You don't need to be signed in to read BMJ Group Blogs, but you can register here to receive updates about other BMJ Group products and services via our Group site.

Richard Smith: A bad case of health

4 Jan, 10 | by BMJ Group

Richard Smith I’ve been puzzling for years over how to define health without making much progress, but I thought I might take a step forward by listening to a discussion on the radio about whether philosophy can help you live the good life. The answer seemed to be no: philosophy doesn’t have a wholly convincing answer to the supreme question of “Why not kill yourself – to escape this ‘vale of tears’? ” The questions of “How to live the good life?” and “What is health?” seem to me closely related (perhaps even the same question), and if three millennia of philosophers have got nowhere what hope have I?

But then I have the idea that we might go about defining health in the same way that we have defined disease – through a series of cases. The answer to the question may lie in minute particulars. Perhaps we can build up textbooks of health to match our textbooks of disease: we have thousands of pages to go before we sleep.

I should start with myself. I am healthy. I declare myself to be so.

“No you’re not,” my cardiologist might say if I had one. “Your arteries I know to be atherosclerosed. Your blood pressure and blood lipids are high. You’re overweight. You drink too much. And if you are healthy why are you taking five pills every night to ward off a heart attack or stroke?”

“You are getting very forgetful,” my neurologist might add, “and look at how your mother and grandmother demented when only 15 years older than you are now.”

“Your back doesn’t look too good to me,” says my rheumatologist, “and you seem just a little manic,” mutters my psychiatrist.
“Many of your teeth are filled, more will need filling soon, your breath is less than fresh, and your gums bleed when you brush your teeth,” says my dentist, having the last word.

All this I declare to be irrelevant. I am healthy.

Beginning with the physical side, I feel fine. Soon I will walk the dog. Later I may go for a run – perhaps two miles. Two days ago I walked from Sevenoaks to Hadlow, about 15 miles. If I wanted to walk the Pennine Way starting tomorrow I probably could, although I doubt if I could run a marathon without training. My bowels move regularly and with great satisfaction. My appetite is good, too good – but not unhealthily too good. I’m drinking Viennese coffee right now (and listening to Haydn string quartets – almost a definition of health in themselves) and tonight will chose between a claret and a Beaujolais, perhaps topping it off with an Islay whisky. Alcohol seems to be part of health for me, but I’d dispense with the alcohol before the Haydn (and even more so the Bach and Schubert).

I sleep well, although often waking for 30 minutes or so in what R S Thomas calls the “lean hours.” Those are the hours when we are most likely to die, our steroids are at their lowest ebb, and the vale of tears can feel too much. When editor of the BMJ I used to feel more stressed in those hours than I do now, but I don’t think a little fretting unhealthy, particularly for me, as for many, daylight brings energy and optimism.

It’s in my mind that I feel most healthy – despite the forgetfulness. I’m reading Anne Enright’s “Gathering” and think it magnificent, although it describes yet another dysfunctional family. I’m also reading the “Odyssey,” “After the Ice,” and “The Classical World.” After listening to the philosophers and writing this (which I’m much enjoying even if you are not – and there is perhaps no you, which again doesn’t matter) I plan to read Betrand Russell’s account of Schopenhauer, who evidently hated life, and find Lucretius’s poem “De rerum natura.” Most importantly I have more gratifying work to do than I can ever get done plus the chance to be diverted, as I am now. Put all this together with the music and for me this is close to the heart of being healthy.

“But,” a reader might think, “this is all about him. Can you be healthy without others?” I think I might be able to be so, and I’d rather be alone than be at a party – despite being regarded by all as being a rather extreme extravert. But I’m healthier, I’m sure, (and health just like disease can’t be a binary state) because I have a wife sleeping upstairs, who although regularly exasperated by me loves me as you might an old dog or coat; a son who loves being a chef; another son who is at Machu Pichu and has just been bitten by a spider; and a daughter asleep in East Sheen. These are my children, whom I love, but they are them not me – which seems to me important for health. I may have fulfilled my Darwinian destiny of fathering children, but I have childless friends who seem healthy to me.

