Talk:Global health

Request for changes
I propose major changes in this article. It no longer reads like a concise entry in an encyclopedia whose main objective is to provide basic information about a topic.

The section on bioethics should be incorporated into the bioethics entry. As of my examination on Dec. 4, 2006, the bioethics section overwhelms the news on global health.

The section on brain drain, while pertinent, is overlong and veers into advocacy. CGorman1271 16:23, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Hidden material
In a cleanup edit, I uncovered a very large part of this article that has been hidden. It starts with "Global Health and HIV/AIDS" and goes to the end. It needs a thorough cleanup. JonHarder 04:02, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Have started cutting down article length
Article needs to be cut in half to get it under the 32 KB Wiki guideline for readable articles. CGorman1271 20:57, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Global Health as a political problems and entity
The article must be changed considerably to meet Wiki standards (length, format, references etc.) but the most serious concern is that the current perspectives here are very much from a traditional medical allied health science perspective. Global health (IOM definition) transcends national boundaries and addresses global social, cultural and physical determinants of population health (NOT disease); it is by implication a political challenge that cannot be taken on by nation-states alone. Thus, this is an issue of concern for global good governance and global civil society.

Evelyne de Leeuw —Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.132.1.1 (talk) 04:53, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Global health is different than, say public health, because it is a multidisciplinary study. It is a concern of politics, labor, education and so on. I think this needs to be pertinent within this article. It is not just another version of international health.--MrNiceGuy1113 (talk) 17:35, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Restructuring the Article
I think the way this discussion is going, this article probably needs to be totally (or nearly so) scrapped and given new structure. Maybe a logical way to go would be to start with a clearer "History" section, maybe beginning with the evolution of tropical medicine as a specialty during the 19th century, and bringing it up to about 2000. Then maybe focus on several broader topics, maybe: -New/Re-emerging infections (so HIV/AIDS, TB, SARS, H5N1, etc.) -Malaria -Non-Communicable Chronic Disease -Nutrition -Sanitation

I don't think any of these sections need to be really long, especially as there are already extensive articles on each of these specific topics.

Any thoughts? Daneel (talk) 17:22, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree that none of the following sections need to be very long. They can read on their proper Wikipedia page. I do think this article needs to talk about its relationship with other fields, such as education and possibly even corruption in governments and how that leads to lack of resources within healthcare systems in developing countries. I feel this may be more true to the topic than naming of diseases. Thoughts?--MrNiceGuy1113 (talk) 17:41, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

In the chronic disease subsection, I think it may be worth noting that chronic kidney disease is worth mentioning as well.--MrNiceGuy1113 (talk) 18:02, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Removal of cleanup
I have now removed the cleanup banner. I have made huge number of changes, mainly in the disease section where I have added a number of references. I also added a section on respiratory diseases etc. I did some restructuring and relatively small changes in other parts as well. I feel the disease and nutrition section is now more up to date with current understanding of these issues. However, there is still room for improvement. For example, I feel the introductory part could be improved. The ideal structure and content of this entry is debatable depending on perspective. Any thoughts? Are any important issues missing? --Useknowledge (talk) 20:01, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Much improvement
Many thanks to Useknowledge, whoever you are. The entry is much more easy, readable and concise--a huge improvement.

Next steps: the section on "health conditions" is a little scatter-shot--and to Evelyne de Leeuw's point, it focuses on diseases and not health. Would like to see some thought given to organization there--perhaps along the lines Daneel suggests. This will probably take some discussion first before editing.

As for disciplinary approaches to global health--is there room to take note of the ongoing debate over whether health is a human right?

CGorman1271 (talk) 18:41, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I think that this is a perfectly good talk section for the argument of whether or not health is a human debate. How do we incorporate this debate into the actual article though?--MrNiceGuy1113 (talk) 17:45, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Microsoft
Under the history section, I've deleted a reference about Bill Gates donating billions on international health initiatives. After reviewing the references given on his bio page, I could not find a specific example relating to billions given for global health. However, I know that the "Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation" has been giving serious amounts in support to global issues. Until we can present this better, I doubt stating Gates as this century's example is worth mentioning, giving readers the impression that Microsoft is a top player in global health support. --Enigma (talk) 02:06, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Family Health International
Why is Family Health International a See Also link? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Einlowhood (talk • contribs) 22:12, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

