This article utilizes the agency-structure debate as a framework for constructing a health lifestyle theory. No such theory currently exists, yet the need for one is underscored by the fact that many daily lifestyle practices involve considerations of health outcomes. An individualist paradigm has influenced concepts of health lifestyles in several disciplines, but this approach neglects the structural dimensions of such lifestyles and has limited applicability to the empirical world. The direction of this article is to present a theory of health lifestyles that includes considerations of both agency and structure, with an emphasis upon restoring structure to its appropriate position. The article begins by defining agency and structure, followed by presentation of a health lifestyle model and the theoretical and empirical studies that support it.

This review article addresses the concept of the social determinants of health (SDH), selected theories, and its application in studies of chronic disease. Once ignored or regarded only as distant or secondary influences on health and disease, social determinants have been increasingly acknowledged as fundamental causes of health afflictions. For the purposes of this discussion, SDH refers to SDH variables directly relevant to chronic diseases and, in some circumstances, obesity, in the research agenda of the Mid-South Transdisciplinary Collaborative Center for Health Disparities Research. The health effects of SDH are initially discussed with respect to smoking and the social gradient in mortality. Next, four leading SDH theories—life course, fundamental cause, social capital, and health lifestyle theory—are reviewed with supporting studies. The article concludes with an examination of neighborhood disadvantage, social networks, and perceived discrimination in SDH research.

No abstract

The intent of this article is to move beyond the work of Weber and construct a concept of health lifestyles applicable to the current phase of modernity. Beginning with the early twentieth-century work of Simmel and Weber on lifestyles generally, we move to midcentury to examine Bourdieu's perspective and turn to Giddens for an analysis of late century conditions. We find that Weber's insight concerning the dialectical interplay of choice and chance remains the central feature of the lifestyle concept. We also suggest that in rapidly changing late or postmodern situations, lifestyles not only provide self-identity but also promote a sense of stability and belonging for an individual by providing an anchor in a particular social constellation of style and activity. Our discussion leads us to define health lifestyles as collective patterns of health-related behavior based on choices from options available to people according to their life chances. Consistent with Bourdieu's notion of habitus, we assign priority to chance (structure) over choice.One of the most important new developments in sociological theory is the increased attention given to lifestyles as a key sociological concept. Lifestyles are utilitarian social practices and ways of living adopted by individuals that reflect personal, group, and socioeconomic identities (Giddens 1991). Lifestyles consist of self-selected forms of consumerism, involving particular choices in food, bodily dress and appearance, housing, automobiles, work habits, forms of leisure, and other types of status-oriented behavior. Given the massive social, economic, technological, and political changes that have taken place in the late twentieth century, lifestyles have gained particular significance as individual and collective expressions of differences and similarities (Bourdieu 1984;Giddens 1991;Turner 1988). In fact, some sociologists have argued that lifestyle situations and milieus are more important influences on *Direct all correspondence to William C. Cockerham,

No abstract