Is there a link between cardiovascular mortality and economic fluctuations?

Economic uncertainty and cardiovascular disease mortality

Previous studies have found a link between economic conditions, such as recessions and unemployment, and cardiovascular disease as well as other health outcomes. More recent research argues that economic uncertainty-independently of unemployment-can affect health outcomes. Using data from England and Wales, we study the association between fluctuations in economic uncertainty and cardiovascular disease mortality in the short term for the period 2001-2019. Controlling for several economic indicators (including unemployment), we find that economic uncertainty alone is strongly associated with deaths attributed to diseases of the circulatory system, ischemic heart disease and cerebrovascular disease. Our findings highlight the short-term link between economic conditions and cardiovascular health and reveal yet another health outcome that is associated with uncertainty.

Is Economic Growth Good for Population Health? A Critical Review

A large multidisciplinary literature discusses the relationship between economic growth and population health. The idea that economic growth is good for societies has inspired extensive academic debate, but conclusions have been mixed. To help shed light on the subject, this paper focuses on opportunities for consensus in this large literature. Much scholarship finds that the health-growth relationship varies according to (1) which aspect of "health" is under consideration, (2) shape (e.g., positive linear or logarithmic), (3) issues of timing (e.g., growth over the short or long term), (4) a focus on health inequalities as opposed to population averages, and (5) multivariable relationships with additional factors. After reflecting upon these findings, I propose that economic growth promotes health in some respects, for some countries, and in conjunction with other life-supporting priorities, but does not by itself improve population health generally speaking. I then argue there is already wide, interdisciplinary consensus to support this stance. Moreover, policies focusing exclusively on economic growth threaten harm to both population health and growth, which is to say that political dynamics are also implicated. Yet multivariable approaches can help clarify the bigger picture of how growth relates to health. For moving this literature forward, the best opportunities may involve the simultaneous analysis of multiple factors. The recognition of consensus around these issues would be welcome, and timely.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s42650-023-00072-y.

Identification of cardiovascular risk factors among urban and rural Malaysian youths

Background

Coronary artery disease (CAD) is one of the major causes of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Early identification of the cardiovascular risk factors (CRF) among youths assists in determining the high-risk group to develop CAD in later life. In view of the modernised lifestyle, both urban and rural residing youths are thought to be equally exposed to various CRF. This study aimed to describe the common CRF including obesity, dyslipidaemia, hypertension, smoking and family history of hypercholesterolaemia and premature CAD in youths residing in urban and rural areas in Malaysia.

Methods

We recruited 942 Malaysian subjects aged 15–24 years old [(males = 257, and urban = 555 vs. rural = 387, (mean age ± SD = 20.5 ± 2.1 years)] from the community health screening programmes organised in both rural and urban regions throughout Malaysia. Medical history and standardised anthropometric measurements were recorded. Laboratory investigations were obtained for fasting serum lipid profiles and plasma glucose levels.

Results

A total of 43.7% from the total study population was either obese or overweight. Youths in the rural were more overweight and obese (49.4% vs. 42.7%, p < 0.044) and have higher family history of hypercholesterolaemia (16.3% vs. 11.3%, p < 0.036) than youths in the urban areas. Low-density lipoprotein (LDL-c) (2.8 vs. 2.7 mmol/L) and total cholesterol (TC) (4.7 vs. 4.5 mmol/L) were significantly higher in urban compared to rural youths (p < 0.019 and p < 0.012). Overall, more youth in this study has CRF rather than not (Has ≥ 1 CRF = 69.9%). Significantly more rural youths have at least one CRF compared to urban youths (rural = 74.2% vs. urban = 66.8%, p = 0.016).

Conclusion

In conclusion, our study showed that a large number of youths had at least one or more CRF. Rural youths have significantly higher BMI with higher family history of hypercholesterolaemia compared to urban youths. However, urban youths have higher LDL-c and TC levels. Other coronary risk factors are not significantly different between urban and rural youths. Rural youths have more CRF compared to urban youths. A larger longitudinal study focusing on this population is important to better understand the effect of the area of residence on CRF in youth.