Rapid Responses to:
|
|
Rapid Responses published:
-
UN and WHO Leaders could Welcome a Bioeconomic-Psychosocial Paradigm
- Anonymous Cuban Professional (15 November 2006)
|
||||
| Anonymous Cuban
Professional, Cuban professional Send response to journal: |
Dear Editor, I agree with Ms. Levine’s suggestions to the incoming Director-General to refocus WHO work (Nov 11, p. 1015-17 [1]), and will comment the tension between politics and science. The health of starved and poorest populations cannot be achieved only through health scientific-technological interventions independently from an overall long-run socio-economic and scientific-technological life- support process, specially in isolated small rural villages and in slums. There, is necessary to increase the lowest social life-standards by a sustainable economic growth too [2]. With these populations, the WHO concept of physical, mental and social health results narrow. A comprehensive primary life-health care can be promoted through the Sachs-Ehrlich’s clinical economics method [2], making work efficiently the model of medicine and economy in the community of the 1960-70s, within a broader scientific bioeconomic-psychosocial paradigm. Sachs has estimated that if Africa would have followed the free- market policies of East Asian governments, its average growth rate per head between 1965 and 1990 would have reached 4.3%, trebling incomes. The actual figure was a mere 0.8% [3]. Unfortunately, since the 1920s, Latin American, Asian-Oceania, and African countries acquired a distorted view of human development. The achievement of the Millennium Goals to halve hunger, specially in women, reduce two-third of infant and maternal mortalities, and improve overall women life and health [2], only can be possible by scientifically tested ways of socio-economic growth and technological adoption too. Mr. Ban Ki-moon and Mrs. Margaret Chan, both former East Asian Tigers and Dragon’s leaders can integrate better in this wide sense the work of all the UN Agencies, together with the World Bank, the IMF, other public and private agencies, the Gates Foundation and other influential charities. Today, the lack of adjustment of neglectful regimens to the advanced modernization rules for the promotion of democratic institutions, market economies, factor accumulation, and technological adoption, is the first cause of the maintenance of ignorance, ill health, hunger, and extreme poverty in poor countries. It does not matter whether these regimens are of right or left-wing. They both limit the sustainable human development, and hence, the improvement of real human health. History shows that almost all the countries of the world, including the 30 most developed have been former colonies at some time. Modern Western colonialism and imperialism are not the core causes of misery in the last 250 years, although they have contributed. Among these causes are: geographical, demographic, cultural, and economic; lack of scientific capacity and liberty for technological innovation; and autarkic policies of free countries behind inefficient trade barriers [4]. The Western metropolis exploitation was and still is the key successful slogan of communist deceit, misinformation and subversion. It has been so great, that the Third World was going in the 1970s incredibly in the way of the Eastern primitive and pro-slavery Russian metropolis [3]. Last research suggests that the current wealth of nations can be determined from the 1000 B.C., 0 A.C. to 1500 A.C. technology generation and adoption, even before the industrial revolution of the 1700s [5]. In 1750, the world still suffered generalized oppression and poverty levels [2]. The ideological world war against modern socio-economic and scientific-technological growth created by the Eastern Russian metropolis, produced from 1917 to 1991 a delay and setback in socio-economic growth of a third of the world population to those oppression and poverty levels of 1750. Even so, thanks to the democratic and market economy system from 1750 to 2005, of 6300 million people, 50% live in democracy, and 60% escaped from poverty. In 1750, practically all the 900 million people in the world were poor with very few rich. Now, 2780 and 1000 million peoples are of middle and rich classes, while still are 2520 million in overall poverty: 1520 in moderate (daily income < U$S2.00-1.00) and 1000 in extreme poverty (daily income < U$S1.00) [2]. The promoters of the unsuccessful central planning system have always taken so far advantage of the distorted application of the democratic and market economy system. The moribund Cuban socialism, maintained alive by its last metropolis, Venezuela, continues manipulating the island’s rich medical and public health history, misinforming all the poor of the world, the UN and WHO/PAHO, with overseas brigades of enslaved doctors [6], disregarding Cuba’s increasing adult and elder population medical and dental care unsatisfied needs since 1959. Doctors in Cuba earn less than one US-dollar daily. The modern man not only needs to lengthen his physical life having access to doctors and minimum health facilities. He needs to enjoy all the human rights promoted since 1948 by the UN without repression, including in first place, all the individual liberties and economic freedom to do with his life and family what he wants and go where he wants. The modern life sense is not to survive only biologically (like a working animal in malnourishment, misery, and slavery), but to enjoy a decent life and integral health in all its economic, mental and social dimensions too. When a socio-economic policy has been tested by the social practice for 250 years in all the regions of the world, and there are many evidences that it really works and so far there is not a better policy, there should disappear the feeling of tension between politics and science. Thank you. UN: United Nations WHO: World Health Organization IMF: International Monetary Fund B.C.: Before Christ A.C.: After Christ U$S: US dollars References 1. Levine R. Open Letter to the Incoming Director General of the WHO: Time to Refocus. BMJ 2006;333:1015-1017. http://bmj.com/cgi/content/short/333/7576/1015?etoc 2. Sachs JD, The End of Poverty. Economic Possibilities for Our Time. 1st Ed. New York: The Penguin Press, 2005. 3. Andrew C, Mitrokhin V, The World was Going Our Way. The KGB and the Battle for the Third World. 1st Ed. New York: Basic Books, 2005. 4. Landes DS, The Wealth and Poverty of Nations: Why Some Are So Rich and Some So Poor? 1st Ed. New York: W.W. Norton Co. & Inc., 1999. 5. Comin D, Easterly W, Gong E. Was the Wealth of Nations Determined in 1000 B.C.? NBER Working Paper # 12657. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, 2006. http://papers.nber.org/papers/W12657 6. Anon. Cuba's delayed transition needs. Lancet 2006;368:1323. http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140673606695445/fulltext Competing interests: None declared | |||