EDITORIAL | VOLUME 5, ISSUE 5 , E235, MAY 01, 2020 Published: May, 2020 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S2468-2667(20)30097-9 As of April 21, the coronavirus outbreak has infected more than 2·3 million people and taken 162 956 lives—35 884 in the USA, 24 114 in Italy, 20 852 in Spain, 20 233 in France, 16 509 in the UK, 5209 in Iran, 4642 in China—all underestimates most probably. Beyond these numbers are people, families, communities, societies that have been affected in unprecedented ways.

This post argues for the application of the social determinants frameworks to the problems of mental health. What this post misses or underemphasizes are the opportunities to change through social policy some of the social circumstances that help shape the likelihood of mental health challenges.

Policy changes can be key to both transforming health in a community and helping to eliminate inequities. But when policies aren’t created or enforced with equity in mind, they may perpetuate these disparities – or even amplify them.

I hope this posting will encourage you to look at this site in a different way and get involved. Reach me through the site. Make a personal posting, such as I have done, on the site. Suggest a topic for a Zoom meeting.

A potential resolution is on the horizon, but for COVID-19 vaccination to work, people need to be willing to take the vaccines. Like many social scientists working in the fields of vaccine uptake and disaster response and recovery, we anticipated that widespread acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines would be a critical issue—an issue upon which the success of the vaccination campaign, and the solution to the pandemic, would hinge. That is what we are now seeing today.

Immune evasion, a virological game changer is as important as the arrival of SARS-CoV-2 variants. Dealing with immune evasion will require a re-evaluation of public health strategies, and the creation of a new, evidence-based social contracts.

This is the most recent revision of my PowerPoint about “PACEs and the social sciences”. It reflects some of the new information about PACEs and the social sciences.

Thank you for sharing this! It's a valuable compilation of research and information. I noticed on Slide 11 that the change of ACEs to PACEs doesn't make sense in the context of that slide (to me). I understood the point though! It would be super interesting to see a version of the Three Realms of ACEs document that includes a variety of positives of each of those areas!

Thank you for your comment. The information on slide 11 was an attempt by me to bridge the gap between the ACEs study and the trauma informed responses that have developed. In Dr. Burke Harris’ Ted Talk she focused on the predictability of ACEs for individuals, which is not supported by the ACEs study, and her idea of ACEs becoming a movement, which was more in line with the ACEs study. When following up on her Ted Talk and in reading her book THE DEEPEST WELL I was able to follow her...

Much evidence has been published supporting Pender's call for social determinants to be considered as key in understanding and treating mental illness. The Lancet Commission on global mental health and sustainable development stated that research consistently shows a strong association between social disadvantage and poor mental health. The COVID-19 pandemic has further focused attention on the importance of social determinants in causing both mental and physical illness.

The IFSW a non-governmental organization in consultative status with the Economic and Social Council issued the following statement to the UN 60th Session of the Commission for Social Development. The IFSW encompasses 146 social work associations, representing over 5 million social workers worldwide (IFSW, 2021, IFSW Statement on the Draft on the Right to Development). The mission of IFSW is to advocate for social justice, human rights, and social development through plans, actions,...

Are you interested in learning about new research that integrates the latest brain and social science?