Monday, October 11, 2010
Wednesday, October 6, 2010
Concerns on global health
It is true we live in a global community and it is also a fact that globalization is real and here,but it makes me wonder in as much as globalization has impacted our life so too is nationalism.We should not forget that even though everything is becoming much more closer nations that make up the global village are still individual states or nation consequently when decisions are made at the global level ,each and every nation will be doing so with a mind frame of "what is in this for my country and my people"
In as much as we want to think that global public health should be consider at a global context there are all this issues that makes it difficult to implement all this.Enormous challenges exist in global health especially at the operational levels and at the accountability level.Although the amount of money has increased but the operational gap and the accountability gab is still very significant.
The following question i ask.
-Are people really prepared to leave their nationalist views over global views?
-Are poorer people helped out of pity or is it because it is their fundamental human rights to to have assess to public health ?
-What is in for every nation or country when public health is at a global level?
-Is global public health attainable (especially when some people in countries such as American do not see a reason for a free health care for it own citizens)?
-Is the global community turning in to a giant social system (especially when it comes to global public health)?
With these questions and concerns in mind attaining the millennium development goal by 2015 is something closer to impossible.
In as much as we want to think that global public health should be consider at a global context there are all this issues that makes it difficult to implement all this.Enormous challenges exist in global health especially at the operational levels and at the accountability level.Although the amount of money has increased but the operational gap and the accountability gab is still very significant.
The following question i ask.
-Are people really prepared to leave their nationalist views over global views?
-Are poorer people helped out of pity or is it because it is their fundamental human rights to to have assess to public health ?
-What is in for every nation or country when public health is at a global level?
-Is global public health attainable (especially when some people in countries such as American do not see a reason for a free health care for it own citizens)?
-Is the global community turning in to a giant social system (especially when it comes to global public health)?
With these questions and concerns in mind attaining the millennium development goal by 2015 is something closer to impossible.
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
Reasons to consider health at the global level
As clearly put by Marshall McLuhan “Today, after more than a century of electric technology, we have extended our central nervous system itself in a global embrace, abolishing both space and time as far as our planet is concerned ". (Marshall McLuhan, Understanding Media, 1964.) In his concept of the "global village" he clearly started how events in one part of the world could be experienced in other parts in real-time. Although in this case he was talking about the media, we can see that this concept is extended to globalization. We are leaving in an era of globalization where the world is gradually becoming one "giant village" and as such we are force by want to be interested in what happens in other parts of the world. This globalization process has brought closes regional economies, societies, cultures,religions etc. Borders are being broken and thus by has facilitated the flow of goods,capital,labour.These effects are bound to be observe in the fields of industrial,financial,economic,health policy,political,informational,language,competition,ecological,culture,religious, legal/ethical, education, technical and social sphere.Due to all these changes it is but normal that health should be treated at a global level.
Health has become a commodity and according to Kickbusch (2004) it can be refers to as a global public good and as such should not be left only in the hands of particular nations or in the hands of the private sector . Being in a “global village” it has become more or less imperative that public health should be promoted because if these good (commodity) is left in the hands of the private sector it may become too expensive for the poor and they will be deprive of preventive health. It is therefore a collective responsibility to focus on population and a need to prevent deceases as such lives are being improved through prevention. Public health therefore should not just be deal with at governmental or public health agencies level rather health should be consider at a global level .Furthermore since health is a commodity it therefore means it has been allocated a price and these price can be too expensive for the people. The health systems has become fragmented and privatized thus the sector is crowded with many players who have different private interest. Leaving everything in the hands of private sector will be giving more value to privatized care for the wealthy and less value to the public or the poor. If health as a commodity is left in the hands of the private sector then the poor will not benefit or have access to preventive health care.
