Human Rights
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

In a recent perspective published by the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), Stanford Law student Alexandra Daniels analyzed a growing body of federal litigation brought by prisoners with the hepatitis C virus (HCV) who are seeking access to treatment for their condition. With co-author and mentor, Law Professor David Studdert — also a professor of medicine at Stanford Health Policy — Daniels documented the dire public health problem of HCV in prisons.

“People incarcerated in prisons account for approximately one third of HCV cases in the United States” the authors wrote, and nearly one in five prisoners are infected, compared with 1 percent of the general population. 

HCV is a slow-moving disease, but left untreated it eventually leads to cirrhosis, cancer, liver failure, and death.  

A new wave of “miracle” drugs for treating HCV appeared in 2014. Direct-acting antivirals–or DAAs–are far more effective than anything previously known. The catch–they are extremely expensive, upwards of $50,000 for a course of treatment.  This creates a far higher price tag for universal treatment than most prison systems can afford. The result is that, even though prisons are the epicenter of the HCV epidemic, only a small minority of prisoners have gained access to DAAs.

Read Full Story

Read More

gettyimages run illustration
News

Owning Handgun Associated With Dramatically Higher Risk of Suicide

Men who own handguns are eight times more likely to die of suicide by handgun than men who don’t have one — and women who own handguns are 35 times more likely than women who don’t, according to startling new research led by SHP's David Studdert.
Owning Handgun Associated With Dramatically Higher Risk of Suicide
gettyimages covid prisoners
News

Stanford Works With California Prisons to Test and Prevent COVID-19

A $1 million gift from the Horowitz Family Foundation allows Stanford researchers to work on reducing the spread of COVID-19 among the incarcerated and inform mitigation strategies in other high-density living situations.
Stanford Works With California Prisons to Test and Prevent COVID-19
A map of the United States.
Commentary

Partitioning the Curve — Interstate Travel Restrictions During the Covid-19 Pandemic

Many jurisdictions have responded to the unevenness of the COVID-19 pandemic by battening down their borders. SHP's David Studdert and Michelle Mello take a deep dive into the legalities of attempting to prevent people from crossing state lines in this New England Journal of Medicine perspective.
Partitioning the Curve — Interstate Travel Restrictions During the Covid-19 Pandemic
All News button
1
Subtitle

The U.S. Supreme Court has interpreted the 8th Amendment of the Constitution, which prohibits cruel and unusual punishment, to guarantee prisoners a minimum basic level of health care. Yet even though prisons are the epicenter of the hepatitis C epidemic, only a small minority of prisoners have gained access to new "miracle" drugs to treat HCV.

Authors
Beth Duff-Brown
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

Marcella Alsan and Marianne Wanamaker are recipients of this year’s prestigious Arrow Award from the International Health Economics Association for research that shows the health of African-American men was adversely impacted by the Tuskegee syphilis study of the early 20th century.

The annual award recognizes excellence in the field of health economics and is named after the late Kenneth J. Arrow, a Nobel Prize-winning economist and mathematician. He was a Stanford Health Policy fellow and senior fellow by courtesy at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI). He was also a senior fellow, emeritus, at the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research (SIEPR).

The IHEA awarded the 27th annual Arrow Award to Alsan, a core faculty member at Stanford Health Policy, a senior fellow at FSI and SIEPR, and co-author Wanamaker of the University of Tennessee for their paper, “Tuskegee and the Health of Black Men” published in the Quarterly Journal of Economics.

The infamous Tuskegee study began in 1932 when the U.S. Public Health Service began following approximately 600 African-American men, some of whom had syphilis, for the stated purpose of understanding the natural history of the disease. The government willingly withheld treatment even after penicillin became an established magic bullet for treating the illness. 

The medical doctors and staff of the CDC followed the men for four decades, until ultimately the study was halted in 1972 when it was brought to the attention of the media by law student Peter Buxtun.

As noted in this story about the research, Alsan and Wanamaker found that the public disclosure of the study in 1972 was associated with an increase in medical mistrust and mortality among African-American men in the immediate aftermath of the revelation.

“The award is an immense honor for both Marianne and me. First, it sheds light on the importance of history for understanding health disparities. Second, it reaffirms the “expected behavior of the physician” that Professor Arrow eloquently described in his seminal 1963 paper on the distinctive features of the market for medical care and the externalities associated with deviating from those expectations.”

African-American men today have the worst health outcomes of all major ethnic, racial and demographic groups in the United States. Life expectancy for black men at age 45 is three years less than their white male peers, and five years less than for black women.

When their working paper was first published by the National Bureau of Economic Research, it became part of the national discussion about the lasting impact of the Tuskegee study.

“The story that Alsan and Wanamaker uncovered is even deeper than the direct effects of the Tuskegee Study,” wrote Vann R. Newkirk II in The Atlantic. “Their research helps validate the anecdotal experiences of physicians, historians, and public health workers in black communities and gives new power to them.”

 

All News button
1
Paragraphs

The ongoing decline in under-5 mortality ranks among the most significant public and population health successes of the past 30 years. Deaths of children under the age of 5 years have fallen from nearly 13 million per year in 1990 to less than 6 million per year in 2015, even as the world's under-5 population grew by nearly 100 million children. However, the amount of variability underlying this broad global progress is substantial. On a regional level, east Asia and the Pacific have surpassed the Millennium Development Goal target of a two-thirds reduction in under-5 mortality rate between 1990 and 2015, whereas sub-Saharan Africa has had only a 24% decline over the same period. Large differences in progress are also evident within sub-Saharan Africa, where mortality rates have declined by more than 70% from 1990 to 2015 in some countries and increased in others; in 2015, the mortality rate in some countries was more than three times that in others.

What explains this remarkable variation in progress against under-5 mortality? Answering this question requires understanding of where the main sources of variation in mortality lie. One view that is implicit in the way that mortality rates are tracked and targeted is that national policies and conditions drive first-order changes in under-5 mortality. This country-level focus is justified by research that emphasises the role of institutional factors in explaining variation in mortality—factors such as universal health coverage, women's education, and the effectiveness of national health systems. It is argued that these factors, which vary measurably at the country level, fundamentally shape the ability of individuals and communities to affect more proximate causes of child death such as malaria and diarrhoeal disease.

An alternate view has focused on exploring the importance of subnational variation in the distribution of disease. In the USA, studies on the geographical distribution of health care and mortality have been influential for targeting of resources and policy design. Similar studies in developing regions have shown the substantial variability in the distribution and changes of important health outcomes such HIV, malaria, and schistosomiasis—information that can then be used to improve the targeting of interventions. Nevertheless, the relative contribution of within-country and between-country differences in explaining under-5 mortality remains unknown. Improved understanding of the relative contribution of national and sub-national factors could provide insight into the drivers of mortality levels and declines in mortality, as well as improve the targeting of interventions to the areas where they are most needed.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Journal Articles
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
The Lancet Global Health
Authors
Eran Bendavid
Subscribe to Human Rights