I was initially attracted to the subject of healthism because I felt I’d been a victim of health messaging. But I was also attracted by a sense that something deeper was going on. I now see that the taken-for-granted – the questions that don’t get asked in media coverage of health issues or in the policy positions of governments — unites my blogging topics. In whose interest is neoliberalism? Medicalization? Conformity? Non-holistic medicine? The commercialization of health? Healthism? More often than not the answer is that it’s not in my interest. Nor is it in the interests of the society I want to live in. And that makes these topics personally meaningful to me.

Social determinants of health (often abbreviated SDOH) refers to unequally distributed social and economic conditions that correlate with unequal and inequitable distributions of health and disease. Presumably there is a causal relationship between the two, not merely a correlation. Definitively identifying the causal mechanisms, however, is difficult. A great many things influence our health, including things we’re not even aware of yet, and it’s difficult to isolate and scientifically study the ones we can identify.

A corporate board, on the other hand — whether it governs a hospital, a pharmaceutical company or an insurance giant — is legally required to give priority to stock holders over patients. When it comes to matters of health – which is to say life, death, and disability – it seems obvious to me that corporate boards are the least desirable level at which decisions about patient safety should be made. Decisions like increasing product sales at the expense of patient safety.

Here then, we have the highest court in the land saying that those poor people with pre-paid water meters must not think that their water supply has discontinued when their taps run dry because the meter has cut the supply … they must imagine that it is “temporarily suspended” until such time as they can find the money to buy more water credit or until the next month arrives. Such “logic” … is … an insult both to the poor and to the constitutional imperatives of justice and equality.