Here is an Article from The British Medical Journal that tends to confirm that living on white food is dangerous.

[Guest guest]

BMJ 2003;327:406-407 (23 August)

PDF of this article

 

 

Collections under which this article appears:[NL]Health of indigenous

peoples

Editorial

Changing pattern of ill health for indigenous people

Control of lifestyle is beyond individuals and depends on social and

political factors

Industrialising societies are said to have undergone various epidemiological

transition stages, in which the transition from stage two to stage three

involves a change from receding pandemics to lifestyle diseases.1 The

dynamics of this transition, which took thousands of years in Western

countries, have been unprecedented and greatly compacted in time in most

indigenous populations. Rather than a transition we see the rise of

lifestyle non-communicable diseases at a time when the receding pandemics

have not yet receded.2 The pattern seems to be similar in indigenous people

in their traditional lands, such as the Pacific, and in newly adopted

metropolitan centres, such as New Zealand. We consider here the different

dynamics of the epidemiological transition in indigenous people and argue

that these are linked to socioeconomic transitions beyond their power and

their borders. Thus individual lifestyle interventions cannot be naively

transferred to indigenous populations. Rather, what is required is

appropriate national and international social and political commitment to

health protection, with the specific interventions to be identified and

implemented primarily by indigenous people.

Even with " traditional " communicable diseases, the experience of indigenous

people has differed from that of Western countries.3 In Western countries

agriculture, domestication of animals, the adoption of a sedentary

existence, and the accompanying population increase and density contributed

to the emergence of epidemics of the major communicable diseases.4 The

European colonisation of the Pacific and the Americas after 1492 saw

indigenous populations decimated by imported communicable diseases.5 These

effects were not uniform, depending highly on local conditions. For example,

in the Pacific indigenous people experienced high mortality from imported

infectious diseases mainly when their land was taken and their economic

base, food supply, and social networks were disrupted. When land was not

taken in large amounts by European settlers the death rate was relatively

low.5 Similar social disruption resulting in increases in communicable

disease has been seen more recently in eastern Europe.6

Just as the introduction of the major communicable diseases did not occur in

a vacuum, neither has the rise of non-communicable diseases.7 For example,

the Pima Indians of Arizona had their own way of life and economy until the

late 19th century, when the new white settlers upstream diverted their water

supply.8 This disrupted a 2000 year old tradition of irrigation and

agriculture, causing poverty and starvation. The Pima then had to survive on

lard, sugar, and flour supplied by the United States government, resulting

in one of the highest rates of prevalence of diabetes in the world-a

particularly graphic example of a population living with the consequences of

decisions taken upstream.9

Such problems persist. In one Pacific country, fishing for food is illegal

in front of certain villages, in an area recently leased to a commercial

fishing company partly owned by a political leader. Inequitable land

distribution in Pacific Island countries, deforestation in Asia by

multinational companies, and mass purchasing of individual land for grazing

and cash cropping in the Americas all continue to compromise the ability of

indigenous people to grow food and sustain adequate nutrition. The use of

the Marshall Islands by the United States for nuclear testing led to

ecological destruction, making farming impossible and fish radiotoxic and

resulting in whole populations being displaced and becoming economically

dependent, with a diet now based on imported processed and canned foods.10

Vested political and commercial interests also affect trade policy. For

example, in the Pacific, healthier low fat local sources of protein, such as

fish, generally cost 15-50% more and are less accessible than imported fatty

mutton pieces, chicken pieces, or tinned fish. Fiji's ban on the importation

of mutton flaps immediately resulted in New Zealand threatening a complaint

to the World Trade Organization,11 an action similar to the tobacco

companies flooding of developing countries with their products.12

Although non-communicable diseases are often attributed to genetic factors

or individual lifestyle, they are also caused by broader political and

social factors needing social action.9 The World Health Organization's view

that non-communicable diseases cannot be addressed by the medical profession

alone, and require public, private sector, socioeconomic, and political

involvement,13 is equally valid for indigenous people. Despite the best

intentions of WHO the year 2000 has come and gone, and instead of " Health

For All, " health care is increasingly being privatised-effectively putting

health out of the reach of those most in need, while they face increasing

socioeconomic pressures against healthy lifestyles. Most indigenous health

infrastructures cannot accommodate expensive healthcare models designed to

meet the needs of 3% of the population; however, they can easily deliver

comprehensive primary health care to the other 97%. What is required, rather

than the transfer of individual lifestyle oriented health promotion to

indigenous people, is the active involvement of indigenous people in primary

health care and in the planning and implementation of health protection

programmes at the local, national, and international levels.

Sunia Foliaki, Wellcome Trust visiting research fellow

(s.foliaki)

Neil Pearce, director

Centre for Public Health Research, Massey University, Wellington Campus,

Private Box 756, Wellington, New Zealand

 

The Centre for Public Health Research is supported by a programme grant from

the Health Research Council of New Zealand. SF is funded by a grant from the

Wellcome Trust for epidemiology of asthma and other non-communicable

diseases in the Pacific.

Competing interests: None declared.

References

1. Omran AR. The epidemiologic transition. A theory of the epidemiology of

population change. Milbank Mem Fund Q 1971;29: 509-38.

2. Gaylin DS, Kates J. Refocusing the lens: epidemiologic transition theory,

mortality differentials, and the AIDS pandemic. Soc Sci Med 1997;44:

609-21.[CrossRef][iSI][Medline]

3. Pearce N, McMichael AJ. Interactions of environmental change and human

health. In: Our fragile world: challenges and opportunities for sustainable

development. Oxford: EOLSS, 2001: 795-804.

4. Diamond J. Guns, germs and steel. London: Vintage, 1998.

5. Kunitz S. Disease and social diversity. New York: Oxford University

Press, 1994.

6. Bobak M, Marmot M. East-west mortality divide and its potential

explanations: proposed research agenda. BMJ 1996;312: 421-5.[Free Full Text]

7. Pearce N. Traditional epidemiology, modern epidemiology, and public

health. Am J Publ Health 1996;86: 678-83.[Abstract]

8. Schulz LO. Traditional environment protects against diabetes in Pima

Indians. Healthy Weight Journal 1999;13: 68-70.

9. McKinlay JB. The promotion of health through planned socio-political

change: challenges for research and policy. Soc Sci Med 1993;36:

109-17.[CrossRef][iSI][Medline]

10. Yamada S, Palafox N. On the biopsychosocial model: the example of

political economic causes of diabetes in the Marshall Islands. Fam Med

2001;33: 702-4.[iSI][Medline]

11. Fiji Government. Health of Fijians more important then New Zealand

threats. Press release, 15 March 2001.

http://fiji.gov.fj/press/2001_03/2001_03_15-01.shtml (accessed 29 Jul 2003).

12. Barry M. The influence of the US tobacco industry on the health,

economy, and environment of developing countries. N Engl J Med 1991;324:

917-20.[iSI][Medline]

13. World Health Report. Making a difference. Geneva: WHO, 1999.

 

 

 

 

 

Collections under which this article appears:[NL]Health of indigenous

peoples

 

 

 

 

 

© 2003 BMJ Publishing Group Ltd