McKeown and the Idea That Social Conditions Are Fundamental Causes of Disease
- 1 May 2002
- journal article
- review article
- Published by American Public Health Association in American Journal of Public Health
- Vol. 92 (5) , 730-732
- https://doi.org/10.2105/ajph.92.5.730
Abstract
In an accompanying commentary, Colgrove indicates that McKeown's thesis—that dramatic reductions in mortality over the past 2 centuries were due to improved socioeconomic conditions rather than to medical or public health interventions—has been “overturned” and his theory “discredited.” McKeown sought to explain a very prominent trend in population health and did so with a strong emphasis on the importance of basic social and economic conditions. If Colgrove is right about the McKeown thesis, social epidemiology is left with a gaping hole in its explanatory repertoire and a challenge to a cherished principle about the importance of social factors in health. We return to the trend McKeown focused upon—post-McKeown and post-Colgrove—to indicate how and why social conditions must continue to be seen as fundamental causes of disease.Keywords
This publication has 5 references indexed in Scilit:
- The McKeown Thesis: A Historical Controversy and Its Enduring InfluenceAmerican Journal of Public Health, 2002
- Social Epidemiology and the Fundamental Cause Concept: On the Structuring of Effective Cancer Screens by Socioeconomic StatusThe Milbank Quarterly, 1998
- Understanding sociodemographic differences in health--the role of fundamental social causes.American Journal of Public Health, 1996
- Social Conditions As Fundamental Causes of DiseaseJournal of Health and Social Behavior, 1995