Search

This paper compares the portrayal of breast, testicular and prostate cancer in mass print English language magazines in the United States and Canada from 1996 to 2001. It is a follow-up of three papers that examined each of these three diseases separately in high circulating magazines up to 1995. It includes both quantitative and qualitative analyses of magazine stories and notes the continuing dominance of a medical perspective regarding disease as well as the association of each type of cancer examined with stereotypically individualized yet feminine and masculine characteristics and pursuits. It notes the conflation of breast cancer, since the discovery of BRCA1 and BRCA2, with the family. To be a ‘feminine’ woman is to be vulnerable to breast cancer and to be a ‘masculine’ man is to be vulnerable to testicular cancer when young and prostate cancer when older. The association of disease not just with personhood but also with the specifics of stereotyped masculinity and femininity may construct a more intimate, more personal link between disease and identity. This close attachment of gender and disease may shore up and exacerbate a fear reaction. It may also serve to diminish the awareness of other, more prevalent, causes of death for men and women. The social control consequences of potentially exacerbated disease-specific fear are discussed. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Prior research suggests that racial inequalities in health vary in magnitude across societies. This paper uses the largest nationally representative samples available to compare racial inequalities in health in the United States and Canada. Data were obtained from ten waves of the National Health Interview Survey (n = 162,271,885) and the Canadian Community Health Survey (n = 19,906,131) from 2000 to 2010. We estimated crude and adjusted odds ratios, and risk differences across racial groups for a range of health outcomes in each country. Patterns of racial health inequalities differed across the United States and Canada. After adjusting for covariates, black-white and Hispanic-white inequalities were relatively larger in the United States, while aboriginal-white inequalities were larger in Canada. In both countries, socioeconomic factors did not explain inequalities across racial groups to the same extent. In conclusion, while racial inequalities in health exist in both the United States and Canada, the magnitudes of these inequalities as well as the racial groups affected by them, differ considerably across the two countries. This suggests that the relationship between race and health varies as a function of the societal context in which it operates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: International policies regulating clinical ethics committees'' (CEC) roles are non-existent. Nonetheless, CECs have established themselves in several countries and there exist striking differences in the way these work. This international practice variation stems from the ways CECs developed, within particular legal, political, social and professional contexts. National guidelines and normative documents have been published in many countries regarding CECs. To better understand CECs'' evolution and differences in various countries, we reviewed guidelines, position statements and normative papers which describe and frame the development of CECs in the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada and France. Systematic content analysis addressed guideline development, CECs'' roles, consultation methods and CEC members'' education requirements. Differing contexts informed the ways in which guidelines were developed. American CECs, established within a strongly litigious context are perceived to play strong decision-making roles, whereas British CECs, encouraged by clinicians, endorse a more supportive model. Canadian guidelines focus on the role of the ethicist, while the French model is interested in a theoretical interdisciplinary approach. This analysis shows important challenges facing the implementation of accountable CECs in different contexts and can help inform future policy development. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: This paper uses a comparative case study of Canada and the USA to argue that, in order to fully understand the associations between population health and the socioeconomic environment we must begin to place importance on the dynamic aspect of these factors—examining them as they evolve over time. In particular, for institutional and policy shifts that often unfold over decades, population health must attend to these big, slow moving processes by adopting a historical perspective to the knowledge base. We compare Canada and the USA on basic health outcomes and a range of determinants of health for which routine data have been collected for all or most of the period between 1950 and the present. During the analysis that follows, we are able to establish that, at the level of society (i) greater economic well being and spending on health care does not yield better health outcomes, that (ii) public provision and income redistribution trump economic success where population health is concerned, and (iii) that the gradual development of public provision represents the buildup of social infrastructure that has long-lasting effects on health status. Our case study shows what can be gleaned from a comparative perspective and a long-term view. The long view allows us to detect the gradual divergence in health status between these two societies and to trace potential institutional causes that would otherwise go unnoticed. The perspective introduced here, and in particular the comparison of Canada and the USA, provides strong support for the use of cross-national comparative work, and a historical perspective on the investigation of societies that successfully support population health. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]