News Release

Income Inequality’s Death Toll: 140 Per 100,000 Population

Peer-Reviewed Publication

Center for Advancing Health

Unequal income distribution in U.S. metropolitan areas is linked to almost 140 deaths per 100,000 population, according to a new study.

The 34 metropolitan areas that have the widest disparity in income and the lowest per capita income have, on average, 139.8 deaths per 100,000 more than the areas with the lowest inequality and highest income, according to John W. Lynch, PhD, and his colleagues.

"To place the magnitude of this difference in some perspective," the researchers report, "this mortality difference exceeds the combined loss of life from lung cancer, diabetes, motor vehicle crashes, HIV infection, suicide, and homicide in 1995."

The findings are reported in the July issue of the American Journal of Public Health by Lynch and George A. Kaplan, PhD, both of the University of Michigan Department of Epidemiology and the Institute for Social Research; Elsie R. Pamuck, PhD, and Katherine E. Heck, MPH, both of the National Center for Health Statistics; Richard D. Cohen, MA, and Jennifer L. Balfour, MPH, of the Human Population Laboratory, Berkeley, California and Irene H. Yen, PhD, of the University of California, Berkeley.

Using a variety of methods, they calculated income disparities based on 1990 census information and mortality rates for 282 metropolitan areas using data from the National Center for Health Statistics.

This new research builds on the results of their earlier studies at the state level by showing that the size of the gap between rich and poor is even more strongly associated with mortality than the number of people living in poverty.

"This study showed that associations between income inequality and mortality were not due to differences in the size, population, average household size, per capita income, or proportion of low-income households among U.S. metropolitan areas," they report.

Noting that the U.S. has "some of the highest levels of income inequality in the world," the authors urge that steps be taken to reduce the disparities. The standard political argument against income redistribution, they write, is framed as a trade-off with economic growth: restraining wage increases, cutting social spending, delaying investment in public infrastructure, and abandoning the redistribution of social goods to avoid stifling the economy.

"According to this approach, the best way to improve the lot of those at the bottom...is to enlarge the size of the economic pie," they write. "Evidence is mounting that this strategy of overall economic growth may be relatively ineffective in helping the disadvantaged members of the population and that a rising tide does not lift all boats evenly.... Policies that promote the accumulation of productive assets and skills across all income groups are also important."

The authors caution that metropolitan area data do not address the relationship between income disparities and mortality in rural areas.

Nevertheless, they contend, "Given the mortality burden associated with income inequality, business, private, and public sector initiatives to reduce economic inequalities should be a high priority."

The American Journal of Public Health is the official journal of the American Public Health Association.

Posted by the Center for the Advancement of Health, http://www.cfah.org. For information about the Center, contact Richard Hebert, rhebert@cfah.org, 202-387-2829.

###



Disclaimer: AAAS and EurekAlert! are not responsible for the accuracy of news releases posted to EurekAlert! by contributing institutions or for the use of any information through the EurekAlert system.