In this era of globalization not just good are moving people are too. These global mobility which is said to be characterized by a major increase in the extensive, intensity and velocity of movement and by a wide variety in 'types' of mobility as such deceases are also being transported from one part of the world to another thus the adage microbes know no borders. Take the recent case of the 2009 H1N1 pandemic which spread so fast. On June 11, 2009, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared that a pandemic of 2009 H1N1 flu was underway. This is exemplified in a study, led by Dr. Weizhong Yang and Dr. Hongjie Yu from the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention in Beijing which noted that in 2009 the fast-spreading influenza A (H1N1) virus killed more than 18,000 people in over 200 countries (http://www.businessweek.com. As such there is a global vested interest for health to be considered at a global level in this case.
According to the European commission on the EU role in global health it is about worldwide improvement of health, reduction of disparities, and protection against global health threats.
The Charter of Fundamental Rights further stipulates that everyone has the right of access to preventive health care and the right to benefit from medical treatment under the conditions established by national laws and practices (Article 35 OJ C 303/7, 14.12.2007, and p.1). Thus ethically and morally every human being or population deserves to be protected against any health threats. As such it is ethically right that health should be considered at a global level rather than at governmental or individual level for this reason.
Public health care is very a complex and interwoven issue. It is said that today more money is being a directed toward the world’s poor and sick then ever before. But still we see a great gap .This is because health in “general” is not being targeted. Which means focus should not just be centered on specific diseases but on other issues which relates to health. These may be availability of infrastructures; development etc.These can be sum up as attaining the “Millennium Development Goals” which are measured by indicators. This cannot therefore be a task for individual countries but for the entire human population, race, culture and religion. Therefore a more global and urgent action must be taken or is required for this to happen at a global level
Health has become a commodity and according to Kickbusch (2004) it can be refers to as a global public good and as such should not be left only in the hands of particular nations or in the hands of the private sector . Being in a “global village” it has become more or less imperative that public health should be promoted because if these good (commodity) is left in the hands of the private sector it may become too expensive for the poor and they will be deprive of preventive health. It is therefore a collective responsibility to focus on population and a need to prevent deceases as such lives are being improved through prevention. Public health therefore should not just be deal with at governmental or public health agencies level rather health should be consider at a global level .Furthermore since health is a commodity it therefore means it has been allocated a price and these price can be too expensive for the people. The health systems has become fragmented and privatized thus the sector is crowded with many players who have different private interest. Leaving everything in the hands of private sector will be giving more value to privatized care for the wealthy and less value to the public or the poor. If health as a commodity is left in the hands of the private sector then the poor will not benefit or have access to preventive health care.
In this era of globalization not just good are moving people are too. These global mobility which is said to be characterized by a major increase in the extensive, intensity and velocity of movement and by a wide variety in 'types' of mobility as such deceases are also being transported from one part of the world to another thus the adage microbes know no borders. Take the recent case of the 2009 H1N1 pandemic which spread so fast. On June 11, 2009, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared that a pandemic of 2009 H1N1 flu was underway. This is exemplified in a study, led by Dr. Weizhong Yang and Dr. Hongjie Yu from the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention in Beijing which noted that in 2009 the fast-spreading influenza A (H1N1) virus killed more than 18,000 people in over 200 countries (http://www.businessweek.com. As such there is a global vested interest for health to be considered at a global level in this case.
According to the European commission on the EU role in global health it is about worldwide improvement of health, reduction of disparities, and protection against global health threats.
The Charter of Fundamental Rights further stipulates that everyone has the right of access to preventive health care and the right to benefit from medical treatment under the conditions established by national laws and practices (Article 35 OJ C 303/7, 14.12.2007, and p.1). Thus ethically and morally every human being or population deserves to be protected against any health threats. As such it is ethically right that health should be considered at a global level rather than at governmental or individual level for this reason.
Public health care is very a complex and interwoven issue. It is said that today more money is being a directed toward the world’s poor and sick then ever before. But still we see a great gap .This is because health in “general” is not being targeted. Which means focus should not just be centered on specific diseases but on other issues which relates to health. These may be availability of infrastructures; development etc.These can be sum up as attaining the “Millennium Development Goals” which are measured by indicators. This cannot therefore be a task for individual countries but for the entire human population, race, culture and religion. Therefore a more global and urgent action must be taken or is required for this to happen at a global level
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)