Suchergebnisse

Israel has led the world in rolling out its COVID-19 vaccination program. This experience provides lessons that others can learn from. It is, however, necessary to consider some national specificities, including the small size of the country, its young population, and the political imperative to drive this program forward. Israel also has a number of other advantages, including a strong public health infrastructure. The lessons that can be learnt include the importance of coordinating delivery mechanisms with the inevitable prioritisation of groups within the population, timely deployment of a skilled cadre of health workers, a recognition that not everyone in the population shares in the benefits of digital connectedness, the need to reach out to disadvantaged groups, based on an understanding of the barriers that they face, and the importance of placing COVID-19 vaccination within a comprehensive response to the pandemic.

Israel has led the world in rolling out its COVID-19 vaccination program. This experience provides lessons that others can learn from. It is, however, necessary to consider some national specificities, including the small size of the country, its young population, and the political imperative to drive this program forward. Israel also has a number of other advantages, including a strong public health infrastructure. The lessons that can be learnt include the importance of coordinating delivery mechanisms with the inevitable prioritisation of groups within the population, timely deployment of a skilled cadre of health workers, a recognition that not everyone in the population shares in the benefits of digital connectedness, the need to reach out to disadvantaged groups, based on an understanding of the barriers that they face, and the importance of placing COVID-19 vaccination within a comprehensive response to the pandemic.

Although leadership has been studied extensively, most research has focused on the political and military spheres. More recent work has also examined the role of leadership in sectors such as manufacturing and technology, both areas where it is essential to encourage and nurture innovation. Yet, in the health sector, where innovation is now high on the policy agenda in many countries, there is a paucity of research on how leadership can foster a culture of innovation. In this perspective, written for those seeking to foster innovation in the health sector, we offer a narrative synthesis approach of eight theories and concepts that have been empirically shown to support innovation through all phases of the innovation process.

We trace the development of the concept of the corporate determinants of health. We argue that these determinants are predicated on the unchecked power of corporations and that the means by which corporations exert power is increasingly unseen. We identify four of the ways corporations influence health: defining the dominant narrative; setting the rules by which society, especially trade, operates; commodifying knowledge; and undermining political, social, and economic rights. We identify how public health professionals can respond to these manifestations of power.

Brexit will have profound implications for health and health policy yet, while much attention has focused on health professionals, medicines and health protection, the risk of food insecurity, and thus health, has received less attention. We identify five major threats to the availability and affordability of food supplies. These are a lack of regulatory alignment restricting ability to import foods from the EU and beyond, a shortage of agricultural labour in the UK, increased prices of imported foods due to tariffs, damage to supply chains, for example, due to customs delays and loss of interoperability of transportation, and damage to agricultural production and food flows in Ireland.

In this commentary, we review the growth of populist politics, associated with exploitation of what has been termed fake news. We explore how certain words have been used in similar contexts historically, in particular the term "enemy of the people," especially with regard to public health. We then set out 6 principles for public health professionals faced with these situations. First, using their epidemiological skills, they can provide insights into the reasons underlying the growth of populist politics. Second using their expertise in modelling and health impact assessment, they can anticipate and warn about the consequences of populist policies. Third, they can support the institutions that are necessary for effective public health. Fourth they can reclaim the narrative, rejecting hatred and division, to promote social solidarity. Fifth, they can support fact checking and the use of evidence. Finally, they should always remember the lessons of history, and in particular, the way that public health has, on occasions, collaborated with totalitarian and genocidal regimes.

In this commentary, we endorse concerns about the health impact of the trans-pacific partnership (TPP), paying particular attention to its mechanisms for investor state dispute settlement. We then describe the different, judge-led approach being advocated by the European Commission team negotiating the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, arguing that, while not perfect, it offers significant advantages.

