Read on Twitter
A thread about a desperately needed public health approach to gambling. RTs appreciated!
"The public health approach involves defining and measuring the problem."
So have we defined and measured gambling-harm?
"The public health approach involves defining and measuring the problem."
So have we defined and measured gambling-harm?
IMHO, no, we have not yet defined or measured the problem.
There are significant issues with adult prevalence studies & our most reliable estimates (GB) were in 2007 & 2010.
And IMHO, prevalence is just one piece of the 1st puzzle.
A better question is how much harm is there?
There are significant issues with adult prevalence studies & our most reliable estimates (GB) were in 2007 & 2010.
And IMHO, prevalence is just one piece of the 1st puzzle.
A better question is how much harm is there?
How do we measure how much harm is caused by gambling?
First, we have to think about who can be harmed by gambling. It's not just adults. It's children too.
And it's not just children who gamble. It's the children of gamblers too.
(a neglected issue within a neglected issue)
First, we have to think about who can be harmed by gambling. It's not just adults. It's children too.
And it's not just children who gamble. It's the children of gamblers too.
(a neglected issue within a neglected issue)
The children of gamblers who suffer the most severe harms are worth considering due to harms such as neglect, abuse, and trauma.
https://twitter.com/kish_petal/status/1355323588040134660
Lost sleep at night because of worrying about family member's gambling.
At all: 1 in 20, 4.9%
And also...
https://twitter.com/kish_petal/status/1355323588040134660
Lost sleep at night because of worrying about family member's gambling.
At all: 1 in 20, 4.9%
And also...
these children are among the most at-risk of suffering the most severe harms from their own gambling in the future.
Thus suggesting that children affected others can suffer long-term harms - and for some, these may never end - stretching from the cradle to the grave.
Thus suggesting that children affected others can suffer long-term harms - and for some, these may never end - stretching from the cradle to the grave.
Once we appreciate that gambling-harm is experienced by non-gamblers & gamblers of all different shapes and sizes.
And that harm can be long-lasting (continuing on after the harmful gambling has stopped).
Naturally, we should then ask how significant the harm is?
And that harm can be long-lasting (continuing on after the harmful gambling has stopped).
Naturally, we should then ask how significant the harm is?
This is another way of asking what is the burden of disease.
When we think about the burden of disease, we have to think about both quality of life and loss of life due to mortality.
Quality of life impacts are particularly relevant for gambling-harm because...
When we think about the burden of disease, we have to think about both quality of life and loss of life due to mortality.
Quality of life impacts are particularly relevant for gambling-harm because...
suicidal ideation and attempts are far too common.
And sadly, far too often, individuals suffering gambling-harm can feel that death would be a better state than continuing to suffer gambling-harm.
Thus demonstrating the significance of the harms suffered by individuals.
And sadly, far too often, individuals suffering gambling-harm can feel that death would be a better state than continuing to suffer gambling-harm.
Thus demonstrating the significance of the harms suffered by individuals.
So how else have we not started a public health approach in the UK?
Well, drug use disorders have been measured in terms of burden of disease. (but not for gambling)
https://www.thelancet.com/cms/10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00195-6/attachment/bae7fa2f-f10b-4fe6-8e1d-685f6b616c5c/mmc1.pdf
But which is more significant in terms of harm, gambling-harm or drug-use?
Well, drug use disorders have been measured in terms of burden of disease. (but not for gambling)
https://www.thelancet.com/cms/10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00195-6/attachment/bae7fa2f-f10b-4fe6-8e1d-685f6b616c5c/mmc1.pdf
But which is more significant in terms of harm, gambling-harm or drug-use?
According to the only burden of disease studies (New Zealand and Australia), and according to the World Health Organisation (harm in adults only):
The burden of gambling-harm "is substantially higher
than harm attributed to drug dependence disorder."
https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/substance-use/the-epidemiology-and-impact-of-gambling-disorder-and-other-gambling-relate-harm.pdf?sfvrsn=5901c849_2
The burden of gambling-harm "is substantially higher
than harm attributed to drug dependence disorder."
https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/substance-use/the-epidemiology-and-impact-of-gambling-disorder-and-other-gambling-relate-harm.pdf?sfvrsn=5901c849_2
So why haven't we tried to measure the burden of gambling-harm in the UK? I have no idea. Do you?
If WHO says the harm from gambling>drug-use, why do health care professionals not learn or have access to material on gambling-harm? I have no idea. Do you?
https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/proposed/gid-qs10099
If WHO says the harm from gambling>drug-use, why do health care professionals not learn or have access to material on gambling-harm? I have no idea. Do you?
https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/proposed/gid-qs10099
