Health data is one of the most interesting big data out there. The question of “Who dies of what” leads to so many possible explorations. Yet, prior to global burden of study, the health data from WHO were fragmented and incorrect. Bad data leads to inefficient decisions, and it hurts development on global health.
“Epic Measure” tells the story of how Chris Murray develops Global Burden of Disease project, now published on healthdata.org. This book enhances my belief that good decision-making is backed up by good data and analysis. Collecting good data and good analysis is hard to do (it took Chris and Allen twenty years to realize the project). Plus, there’s always politics in global health, and the book show the struggle Chris and Allen have gone through while fulfilling their mission to measure “who dies of what”.
======================
Great quotes:
The “10/ 90 gap,” Murray called it. People in developing countries endured more than 90 percent of the world’s health problems. Those problems, however, received less than 10 percent of health-related research investments.
An estimated 93 percent of the world’s burden of preventable mortality . . . occurs in the developing world.
Not all poor people were the same. Yes, all had relatively little money. But reports repeatedly heralded residents of some low-income countries— China, Costa Rica, Sri Lanka— and the state of Kerala in India as healthier than others and, in terms of mortality rate improvement, doing even better than those in many wealthy Western nations. According to the World Bank, for example, China, Sri Lanka, and Kerala each had per capita incomes of, at most, $ 330 in the early 1980s. Nonetheless, in all of them life expectancy at birth approached seventy years. In Costa Rica, income per capita was $ 1,020, an order of magnitude less than in the United States. Yet the two countries’ infant and adult mortality rates were about equal.
But how could we say what would make people live better if we couldn’t even be certain when and how they were dying?
He realized that the broadest and best-funded initiatives to improve world health did not resemble individual efforts like those he’d participated in with his family or imagined with Culhane. They were about politics and diplomacy, promises and threats, secrets and handshakes.
Choices between competing health priorities are made every day by decision-makers in the public and private sectors,” they would write. “These choices reflect each decision-maker’s implicit understanding of a population’s epidemiological profile, as well as opportunities for intervention. We believe that it is preferable to make an informed estimate of disability due to a particular condition than to have no estimate at all.” Better to push epidemiology to its limits— and then improve it— than to hold back, waiting for more information, and let the pain and suffering of billions remain ignored.
In bureaucracies, it is said, nothing is allowed, but there’s a way around every rule. Murray, the skeptic and debater, now had to master the more subtle art of office politics. Anything sensitive, for example, had to be said in person, not in writing, or it might be used against you.
Working with Frenk, he defined national health system performance not just by how healthy or unhealthy a country’s people were, but also by how much health was improving or declining, how small or large the gaps were between the best and worst off in a country, and how well services matched demand.
Knowing the burden by disease told you the scope of a region’s health problems— who was sick and dying where, and what they suffered from. Knowing the burden by consequence across the full range of disabilities told you what programs were required to help people get better.
One of the increasingly important functions of public health programs is prevention, reaching healthy people who need help knowing how to stay that way.
“Women from ten to sixty have a survival advantage, but a disadvantage in living with disability,” Murray concluded. The disadvantage was significant, and not limited to injuries and illnesses related to having children. Women needed more and better care in a variety of areas.
Low back pain, sixth on the list, was so prevalent and so painful it now caused more years of healthy life lost than murder, malnutrition, lung cancer, or tuberculosis. “As the world is aging, the burden shifts,”
the stresses of unemployment or a general condition of powerlessness that drive many people to drink or drugs— are beyond the ability of the ordinary individual to change.
“A lot of strange ideas people pursue come from a misperception of what priorities are,” Murray said. In 2010, for example, rabies killed 50 percent more people than all acts of war, according to IHME numbers. Nearly three times more people died from falls than from brain cancer.
Most economists believe that if the average wealth of a country increases, its populace will be able to afford better health care, and become healthier as a result. However, IHME data shows that this is true only up to a certain point. A much stronger correlation exists between health and education.
Educating women is an especially wise health investment on two fronts: first, it makes them better advocates and decision makers for themselves and their families during times of medical need; second, it leads women to delay the onset of motherhood and have fewer life-risking pregnancies overall.