As Tuberculosis was considered as the disease of poor socio-economic group, mainly in developing countries, why it is still prevalent in developed countries or among those of high socioeconomic status?
Firstly, tuberculosis is not exclusive to the "poor socio-economic group", it just have higher (or much higher) incidence in that group. So it still can attack wealthy and seemingly healthy people: the example from Russia is the wave of tuberculosis in the families of the then-high-class people after the devastating economic crisis that we had in 1998 (the cause of TB was, obviously, psychological stress in those people).
Secondly, no developed country is free from some amount of poor people; and tuberculosis can persist in that subgroup of the population (or in immigrants and foreign-born people like in the USA).
Yes, and thirdly, there is a huge difference between infection and disease. As come from nature of Mycobacterium tuberculosis, everybody can be infected but few become ill (approx. 10%). Period of latence is meritum. Prevalence of progressive (infectious lung form) disease in low socio communities is obvious, but there is still survive older genration wich carring primary complex from childhood (most cases of progressive forms in Czech Republic). Even high social status does not mean helth lifestyle - younger population (civilization´s diseases, alcohol, drugs, smoking), sligtly . Nobody knows overall incidence of TB (infections), WHO only estimetes overworld 1/3 of human population. And ofcourse migration................
Tuberculosis is no longer a disease confined to only developing countries. Modern day living style, associated co morbid conditions , other addictions have led to emergence of Tuberculosis in developed countries also. USA has a high rate of tuberculosis in Chicago, compared to affluent countries, majority of Asian countries have a high population, overcrowded living conditions, nutritional poor status has led to rapid spread of TB in these people. In some developed countries Atypical mycobacterial pulmonary infections are more frequently seen.
so tuberculosis according to WHO is now a global emergency. the demarcation between developed and developing countries is gradually disappearing. British exported TB to india during their long rule. , we indians always are very prompt in repaying the debt. hence we are promptly returning TB to UK in the form of tourists or expatriates
There is no emergence of TB in developed countries now, it is re-emergence. In 18-19th centuries, TB was abundant (often the most frequent cause of death) in countries that are considered developed now and, as I think, TB was relatively scarce in now-developing countries that had much less city/town population then the now-developed countries had at that time. TB, besides being the disease of the poor, is the disease of overcrowded cities.
So TB has never been "confined to developing countries". The now-developed countries had paid their tribute to TB a couple of centuries ago (and so now they have population pretty much evolutionary selected for resistance to TB). And it is now the developing countries' turn to undergo this selection process as they convert from mostly rural to mostly town type of population.
Well, I don't think occur at higher or even equal frequency among people of high socioeconomic status from developed countries. Most studies demostrate the opposite.
We recently published a paper exploring relationships between the Human development index in time at 165 countries, using data from UNPD and Stop TB programs, to see the association with TB incidence.
We assessed relationship between the Human Development Index (HDI) and the incidence of tuberculosis (TB) in 165 countries in the World in the period 2005-2011.
At the non-linear regression models, it was observed that the relationship
between epidemiological and HDI was significant, those countries with higher rates presented lower values of HDI (p