Talking About Health; Why Health Communication Matters

Does drinking diet soda cause osteoporosis?

October 11, 2010

As I observe in the chapter, ‘What are my risk factors?’, we have a lot of competing goals in life that put being healthy in competition with other things going on. I was attending a conference and met a graduate student who was on crutches. I asked her what happened. She said that she had a fractured pelvis and it was blamed on osteoporosis. She told me that her osteoporosis was caused by drinking too many diet sodas. I decided that I would find a research review article about osteoporosis to share with my undergraduate health message design class. I did. And it reported that the evidence is inconclusive about a link between diet soda and osteoporosis. There was a collective sigh of relief from my students about that statement. Until I asked them, “How would we draw a conclusive link between drinking diet soda and osteoporosis? Why isn’t the research finding considered to be conclusive?”

And so, we launched into another discussion about self-report data and relationships based on having a condition versus not having the condition. “How much diet soda do you drink each day?” I asked. Some were able to answer, while others said, “It depends…” “On what?” I asked. “How hot it is outdoors.” “How much money I have.” “…you know.”

“I do.” imgp1303 I know that we often build an understanding about health conditions based on asking people questions. As a form of communication, asking people health questions is both an art and a science. How do we ask a question in a way that someone can give us an accurate and complete answer? If asked about how much diet soda you drink on an average each day, how do you decide to respond if you only drink diet soda when it is hot? Do you say, “none,” because it is winter? Do you respond “less than one a day” because you divide it out and even though you may drink a six-pack a day in the summer, summer is only really two months long…so it seems to average out to…less than one a day?

Trying to answer a question about how much diet soda has been consumed for a survey that may later be used to relate to participant responses about whether they had been diagnosed with osteoporosis or not may give some evidence to support a relationship. But the evidence is not…strong. If there are enough survey participants to consider all those who consume large quantities of diet soda and divide them into two groups–those with osteoporosis and those without osteoporosis, one might find that there are significantly more with the condition than without… This provides another kind of evidence.

If we think about what bones are made from…and we take diet soda and soak a bone in it…either or both may also provide some evidence that drinking large quantities of diet soda weakens one’s bones and contributes to osteoporosis. But we are not going to have a medical research study in which we give a randomly selected group large quantities of diet soda in order to see if their bones become weak… So, yes, this story of a student whose doctor was willing to tell her, “Stop drinking a six-pack or more of diet soda a day. In fact, stop drinking diet soda–period–and maybe we can prevent more bone deterioration,” imgp13045 suggests that her doctor used the evidence of a patient before him to guide a recommendation that the published medical research says was based on inconclusive data… And I say, “Let’s be truthful about what we mean when we talk about the data and the evidence. Let’s be willing to consider the ethical boundaries of research studies. Let’s realize that ‘inconclusive data’ sometimes means that a clinical trial, the gold standard of medical research, is not appropriate and so, there will never be “conclusive data”…

Why don’t we talk about ‘health’ when communicating about our health?

June 11, 2010

A lot of attention is given to patient stories. Most online health sites have a link to patient stories. Why? Often because the stories make content more ‘real’ than numbers and statistics alone do.

When we tell our stories, we can describe how we feel, what matters in our life, things about family, what kinds of things we do for fun, and how we earn a living. Implicitly, we talk about these things because we value our good health, and being healthy comprises one important goal. But being healthy often needs to be adapted to our family, recreational, and occupational lives. And so, we talk about these topics, implicitly hoping for conversation about how to adapt to possible health risks while sustaining these other areas of our lives…

How might communication–including access to the internet–relate to health disparities?

butterfly-picture May 19, 2010

Health disparities…differences in the health status of some of us compared to others–have many links to communication. We could place more emphasis on efforts to address some of these as part of health care reform.

One communication contributor to health disparities is a lack of equal access to health information. In particular, a digital divide has been identified as leading to differences in people’s awareness and understanding of ways to promote health and treatments for various diseases.

