Macintyre S
MRC Medical Sociology Unit, Glasgow, Scotland, UK.
Soc Sci Med. 1997 Mar;44(6):723-45. doi: 10.1016/s0277-9536(96)00183-9.
This paper provides an overview of the Black Report, published in Britain in 1980. It outlines its place in the history of British concern about socio-economic differentials in death rates since the mid-19th century, and suggests continuities in suggested explanations for these, a particularly persistent thread being debates between environmentalists, hereditarians, and those emphasising personal ignorance or irresponsibility. It introduces a distinction between "hard" "soft" versions of the Black Report's four explanatory models for inequalities in health (artefact, selection, behavioural and materialist), points out that the working group rejected the "hard" rather than the "soft" versions of the first three and espoused the "soft" version of the last, and suggests that the rather polarised debate about these explanations that followed can be understood in the light of the contemporary political context and a tendency to confuse the "hard" and "soft" versions. Methodological and empirical developments since the report are summarised, attention being drawn to seven themes which raise important issues for future research: the ubiquity of socio-economic differentials across industrialised countries, continuing or increasing differentials, stepwise gradients, interest in psychosocial mechanisms, the hypothesis of biological programming in utero or infancy, controls for behaviour, and evaluations of interventions. The overall conclusion is that we need more detailed studies of the mechanisms which generate and maintain social inequalities in health, and of interventions to reduce such inequalities.
本文概述了1980年在英国发表的《布莱克报告》。它概述了该报告在自19世纪中叶以来英国对死亡率方面社会经济差异的关注历史中的地位,并指出在对这些差异的解释建议方面存在连续性,一个特别持久的主题是环境主义者、遗传主义者以及强调个人无知或不负责任的人之间的争论。它介绍了《布莱克报告》关于健康不平等的四种解释模型(人为因素、选择、行为和物质主义)的“强硬”和“温和”版本之间的区别,指出工作组拒绝了前三种模型的“强硬”版本而非“温和”版本,并支持最后一种模型的“温和”版本,还表明随后关于这些解释的相当两极分化的争论可以根据当代政治背景以及混淆“强硬”和“温和”版本的倾向来理解。总结了自该报告以来的方法学和实证发展,提请注意七个主题,这些主题为未来研究提出了重要问题:社会经济差异在工业化国家的普遍存在、差异持续或增加、逐步梯度、对心理社会机制的兴趣、子宫内或婴儿期生物编程的假设、行为控制以及干预措施的评估。总体结论是,我们需要对产生和维持健康方面社会不平等的机制以及减少此类不平等的干预措施进行更详细的研究。