Creative Ways of Staying Alive | Jane Hearst | TEDxDeMontfortU

Jane Hearst opens by challenging the dominant narrative that health is primarily managed through clinical services like hospitals and GP surgeries. She argues that clinical services account for only up to 20% of overall health and well-being, with the remaining 80% determined by social determinants such as food, shelter, education, workplace conditions, stress, and sense of purpose. This framing sets up her central thesis: that creativity is a legitimate and powerful tool in everyone's healthcare toolkit.

To illustrate the real-world impact of creative health interventions, Hearst tells the story of Susan, a retired woman who became fearful and increasingly isolated after a fall. She situates Susan's experience within a broader public health context, noting that 30% of UK adults aged 65 and over fall each year, with one in ten becoming too scared to leave the house and another one in ten dying within a year of their fall. Susan's participation in a dance program designed for people with frailty resulted in a 58% reduction in the chance of falling, alongside improvements in confidence, well-being, and social connection.

Hearst then presents a range of statistics to support the broader health benefits of creative engagement. She cites that dancers are 46% less likely to die of a cardiovascular death than non-dancers, that dance saves £149 million annually by preventing dementia onset and £157 million by preventing type 2 diabetes, and that it also supports conditions like Parkinson's and chronic pain. Singing is highlighted as beneficial for people with COPD or asthma, with referrals to singing for lung health services leading to 23% fewer A&E admissions and 21% fewer doctor's appointments after six months. Viewing art in hospital settings is associated with faster recovery and less pain, and everyday cultural engagement is linked to reduced risk of depression.

Hearst acknowledges the advocacy work of the National Centre for Creative Health in promoting these benefits to healthcare leaders and policymakers, but she identifies a critical gap: the public—the very people who benefit from these services—has been left out of the conversation. She argues that without cultural change at the individual level, healthcare systems will continue defaulting to clinical solutions even when creative interventions have been proven more effective for certain conditions.

She concludes by addressing a key psychological barrier: the widespread belief that creativity belongs only to talented or trained individuals. She reminds the audience that creativity was once intuitive and effortless in childhood, and invites everyone to reconsider how creativity might re-enter their lives—whether through imagination, flow states, social laughter, purposeful making, or illness prevention. She closes with a rhetorical question challenging each person to identify their own creative way of staying alive.