From international health to global health

Global Medicine, Parasites, and Tasmania

Until the 1970s, infectious disease training in most medical schools was limited to those diseases common in the area of instruction. Those wishing to explore a more globalised curriculum were encouraged to undertake specialist postgraduate training at schools or institutes of tropical medicine. However, the increase in global trade and travel from the 1970s onward led to dramatic changes in the likelihood of returning travellers and new immigrants presenting with tropical infections in temperate regions. Furthermore, population growth and the changing relationships between animals, the environment, and man in agriculture accentuated the importance of a wider understanding of emerging infectious diseases, zoonotic diseases and parasitic infections. These epidemiological facts were not adequately reflected in the medical literature or medical curriculum at the time. The orientation on tropical infections needed specialised attention, including instruction on diagnosis and treatment of such infections. We describe key global health events and how the changing field of global medicine, from the 1970s to early 2000, impacted on medical education and research. We describe the impact of global health changes in the Tasmanian context, a temperate island state of Australia. We retrospectively analysed data of patients diagnosed with parasites and present a list of endemic and non-endemic parasites reported during this period. Finally, we reflect on the new approaches to the changing needs of global health and challenges that medical programmes, learners and educators face today.

Global Health as "umbrella term" - a qualitative study among Global Health teachers in German medical education

Background

The increasing impact of globalisation on healthcare demands new knowledge, skills and attitudes from healthcare professionals. One consequence of this is the rise of Global Health (GH) programs in health education all over the world. In Germany no consensus exists on what GH is and how it should be taught. This study used a grounded theory approach. We conducted eleven in-depth interviews with GH teachers in German medical education to ask them about their views on Global Health and the approaches they took in teaching these topics. Data collection and Analysis informed each other and followed an inductive approach.

Results

Our research identified three major questions: (1) What is GH? (2) What belongs to GH? (3) How can GH be taught? A central finding of our study is the understanding of GH as an umbrella term. We show how this understanding helps clarify the relation between GH and Public Health, International Health and Tropical medicine. At the core of GH we see the supraterritorial determinants of health. Surrounding the core, we describe a wide variety of topics that are a facultative, but not necessarily a compulsory part GH. One of the key characteristics of GH within all its aspects is its multidisciplinary nature. Based on this understanding we present models about the content of GH, how it can be taught and how GH teaching improves and strengthens overall medical education.

Conclusions

This is to our knowledge the first study that conducts in-depth interviews with GH teachers to explore the practical understanding of GH in medical education. While the generalisability of our results needs to be subject of further research, the models presented can help shape the future discourse around GH and its integration into medical education.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12992-018-0352-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

From “Health for All” to “Health as Investment:” The Role of Economic Rationalities in the Transition from International to Global Health 1978–2013

This chapter examines the role of economic rationalities in the transition from international health to global health since the late 1970s. It focuses, in particular, on the recent rise to prominence of non-communicable diseases on the global health agenda. Once considered to be diseases of affluence, non-communicable diseases (NCDs) such as cancer, diabetes, cardiovascular disease have recently come to be seen as a threat to both the global population and the global economy. Strategies to combat the proliferation of NCDs have simultaneous been shown to be particularly cost-effective, making NCD interventions a solid global health investment. This chapter contrasts the current era of global health, in which health is imagined in as a form of human capital and a site of investment with a post-war era of international health during which health was advocated as a human right and public good. Drawing on empirical material including historical documents, published reports and the scientific literature, it argues that the transition from international to global health can be best understood as resulting from the rise of economic rationalities in the field of world health over the last 25 years.

Global health-a circumpolar perspective

Global health should encompass circumpolar health if it is to transcend the traditional approach of the "rich North" assisting the "poor South." Although the eight Arctic states are among the world's most highly developed countries, considerable health disparities exist among regions across the Arctic, as well as between northern and southern regions and between indigenous and nonindigenous populations within some of these states. While sharing commonalities such as a sparse population, geographical remoteness, harsh physical environment, and underdeveloped human resources, circumpolar regions in the northern hemisphere have developed different health systems, strategies, and practices, some of which are relevant to middle and lower income countries. As the Arctic gains prominence as a sentinel of global issues such as climate change, the health of circumpolar populations should be part of the global health discourse and policy development.

[The transition from 'international' to 'global' public health and the World Health Organization]

Within the context of international public health, 'global health' seems to be emerging as a recognized term of preference. This article presents a critical analysis of the meaning and importance of 'global health' and situates its growing popularity within a historical context. A specific focus of this work is the role of the World Health Organization - WHO in both 'international' and 'global' health, and as na agent of transition from one to the other. Between 1948 and 1998, the WHO went through a period of hardship as it came up against an organizational crisis, budget cuts and a diminished status, especially when confronted with the growing influence of new, power players like the World Bank. We suggest that the WHO has responded to this changing international context by inititating its own process of restructuring and repositioning as an agent for coordinating, strategically planning and leading 'global health' initiatives.

The World Health Organization and the transition from "international" to "global" public health

The term "global health" is rapidly replacing the older terminology of "international health." We describe the role of the World Health Organization (WHO) in both international and global health and in the transition from one to the other. We suggest that the term "global health" emerged as part of larger political and historical processes, in which WHO found its dominant role challenged and began to reposition itself within a shifting set of power alliances. Between 1948 and 1998, WHO moved from being the unquestioned leader of international health to being an organization in crisis, facing budget shortfalls and diminished status, especially given the growing influence of new and powerful players. We argue that WHO began to refashion itself as the coordinator, strategic planner, and leader of global health initiatives as a strategy of survival in response to this transformed international political context.