Search

The COVID-19 pandemic put the life science sector to the test. Vaccines were developed at unprecedented speed, benefiting from decades of fundamental research and now honoured by a Nobel Prize. However, we saw that the fruits of science were inequitably distributed. Most low- and middle-income countries were left behind, deepening the inequalities that the Sustainable Development Goals were set to reduce. We argue that the life science sector must reinvent itself to be better and more equitably prepared for the next health crisis and to ensure fair access to health across current and future generations. Our recommendations include global governance, national strategies and the role of universities and corporations. Improved and more equitable health care should be centre stage for global health action and a core mission of a reframed Life Science sector – what we call Life Science 2.0. Paper Context Main findings: During the COVID-19 pandemic the Life Science sector stepped up to the challenge, but vaccines and medicines were not equitably distributed. Added knowledge: Obstacles were identified that hindered global access to medical innovations. Global health impact for policy and action: Global and national governance, universities and the private sector should join forces to create a Life Science sector (Life Science 2.0) that affords equitable access to medical advances across geographical and generational boundaries and socio-economic strata.

The World Medical Association’s Declaration of Helsinki is in the process of being revised. The following amendments are recommended to be incorporated in pursuit of the common goal of promoting health for all. 1. Data-driven research that facilitates broad informed consent and dynamic consent, assuring participant’s rights, and the sharing of individual participant data (IPD) and research results to promote open science and generate social value. 2. Risk minimisation in a placebo-controlled study and post-trial access to the best-proven interventions for all who need them. 3. A future-oriented research framework for co-creation with all the relevant stakeholders.

Copyright of Public Health Forum is the property of De Gruyter and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Scientific Annals of the 'Al. I. Cuza' University, Iasi. Sociology & Social Work / Analele Stiintifice ale Universitatii 'Al. I. Cuza' Iasi Sociologie si Asistenta Sociala is the property of Alexandru Ioan Cuza University and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

During health emergencies such as the COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare workers face numerous ethical challenges while catering to the needs of patients in healthcare settings. Although the data recapitulating high-income countries ethics frameworks are available, the challenges faced by clinicians in resource-limited settings of low- and middle-income countries are not discussed widely due to a lack of baseline data or evidence. The Nepali healthcare system, which is chronically understaffed and underequipped, was severely affected by the COVID-19 pandemic in its capacity to manage health services and resources for needy patients, leading to ethical dilemmas and challenges during clinical practice. This study aimed to develop a standard guideline that would address syndemic ethical dilemmas during clinical care of COVID-19 patients who are unable to afford standard-of-care. A mixed method study was conducted between February and June of 2021 in 12 government designated COVID-19 treatment hospitals in central Nepal. The draft guideline was discussed among the key stakeholders in the pandemic response in Nepal. The major ethical dilemmas confronted by the study participants (50 healthcare professionals providing patient care at COVID-19 treatment hospitals) could be grouped into five major pillars of ethical clinical practice: rational allocation of medical resources, updated treatment protocols that guide clinical decisions, standard-of-care regardless of patient's economic status, effective communication among stakeholders for prompt patient care, and external factors such as political and bureaucratic interference affecting ethical practice. This living clinical ethics guideline, which has been developed based on the local evidence and case stories of frontline responders, is expected to inform the policymakers as well as the decision-makers positioned at the concerned government units. These ethics guidelines could be endorsed with revisions by the concerned regulatory authorities for the use during consequent waves of COVID-19 and other epidemics that may occur in the future. Other countries affected by the pandemic could conduct similar studies to explore ethical practices in the local clinical and public health context.

The COVID-19 pandemic put the life science sector to the test. Vaccines were developed at unprecedented speed, benefiting from decades of fundamental research and now honoured by a Nobel Prize. However, we saw that the fruits of science were inequitably distributed. Most low- and middle-income countries were left behind, deepening the inequalities that the Sustainable Development Goals were set to reduce. We argue that the life science sector must reinvent itself to be better and more equitably prepared for the next health crisis and to ensure fair access to health across current and future generations. Our recommendations include global governance, national strategies and the role of universities and corporations. Improved and more equitable health care should be centre stage for global health action and a core mission of a reframed Life Science sector - what we call Life Science 2.0.Paper Context Main findings : During the COVID-19 pandemic the Life Science sector stepped up to the challenge, but vaccines and medicines were not equitably distributed. Added knowledge : Obstacles were identified that hindered global access to medical innovations. Global health impact for policy and action : Global and national governance, universities and the private sector should join forces to create a Life Science sector (Life Science 2.0) that affords equitable access to medical advances across geographical and generational boundaries and socio-economic strata.

