作者: SIMON SZRETER
DOI: 10.1093/SHM/1.1.1
关键词: Environmental health 、 Public health 、 Public Health Act 、 Law 、 Interpretation (philosophy) 、 Health policy 、 Intervention (law) 、 History 、 Social determinants of health 、 Health promotion 、 Orthodoxy
摘要: Introduction Dr John Tatham of the General Register Office (GRO), looking back in 1905 over more than half a century' achievements by public health movement since passing first Public Health Act 1848, found it necessary deprecatingly to remind his readers that “it will be well utter caution at this stage against prevalent tendency attribute results sanitary administration alone whole life-saving which has taken place.…” As most undergraduates today medicine or modern history know, is now widely considered confidently expressed belief, directed human agency informed medical and science was principal source improvement nation' health, apparently been deflated debunked conclusively historical epidemiological research project Professor Thomas McKeown associates. The strong currency McKeown' new orthodoxy continues enjoy illustrated recently leading article British Medical Journal , concluded improving nutrition—the essence “McKeown thesis”—is still best explanation we have for fall mortality Britain. main purpose chapter argue analysis empirical data misleading show closer attention crucial elements own quantitative evidence fact confirms essential spirit Tatham' contemporary assessment.