Suchergebnisse

The United Nations (UN) Sustainable Development Agenda offers an opportunity to realise the right to health for all. The Agenda's "interlinked and integrated" Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) provide the prospect of focusing attention and mobilising resources not just for the provision of health services through universal health coverage (UHC), but also for addressing the underlying social, structural, and political determinants of illness and health inequity. However, achieving the goals' promises will require new mechanisms for inter-sectoral coordination and action, enhanced instruments for rational priority-setting that involve affected population groups, and new approaches to ensuring accountability. Rights-based approaches can inform developments in each of these areas. In this commentary, we build upon a paper by Forman et al and propose that the significance of the SDGs lies in their ability to move beyond a biomedical approach to health and healthcare, and to seize the opportunity for the realization of the right to health in its fullest, widest, most fundamental sense: the right to a health-promoting and health protecting environment for each and every one of us. We argue that realizing the right to health inherent in the SDG Agenda is possible but demands that we seize on a range of commitments, not least those outlined in other goals, and pursue complementary openings in the Agenda – from inclusive policy-making, to novel partnerships, to monitoring and review. It is critical that we do not risk losing the right to health in the rhetoric of the SDGs and ensure that we make good on the promise of leaving no one behind.

Background: In 2017, the G20 health ministers convened for the first time to discuss global health and issued a communiqué outlining their health priorities, as the BRICS and G7 have done for years. As these political clubs hold considerable political and economic influence, their respective global health agendas may influence both global health priorities and the priorities of other countries and actors. Methods: Given the rising salience of global health in global summitry, we analyzed the health ministerial communiqués issued by the BRICS, G7 and G20 after the SDGs were adopted in 2015. We compared the stated health priorities of the BRICS, G7 and G20 against one another and against the targets of SDG 3 on health, using a traffic light system to assess the quality of their commitments. Results: With regard to the SDG 3 targets, the BRICS, G7 and G20 priorities overlapped in their focus on emergency preparedness and universal health coverage, but diverged in areas of environmental pollution, mental health, and maternal and child health. Health issues with considerable associated burdens of disease, including substance use, road traffic injuries and sexual health, were missing from the agendas of all three political clubs. In terms of SDG 3 principles and ways of working, the BRICS, G7 and G20 varied in their emphasis on human rights, equity and engagement with non-state actors, but all expressed their explicit commitment to Agenda 2030. Conclusions: The leadership of BRICS, G7 and G20 on global health is welcome. However, their relatively narrow focus on the potential impact of ill-health primarily in relation to the economy and trade may not be sufficiently comprehensive to achieve the Agenda 2030 vision of promoting health equity and leaving no-one behind. Recommendations for the BRICS, G7 and G20 based on this analysis include: 1) expanding focus to the neglected SDG 3 health targets; 2) placing greater emphasis on upstream determinants of health; 3) greater commitment to equity and leaving no-one behind; 4) adopting explicit commitments to rights-based approaches; and 5) making commitments that are of higher quality and which include time-bound quantitative targets and clear accountability mechanisms. ; Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies ; Non UBC ; Reviewed ; Faculty