The digital divide has been discussed for years in terms of the affordability and availability of computers. This contributed to programs to increase access to computers in public schools and public libraries. Access to sources of health information is an important goal–one that may be enhanced by improving the nation’s infrastructure. I was struck by a colleague’s recent revelation on our way to a meeting in a rural community in Pennsylvania. He said that he seldom uses the internet from home. In his location, internet access still depends on the use of a dial-up modem. The slow and painful effort to get online just isn’t worth it. Libraries and schools in his area suffer from the same challenges.

The effort to reduce the digital divide by increasing access to online health resources is a good start but reminds me of the ‘just build it and they will come’ fallacy. Once we get on the computer, and we use our favorite search engines to look for health information, how do we decide whether the information is useful and relates to us? How do we understand the information? How do we harness resources to apply the information when we do understand it? That includes having sites for care and providers for care. …that includes having the ability to pay for care, time off to receive care, and transportation to sites for care.

Health disparities becomes a communication issue with many facets and many audiences to consider. If we approach health disparities as only an issue relating to access to information, we risk placing blame for continuing and/or growing disparities on people experiencing the disparities.

In a world where access to health information was supported by access to services, products, and care–our individual perceptions still may lead to disparities. Understanding related to the information and choices to apply the content depends on some knowledge of health terms and ability to translate the metaphors so often used to commmunicate in health information. Understanding also depends on the cultural and social lens through which we view the information. And on our own goals–including where we place responsibility for health.

Some of us assume more personal responsibility for our health than others. Some of us believe more in the role of family history and genetics than others. Some of us believe that the environment plays a greater role in our health than our own behavior. And some of us believe in a role for spirituality and religious faith. When we combine these into our health perspective, sometimes health disparities emerge… Can erasing a digital divide make a difference in these issues? Perhaps if we communicate about them directly, online and in other settings where we talk about health.

How will health care reform change how our country communicates about health?

118_1806 May 12, 2010

Watching my 5 year old granddaughter play youth soccer was great fun. Such energy. Such excitement. Such effort. Everyone running toward the ball and doing their best to get in a good kick. Sometimes in their enthusiasm, they lost sight of which goal they should be aiming for and may even accidentally kick the ball into the other team’s space. It’s a bit like health care reform in the U.S.

Keep ‘health’ in health communication… this is one of my mantras. I remind myself of it when thinking about the value of my own health communication research and the value of work that I review. It reminds me to consider, “how will the work make a difference in the health of someone?” Will it, for example, help someone to make a decision about which treatment to choose, which food to eat, how important rest and fun can be for health? Will it help someone to talk with family members about health history or to disclose to family members, doctors, or others important information about health status? Will it enable others to provide emotional or tangible social support to keep to a health regimen? …and so on.

So when I listen to conversation about health care reform, I am struck by several trends. First, there is so much fear and anger in the discourse. My mom, for example, will be having hip replacement surgery this summer. She is in her late 70s and on Medicare. She is convinced that her doctor will be paid very little for her surgery because of health care reform. She is also fearful that if she doesn’t act now, she may not be able to even find a doctor who will do the surgery soon…because the doctors won’t be paid well and won’t accept patients on Medicare.

We know quite a bit about fear appeals in communication. And sure enough, what I hear suggests to me that for many, the talk about health care reform and the actual reform itself does not make the efficacy of the actions clear. How will this reform be an effective response in both promoting ‘health’ of citizens and in limiting the runaway expenses? How might each one of us feel more confident or gain the ability to make decisions about our own health based on the reform? Made to feel fearful, many become angry and direct it toward the source.

Second, there has been too little direct translation of how health care reform will benefit health. Health illiteracy and science illiteracy often provide a way to explain our lack of understanding about health issues. Health insurance illiteracy is a whole new ball game. Most of us have some experience with car insurance or home owner insurance or life insurance, so we fall back on those as a way to understand health care insurance and health care reform. We need some help here. We need to know what ideas from other insurance contexts apply and what ideas don’t apply.

In some cases, if you get ticketed for speeding or running a red light, it shows up as higher premiums on your car insurance for awhile. Generally, we think that buying life insurance when we are younger rather than older will be less expensive. And if we fail to prune the tall tree near our home and it falls onto our roof, causing us to file a claim–some increase in our premium isn’t too surprising. So how do these ideas relate to health care reform? And if they don’t, why not?

