Objective To determine whether English regions worst affected by the economic recession in the United Kingdom in 2008-10 have had the greatest increases in suicides.Design Time trend analysis comparing the actual number of suicides with those that would be expected if pre-recession trends had continued. Multivariate regression models quantified the association between changes in unemployment (based on claimant data) and suicides (based on data from the National Clinical Health Outcomes Database). Results Between 2008 and 2010, we found 846 (95% confidence interval 818 to 877) more suicides among men than would have been expected based on historical trends, and 155 (121 to 189) more suicides among women. Historically, short term yearly fluctuations in unemployment have been associated with annual changes in suicides among men but not among women. We estimated that each 10% increase in the number of unemployed men was significantly associated with a 1.4% (0.5% to 2.3%) increase in male suicides. These findings suggest that about two fifths of the recent increase in suicides among men (increase of 329 suicides, 126 to 532) during the 2008-10 recession can be attributed to rising unemployment. ConclusionThe study provides evidence linking the recent increase in suicides in England with the financial crisis that began in 2008. English regions with the largest rises in unemployment have had the largest increases in suicides, particularly among men.

The importance of public policy as a determinant of health is routinely acknowledged, but there remains a continuing absence of mainstream debate about the ways in which the politics, power and ideology, which underpin public policy influence people's health. This paper explores the possible reasons behind the absence of a politics of health and demonstrates how explicit acknowledgement of the political nature of health will lead to more effective health promotion strategy and policy, and to more realistic and evidence-based public health and health promotion practice.

Background: This study is the first to examine the relationship between gender and self-assessed health (SAH), and the extent to which this varies by socioeconomic position in different European welfare state regimes (Liberal, Corporatist, Social Democratic, Southern). Methods: The EUROTHINE harmonised data set (based on representative cross-sectional national health surveys conducted between 1998 and 2004) was used to analyse SAH differences by gender and socioeconomic position (educational rank) in different welfare states. The sample sizes ranged from 7124 (Germany) to 118 245 (Italy) and concerned the adult population (aged >16 years). Results: Logistic regression analysis (adjusting for age) identified significant gender differences in SAH in nine European welfare states. In the UK (OR 0.88; 95% CI 0.78 to 0.99) and Finland (OR 0.85; 95% CI 0.77 to 0.95), men were significantly more likely to report ''bad'' or ''very bad'' health. In Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Holland, Italy, Spain and Portugal, a significantly higher proportion of women than men reported that their health was ''bad'' or ''very bad''. The increased risk of poor SAH experienced by women from these countries ranged from a 23% increase in Denmark (OR 1.23; 95% CI 1.08 to 1.39) to more than a twofold increase in Portugal (OR 2.01; 95% CI 1.87 to 2.15). For some countries (Italy, Portugal, Sweden), women's relatively worse SAH tended to be most prominent in the group with the highest level of education. Discussion: Women in the Social Democratic and Southern welfare states were more likely to report worse SAH than men. In the Corporatist countries, there were no gender differences in SAH. There was no consistent welfare state regime patterning for gender differences in SAH by socioeconomic position. These findings constitute a challenge to regime theory and comparative social epidemiology to engage more with issues of gender.Gender differences in health are well documented in terms of both mortality and morbidity. However, the extent to which gender differences in health vary by socioeconomic position is less well documented.2 Furthermore, although welfare state arrangements and social policies are increasingly being acknowledged as important determinants of health and of inequalities in health, [3][4][5][6][7][8] there is little research into how gender differences in health vary by welfare state; specifically, there has been little gendered analysis with a focus on the implications for women. [9][10][11] As part of the EUROTHINE project, this study focused on gender and health inequality in 13European welfare states, representing four welfare state regimes: Finland,

BackgroundThe adverse health and equity impacts of transnational corporations’ (TNCs) practices have become central public health concerns as TNCs increasingly dominate global trade and investment and shape national economies. Despite this, methodologies have been lacking with which to study the health equity impacts of individual corporations and thus to inform actions to mitigate or reverse negative and increase positive impacts.MethodsThis paper reports on a framework designed to conduct corporate health impact assessment (CHIA), developed at a meeting held at the Rockefeller Foundation Bellagio Center in May 2015.ResultsOn the basis of the deliberations at the meeting it was recommended that the CHIA should be based on ex post assessment and follow the standard HIA steps of screening, scoping, identification, assessment, decision-making and recommendations. A framework to conduct the CHIA was developed and designed to be applied to a TNC’s practices internationally, and within countries to enable comparison of practices and health impacts in different settings. The meeting participants proposed that impacts should be assessed according to the TNC’s global and national operating context; its organisational structure, political and business practices (including the type, distribution and marketing of its products); and workforce and working conditions, social factors, the environment, consumption patterns, and economic conditions within countries.ConclusionWe anticipate that the results of the CHIA will be used by civil society for capacity building and advocacy purposes, by governments to inform regulatory decision-making, and by TNCs to lessen their negative health impacts on health and fulfil commitments made to corporate social responsibility.

Critiques of gender mainstreaming (GM) as the officially agreed strategy to promote gender equity in health internationally have reached a critical mass. There has been a notable lack of dialogue between gender advocates in the global north and south, from policy and practice, governments and non-governmental organisations (NGOs). This paper contributes to the debate on the shape of future action for gender equity in health, by uniquely bringing together the voices of disparate actors, first heard in a series of four seminars held during 2008 and 2009, involving almost 200 participants from 15 different country contexts. The series used (Feminist) Participatory Action Research (FPAR) methodology to create a productive dialogue on the developing theory around GM and the at times disconnected empirical experience of policy and practice. We analyse the debates and experiences shared at the seminar series using concrete, context specific examples from research, advocacy, policy and programme development perspectives, as presented by participants from southern and northern settings, including Kenya, Mozambique, India, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Canada and Australia. Focussing on key discussions around sexualities and (dis)ability and their interactions with gender, we explore issues around intersectionality across the five key themes for research and action identified by participants: (1) Addressing the disconnect between gender mainstreaming praxis and contemporary feminist theory; (2) Developing appropriate analysis methodologies; (3) Developing a coherent theory of change; (4) Seeking resolution to the dilemmas and uncertainties around the 'place' of men and boys in GM as a feminist project; and (5) Developing a politics of intersectionality. We conclude that there needs to be a coherent and inclusive strategic direction to improve policy and practice for promoting gender equity in health which requires the full and equal participation of practitioners and policy makers working alongside their academic partners.