Dynamically health and religiousity interact on many levels. In 1997 Koenig divided this dynamic along direct and
indirect lines. Later, in 1998 Matthew,
McCullough and Larson divided these along three lines being; prevention, coping
and recovery. This division has perhaps helped in noting and measuring these
effects.
The positive effects of religiousity on health are evident in protective
factors, social dynamics and, types of behaviours (Rosner, 2001). These
benefits manifest themselves across a range of areas including lower rates
of physical and social problems (see Sherman, 2001). Some of these
benefits include; perceived health, improved functioning and medical
compliance along with, lower rates of anxiety and diseases such as coronary
disease (Sherman, 2001, p25). The difficulty with listing these positive
effects is that different studies are not all conducted in the same manner. The
exclusion of lifestyle factors is unable to be made across the board.
The difficulty
with measuring religiousity and health is often due to the inseparability of
lifestyle and belief. Where is the boundary drawn between what Koenig (1997)
labels indirect and direct effects? One particular study that crossed this
boundary effectively measured people who had the same lifestyle habits but
differing beliefs. This study (found in Matthews, McCullough and, Larson,
1998), found that among smokers those with religious commitments have lower
rates of abnormal diastolic pressure. The effect of religion is therefore
beyond that and inclusive of indirect factors.
Religiousity clearly has an influence on health. Despite complexity
in studying religiousity and health studies have been able to list effects,
influencers and dynamics. These can then be separated into specific areas of
influence which enables the specific effect and surrounding dynamics to be comprehended.
Koenig, H.
(1997) Is Religion Good for Your Health?
The Effects of Religion on Physical and Mental Health. The Haworth Pastoral
Press. New York.
Matthews, D., et al. (1998) ‘Religious commitment and health status: a review of the research
and the implications for family medicine’ in Arch Intern Med 7.
American Medical Association. Accessed online archintermed.com on the 15th
of May 2011
Rosner, F. (2001) ‘Religion and Medicine’
in Arch Intern Med 161. American
Medical Association. Accessed online archintermed.com on the 15th of
May 2011
Sherman, A.
(2001) ‘Research on Faith and Health: New Approaches to Old Questions’ in faith and health. Plante, T. and
Sherman, A. (eds.) The Guilford Press.
New York.
Most interesting post Astrid. Compelling theme. The question that emerges for me is, what are the dimensions or qualities of religiosity that are reflected in health and healing. How is human resilience in health and wellbeing matters affected by or determined by religious belief and practice as much as levels of social support and/or spiritual capital?
ReplyDeleteThis is a dynamic that has been addressed by many people, including the theorists above. It really depends where you look. I've read books by healers which include written testimonies by others about their instant physical healing, for example John Mellor's 2006 book 'Miracles from the dust'. On the other hand Koenig (1997-as referenced above) provides a social perspective, including; views on the body, social attitudes of the community etc. In short, I believe it is a matter of social and spiritual significance. For me this duel significance shows we have an intervening caring God who can heal us, but also a God who creates dynamics of health in social arenas as we were created for relationship (for example in Gensis 2:18 it says that "It is not good for man to be alone" and then, in verse 21, he creates Eve).
ReplyDeleteDid that provide a bit more clarity for you as to the causation?
..it really is a vast subject, if you have room in your degree there is a course RELN2119 'religion, health, death and dying' which is pretty interesting. It gives room for these topics to be investigated for some of the assessments.