The pandemic has exposed the vulnerability of our civilization and reinforced the importance of living in harmony with nature, not rampaging it in a conquering mode. South and South-East Asia have a vital role to play in achieving the global goal of 'Health for All' as the regions have a significantly large share of global income and multidimensional poor compared to other regions. Clearly, the progress in health and development outcomes of these regions cannot be achieved without addressing social determinants of health and ensuring active public participation. These regions must collectively address the social determinants of health following a realistic health promotion model. It is indeed a favourable time to look beyond the so-called predominantly reductionist biomedical model of health care to a more holistic model of health, that places humans and the environment at the centre, and emphasizes the importance of promoting health and wellbeing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background The People’s Health Movement (PHM) was formed in 2000 and drew inspiration from the Alma Ata Declaration on Primary Health Care’s ‘Health for All’ (1978). Since then PHM has been an active part of a global counter-hegemonic social movement. This study aimed to gain insights on social movement building, drawing on the successes and failures reported by activists over their experiences of working in the Health for All social movement to improve health, justice and equity. Methods Qualitative research methods were employed in this study to capture complex and historical narratives of individual activists, through semi-structured interviews and subsequent thematic analysis of transcripts. The research design and analysis were informed by social movement theory and literature on health activism as a pathway for social change. In this study we examine the semi-structured interviews of 15 health activists who are part of the PHM, with the aim of deriving lessons for strengthening movements for Health for All. Results This study locates the activists’ narratives within a socio-political analysis of the global trends of late modern individualism and capitalist neoliberalism. This highlights the challenges faced by civil society groups mobilising collective action and building social movements for Health for All. The study found that within the constraints of the neoliberal socio-political and economic conditions which have caused the rise in social and health inequities, this group of long-term health activists have been nurturing alternative approaches to structuring society and building collective agency to improve health. Conclusion The practical long-term experiences of the PHM activists examined in this study contribute to a better understanding of the processes and motivations that lead to and sustain health activism, and the dilemmas, strategies, impacts and achievements of such activism.

World Health Organization established the concept of essential medicines with the main aim to improve the availability of most necessary drugs to fulfil basic health care needs of population. Access to essential medicines is one of the crucial components of primary health care. Access to medicines is included in millennium development goals as well as universal health coverage policy. In 2000, India made a policy "Health for All" and one of the main objective of this policy is to ensure availability of quality medicines at reasonable cost to the society. The overall budget on medicines differs widely in different states of India and as a result their access is also highly variable. This review will emphasis on essential medicine concept and report of various research surveys conducted to evaluate availability of essential medicines in different parts of India. An exhaustive literature search was planned to study the availability of essential medicines in India. The search engines used were PubMed and Google Scholar. Relevant keywords were used to make the searches such as essential medicines concept, essential medicines report, essential medicine research in India, availability of essential medicines in India. The articles published in English language between the years 2003 and 2017 were extracted and included. The findings of these studies were summarized into a narrative review. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista Futhark is the property of Revista Futhark and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The World Medical Association's Declaration of Helsinki is in the process of being revised. The following amendments are recommended to be incorporated in pursuit of the common goal of promoting health for all. 1. Data-driven research that facilitates broad informed consent and dynamic consent, assuring participant's rights, and the sharing of individual participant data (IPD) and research results to promote open science and generate social value. 2. Risk minimisation in a placebo-controlled study and post-trial access to the best-proven interventions for all who need them. 3. A future-oriented research framework for co-creation with all the relevant stakeholders., Competing Interests: JS is an owner and executive consultant of PPH plus GmbH & Co. KG. AC is employed by Pfizer Healthcare Ireland. VB is president of IFAPP. SK-F declares that he serves as Associate Editor in Frontiers in Medicine and Frontiers in Pharmacology, and CK serves as a reviewer of Frontiers in Pharmacology. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Kurihara, Kerpel-Fronius, Becker, Chan, Nagaty, Naseem, Schenk, Matsuyama and Baroutsou.)

