After 50 years and 200 papers, what can the Midspan cohort studies tell us about our mortality?

Objective: To distil the main findings from published papers on mortality in three cohorts involving over 27,000 adults, recruited in Scotland between 1965 and 1976 and followed up ever since. Method: We read and summarized 48 peer-reviewed papers about all-cause and cause-specific mortality in these cohorts, published between 1978 and 2013. Results: Mortality rates were substantially higher among cigarette smokers in all social classes and both genders. Exposure to second-hand smoke was also damaging. Exposure to higher levels of black smoke pollution was associated with higher mortality. After smoking, diminished lung function was the risk factor most strongly related to higher mortality, even among never-smokers. On average, female mortality rates were much lower than male but the same risk factors were predictors of mortality. Mortality rates were highest among men whose paternal, own first and most recent jobs were manual. Specific causes of death were associated with different life stages. Upward and downward social mobility conferred intermediate mortality rates. Low childhood cognitive ability was strongly associated with low social class in adulthood and higher mortality before age 65 years. There was no evidence that daily stress contributed to higher mortality among people in lower social positions. Men in manual occupations with fathers in manual occupations, who smoked and drank >14 units of alcohol a week had cardiovascular disease mortality rates 4.5 times higher than non-manual men with non-manual fathers, who neither smoked nor drank >14 units. Men who were obese and drank >14 units of alcohol per day had a mortality rate due to liver disease 19 times that of normal or underweight non-drinkers. Among women who never smoked, mortality rates were highest in severely obese women in the lowest occupational classes. Conclusion: These studies highlight the cumulative effect of adverse exposures throughout life, the complex interplay between social circumstances, culture and individual capabilities, and the damaging effects of smoking, air pollution, alcohol and obesity

Effect of tobacco smoking on survival of men and women by social position: a 28 year cohort study

<b>Objective:</b> To assess the impact of tobacco smoking on the survival of men and women in different social positions. <b>Design:</b> A cohort observational study. <b>Setting:</b> Renfrew and Paisley, two towns in west central Scotland. <b>Participants:</b> 8353 women and 7049 men aged 45-64 years recruited in 1972-6 (almost 80% of the population in this age group). The cohort was divided into 24 groups by sex (male, female), smoking status (current, former, or never smokers), and social class (classes I + II, III non-manual, III manual, and IV + V) or deprivation category of place of residence. <b>Main outcome measure:</b> Relative mortality (adjusted for age and other risk factors) in the different groups; Kaplan-Meier survival curves and survival rates at 28 years. <b>Results:</b> Of those with complete data, 4387/7988 women and 4891/6967 men died over the 28 years. Compared with women in social classes I + II who had never smoked (the group with lowest mortality), the adjusted relative mortality of smoking groups ranged from 1.7 (95% confidence interval 1.3 to 2.3) to 4.2 (3.3 to 5.5). Former smokers’ mortalities were closer to those of never smokers than those of smokers. By social class (highest first), age adjusted survival rates after 28 years were 65%, 57%, 53%, and 56% for female never smokers; 41%, 42%, 33%, and 35% for female current smokers; 53%, 47%, 38%, and 36% for male never smokers; and 24%, 24%, 19%, and 18% for male current smokers. Analysis by deprivation category gave similar results. <b>Conclusions:</b> Among both women and men, never smokers had much better survival rates than smokers in all social positions. Smoking itself was a greater source of health inequality than social position and nullified women’s survival advantage over men. This suggests the scope for reducing health inequalities related to social position in this and similar populations is limited unless many smokers in lower social positions stop smoking

Cause specific mortality, social position, and obesity among women who had never smoked: 28 year cohort study

Objective To investigate the relations between causes of death, social position, and obesity in women who had never smoked

Reducing the impact of the coronavirus on disadvantaged migrants and ethnic minorities.

Studies from several countries have shown that the COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionally affected migrants. Many have numerous risk factors making them vulnerable to infection and poor clinical outcome. Policies to mitigate this effect need to take into account public health principles of inclusion, universal health coverage and the right to health. In addition, the migrant health agenda has been compromised by the suspension of asylum processes and resettlement, border closures, increased deportations and lockdown of camps and excessively restrictive public health measures. International organizations including the World Health Organization and the World Bank have recommended measures to actively counter racism, xenophobia and discrimination by systemically including migrants in the COVID-19 pandemic response. Such recommendations include issuing additional support, targeted communication and reducing barriers to accessing health services and information. Some countries have had specific policies and outreach to migrant groups, including facilitating vaccination. Measures and policies targeting migrants should be evaluated, and good models disseminated widely

Test, test, test for COVID-19 antibodies:the importance of sensitivity, specificity and predictive powers

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibody tests of varying specificity and sensitivity are now available. For informing individuals whether they have had coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), they need to be very accurate. For measuring population prevalence of past infection, the numbers of false positives and negatives need to be roughly equal. With a series of worked examples for a notional population of 100,000 people, we show that even test systems with a high specificity can yield a large number of false positive results, especially where the population prevalence is low. For example, at a true population prevalence of 5%, using a test with 99% sensitivity and specificity, 16% of positive results will be false and thus 950 people will be incorrectly informed they have had the infection. Further confirmatory testing may be needed. Giving false reassurance on which personal or societal decisions might be based could be harmful for individuals, undermine public confidence and foster further outbreaks