Third, the optimistic outcome relating to health care reform and changes for how our country communicates about health is that we all become wiser about how politics relates to health… So we participate in the political process with our vote in elections and our voice in debate… not just in overcrowded town hall meetings but in the online forums available to us through access to our representatives where we ask questions and persist until we have answers… often and not just when something ‘big’ seems to be in the wind.

In short, we need to keep our eye on the ball and the goal, and make sure that those who represent us do the same…

What does the “food pyramid” tell us about health communication and ‘old science’, ‘new science’, ‘conflicting science’, and no science’?

143_07811 May 3, 2010

I cannot recall the first time I heard about the ‘food pyramid’ but it was decades ago. The United States Department of Agriculture [USDA] online site at http://www.mypyramid.gov/ provides an overview of the research in this area. Right under the image of the pyramid on the homepage, the follow sentence is bolded: “One size doesn’t fit all.” Over to the left of the pyramid, the heading, ‘Specific Audiences,’ includes ‘Preschoolers’, ‘Kids’, ‘Pregnant & Breastfeeding’, and ‘General Population’–giving us a sense of groups whose needs vary. Skimming through some of the information, it doesn’t take long to affirm one of the points that I make in my book, Talking about health…

When communicating about health, sometimes there is no science to guide prevention guidelines, diagnosis, or treatment. A quick review of the history of the food pyramid shows that even before vitamins and minerals had been discovered, the USDA provided dietary guidelines–the first time appearing in 1894. The first food pyramid was published in the 1960s. The goal is to help us know how to talk about food and nutrition without having to be an expert. So food is divided into groups and we gain a sense of how much of each group adds up to a more versus less healthy diet.

Often, what we know in any area relating to health is based on ‘old science’ that we learned in school several years or even decades ago–forgetting the simple fact that times change. New knowledge is generated everyday. If asked, we know this truth. The trick is to apply it when we are communicating about health. ‘New science’ may support the ‘old science’ or build on its core idea. ‘New science’ may also conflict with ‘old science’ creating doubt and indecision. It is helpful when talking about health to consider the ‘age’ of the science we are using and also the characteristics of the people the science is based on. As suggested by the latest food pyramid, when science takes into account the ‘age’ of and audience, the food pyramid looks slightly different for different groups…

What is the meaning of uncertainty when it comes to illness?

April 21, 2010

Communication and uncertainty go hand-in-hand. Many of our theories in communication focus on uncertainty as a reason to communicate. In these cases, we usually focus on communicating to reduce uncertainy. We talk about how we use cues from others–such as how they dress, the hair style they wear, the way that they gesture, and even how fast or slow they talk and their accent–to decide how much we are like another person. In these ways, we are using nonverbal information to reduce our uncertainty about talking with someone.

In already established relationships, we also experience uncertainty. Relational uncertainty may happen because we don’t know if our friend or family member is being ‘honest’ about whether they think we should take the job, go back to school, or in a million little day-to-day situations–like what to wear, what to eat, or what to do with our free time. We often try to reduce our uncertainty in these sitautions as well by communicating. ‘What do you want to do?’ ‘What are you doing to wear?’ ‘Do you think I should take this job?’ ‘What about the fact that we can’t sell the house right now?’ ‘They didn’t offer me any moving costs–can we afford it?’ So relational uncertainty emerges in a thousand different ways as part of having relationships. And it is a challenge to imagine how to balance the relationship needs and well, live our lives. So what happens when into the mix we introduce illness?

A diagnosis, whether it is terminal or not–as suggested by one of the participants in my last post–may spark the motivation to communicate. The diagnosis might be for a chronic condition such as heart disease, high blood pressure, high cholesterol, diabetes, or even HIV. It might be a broken leg or a sprained neck. Into each and every one of these and possibly thousands of other diagnoses enters uncertainty. “Illness uncertainty” is a big part of the uncertainy. But “relational uncertainty” is introduced into a diagnosis as well. To improve our communication about health, keeping both kinds of uncertainty in mind may help.

