MyMedR

Displaying all 7 publications

Abstract:

Sort:

Fulltext Global Health Diplomacy Fingerprints on Human Security

Chattu VK, Knight A, Reddy KS, Aginam O

Int J Prev Med, 2019;10:204.
PMID: 31879553 DOI: 10.4103/ijpvm.IJPVM_11_19

Human security is a concept that challenges the traditional notion of national security by placing the 'human' as the central referent of security instead of the 'state.' It is a concept that encompasses health and well-being of people and prioritizes their fundamental freedoms and basic livelihoods by shielding them from acute socioeconomic threats, vulnerabilities and stress. The epicenter of "health security" is located at the intersection of several academic fields or disciplines which do not necessarily share a common theoretical approach. Diverse players in the "health security" domain include practitioners in such fields as security studies, foreign policy, international relations, development theory, environmental politics and the practices of the United Nations system and other multilateral bodies like the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO). Improvements in health are not only dependent on continued commitments to enhance the availability of healthcare and to strengthen disease prevention systems; they are very much enhanced by that intersection between global security and global health. What is emerging is global health diplomacy paradigm that calls for strengthening of core capacities in the public health and foreign policy arenas aimed at advancing human security through the strengthening of global health diplomacy practices. Human security in its broadest sense embraces far more than the absence of violence and conflict. It encompasses human rights, good governance, access to education and health care, and ensuring that each individual has opportunities and devices to fulfill his or her potential. Every step in this direction is a step towards reducing poverty, achieving growth and preventing conflict. Freedom from want, freedom from fear and the freedom of future generations to inherit a natural environment - these are the interrelated building blocks of human- and therefore national security.
Fulltext Corrected and Republished: Global Health Diplomacy Fingerprints on Human Security

Chattu VK, Knight A, Reddy KS, Aginam O

Int J Prev Med, 2020;11:32.
PMID: 32363019 DOI: 10.4103/2008-7802.279163

Human security is a concept that challenges the traditional notion of national security by placing the 'human' as the central referent of security instead of the 'state.' It is a concept that encompasses health and well-being of people and prioritizes their fundamental freedoms and basic livelihoods by shielding them from acute socioeconomic threats, vulnerabilities and stress. The epicenter of "health security" is located at the intersection of several academic fields or disciplines which do not necessarily share a common theoretical approach. Diverse players in the "health security" domain include practitioners in such fields as security studies, foreign policy, international relations, development theory, environmental politics and the practices of the United Nations system and other multilateral bodies like the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO). Improvements in health are not only dependent on continued commitments to enhance the availability of healthcare and to strengthen disease prevention systems; they are very much enhanced by that intersection between global security and global health. What is emerging is global health diplomacy paradigm that calls for strengthening of core capacities in the public health and foreign policy arenas aimed at advancing human security through the strengthening of global health diplomacy practices. Human security in its broadest sense embraces far more than the absence of violence and conflict. It encompasses human rights, good governance, access to education and health care, and ensuring that each individual has opportunities and devices to fulfill his or her potential. Every step in this direction is a step towards reducing poverty, achieving growth and preventing conflict. Freedom from want, freedom from fear and the freedom of future generations to inherit a natural environment - these are the interrelated building blocks of human- and therefore national security.
Fulltext Strengthening health systems globally: a lingering challenge of funding

Lin V, Ghaffar A, Khor SK, Reddy KS

Public Health Res Pract, 2021 Nov 10;31(4).
PMID: 34753160 DOI: 10.17061/phrp3142115
Fulltext Politics of disease control in Africa and the critical role of global health diplomacy: A systematic review

Chattu VK, Knight WA, Adisesh A, Yaya S, Reddy KS, Di Ruggiero E, et al.

Health Promot Perspect, 2021;11(1):20-31.
PMID: 33758752 DOI: 10.34172/hpp.2021.04

Background: Africa is facing the triple burden of communicable diseases, non-communicable diseases (NCDs), and nutritional disorders. Multilateral institutions, bilateral arrangements, and philanthropies have historically privileged economic development over health concerns. That focus has resulted in weak health systems and inadequate preparedness when there are outbreaks of diseases. This review aims to understand the politics of disease control in Africa and global health diplomacy's (GHD's) critical role. Methods: A literature review was done in Medline/PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, and Google scholar search engines. Keywords included MeSH and common terms related to the topics: "Politics," "disease control," "epidemics/ endemics," and "global health diplomacy" in the "African" context. The resources also included reports of World Health Organization, United Nations and resolutions of the World Health Assembly (WHA). Results: African countries continue to struggle in their attempts to build health systems for disease control that are robust enough to tackle the frequent epidemics that plague the continent. The politics of disease control requires the crafting of cooperative partnerships to accommodate the divergent interests of multiple actors. Recent outbreaks of COVID-19 and Ebola had a significant impact on African economies. It is extremely important to prioritize health in the African development agendas. The African Union (AU) should leverage the momentum of the rise of GHD to (i) navigate the politics of global health governance in an interconnected world(ii) develop robust preparedness and disease response strategies to tackle emerging and reemerging disease epidemics in the region (iii) address the linkages between health and broader human security issues driven by climate change-induced food, water, and other insecurities (iv) mobilize resources and capacities to train health officials in the craft of diplomacy. Conclusion: The AU, Regional Economic Communities (RECs), and African Centres for Disease Control should harmonize their plans and strategies and align them towards a common goal that integrates health in African development agendas. The AU must innovatively harness the practice and tools of GHD towards developing the necessary partnerships with relevant actors in the global health arena to achieve the health targets of the Sustainable Development Goals.
Fulltext The WHO's 75th anniversary: WHO at a pivotal moment in history