And I have a goodly smattering of friends across the world, whom I’m very glad are there but whom I don’t see that often. I have 256 friends on Facebook and a host of “colleagues and contacts.” If I died tomorrow – at 57 – I think a fair few would turn up for my funeral. These friends seem important for health but not as important as a life of the mind and work. Seeing death, by the way, as normal and providing a much needed narrative structure to life seems essential for health, although fear of death and health may be compatible.

The fact that I can afford my Viennese coffee, claret, Haydn, and books, live in a warm house where I have my own basement study, and have no financial worries seems very important for health. Poverty might break me, although I’m very attracted to the idea of shedding as many things as possible and wonder (but no more than that) about committing myself to a year without buying anything new apart from food and medicines. It’s also important that I don’t expect to be blown up or robbed today, and if I want to catch a train to Scotland it will run roughly on time. A functioning society is important for my health.

But what about the credit crunch, the coming rise in unemployment, the gross injustices in the world, and the overheating of the planet, which is likely to leave a fucked world for my grandchildren? These things detract from my state of health, but I’m blessed by Eliot’s observation that “human kind cannot stand very much reality.” My innate selfishness and lack of imagination, shared with most other humans, insulate me in my healthy state, but I have an unselfish, fingerless friend with severe scleroderma who may in her unselfishness and need to make a difference be healthier. Truly health has many forms.

Richard Smith is a former BMJ editor.

By submitting your comment you agree to adhere to these terms and conditions
  • http://unhub.com/mikey3982 Mike Baldwin

    Lovely post – my lunchtime read. I enjoyed it. For me health is a complex bag of constructions and narratives. One thing that is well demonstrated here is your ability (and resources) to enjoy yourself. Surely this is what I think should remain in the core of being healthy.

  • Julian Sheather

    Many thanks for a delightful post. A little bit of me worries though that there might be risks associated with conflating a good life with a healthy life – although you may be using them as interchangeable metaphors for something less easy to define. While nobody would want to deny that your friend with severe scleroderma leads a good life, to say it is healthy makes it difficult to acknowledge that some part of our admiration stems from the fact that she leads it in the face of her illness. The presence of the illness somehow makes the sense of her virtue stronger. There is also the counter-possibility that conflating a good life with a healthy life could lead to the medicalisation of all human goods, putting all of our lives in the hands of doctors. And then where would we be?

  • http://www.scire-ausl.bo.it/ Danilo di Diodoro, Bologna, Italy

    Thank you Richard, for such a wide vision of health. It sounds comforting. It’s really true that we should consider ourselves healthy, even when we have to take drugs, when we wake up in the night, when we drink more alcohol than we should, when we realize we are getting older than yesterday. In spite of doctors, we’ll consider ourselves healthy, till we’ll be able to enjoy our lives, and probably we should appreciate much more our health and happiness (and our often disregarded wealth). Your post helps us to do it. Anyway, please, tell us if you really will commit yourself to a year without buying anything new. I’m ready to follow you…

  • Richard Smith

    Julian’s points have made me think, but unfortunately my thinking has not got very far. I hadn’t intended to suggest that the good life and health were the same thing, although I did raise the possibility within parentheses.

    I share Julian’s reluctance to conflate the too, but I find it hard to be clear on the difference. He uses the example of my friend with severe scleroderma as way to distinguish the two, and maybe comparing her with me might be a way to unravel the two concepts. My suggestion that she is healthy has nothing to do with admiration, although I do admire her. It’s more a reluctance to brand her (and I’m interested that I use such a powerful word as brand) as unhealthy. She is arguably much less healthy than me in that she is constantly in the hands of doctors, whereas I’m not. And I think that she does lead a better life than me in that she is much more committed in her concern for others than I am. So perhaps “health” and the “good life” are not the same thing, but I feel a discomfort in basing the difference on the fact that my friend is much more often in the hands of doctors than I am: this seems to bring us back to health being about the absence of disease (or doctors).