Can primary care data be used to monitor regional smoking prevalence? An analysis of The Health Improvement Network primary care data

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Accurate and timely regional data on smoking trends allow tobacco control interventions to be targeted at the areas most in need and facilitate the evaluation of such interventions. Electronic primary care databases have the potential to provide a valuable source of such data due to their size, continuity and the availability of socio-demographic data. UK electronic primary care data on smoking prevalence from The Health Improvement Network (THIN) have previously been validated at the national level, but may be less representative at the regional level due to reduced sample sizes. We investigated whether this database provides valid regional data and whether it can be used to compare smoking prevalence in different UK regions.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Annual estimates of smoking prevalence by government office region (GOR) from THIN were compared with estimates of smoking prevalence from the General Lifestyle Survey (GLF) from 2000 to 2008.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>For all regions, THIN prevalence data were generally found to be highly comparable with GLF data from 2006 onwards.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>THIN primary care data could be used to monitor regional smoking prevalence and highlight regional differences in smoking in the UK.</p

Menstrual Product Insecurity Resulting From COVID-19‒Related Income Loss, United States, 2020.

To identify key effects of the pandemic and its economic consequences on menstrual product insecurity with implications for public health practice and policy. Study participants (n = 1496) were a subset of individuals enrolled in a national (US) prospective cohort study. Three survey waves were included (March‒October 2020). Menstrual product insecurity outcomes were explored with bivariate associations and logistic regression models to examine the associations between outcomes and income loss. Income loss was associated with most aspects of menstrual product insecurity (adjusted odds ratios from 1.34 to 3.64). The odds of not being able to afford products for those who experienced income loss was 3.64 times (95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.14, 6.19) that of those who had no income loss and 3.95 times (95% CI = 1.78, 8.79) the odds for lower-income participants compared with higher-income participants. Pandemic-related income loss was a strong predictor of menstrual product insecurity, particularly for populations with lower income and educational attainment. Provision of free or subsidized menstrual products is needed by vulnerable populations and those most impacted by pandemic-related income loss.( 2022;112(4):675-684. (https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306674)

The impact of life tables adjusted for smoking on the socio-economic difference in net survival for laryngeal and lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Net survival is a key measure in cancer control, but estimates for cancers that are strongly associated with smoking may be biased. General population life tables represent background mortality in net survival, but may not adequately reflect the higher mortality experienced by smokers. METHODS: Life tables adjusted for smoking were developed, and their impact on net survival and inequalities in net survival for laryngeal and lung cancers was examined. RESULTS: The 5-year net survival estimated with smoking-adjusted life tables was consistently higher than the survival estimated with unadjusted life tables: 7% higher for laryngeal cancer and 1.5% higher for lung cancer. The impact of using smoking-adjusted life tables was more pronounced in affluent patients; the deprivation gap in 5-year net survival for laryngeal cancer widened by 3%, from 11% to 14%. CONCLUSIONS: Using smoking-adjusted life tables to estimate net survival has only a small impact on the deprivation gap in survival, even when inequalities are substantial. Adjusting for the higher, smoking-related background mortality did increase the estimates of net survival for all deprivation groups, and may be more important when measuring the public health impact of differences or changes in survival, such as avoidable deaths or crude probabilities of death

The combined effect of smoking tobacco and drinking alcohol on cause-specific mortality: a 30 year cohort study

&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;Background:&lt;/b&gt; Smoking and consuming alcohol are both related to increased mortality risk. Their combined effects on cause-specific mortality were investigated in a prospective cohort study.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;Methods:&lt;/b&gt; Participants were 5771 men aged 35-64, recruited during 1970-73 from various workplaces in Scotland. Data were obtained from a questionnaire and a screening examination. Causes of death were all cause, coronary heart disease (CHD), stroke, alcohol-related, respiratory and smoking-related cancer. Participants were divided into nine groups according to their smoking status (never, ex or current) and reported weekly drinking (none, 1-14 units and 15 or more). Cox proportional hazards models were used to obtain relative rates of mortality, adjusted for age and other risk factors.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;Results:&lt;/b&gt; In 30 years of follow-up, 3083 men (53.4%) died. Compared with never smokers who did not drink, men who both smoked and drank 15+ units/week had the highest all-cause mortality (relative rate = 2.71 (95% confidence interval 2.31-3.19)). Relative rates for CHD mortality were high for current smokers, with a possible protective effect of some alcohol consumption in never smokers. Stroke mortality increased with both smoking and alcohol consumption. Smoking affected respiratory mortality with little effect of alcohol. Adjusting for a wide range of confounders attenuated the relative rates but the effects of alcohol and smoking still remained. Premature mortality was particularly high in smokers who drank 15 or more units, with a quarter of the men not surviving to age 65. 30% of men with manual occupations both smoked and drank 15+ units/week compared with only 13% with non-manual ones.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;Conclusions:&lt;/b&gt; Smoking and drinking 15+ units/week was the riskiest behaviour for all causes of death.&lt;/p&gt