Health And The Interconnectedness And Critique Of Global Health

Global Health Critique

Humans rely on each other for survival, whether mentally or physically. When the responsibility of survival relies on other members of the group and their help and not just the individual, all members’ chance of survival are improved (Taflinger, 1996). Therefore, when addressing the idea of improving health on a global level, the need for interconnectedness and reliance on each other cannot be ignored. As Holtz (2017) emphasizes, global health has no geographical or political boundaries and encompasses the health of the entire planet. So, why does global health matter? The health of people in a certain area in the world eventually, in some way whether positive or negative, can affect another area of the world, if not the entire world. This effect may be directly related to health, such as the spreading of disease,

For areas in the world, such as Japan, who have some of the best health outcomes in the world (Holtz, 2017), why should they worry about helping other areas in the world that are not as fortunate? Aside from the obvious answers that address morals and values for helping those systems in need, there are still areas in the best healthcare systems that could improve. This improvement could stem from learning from other healthcare systems. An important concept to consider when addressing this issue is the actual definition of health. The World Health Organization (2017) defines health as “ a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity.” Therefore, when comparing different countries and their outcomes related to mental health, social and political stability, risk factors for specific diseases, and even their contributions to environmental degradation, these “less-fortunate” countries do not seem as unfortunate as initially