Over the past 15 years, the European Union (EU) has spent around €80 billion on science research via Framework Programmes (FP5, FP6 and FP7). In 2014, a new programme, Horizon 2020, will likely invest another €70 billion over 6 years. Health research has been a major part: between 12% and 17% was spent on official FP5 and FP6 health research lines, although our work categorizing all EU science projects puts the health-related investment proportion nearer to 20%. Here, we compare our analyses and experiences with the European Commission's own impact assessments and plans that inform the Horizon 2020 programme. Much is moving in the right direction but some key gaps are overlooked. We discuss four areas: red tape, what to fund, harnessing informatics and neglect of Eastern Europe.

Over the past 15 years, the European Union (EU) has spent around €80 billion on science research via Framework Programmes (FP5, FP6 and FP7). In 2014, a new programme, Horizon 2020, will likely invest another €70 billion over 6 years. Health research has been a major part: between 12% and 17% was spent on official FP5 and FP6 health research lines, although our work categorizing all EU science projects puts the health-related investment proportion nearer to 20%. Here, we compare our analyses and experiences with the European Commission's own impact assessments and plans that inform the Horizon 2020 programme. Much is moving in the right direction but some key gaps are overlooked. We discuss four areas: red tape, what to fund, harnessing informatics and neglect of Eastern Europe.

Light therapy is still used to treat a number of common diseases in Russia. The practice is firmly anchored in history: Soviet clinical practice was divorced from the emerging field of evidence-based medicine. Medical researchers were cut off from international medical research and scientific literature, with much Soviet scientific activity based on a particular socialist ideology. In this study, the use of light therapy serves as a case study to explore tensions between international evidence-based medicine and practices developed in isolation under the Soviet Union, the legacy of which is to the detriment of many patients today. We used four different search methods to uncover scientific and grey literature, both historical and contemporary. We assessed the changing frequency of publications over time and contrasted the volume of literature on light therapy with more orthodox treatments such as statins and painkillers. Our search found an increasing number and comparatively large body of scientific publications on light therapy in the Russian language, and many publications emanating from prestigious Russian institutions. Combined with our analysis of the historical literature and our appraisal of 22 full text articles, this leads us to suggest that light therapy entered mainstream Soviet medical practice before the Stalinist period and still occupies an important position in contemporary Russian clinical practice. We propose that this outdated treatment survives in Russia in part due to the political, economic and social forces that helped to popularize it during Soviet times, and by the seeming justification offered by poorly executed studies.

Light therapy is still used to treat a number of common diseases in Russia. The practice is firmly anchored in history: Soviet clinical practice was divorced from the emerging field of evidence-based medicine. Medical researchers were cut off from international medical research and scientific literature, with much Soviet scientific activity based on a particular socialist ideology. In this study, the use of light therapy serves as a case study to explore tensions between international evidence-based medicine and practices developed in isolation under the Soviet Union, the legacy of which is to the detriment of many patients today. We used four different search methods to uncover scientific and grey literature, both historical and contemporary. We assessed the changing frequency of publications over time and contrasted the volume of literature on light therapy with more orthodox treatments such as statins and painkillers. Our search found an increasing number and comparatively large body of scientific publications on light therapy in the Russian language, and many publications emanating from prestigious Russian institutions. Combined with our analysis of the historical literature and our appraisal of 22 full text articles, this leads us to suggest that light therapy entered mainstream Soviet medical practice before the Stalinist period and still occupies an important position in contemporary Russian clinical practice. We propose that this outdated treatment survives in Russia in part due to the political, economic and social forces that helped to popularize it during Soviet times, and by the seeming justification offered by poorly executed studies.

Countries that are in transition from communism provide the opportunity for comparing the effects on health of communist and democratic political systems

The Royal College of Physicians has long played an important role in the struggle against tobacco. As tobacco is a legally traded substance, its regulation increasingly takes place at a European level, where governments seek to balance concerns about public health and free trade. Consequently, it is essential that those seeking to reduce the toll of tobacco-related disease understand the nature of the debate at a European level, in particular the strategies being pursued by the tobacco industry to undermine efforts to promote public health. After describing the European legislative process, this paper explores the current European debates on advertising restrictions, warning labels and cigarette composition, bans on public smoking, taxation, alleged industry involvement in smuggling, and subsidies for tobacco producers. It concludes by examining areas where the College might take action.