Professor M. G. Marmot et al. conducted two studies, Whitehall I and Whitehall II, in which they studied morbidity and mortality in the British civil service sector in the 1960s and the 1980s. British civil servants are under the same plan with the National Health Service, so the studies controlled for access to healthcare. But what these famous studies found was that morbidity and mortality still correlated with income. Further research and analysis has concluded that it is job satisfaction and social status more so than income that determines health outcomes. Does an individual feel like she has control over the work she does? Is she stressed out a lot? How does she feel about herself in relationship to those around her? Does she feel healthy? Does she like her life? Those who feel in control of their lives, feel valued by society, and feel good about their health actually end up living longer and healthier lives on average compared to those who don’t share these beliefs.
Deep structural inequalities exist in every society, and social justice groups work toward greater social equality everywhere. Does the notion that social inequalities are hurting people in a physiological way change the way we feel about the mission of equality? Is health so fundamentally different that individuals who accept economic inequality might mobilize over health inequality? It is certainly implicated in the right to a dignified life, a concept underpinning the human rights movement as whole. It may be though that the social inequalities on their own terms are an equal evil, because the limitations on one’s abilities to pursue her interests are as inimical to human rights as worse health.