoting School (HPS) framework. Providing teachers with professional development and utilising interactive resources that complement the curriculum is also important. The report recommendations outline ways to improve the Health Promotion and Health Education and provide a potential framework for delivering TSE provision in schools.

Who gets what : politics, evidence, and health promotion

Science journal, starting with its July 2005 issue, presents its readers with 125 questions and problems yet to be resolved by the scientific community. These range from the deceptively simple (‘what is the structure of water?’), the obvious (‘what triggers puberty?’ or ‘what are the roots of human culture?’), to the amazingly esoteric (‘do mathematically interesting zero-value solutions of the Riemann zeta function all have the form of a+bi?’).

Knowledge synthesis, translation and exchange in public health and health promotion: the role of a Cochrane review group

The Cochrane Collaboration is an international non-profit organisation that aims to produce high quality systematic reviews of the effectiveness of health interventions. This work is conducted by 51 Review Groups that span a  range of topics (e.g. pregnancy and childbirth, HIV/AIDS). The role of Fields within the Collaboration has been to actively engage relevant stakeholders internationally to improve the quality and relevance of reviews. Since the inception in 1996 of the Cochrane Public Health and Health Promotion Field, the Cochrane Collaboration has begun to embrace reviews related to public health and health promotion and is adapting to the changing needs of end-users. The introduction of a Cochrane health promotion and public health review group will help ensure that reviews will be oriented towards building evidence for equity and reducing inequalities and best meet the needs of decision-makers, practitioners and consumers. Our role as a Field has led to us working with a range of partners including reviewers,  researchers, practitioners and consumers. Knowledge synthesis, translation and exchange (KST&E) has emerged as an issue in need of further  exploration for practice to influence decision-makers and for policy to  influence practitioners. 2007 will be an exciting year for evidence-informed Health Promotion and Public Health (HPPH) both within the Cochrane Collaboration and for our partners in policy, practice and research.