Film or cinema has always been a powerful medium that can be adapted to various situations of the human societies anywhere in the world whenever necessary. It also possesses a huge potential in making a point felt meaningfully by the human beings if properly disseminated. Presently, with the outbreak of the COVID19 pandemic situation, thinkers and activists from the field of communication and media need to seriously brainstorm about the most effective means of communicating messages of health and risk communication. Specially the medium of cinema as it has not been utilized to the optimum for achieving the desired goal. Cinema that includes feature films and documentaries have been used on experimental basis by a very few film makers for this purpose. However, films on different kinds of diseases and health risks have been usually produced more for commercial gains not necessarily orienting them from the perspective of our discussion. It is high time a serious, coordinated effort needs to be pushed forward for taking advantage of the medium for facilitating health and risk communication in a far convenient and effective manner than it has been till date. There is more than enough scope for presenting issues in these two fields as a fully-prepared package for the public which would go deep down their mindset and convert them to empowered active citizens. This shall help them in adopting the suggestions and hints and thereby improving their standard of living. This paper makes an attempt at examining the issues and challenges on the path towards achieving the same. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract With increasing adoption of universal health coverage (UHC), the health for all agenda is resurgent around the world. However, after a promising start the first time in 1978, the health for all agenda fizzled over the next decade. This commentary discusses the origin of the health for all agenda in the 1970s and the influence of global politico-economic forces in shaping that agenda, its demise and the resurgence in the form of UHC in the twenty-first century. We discuss UHC’s focus on finances and the increasing role of market economy in health care, and the opportunities and risks UHC poses. We conclude by saying that UHC’s greater focus on finances is prudent, but in order to achieve its promise, UHC needs to regulate the market based provision of healthcare, and incorporate more of the people and community centered ethos of its earlier iteration from 40 years ago.

Civil society engagement around health care and population health improvement is an important driver towards Health for All. Research can improve the effectiveness of health activism by examining the resources, structures and strategies of civil society engagement. However, research to support such engagement faces epistemological and methodological challenges which call for specific research strategies. A four year multi-country study was undertaken by the People's Health Movement, a global network working for health for all. The research took place in six countries (Brazil, Colombia, DR Congo, India, Italy, South Africa) and globally, and was directed to understanding five domains of civil society engagement: movement building; campaigning and advocacy; capacity building; knowledge generation, access and use; and engaging with governance. The research plan and methods of data collection and analysis were tailored to address the objective of improving activist practice, while negotiating research challenges identified during the design phase. Results include insights into the practice of civil society engagement in relation to the five domains of activist practice, as well as experience gained in managing six methodological challenges which we describe as: making meaning, aligning research and action, managing power relations, valuing experiential knowledges, chaos and contingency, challenging preconceptions. Researching activism can produce useful insights into practice as well as support continuous improvement in the effectiveness of such activism. However, there are significant methodological challenges that can be addressed through appropriate strategies. More research, building on the approach described in this paper, can contribute to more effective civil society activism for health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The People's Health Movement (PHM) was formed in 2000 and drew inspiration from the Alma Ata Declaration on Primary Health Care's 'Health for All' (1978). Since then PHM has been an active part of a global counter-hegemonic social movement. This study aimed to gain insights on social movement building, drawing on the successes and failures reported by activists over their experiences of working in the Health for All social movement to improve health, justice and equity. Methods: Qualitative research methods were employed in this study to capture complex and historical narratives of individual activists, through semi-structured interviews and subsequent thematic analysis of transcripts. The research design and analysis were informed by social movement theory and literature on health activism as a pathway for social change. In this study we examine the semi-structured interviews of 15 health activists who are part of the PHM, with the aim of deriving lessons for strengthening movements for Health for All. Results: This study locates the activists' narratives within a socio-political analysis of the global trends of late modern individualism and capitalist neoliberalism. This highlights the challenges faced by civil society groups mobilising collective action and building social movements for Health for All. The study found that within the constraints of the neoliberal socio-political and economic conditions which have caused the rise in social and health inequities, this group of long-term health activists have been nurturing alternative approaches to structuring society and building collective agency to improve health. Conclusion: The practical long-term experiences of the PHM activists examined in this study contribute to a better understanding of the processes and motivations that lead to and sustain health activism, and the dilemmas, strategies, impacts and achievements of such activism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study aimed at summarizing the existing health policies for stateless populations living in the 10 ASEAN countries: Brunei, Cambodia, Lao PDR, Indonesia, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam. We followed scoping review method recommended by Arksey and O'Malley. Our inclusion criteria were based on three concepts: populations (stateless and undocumented people), issues (healthcare policies and regulations), and settings (10 ASEAN countries). Our findings suggest that none of the ASEAN countries have explicit healthcare policies for stateless people except Thailand. We also observed that ratification of international human rights treaties relating to the right to health does not necessarily translate into the provision of healthcare policies for stateless population. Although Thailand seems like the only country among 10 ASIAN countries having health policies for stateless populations in the country, the question remains whether having a policy would lead to a proper implementation by ensuring right to health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: Health was declared as fundamental human right by WHO constitution of 1948. The major key role playing factor in HAQ rankings is the universal health care programme and health schemes which are initiated and ran by the government. Health care provision is incredibly complex and many nations around the world spend considerable resources trying to provide it. Developed countries have their own insurance scheme which benefits its population and meets their health care needs. No uniform one-sizefits- all operational model exists when it comes to the successful implementation of a scheme. For instance, multinational insurers who are successful in one country have met failure in other countries. Developing country like India must try to improve their health care system by following certain initiatives incorporated by other countries. Low income countries like Africa and Nepal need to take extra measure to improve health insurance program and to provide quality care to their people. It is evident that there are an enormous number of ways that health care insurance programs vary around the world. There is a need to identify the characteristics of the most effective systems and the most equitable ones which could serve as a framework by all countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Primary health care (PHC) emerged in the early 1970s as WHO's response to the failure of its basic health services approach. The Soviet Union succeeded in getting WHO's governing bodies to agree to hold an international conference on PHC, a conference that was held in Alma-Ata, the capital of the Soviet Republic of Kazakhstan, in September 1978. In 1975, Dr. Halfdan Mahler, WHO's charismatic director-general, introduced the goal of "health for all" (HFA) by the year 2000. Alma-Ata declared PHC as the key for achieving HFA. Although WHO had promoted the involvement of medical schools in community health, Mahler's antimedical establishment rhetoric contributed to WHO ignoring the potential role that medical doctors could play in PHC and HFA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Sustainable Development Goals are the latest means to attempt to attain health for all as an end. This article examines this means from a Biblical perspective, asking Christians to examine not only the means we use to achieve ends, but more profoundly the way we determine what our ends are.

