http://bmj.com/cgi/content/full/324/7339/690
BMJ 2002;324:690-691 ( 23 March )
Editorials
Modern worries, new technology, and medicine
New technologies mean new health complaints
Over recent years there has been a steady and important change in the
public's perception of the relation between aspects of modern life
and health. Now, at the beginning of the 21st century, people's
suspicion of modernity has increased to such an extent that it has
undermined their view of their own health, increased their worries
about environmental causes of poor health, and fostered a migration
to complementary medicine. Concerns about the safety of mobile
phones, environmental pollution, vaccines, bovine spongiform
encephalopathy, genetically modified food, and food in general have
led to a heightened awareness of the effect of environmental changes
on health. We believe that these concerns about technological change,
which have been largely unrecognised by researchers, have important
implications for the way patients interact with health services.
This change in public concerns has obvious and more subtle effects. Despite
considerable recent research and official inquiries into new
technologies such as mobile phones and genetically modified food,
public suspicion remains high. In clinical settings patients are
reluctant to start medication or to continue it for an extended
period for fear of putting "unnatural chemicals" into their body. At
the same time the consumption of unproved herbal and alternative
"natural" remedies is increasing.1 This anxiety is
reflected in the pattern of presentations of psychosomatic illness:
the number of illnesses attributed to environmental factors
for
example, sick building syndrome, multiple chemical sensitivity, total
allergy syndrome, and 20th century disease
has
increased.2
The milieu that has fostered this unease with modernity is an increase in the
public's fascination with personal health and medicine, as evidenced
by the burgeoning of gyms and fitness programmes, and the widespread
adoption of a "healthy lifestyle."3 The
media's increased coverage of health topics, in stories on the
dangers lurking in ordinary activities such as air travel and
vaccination, has raised worries about routine health care and
increased people's perception of their vulnerability to new and
exotic illnesses. Media stories also tend to misrepresent the dangers
of new environmental influences and aspects of modernity, while
playing down more mundane causes of ill health, such as the link
between tobacco and heart disease.4 This focus of
the media on risks with a novelty value fosters the belief that
they are far more common than they actually are.
The result of this deluge of information on the supposedly pervasive risks to
personal health is that people now feel much more vulnerable. Normal
everyday symptoms such as headache and fatigue are now more easily
interpreted as signs of disease or ill health. Attributions made by
patients about the cause of their illness often involve environmental
pollution, and they see the effects of modern life as undermining the
effectiveness of their immune system. Not surprisingly, recent
research has shown that patients who are the most concerned about the
effects of modern life on health are also more likely to complain of
symptoms in the previous month, have more functional illness, and be
consumers of complementary health care than patients with fewer
concerns about modernity.5
Historically, the introduction of new technologies has frequently been
accompanied by new complaints, fears, and illnesses, such as railway
spine and electric allergy.6 George Beard,
the founder of the diagnosis of neurasthenia, ascribed the cause
of this disorder to "wireless telegraphy, science, steam power,
newspapers and the education of women; in other words modern civilisation."7
Currently the adoption of new technologies is accelerating and
is occurring in a climate of suspicion and mistrust in medical
evidence or reassurances.
Distrust of experts is now commonplace, and at its extreme it can merge into
the conspiratorial thinking that is part of a modern paranoid style.8
Well publicised crises, most obviously bovine spongiform
encephalopathy and foot and mouth disease, have severely dented
confidence, although the trend was clear long before. Mismanaged
environmental incidents and easily recalled examples of the
fallibility of experts, such as in the cases of new variant
Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease and thalidomide, add to the fears of the
public and undermine its trust in the people and authorities
responsible for managing risk. Sadly, trust once lost is difficult to
restore.