What is health? / Charles Foster and Jonathan Herring -- Pathways towards a framework convention on global health : political mobilization for the human right to health / Kent Buse, Lawrence Gostin and Eric Friedman -- The bloodless ideological supreme court battle over the affordable care act and the 'right to health' in America / George Annas -- Conceptualising Implementation of the Right to Health : the Learning Network for Health and Human Rights, Western Cape, South Africa / Maria Stutaford -- Access to essential medicines in Kenya : intellectual property, anti-counterfeiting and the right to health / John Harrington -- Vulnerability : an issue for law and policy in pandemic planning? / Belinda Bennett and Terry Carney -- Legally vulnerable : What is vulnerability and who is vulnerable? / Hazel Biggs and Caroline Jones -- The ECHR, Health Care and Irregular Migrants / Sylvie Da Lomba -- Rights-based Approaches to HIV in the Middle East and North Africa Region / David Patterson, Shereen El Feki and Khadija Moalla -- Indigenous people, emerging research and global health / Mark Henaghan -- Human Trafficking and Organ Trade : Does the Law Really Care for the Health of People? / Daniel Sperling -- Cross Border Commercial Surrogacy : A global patchwork of inconsistency and confusion / Kerry Petersen -- Maternal mortality and human rights : from theory to practice / Judith Bueno De Mesquita -- Disability, human rights and global health : past, present and future / Maya Sabatello -- What can human rights do for women's health? / Kristine Hessler -- The practice of uvulectomy in Chad, children's rights and public health challenges / Jacquineau Azetsop -- Adding non-ideal agents to work out a pending debt / Florencia Luna -- Global ageing : Demographic and ethical challenges to population health and development policies / Michal Engelman -- Libertarian paternalism and public health nudges / Stephen Holland -- Global health, law and ethics : Fragmented sovereignty and the limits of universal theory / John Coggon -- International human rights laws and principles : cornerstone for defining health inequalities and health equity / Paula Braveman -- Exposing the limits of the law? Biotechnological challenges to global health / Sara Fovargue -- Moving forward : further reflections on global health law norms and the PPCA framework to eliminate health disparities / Gwendolyn Majette -- Global health law : aspirational, paradoxical or oxymoronic? / George P Smith -- Environmental sustainability and global health law : the case study of global artificial photosynthesis / Tom Faunce, Anton Wasson and Kim Crow -- Bridging the health/law divide in global health : The role of law professors / Scott Burris -- International law and global health / Geoffrey B. Cockerham and William C. Cockerham -- Competitition and co-operation in global health governance : the impact of multiple framing / Colin McInnes and Roemer Mahler -- The interlocking world of global health governance : the tobacco industry, bilateral investment treaties and health policy / Hadii M. Mamadu -- Mission (im)possible? WHO as a 'norm entrepreneur' in global health governance / Obijiofor Aginam -- Policy space for health in the context of emerging European trade policies / Meri Koivasulo and Nicola Watt -- An agenda for normative policy analysis in global health governance / Benjamin Mason Meier -- The contributions of science and politics to global food safety law / Erik Millstone

BACKGROUND: Marketing of foods and non-alcoholic beverages high in saturated fats, trans-fatty acids, free sugars, or salt ("unhealthy foods") to children is contributing to increasing child obesity. However, many countries have not implemented WHO recommendations to restrict marketing of unhealthy foods to children. We sought to understand the absence of marketing restrictions and identify potential strategic actions to develop and implement such restrictions in Nepal. METHODS: Eighteen semi-structured interviews were conducted. Thematic analysis was based on Baker et al.'s 18 factor-framework for understanding what drives political commitment to nutrition, organised by five categories: Actors; Institutions; Political and societal contexts; Knowledge, evidence and framing; Capacities and resources. RESULTS: All factors in Baker et al.'s framework were reported to be acting largely as barriers to Nepal developing and implementing marketing restrictions. Six factors were identified by the highest number of respondents: the threat of private sector interference in policy-making; lack of international actor support; absence of well-designed and enacted policies and legislation; lack of political commitment to regulate; insufficient mobilisation of existing evidence to spur action and lack of national evidence to guide regulatory design; and weak implementation capacity. Opportunities for progress were identified as Nepal's ability to combat private sector interference - as previously demonstrated in tobacco control. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study conducted in Nepal examining the lack of restrictions on marketing unhealthy foods to children. Our findings reflect the manifestation of power in the policy process. The absence of civil society and a multi-stakeholder coalition demanding change on marketing of unhealthy food to children, the threat of private sector interference in introducing marketing restrictions, the promotion of norms and narratives around modernity, consumption and the primary role of the ...