A diagnosis often leads us to want to reduce illness uncertainty about such things as ‘what is it,’ ‘what does it mean for my life,’ ‘how long will it last,’ ‘how will we treat it,’ and a host of other questions that may lead us to seek information to reduce our illness uncertainty. Sometimes, there will be no answers as we seek information, and so we have to “manage” our illness uncertainty by knowing that we have done what we could to answer our questions and perhaps by joining support groups online or in other ways putting ourselves in a position to keep up-to-date with any new information. What we don’t often think about is that in some situations, “increasing” our illness uncertainty may offer the most hope. As an emotion, hope let’s us look forward to a future that is a positive one and where we see ourselves able to achieve important goals. When we do not have certain information about our illness, that may provide a path toward hope if we frame it based on such comments as, “the doctor told me, ‘I don’t see any expiration date on you'”,–meaning that there is no answer to a question framed as, ‘how long do I have to live’.

In some of my past research, I have talked about the acute phase following a spinal cord injuury. During this phase, patients and families often are most reassured by communication that increases their uncertainty about the course of the diagnosis. Doctors not knowing whether a patient will walk again is a hopeful thing. At the same time that the patient and family experience hope related to increasing their illness uncertainty, they may experience sadness and fear and anger about a sense of increasing relational uncertainty. This is a case where friends and family may be very supportive in the beginning but seem to be less so over time. Communication may need to be more direct to reveal what is happening. If a friend asks, ‘what can I do for you?’ and the ansswer is always the same–‘nothing’–the friend may quit asking and quit coming around. There are many reasons that we don’t ask for help–and we can discuss those in the coming days–but if we remember that it may increase a friend’s uncertinaty about the relationship if we say ‘nothing’ and we obviously need help. And their lack of helping when we obviously need help may in turn increase our uncertainty about them. And both may contribute to illness uncertainty in negative ways–relating to a lack of tangible and emotional support–perhaps we can stop the spiral and communicate about our health and our relationship in more fruitful ways… not always to reduce uncertainty… but at least in ways to manage it.

What do you say to a loved one just diagnosed with terminal cancer?

122_0562 April 13, 2010

Maureen Keeley and Julie Yingling are authors of the award-winning book, Final conversations: Helping the living and dying talk to each other. Through interview data collected from some of us who have gone through the experience of knowing that a close relative has received a terminal diagnosis, Maureen and Julie provide a table of contents that introduce the important topics they address in the book. Among these–telling our loved one, “I love you.” While saying the words is important, giving clear messages that leave no doubt about the love that has been shared is emphasized in the authors’ summary of what interviewees told them. Telling a parent that she is loved, that you will do your best to live the kind of life she would be proud of, and that you are grateful for the time you had to to share together…these are messages that we want to say explicitly while we have time to do so.

Keeley and Yingling remind of us that a terminal diagnosis does not mean that your loved one is dead–yet. He or she probably wants to go on taking care of everyday business as long as possible. So when your loved one says that he wants to hear about your life, he really means it. There may not be a lot of opportunities left for you to tell him about the everyday and ordinary parts of living. What did you do at work? Who did you talke to? What did you eat when you went out to dinner last night? Where are you planning to go on vacation this year?

Simple joys…baking cookies for a loved one and eating them with a cup of herbal tea or coffee. Sitting near a window that looks onto a view that is a favorite one. One of my aunts that I felt very close to died from ovarian cancer. I remember her wanting to continue to do some work from the office…right up until she died. Her employer brought some of the bookkeeping to the house and she worked on it when she felt like it. We didn’t say to her, “Why are you spending your time that way?” She wanted to do it. That was enough. An uncle who died from lung cancer wanted to go on a camping trip. It meant getting a trailer that he could be comfortable in so that my aunt could take him on that final campout.

It also may be the time to talk through some things that have been avoided in the past. We don’t have just positive feelings, even about the relatives that we feel close to. A conflict long buried might be on our minds. An invitation to a loved one such as, “Do you want to talk about it?” may open the door to clear the air. We shouldn’t force the invitation, but provide a space for a conversation that many times will be a relief to the living and the dying.

