Repeal of EPA’s endangerment finding won’t change the realities of chronic disease
Key takeaways
- Three-quarters of adults in the U.S. have a chronic condition, and more than half grapple with two or more diagnoses.
- Yet, most of our health is determined outside of clinics and hospitals.
- Anyone who has experienced oppressive heat, breathed wildfire smoke or noticed their allergies worsening every year can appreciate this.
Why this matters: political developments that affect policy direction and public trust.
Three-quarters of adults in the U.S. have a chronic condition, and more than half grapple with two or more diagnoses. Many of the patients I treat in my primary care clinic in Chicago live with combinations of conditions like diabetes, cancer and dementia or asthma, high blood pressure and obesity. Chronic disease is the leading cause of death in the U.S., and treating it costs billions of dollars a year.
Yet, most of our health is determined outside of clinics and hospitals. I can prescribe medication and make dietary recommendations until I m blue in the face, but it won t matter if my patients can t afford the pills or access the healthy food. I can send an asthma patient home with multiple inhalers, but that only does so much when the air outside is toxic. Social and environmental determinants of health, like air quality, insurance coverage and food access, often have a much greater impact on my patients chronic disease outcomes than my medical care.
Climate change is another determinant of health. Anyone who has experienced oppressive heat, breathed wildfire smoke or noticed their allergies worsening every year can appreciate this. People with chronic disease are among the most vulnerable to the climate s health impacts. This is why the recent repeal of what is known as the endangerment finding is a step in the wrong direction when it comes to improving chronic disease outcomes in the U.S. and globally.