1. Mixed Health Promotion
1.1. I am unsure exactly where some of these programs would fit as they are focused largely on reducing barriers, but also were handed down and designed based on top-down research.
1.2. Healthy Smiles Ontario
1.2.1. Dental care for children and youth 17 and under from low-income families.
1.2.2. Preventative cleaning/screenings
1.2.3. Fillings and other urgent needs can also be addressed
1.3. Participaction
1.3.1. Does place onus on citizens to improve own activity levels.
1.3.2. Incentivies activity
1.3.3. Supplies activities that do not need dedicated space, or advanced fitness.
1.3.4. Awareness through advertising.
1.3.5. Does not address technology barriers, or work to undo systemic issues in terms of nutrition, poverty, or fatphobia.
1.4. New Canada Food Guide
1.4.1. Much less prescriptive than previous guides.
1.4.2. Assumes access to food, cooking ability, and time for meal preparation.
1.4.3. Education component as well as some practical elements e.g. recipes.
2. Health promotion is the identification, and addressing, of a health deficit. The purpose is to increase health equity and reduce preventable negative health outcomes. While it can be done at all levels of intervention it is most noticeable at tier 1 and 2 with both broad and targeted strategies.
3. Top Down
3.1. Top down health promotion relies on the assumption that awareness fosters a change in behaviour.
3.1.1. Undermines the intelligence of audience, assumes they are unaware and that is the only barrier to better health.
3.1.2. Often ignores social determinants of health.
3.1.3. Places onus on citizens to maintain health.
3.1.4. Government or health officials identify health needs.
3.2. Media/Awareness Campaigns
3.2.1. Flu season billboards
3.2.2. Smoking cessation ads (not including programs that incentivize quitting smoking)
3.2.3. Brochures
3.2.4. TV ads
3.2.5. Billboards
3.2.6. Some times more shame based e.g. "Social Farter" campaign about ending causal/social smoking.
3.3. In Schools
3.3.1. D.A.R.E
3.3.2. Some school boards have banned snacks that are considered unhealthy.
3.3.3. Health curriculums
3.4. Basic Needs
3.4.1. ODSP
3.4.2. Ontario Works
3.4.3. From my perspective most subsidized housing options
4. Bottom Up
4.1. Health promotion that comes from the needs expressed by the group who is receiving the health promotion/support.
4.1.1. Difficult to support from a governmental funding perspective due to reliance and value of subjective experiences.
4.1.2. Based in community empowerment and goal setting
4.1.3. Focus on meeting people where they are at and helping to reduce barriers to health.
4.1.4. Generally more conscious of external factors/social determinants of health.
4.1.5. Conceivably takes more time to set up due to requirement of consultation.
4.1.6. Health needs identified by members of the group who need the resources.
4.2. Harm Reduction
4.2.1. Needle supply programs
4.2.2. Safe consumption sites
4.2.3. Non-abstinence based sexual health and drug use education.
4.2.4. This Tent Saves Lives
4.2.5. Safe consumption sites
4.3. Peer support
4.3.1. Unions/grassroots support organizations
4.3.2. Addictions and mental health support groups
4.3.3. Street level outreach
4.4. Basic Needs
4.4.1. Breakfast programs
4.4.2. Housing first programs
4.4.3. Guaranteed basic income
4.4.4. Supported tent cities
4.4.4.1. The Kenora health unit and other organizations approached the tent-cities in our area to determine how they could help and then rallied those resources.
4.4.5. Schools and business that offer free menstrual products in washrooms
4.4.6. GoHere washroom access program
4.4.6.1. An app that encourages businesses to make their washrooms available to people with Crohns and Colitis and also to advertise this via signage and an app. This program was designed by individuals with Crohns and Colitis to address their concerns about leaving their homes. There are still some issues in terms of reliance on technology, but it is still a really interesting basic needs health promotion strategy.