Gostin LO, Chirwa DM, Clark H, Habibi R, Kümmel B, Mahmood J, et al.

BMJ Glob Health, 2023 Apr;8(4).
PMID: 37085271 DOI: 10.1136/bmjgh-2023-012344

The World Health Organisation (WHO) was inaugurated in 1948 to bring the world together to ensure the highest attainable standard of health for all. Establishing health governance under the United Nations (UN), WHO was seen as the preeminent leader in public health, promoting a healthier world following the destruction of World War II and ensuring global solidarity to prevent disease and promote health. Its constitutional function would be 'to act as the directing and coordinating authority on international health work'. Yet today, as the world commemorates WHO's 75th anniversary, it faces a historic global health crisis, with governments presenting challenges to its institutional legitimacy and authority amid the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. WHO governance in the coming years will define the future of the Organisation and, crucially, the health and well-being of billions of people across the globe. At this pivotal moment, WHO must learn critical lessons from its past and make fundamental reforms to become the Organisation it was meant to be. We propose reforms in WHO financing, governance, norms, human rights and equity that will lay a foundation for the next generation of global governance for health.
Fulltext The Lancet Commission on lessons for the future from the COVID-19 pandemic

Sachs JD, Karim SSA, Aknin L, Allen J, Brosbøl K, Colombo F, et al.

Lancet, 2022 Oct 08;400(10359):1224-1280.
PMID: 36115368 DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(22)01585-9
Fulltext Repurposed Antiviral Drugs for Covid-19 - Interim WHO Solidarity Trial Results

WHO Solidarity Trial Consortium, Pan H, Peto R, Henao-Restrepo AM, Preziosi MP, Sathiyamoorthy V, et al.

N Engl J Med, 2021 Feb 11;384(6):497-511.
PMID: 33264556 DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2023184

BACKGROUND: World Health Organization expert groups recommended mortality trials of four repurposed antiviral drugs - remdesivir, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir, and interferon beta-1a - in patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19).
METHODS: We randomly assigned inpatients with Covid-19 equally between one of the trial drug regimens that was locally available and open control (up to five options, four active and the local standard of care). The intention-to-treat primary analyses examined in-hospital mortality in the four pairwise comparisons of each trial drug and its control (drug available but patient assigned to the same care without that drug). Rate ratios for death were calculated with stratification according to age and status regarding mechanical ventilation at trial entry.
RESULTS: At 405 hospitals in 30 countries, 11,330 adults underwent randomization; 2750 were assigned to receive remdesivir, 954 to hydroxychloroquine, 1411 to lopinavir (without interferon), 2063 to interferon (including 651 to interferon plus lopinavir), and 4088 to no trial drug. Adherence was 94 to 96% midway through treatment, with 2 to 6% crossover. In total, 1253 deaths were reported (median day of death, day 8; interquartile range, 4 to 14). The Kaplan-Meier 28-day mortality was 11.8% (39.0% if the patient was already receiving ventilation at randomization and 9.5% otherwise). Death occurred in 301 of 2743 patients receiving remdesivir and in 303 of 2708 receiving its control (rate ratio, 0.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81 to 1.11; P = 0.50), in 104 of 947 patients receiving hydroxychloroquine and in 84 of 906 receiving its control (rate ratio, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.89 to 1.59; P = 0.23), in 148 of 1399 patients receiving lopinavir and in 146 of 1372 receiving its control (rate ratio, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.25; P = 0.97), and in 243 of 2050 patients receiving interferon and in 216 of 2050 receiving its control (rate ratio, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.96 to 1.39; P = 0.11). No drug definitely reduced mortality, overall or in any subgroup, or reduced initiation of ventilation or hospitalization duration.
CONCLUSIONS: These remdesivir, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir, and interferon regimens had little or no effect on hospitalized patients with Covid-19, as indicated by overall mortality, initiation of ventilation, and duration of hospital stay. (Funded by the World Health Organization; ISRCTN Registry number, ISRCTN83971151; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04315948.).