Since we are running short of class time, I thought we could have a discussion on Dr. Orbinski’s talk here. Did anyone want to talk about any of the points he brought up?
I think an excellent point was the effect of climate change on health care. It’s not something we discussed in class, but it is definitely something that is becoming more and more important.
If droughts are going to increase in the coming years, what immediate actions do we need to take to ensure basic needs such as food, water or healthcare. How does this change the role of organisations like the UN vs. organisations like MSF?
Feel free to post your own questions, thoughts and opinions.
Just as a reminder, posting here counts as participation mark in place of missing classes.
Filed under: General
I think there has to be more research done on how the climate change will alter how diseases are spread in the world. With climate change affecting the environment in ways such as floods, malaria and diarrheal disease. By being able to predict how climate change will affect these, health systems can be strengthened in preparation.
Also, There has been a lot of focus on the direct consequences of climate change, such as rising sea levels, extinction of animals, health should also be focused upon when climate change is researched.
That’s definitely a good point. I didn’t think about climate change affecting the spread of diseases.
I also thought that the privitisation of health care was an interesting point. How common is private health care in Africa? Thoughts?
Reducing the climate change that is projected is imperative since continual drought and floods and other extreme conditions will force huge populations to migrate that will not only change current knowledge of diseases and viruses but could lead to political crises. As we discusses earlier in the term the strong relationship between political crises and violence against women, the different ethnicities and religions etc convening to compete for sparce resources will provoke war and conflict. I think that in response to such a correlation, NGOs should report migratory facts that governments should use to build a comprehensive infrastructure to provide adequate food and health to it’s population while advoiding explotation of another countries resources.
http://www.economist.com/world/international/displaystory.cfm?story_id=12208005
I just want to post what I thought about Media and humanitarian efforts. This is closely tied to what Dr. Shafik Dharamsi is working on (Ethical International Service Learning). The whole thing with the media reporting upon what is happening around the world by portraying the worst does cause compassion fatigue, but wouldn’t ‘progress fatigue’ be the result of what happens if we show what is good. I just think the the media has taken this path because it is what appeals to human nature the most. Everybody knows how it is: we remember one bad thing, its hard to remember all the good., people remember mistakes. This is probably because humans view themselves and others as ‘good’ , so good becomes normal, and when something bad happens thats out of the normal so we remember it.
Now back to ethical ISL, by having advertisements that compel people to volunteer overseas, at least I think, won’t do the world any better. This will just contribute to voluntourism which I personally don’t think helps. As Dr. James Orbinski said, politics is important, and it is politics that I think will cause the greatest change, and these political efforts will be based on the awareness and activism of citizens in their own country. Granted, those who go overseas bring back a certain amount of awareness, but weighing the good and bad, having professional journalists overseas reporting is better than having people going overseas to build buildings or teaching english (I have no evidence to back that up though).
So I agree with what Kevin said in class. Raising Awareness. That is what media should do. Not pushing people to go overseas to help. Because if we do, for-profit organizations will sprout up catering to those who want to help (but how much help are they providing). If that is the path we take then ethical ISL is something that should have to be looked into.
Media and politics. I recommend people read about “CNN effect” and “Manufacturing Consent” (manufacturing consent by Noam Chomsky is really good, or just look up the terms online).
Dr. Orbinski’s link between climate change and health aid is highly relevant and certainly needs to become a focus of research as Hans pointed out. But is research really enough? It will take years to accumulate a body of evidence that will show a direct relationship between the two factors (even though common sense tells us there is a link). Think of how long it took for the concept of global warming to be widely accepted…
I really don’t know what solutions to offer, but I do have another problem to throw in to the mix. Currently, consumption patterns in the Western world is the major contributor to climate change. Developing countries are working towards raising their standards of living based on precedent set by our way of life. This means that even if North American and European countries are able to decrease CO2 output and transition to more sustainable production and consumption patterns, other countries will be increasing their CO2 emissions as people can afford to consume more. This means the rate of global warming is going to increase further before it starts to decrease.
I don’t know if I explained that very well… it’s something I learned about in a geography course. It raises the question: can countries striving to increase their standards of living do so in a more environmentally friendly way, without further contributing to global warming? ie. can they decrease child mortality rates, increase access to education, empower women (achieve MDG goals) without causing increased use of fossil fuel and other natural resources through cars, manufactured goods, processed foods, etc.
One of the most interesting things that captured my attention during Dr. Orbinski’s talk was how he talked about the occurrence of “neglected diseases” (such as Malaria, TB) in Canada and other developed countries . I mentioned this to Dr. Orbinski and he agreed that it is interesting how we are becoming the developing world again. We are responsible in many ways for why the developing world is the developing world, (or why there are fragile or failed states), and why many die of these diseases. Now some may argue that with the reoccurrence of these diseases we are becoming the developing world again. Soon, diseases such as malaria or TB will become our disease. It’s like, what goes around comes all the way back around. Isn’t it?
How would this affect research on neglected diseases? what do you think?