    But perhaps Julian gets to the nub of the problem when he suggests I may be trying to relate two concepts neither of which can be well defined. This is what Alex Jadad, Laura O’Grady, and I wrote about defining health in the Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice (1) (which annoyingly you can’t access for free):

    “Despite our attempts to define health we have to agree with a philosopher-psychiatrist who recently said to one of us:
    “It’s impossible to define health. It’s like trying to describe time. It can’t be done. It’s a ‘higher order’ question.” Most of the important things in life—love, freedom, charity—can’t be operationally defined, but it’s still worth attempting descriptions to deepen our understanding of these virtues. Health may be especially important to try and describe in that we are devoting huge amounts of resources to its pursuit. Are we using those resources—which might be devoted to other benefits including international aid, education, housing, and the arts—wisely?”

    (1) In search of health (p 743-744)
    Richard Smith, Laura O’Grady, Alejandro R. Jadad
    Published Online: Jul 23 2009 10:19AM
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2009.01263.

  • Rhona MacDonald

    Hello. I am the fingerless person with severe scleroderma that my friend, Richard Smith, refers to. I would like to share my thoughts with you. First and foremost, I am me. I always have been and I always will be. So although troublesome and at times hugely frustrating, my illness and its consequences, do not define me. I have certainly tried not to let them change me. In fact, I had nine fingers and was relatively well when I first met Richard 10 years ago. So, Ok, now I have no fingers left, am two stone lighter, and spend a considerable amount of time in hospital, but I am sure that all those who know me will agree that the essence of me is still the same. I still care
    (probably too much), still fight against injustices, still campaign against everything I consider “wrong”, and still annoy a lot of people with my stubbornness and determination.

    My goal is always to keep going, and functioning, no matter what. My motto, derived through a lot of blood, sweat, and tears is to “accept, adapt, and carry on.” Ok, so sometimes the accept stage comes a bit later but whatever, I carry on. My “normal” constantly changes. After each episode, treatment, or operation, my subsequent state becomes the new normal, the new point around which I adapt, so I can carry on doing what I do: doing what makes me, well, me! I would never describe myself in terms of my health. Others may think that I am sickly, ill, or unhealthy. But to me, I am just me. So for me, healthiness (like happiness) is a state of mind, a relative, subjective entity that cannot be measured by hard clinical outcomes or biochemical markers.

    And incidentally, I wouldn’t describe myself as selfless either. I love to help, care, and fight for peoples rights. Such action has always been my purpose in life and is what drives me. But if you think about it, my motives for my actions may be rather selfish: helping people gives me great satisfaction and helps to keep me going! In other words, keeps me happy. And isn’t happiness the basis of what most people consider good “health”?

  • Richard Smith

    The capacity to adapt, as Rhona describes, is fundamental to any concept of health.

  • Julian Sheather

    Perhaps because, howsoever we define it, health is such an important human good, it has smuggled a great deal more than something like ‘species-typical biological functioning’ under its covers. Richard’s disinclination to describe Rhona – Hi Rhona, I figured it was you – as unhealthy might stem from his suspicion that there might be a moral residue in the word, that it is not entirely a value-neutral description. It is also obvious that without some – probably undefinable – minimum of health, a minimum that will vary from person to person, no other goods are achievable. Some degree of health is therefore a necessary condition for a good life, but clearly not a sufficient one. If Rhona will forgive me for continuing to point to her as an example, whatever dimension in life it is that makes her remarkable, it cannot be reduced to her health. It is, as she quite properly points out, who she is, and I get a feeling that both Richard and I feel equally uncomfortable about reducing that to a medical index. And Rhona I hope you will forgive me one last comment. Because an action makes you feel good doesn’t make it selfish. Someone who gets pleasure from helping others is less selfish than someone whose pleasures centre solely on themselves.

  • Zoe Ballantyne

    Reading this charming article and the comments made me wish to share a quote, from Iris Murdoch, which has stuck with me. Although it gives a description of happiness I feel the same idea could just as usefully be taken up in our consideration of what or how it is to be healthy.

    ‘Happiness is a matter of one’s most ordinary everyday mode of consciousness being busy and lively and unconcerned with self’

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
BMJ blogs homepage

BMJ.com

Helping doctors make better decisions. Visit site



Creative Comms logo

Latest from BMJ.com

Latest from BMJ.com

Latest from BMJ.com podcasts

Latest from BMJ.com podcasts

Blogs linking here

Blogs linking here