In Reply Our study1 on inequalities in life expectancy found that a combination of socioeconomic and race/ethnicity factors, behavioral and metabolic risk factors, and health care factors could explain 74% of the variation in life expectancy among counties. We agree with Dr Mestral that other factors such as diet quality and housing conditions may play a role in explaining the remaining variation. This is an important area of future research and will require identifying appropriate countylevel data sources that relate to these factors. Our study1 also found that much of the effect at the county level of variation in socioeconomic factors on variation in life expectancy was mediated via risk factors. We do not interpret this to mean that risk factors should be the sole focus of efforts to improve population health. Socioeconomic factors are important, not only for health, but for well-being and prosperity more generally. Our research1 suggests that both socioeconomic and racial inequalities, as well as behavioral and metabolic risk factors, are important targets for improving population health and reducing inequalities. After all, individuals with low socioeconomic status are often the most impacted by these risk factors and are the most likely to benefit from such a strategy.

中文翻译：

---

关于加热不燃烧烟草卷烟的令人困惑的结论

在答复中 我们关于预期寿命不平等的研究 1 发现，社会经济和种族/民族因素、行为和代谢风险因素以及医疗保健因素的结合可以解释 74% 的县之间预期寿命差异。我们同意 Mestral 博士的观点，其他因素如饮食质量和住房条件可能在解释剩余的变化方面发挥作用。这是未来研究的一个重要领域，需要确定与这些因素相关的适当县级数据源。我们的研究 1 还发现，县级社会经济因素变化对预期寿命变化的大部分影响是通过风险因素调节的。我们并不将此解释为风险因素应该是改善人口健康的唯一重点。社会经济因素不仅对健康很重要，而且对更普遍的福祉和繁荣也很重要。我们的研究 1 表明，社会经济和种族不平等以及行为和代谢风险因素都是改善人口健康和减少不平等的重要目标。毕竟，社会经济地位低的人往往受这些风险因素的影响最大，也最有可能从这种策略中受益。