Commentary: The McKeown debate: time for burial

The work of Thomas McKeown, in one form or another, has for several decades featured on countless student reading lists and in virtually all Anglophone accounts of population change and the epidemiological transition. It has additionally provoked or exacerbated a range of fierce debates on the role of medicine, links between nutrition and health, the costs and benefits of industrial capitalism, associations between economic development and population growth, and the influence of bias on research and interpretation of research findings