Antenatal syphilis control is an integral component of reproductive health policies in most countries. In many of these countries, however, the existence of a health policy does not automatically translate into an effective health programme. We argue that neglecting to take into account the perspectives of all stakeholders when planning programmes may be the reason that functional and sustained interventions for antenatal syphilis are lacking. Stakeholders may include health policy decision-makers, programme managers, service delivery personnel (on whom implementation depends), as well as the pregnant women, families, and communities who will most benefit from the intervention. We describe how to undertake a multilevel assessment in order to identify stakeholders, identify interlinked perspectives, and analyse these perspectives within the socioeconomic, cultural and political environment within which an intervention is designed to be delivered. Using this multidisciplinary approach, we propose that the barriers to, and opportunities for, turning health policy into effective practice will be identified, and the result will be the formulation of a broad programme response to ensure implementation of the policy. Undertaking a multilevel assessment is but the first step in identifying barriers to successful programmes. Currently there is a lack of strong political support for this intervention at national and international levels. Devising strategies to address these potential barriers requires a broad range of skills and approaches some of which are outlined in this paper.

Antenatal syphilis control is an integral component of reproductive health policies in most countries. In many of these countries, however, the existence of a health policy does not automatically translate into an effective health programme. We argue that neglecting to take into account the perspectives of all stakeholders when planning programmes may be the reason that functional and sustained interventions for antenatal syphilis are lacking. Stakeholders may include health policy decision-makers, programme managers, service delivery personnel (on whom implementation depends), as well as the pregnant women, families, and communities who will most benefit from the intervention. We describe how to undertake a multilevel assessment in order to identify stakeholders, identify interlinked perspectives, and analyse these perspectives within the socioeconomic, cultural and political environment within which an intervention is designed to be delivered. Using this multidisciplinary approach, we propose that the barriers to, and opportunities for, turning health policy into effective practice will be identified, and the result will be the formulation of a broad programme response to ensure implementation of the policy. Undertaking a multilevel assessment is but the first step in identifying barriers to successful programmes. Currently there is a lack of strong political support for this intervention at national and international levels. Devising strategies to address these potential barriers requires a broad range of skills and approaches some of which are outlined in this paper.

BACKGROUND: Labour migrants, who represent over sixty per cent of international migrants globally, frequently have poorer health status than the population of host countries. These health inequities are determined in a large part by structural drivers including political, commercial, economic, normative and social factors, including living and working conditions. Achieving health equity for migrant workers requires structural-level interventions to address these determinants. METHODS: We undertook a systematic review of peer-reviewed literature designed to answer the question "what is the evidence for the effectiveness of interventions to address the structural determinants of health for labour migrants?" using the Ovid Medline electronic database. FINDINGS: We found only two papers that evaluated structural interventions to improve the health of labour migrants. Both papers evaluated the impact of insurance – health or social. In contrast, we found 19 evaluations of more proximal, small-scale interventions focused on changing the knowledge, attitudes and behaviours of labour migrants. INTERPRETATION: Despite the rise in international migration, including for work, and evidence that labour migrants have some higher health risks, there is a paucity of research addressing the structural determinants of health inequities in labour migrants. The research community (including funders and academic institutions) needs to pay greater attention to the structural determinants of health – which generally requires working across disciplines and sectors and thinking more politically about health and health inequities. FUNDING: Wellcome Trust (208712/Z/17/Z).

Background: Labour migrants, who represent over sixty per cent of international migrants globally, frequently have poorer health status than the population of host countries. These health inequities are determined in a large part by structural drivers including political, commercial, economic, normative and social factors, including living and working conditions. Achieving health equity for migrant workers requires structural-level interventions to address these determinants. Methods: We undertook a systematic review of peer-reviewed literature designed to answer the question "what is the evidence for the effectiveness of interventions to address the structural determinants of health for labour migrants?" using the Ovid Medline electronic database. Findings: We found only two papers that evaluated structural interventions to improve the health of labour migrants. Both papers evaluated the impact of insurance - health or social. In contrast, we found 19 evaluations of more proximal, small-scale interventions focused on changing the knowledge, attitudes and behaviours of labour migrants. Interpretation: Despite the rise in international migration, including for work, and evidence that labour migrants have some higher health risks, there is a paucity of research addressing the structural determinants of health inequities in labour migrants. The research community (including funders and academic institutions) needs to pay greater attention to the structural determinants of health - which generally requires working across disciplines and sectors and thinking more politically about health and health inequities.