It is now forty years since 134 countries, 67 international organisations including NGOs (Non- governmental organisations) met at an innovative three-day conference, to agree on the best approach to improve global health (WHO 1978). The Alma Ata Declaration called for global commitments to achieving Health for All by the year 2000. It was based on the principles of equity and community participation in health planning and policy making, through an intersectoral approach. As stakeholders prepare to meet in Astana in Octber, to agree on the new Global Health Declaration, we must reflect on lessons learned in the last 40 years to ensure that we can achieve Health for all by the year 2030.

Copyright of Public Health Forum is the property of De Gruyter and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Public Health Forum is the property of De Gruyter and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This study aimed to evaluate the challenges and patterns of seeking primary health care services in slums of Karachi, where about 60% of the population lives in various informal settlements. We surveyed 8 largest slums of the metropolitan, and analyzed the data both descriptively and inferentially to evaluate the factors associated with health care seeking behavior. Significantly positive association of quality health care seeking behavior and various socioeconomic indicators were found. In addition, substantial insights about the conditions of slum dwellers and health challenges of the population, such as low immunization and low vaccinations, among others, were reported. Thus, the role of policymakers is emphasized to strategize for the inclusion of these people in national health plans and to develop health infrastructure near these communities. Furthermore, there is a strong need to increase awareness of the population about hygiene practices, importance of immunization, and importance of utilizing appropriate health care services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The 4-year (2007–2011) Revitalizing Health for All international research program (http://www.globalhealthequity.ca/projects/proj_revitalizing/index.shtml) supported 20 research teams located in 15 low- and middle-income countries to explore the strengths and weaknesses of comprehensive primary health care (CPHC) initiatives at their local or national levels. Teams were organized in a triad comprised of a senior researcher, a new researcher, and a ‘research user’ from government, health services, or other organizations with the authority or capacity to apply the research findings. Multiple regional and global team capacity-enhancement meetings were organized to refine methods and to discuss and assess cross-case findings. Objective: Most research projects used mixed methods, incorporating analyses of qualitative data (interviews and focus groups), secondary data, and key policy and program documents. Some incorporated historical case study analyses, and a few undertook new surveys. The synthesis of findings in this report was derived through qualitative analysis of final project reports undertaken by three different reviewers. Results: Evidence of comprehensiveness (defined in this research program as efforts to improve equity in access, community empowerment and participation, social and environmental health determinants, and intersectoral action) was found in many of the cases. Conclusions: Despite the important contextual differences amongst the different country studies, the similarity of many of their findings, often generated using mixed methods, attests to certain transferable health systems characteristics to create and sustain CPHC practices. These include: 1. Well-trained and supported community health workers (CHWs) able to work effectively with marginalized communities 2. Effective mechanisms for community participation, both informal (through participation in projects and programs, and meaningful consultation) and formal (though program management structures) 3.Co-partnership models in program and policy development (in which financial and knowledge supports from governments or institutions are provided to communities, which retain decision-making powers in program design and implementation) 4. Support for community advocacy and engagement in health and social systems decision making These characteristics, in turn, require a political context that supports state responsibilities for redistributive health and social protection measures.