The authors also emphasize how important it can be to say that a connection to a loved one lives on…even when they do not.

What is Dr. Besser telling us when he says, “There is no ‘evidence’ that herbs work for a cold”?

March 30, 2010

Spring is in the air and hopefully, you are not suffering from a spring cold. Or allergies. This morning on, “Good Morning America,” Dr. Besser talked about health information and social media–offering cautions about ‘advice’ that might appear on Facebook or other outlets, or health information sent via tweets.

After offering the general advice to be careful about what we believe, he focused on an example relating to the use of an herb to fight a cold. He made the statement I used in the title for this post: “There is no evidence that herbs work for a cold.” O.K. What’s wrong with that statement?

From a health communication perspective, this kind of comment is made often. If Dr. Besser or another source of the comment is someone we trust and believe to be an expert, we may accept the comment without further thought. We are usually not expert in health. Not surprisingly, we look to experts in health to guide our understanding.

But here is the problem I have with such statements. They do nothing to help us become more competent in making decisions for ourselves about health information. Dr. Besser could explain that there is no evidence and also explain what he means by evidence. For him, evidence = scientific data. Those numbers are usually the result of carefully conducted clinical trials. Those carefully conducted clinical trials cost — well a lot of money. And relatively few dollars are spent on research to study complementary and alternative medical practices–such as the use of herbs to fight colds.

The traditional approaches to health in the U.S. are prescription and over-the-counter drugs, and surgery, and the use of medical devices–many device relate to surgery and others that boost some of our ability to manage our own health. There are many expensive funded studies to evaluate the effects of these approaches. Based on the results, evidence is published and then disseminated to guide our doctors’ knowledge and our care.

We should realize that the research by pharmaceutical companies sometimes looks at herbs and works to understand how they might work to help or harm human health. Finding that an herb works may lead the drug company to produce synthetic versions of the herb and conduct research to see how they work. After all, we and our doctors do not live in the era of Dr. Quinn, Medicine Woman and cannot go into nearby woods to pick herbs to make teas or other potions to heal us. Medicine generally needs products that can be sold in mass quantities.

So, what does a lack of evidence mean when it comes to Dr. Besser’s statement? It means that no scientific clinical trials have shown the use of the ‘natural’ herb to be effective in reducing the effects of a cold.

Dr. Besser’s statment is not considering that your friend, your neighbor, or a thousand friends and neighbors on a social media site have used the herb and tell their stories about how it worked for them. It is not addressing the fact that we often trust the stories of others as ‘evidence.’ But it is not the same kind of evidence as science would provide. That is something he did not say. From a health communication perspective, we want to know this to help us better understand health information.

He also did not say whether the herb being promoted for a cold is one that drug companies may have or may be studying in some form. From a health communication perspective, we also want to know this to help us better understand health information…

Should we ask our doctors about antibiotics?

138_07301 February 27, 2010

On the ABC evening news this past week, Dr. Besser advised the audience, “Do not ask your doctor for antibiotics.” He provided the evidence to support the claim that asking for antibiotics greatly increases the chances that a doctor will prescribe antibiotics to a patient. He went on to explain that antibiotics are designed to treat bacteria. They do not treat a virus.

I would reframe this conversation. From the doctor’s side, if a patient asks for antibiotics to treat a virus, this seems like a great opportunity for the doctor to explain, “Antibiotics do not work to treat a virus, and your cold is caused by a virus.”

The advantages of this approach include the chance to improve a patient’s health literacy. We can increase our own understanding about health if our doctors take the opportunity to use these teachable moments to ‘teach’ us.

Another advantage is that we feel able to ask a question about our treatment without concern that our doctor might prescribe something unncessary. One likely unintended of Dr. Besser’s advice to not ask for an antibiotic is that it may lead us to wonder, ‘how often would a doctor prescribe something to me just because I asked for it?’

