Send us a text

This conversation is the second segment of SurfingMASH's coverage of the Global Think Tank on Steatotic Liver Diseases (#SLDThinkTank2025) held in Barcelona in June. It focuses on the kinds of feedback most likely to produce successful behavioral interventions.

The conversation begins with Jörn discussing the Liver Screen Study, a "very ambitious effort" that starts with 30,000 members of the general European population, narrows down to a subgroup with liver disease, and then provides these individuals with information about MASLD and how to manage it, ultimately evaluating its impact. Many of these people did not know about liver disease before being informed they had it, and many changed their behavior as a result. Jörn links this to the EASL Amsterdam activity discussed last week in 6.7.1 and 6.7.2.

Louise relates a story of speaking with Laurent Sandrin, Chairman of Echosens and inventor of FibroScan, who was "blown away by the reaction" to making FibroScans available and promoting this fact. Louise explained to Laurent that from her vantage point, FibroScan is "more than just the physical diagnostic. It has the power to engage populations," and, for many, provide the information and motivation they need to change behavior. Kristina describes how we can provide "biofeedback" like this, along with other behavioral strategies, to produce sustainable behavior change, which is far harder for an individual than simply reacting to a medical scare. She describes a model she deploys, the "Combi" model, which integrates an array of informational, motivational and behavioral items into an integrated, individualized approach.

The conversation shifts to focus on environmental factors that work against long-term change. For someone with alcohol use disorder, this might be a family member who continues to consume large quantities of alcohol frequently. For someone living with obesity, it might be a favorite high-calorie dish...or even simply food advertising.

In the final part of this conversation, Jörn states that the Think Tank steering committee invited politicians to help them understand why certain kinds of interventions — such as taxing medically harmful goods or limiting advertising — might be socially valuable, even if unpopular. The group discussed some governmental tactics that are effective and others that are not.