As I think about the critical health issues that should be dominating policy and public debate as we approach the federal election, a photograph from Canada keeps recurring in my mind's eye.
It was taken by photojournalist Mark Blinch on 7 May, and shows a huge storm of fire and dark smoke billowing behind a solitary vehicle on the highway near Fort McMurray, Alberta.
The apocalyptic image speaks powerfully to the vulnerability of humanity as extreme weather events become ever more common — as people now are experiencing right around the globe, from Paris to Texas to Tasmania, among other places.
It also encapsulates why so much of our public dialogue around health and health policy — particularly during elections — is deeply unhealthy, undermining the likelihood of current and future generations experiencing good health.
When politicians and journalists speak about 'health' in an election context, they invariably are referring to healthcare, and usually hospitals at that.
However, the health of individuals and communities is the result of many factors, of which access to healthcare is just one determinant. When we focus so much on healthcare, we limit the possibilities for addressing some of those wider determinants.
Evidence suggests that healthcare services contribute somewhere around 20 per cent to overall health, while broader social and economic factors account for most of the rest, according to Professor Fran Baum, Director of the Southgate Institute of Health, Society and Equity at Flinders University.
She made this observation in the context of a recent submission urging the Medical Research Future Fund to take a broader focus in funding research than the fund's name suggests is likely. The submission highlights the importance to health of factors such as income and wealth distribution and the extent of publicly provided health, education and welfare services.
"I'd vote ONE for a party promising to appoint a minister with the power to work across portfolios, ensuring that the health impacts of wider policies are routinely assessed."
Baum states: 'While it seems that finding cures for diseases would make the biggest contribution to promoting health, this isn't the case. Introducing preventive measures which make small changes in the non-medical risk across a whole population is much more effective at creating a healthier population.'
Meanwhile, climate change — the defining issue for public health this century, according to the World Health Organization's outgoing director general Dr Margaret Chan — barely figures in election health debate. Perhaps this is not surprising, given