The medical research supports the conclusion that in the U.S., direct-to-consumer advertising leads patients to ask for tests and prescriptions that increases the likelihood that a doctor will order the tests and/or prescribe the medication. So, like in the case of antibiotics, when a patient asks — a doctor is more likely to prescribe.

But is this always a bad thing? We have decades of research to support the conclusion that the time demands on a doctor and the ever growing body of research about available therapies for various conditions = less chance to consider all options in each situation. To participate in our care, we should ask about treatments we may know about. Just asking may prompt the doctor to consider a path that wasn’t the one being considered. Just because it is considered doesn’t mean it should be selected. Sometimes, however, the doctor might judge it to be a ‘good idea.’

If each time a patient asks a doctor for treatment that is not a good match to the health condition, a doctor feels compelled to prescribe the treatment, it will lead to further waste in the health care system. We know that a doctor is not likely to follow the path a patient suggests if the doctor believes it will be harmful…at least, in the short term. But with antiobiotics as a case to illustrate, we want our doctors to think about our well-being in the long term. And if our request doesn’t make sense, take a minute to tell us why it doesn’t.

This approach means that doctors and patients can keep talking, and that their communication might benefit health in the short term and the long term, and the cost of health care as well.

Do we want doctors to tell us if we have advanced cancer?

117_1755 February 18, 2010

In 2002, Hisako Kakai published an article in the journal, Health Communication, about preferences for disclosure of a cancer diagnosis. Dr. Kakai indicates that in Japan, a direct communication style is usually preferred when it comes to disclosing one’s personal diagnosis of cancer. In other words, people want to be told they have cancer. However, an indirect communication style with no disclosure, or an ambiguous disclosure to the patient was preferred for a family member. The article raises many interesting communication and ethical issues.

A serious diagnosis raises the question, ‘how do we deal with uncertainty?’ Communication plays a big role. It points to the reality that we often are not good with dealing with uncertainty. We frame uncertainty as ‘bad’ and let uncertainty overtake everything good that might be going on in our lives. This relates to how we communicate about a serious health condition. It also relates to how we communicate about the economy, about security, and about an endless number of issues that equal being — human.

The message communicated often to us is, ‘work hard and it will pay off’ — with payoff crossing a spectrum from health, relationships, and wealth. The message, ‘life is uncertain. Work hard at your relationships and school and work, and take satisfaction in the fact that you worked hard’ — is communicated less often, if at all. And it shows up in our inability to deal with uncertainty, our obsession with …reducing the uncertainty.

Should the goal in communicating be to reduce uncertainty? When it comes to our health, that may not always be the best aim. If we can learn to manage the uncertainty of a diagnosis, we may be better able to live our lifes as someone living with cancer or heart disease or diabetes. If we make the diagnosis a more integral part of our being and identity, we may communicate in ways that define us to others as being disabled rather than living with a disability, diabetic rather than managing life while living with diabetes, and so on.

Even more surprising, when we focus on managing our uncertainty as a part of life, we may even discover that there are times when we communicate to increase uncertainty. Instead of being certain that our future, our health, our well-being are uncertain and that is a bad thing, we can use uncertainty as a way to promote hope. In our own research, Ben Cairns and I found that this was particularly important for people who have newly experienced spinal cord injuries and their family members. ‘Will she walk again? Will he be able to do things for himself? Can she sit up on her own? Can he feed himself?’ Not knowing offers people living with the injury and their families and friends the hope that they might do these things again.

Communicating to increase uncertainty about a diagnosis thus gives some time to adapt to a diagnosis. And that may be the best and more ethical way to communicate about an advanced cancer diagnosis as well. Not telling so that a patient does not know a true diagnosis may seem to offer a way to manage a serious diagnosis and thus to reduce uncertainty. Telling and acknowledging that the diagnosis is serious, even very serious, but that predicting exactly when the end-of-life will happen is uncertain may give some time to adapt to the diagnosis and some hope that important things that have not been said can be…

…a lesson in Dr. Maureen Keeley’s award-winning book, Final Conversations that has been shown to be so important for those who know that they are dying and the loved ones they will leave behind.