Sheila Quinn: Pepsico May Be Moved by Taxes, But For People, Health Has to Be FOR Something
Written by John Weeks
Sheila Quinn: Pepsico May Be Moved by Taxes, But For People, Health Has to Be for Something
Summary: In Michael Levin's controversial perspective in a recent Integrator column he wrote: "Pepsico knows the truth: taxes, not education, reduces (poor lifestyle choices)." His column provoked Integrator adviser
Sheila Quinn to this thoughtful look at the obstacles to good education
penetrating our thinking, and shifting our habits. Quinn's conclusion is
also that mere education is limited: "Health has to be FOR something."
Quinn, recently the co-author of 21st Century Medicine: A New Model for Medical Education and Practice,
urges that we as a community, together with our policy-makers, spend
more time exploring the carrots of positive incentives rather than
merely the sticks of higher taxes. Could be a key step toward U.S. Senator Harkin's new "wellness society."
Why We Aren't More Responsive to Information in Making Behavior Changes, and a Solution
- Sheila Quinn
Sheila Quinn
I
think none of us can doubt the fact that information alone rarely changes
behavior. An exception might be when people receive the information in a moment
of great fear (i.e., following a heart attack or the premature/preventable
death of a loved one).
Perhaps economic incentives can improve the behavioral
response rate to information, but it seems extremely important to me to
seriously explore WHY we aren’t more responsive. It’s not enough to place all
the responsibility (or blame) upon the individual; we must also look at how
society reinforces unhealthy behaviors and makes it hard to change. Here are
just a few examples:
Advertising is a potent force. It envelops us
continuously—radio, newspapers, the internet, television, movies,
billboards, flyers, brochures, signs, in-store ads, and marketing calls.
If advertising weren’t effective at changing behavior, you can bet that
retailers and marketers wouldn’t invest so heavily in it. It might be very
productive for the public health community to look at effectiveness
research from the advertising world in order to fight fire with fire, but
it is SURELY true that it is very difficult for an individual, by
him/herself, to counteract all of these pervasive influences.
The dominant part of the food supply is represented by
fast food, junk food, and (only slightly lower on the list) denatured
food, by which I mean food that is far removed from the living plant or
animal, heavily processed, and full of additives. These foods are not only
the most readily accessible (and often the cheapest), but in stores they
are placed in the most obvious places and many small groceries or
convenience stores can’t afford to stock anything else.
Health has to be
FOR something
"I hope we (collectively) spend some time
and money exploring what are the positive incentives for healthy behaviors and
what are some effective ways of changing our environment to encourage and
empower those healthy behaviors.
- Sheila Quinn
For people who are poor, there are often very few
healthy choices—no fresh (let alone organic) food in reasonably priced
supermarkets near home; few sidewalks and limited safety for exercising
outdoors; parents often working multiple jobs just to survive; crippling
emotional stressors; no budgets for gyms or classes or sports (or arts
events, which feed the soul). In fact, the people at greatest risk for
chronic disease are often the people least equipped to respond to
information about healthy living.
Fragmentation of family, friends, and communities. The
mobile society has produced many economic benefits and some significant
social costs. The lack of an extended family or community structure nearby
means increased stress in times of illness and economic hardship.
Loneliness and isolation drive many unhealthful behaviors.
Loss of spiritual connection, whether it is to nature,
community, or religion. Time for reflection and connection can be very
limited. While it may be counterproductive to seek momentary relief in yet
more valueless stimulation (television, movies, alcohol, sweet and salty
foods), it takes tremendous discipline and commitment to demand of oneself
a different way and live by it—all for the sake of some possible long-term
gain.
Much
more could, and should, be said. Everyone can add their own examples. My point
is simply to emphasize that it’s not useful to expect most individuals to
change their behavior (even for money) in the face of pervasive societal
influences that converge to make those changes extremely difficult,
particularly when considered in the context of what seems to be a natural human
tendency to more readily form habits than to break them. I am reminded always
of what my wise and wonderful friend, Cathy Rogers, ND, said to me many years
ago: “Health has to be FOR something.” I hope we (collectively) spend some time
and money exploring what are the positive incentives for healthy behaviors and
what are some effective ways of changing our environment to encourage and
empower those healthy behaviors.
Sheila Quinn Freelance Medical Writing and Editing Services Gig Harbor, WA 98332
______________________________
Comment: I know from the grapevine that
Obama recently brought together a group of experts on health and
productivity management to look at some options for a progressive
approach to health benefits among federal employees. These discussions
often bridge into how to incentivize positive choices. One would hope
that the White House - if it hasn't already - will soon be inviting a
top-level group of experts to a specifically address Quinn's suggestion
that we "spend some time and money exploring what are the positive incentives for healthy behaviors and
what are some effective ways of changing our environment to encourage and
empower those healthy behaviors."
These are essential discussions if we are to move, as US Senator Tom
Harkin likes to put it, toward becoming "a genuine wellness society."