The internet has brought a new dimension to the spread of worries and health
scares. Whereas previous health scares
amalgam
fillings, saccharin, and fluoridation of water
were
published in the usual media sources, new and unsubstantiated health
worries can be instantly transmitted to an internet audience eagerly
seeking information on health or to special interest networks, such
as illness support groups. A recent US study of hospital outpatients
found that 25% of the patients had used the web for medical information
in the past year and that 60% planned to do so in the next year.9
Medical scares recently transmitted on the web and through email
lists include antiperspirants that cause breast cancer, and the
spread of necrotising fasciitis by bananas. We believe it is only a
matter of time before a mass psychogenic illness is identified as
being spread electronically.
It is difficult to feel optimistic. Despite all the evidence of the
extraordinary improvements in public health during the past century,
surveys show that we experience more symptoms and feel worse than our
ancestors.10 The rapid introduction of new
technologies, while improving the quality of life of millions
of people, has been accompanied by important adverse effects in the
way people make sense of illness and present with health complaints.
Keith J Petrie, associate professor.
Health Psychology Department, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences,
University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand (kj.petrie@auckland.ac.nz)
Simon Wessely, professor.
Academic Department of Psychological Medicine, Guy's, King's College, and St
Thomas's Hospitals School of Medicine and Institute of Psychiatry, London SE5
8AF (sphascw@iop.kcl.ac.ik)
| 1. |
Eisenberg DM, Davis RB, Ettner SL, Appel S, Wilkey S, Van
Rompay M, et al. Trends in alternative medicine use in the United States,
1990-1997: results of a follow-up national survey. JAMA 1998; 280:
1569-1575[Medline].
|
| 2. |
Wessely S. Chronic fatigue syndrome: a 20th century
illness? Scand J Work Environ Health 1997; 23(suppl l3): 17-34[Medline].
|
| 3. |
Barsky AJ. The paradox of health. N Engl J Med 1988;
318: 414-418[Abstract].
|
| 4. |
Frost K, Frank E, Maibach E. Relative risk in the news
media; a quantification of misrepresentation. Am J Public Health
1997; 87: 842-845[Abstract].
|
| 5. |
Petrie KJ, Sivertsen B, Hysing M, Broadbent E, Moss-Morris
R, Eriksen HR, et al. Thoroughly modern worries: the relationship of worries
about modernity to reported symptoms, health and medical care utilization.
J Psychosom Res 2001; 51: 395-401[Medline]
|
| 6. |
Dembe A. Occupation and disease: how social factors
affect the conception of work-related disorders. New Haven: Yale
University Press, 1996. |
| 7. |
Beard G. A practical treatise on nervous exhaustion
(neurasthenia): its symptoms, nature, sequences, treatment. New York:
William Wood, 1880. |
| 8. |
Showalter E. Hystories: hysterical epidemics and modern
culture. London: Picador, 1997. |
| 9. |
O'Connor JB, Johanson JF. Use of the web for medical
information by a gastroenterology clinic population. JAMA 2000; 284:
1962-1964[Medline].
|
| 10. |
Verbrugge L. Longer life but worsening health? Trends in
health and mortality of middle aged and older persons. Millbank Memorial
Fund Q 1984; 62: 475-519.
|
© BMJ 2002
Rapid Responses:
Read all Rapid Responses
- Accountability, gentlemen! Accountability!
- Gurli Bagnall
- bmj.com, 22 Mar 2002
[Full text]
ALL INFORMATION, DATA, AND
MATERIAL CONTAINED, PRESENTED, OR PROVIDED HERE IS FOR GENERAL INFORMATION
PURPOSES ONLY AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS REFLECTING THE KNOWLEDGE OR OPINIONS
OF THE PUBLISHER, AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED OR INTENDED AS PROVIDING MEDICAL OR
LEGAL ADVICE. THE DECISION WHETHER OR NOT TO VACCINATE IS AN IMPORTANT AND
COMPLEX ISSUE AND SHOULD BE MADE BY YOU, AND YOU ALONE, IN CONSULTATION WITH
YOUR HEALTH CARE PROVIDER.