International Labour Organization
I was wondering what other people's thoughts were about this subject. Should this article mention the International Labour Organization? I feel that worker's rights is a component of global health since workers need to be health in order to work (and the subjects transcends much deeper than this)? If not here then is there another page relevant as to where a subject like this should be placed?--MrNiceGuy1113 (talk) 17:53, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Understanding Anatomy and Physiology of the Respiratory System
Anatomy and physiology of the human respiratory system assists in illustrating the different lung structures which are affected by respiratory diseases. This can be helpful to countries that suffer from lack of information and specific diagnoses of respiratory disease. The main function of the respiratory system is to transport oxygen to the blood and expel carbon dioxide from the blood which assists in cellular metabolism. With the assistance of the diaphragm muscle, the lungs expand and contract which forces oxygen from the air in and out of the lungs. When inhaling, the air travels to the lungs from the nose to the pharynx, the trachea, the bronchi, the bronchioles and alveoli. Alveoli are small air sacs at the ends of the bronchioles where gas exchange occurs. Oxygen is carried across the membranes of the alveoli and into the blood by attaching to hemoglobin molecules. This oxygenated blood is sent from the lungs, to the heart and out to the body through the arterial circulation. The used blood circulates carbon dioxide and deoxygenated blood back through the venous system to the heart. The heart pumps it to the lungs and across the membranes of the alveoli where it is to be expelled out of the body through exhalation, and the cycle begins again. The respiratory system includes structures to help keep irritants from entering the lungs. There are hairs in the nose, cilia in the trachea and mucus in the bronchi which trap and lubricate irritants in the airway. If these systems fail, inflammation and constriction of the airway can occur, and keeps the body from receiving enough oxygen and releasing carbon dioxide . Many respiratory diseases are associated with signs and symptoms including difficulty breathing, wheezing, coughing, shortness of breath and weakness. If untreated, improper gas exchange can lead to respiratory distress, respiratory disease and can be fatal. Illustrating the anatomy and physiology of the respiratory tract helps identify where problems occur, why they occur and assist in prevention.71.238.178.207 (talk) 23:50, 16 October 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.238.178.207 (talk) 23:44, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

New class editing
Have reverted to an old version in this edit. The addition need substantial work with respect to referencing and formatting. I would invite the class to all create accounts and work in their sandbox to get formatting right. If your prof is interested in contacted me I would be happy to provide more guidance. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 21:12, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Original research?
Right now, the article says "But success with smallpox bred overconfidence and displaced efforts to build primary health care systems centered on community participation as advocated at the Alma Ata Conference sponsored by WHO and UNICEF in 1978.[9]" And that source is "World Health Organization and UNICEF. Report of the International Conference on Primary Health Care, Alma-Ata, USSR September 6-12. Geneva: World Health Organization; 1978." Unless the WHO and UNICEF claimed they were overconfident in 1978, this is unverfied (WP:V). "Bred overconfidence" also sounds like it violates WP:NPOV. Biosthmors (talk) 05:42, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Proposed merge with Globalization and risks to health
Merge relevant info from new article into pre-existing, substantive article on same topic. Thanks, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 18:47, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree that article should be merged into this Global health article. Steve Quinn (talk) 02:29, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Support as this article is redundant as long as the primary article exists -- T K K  bark !  20:19, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

With no objections, I've completed this merge. The content in the merged article is already contained here, so I haven't transferred any of the content. By the way, this article is looking good! It would be fantastic if it was able to get to B or GA status. LT910001 (talk) 23:30, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Global health. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091222043141/http://www.rotavirusvaccine.org/documents/WHO_position_paper_rotavirus_2007_000.pdf to http://www.rotavirusvaccine.org/documents/WHO_position_paper_rotavirus_2007_000.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 05:38, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Expanding & Revising the Sub-Sections on "Surgical Disease" and "Surgical Care"
As part of the WikiMed course at the University of California, San Francisco, School of Medicine, I would like to expand and revise the sub-sections on global surgery with the workplan described below:

Mon 2/28 Course Day 1

• reviewed Wikiproject Medicine’s website

• completed all 9 required Wiki Ed training modules

• began brainstorming about what article I want to work on this month

Tues 3/1 Course Day 2

• Picked “global surgery” as a potential topic

• Reviewed what is currently written on Wikipedia about global surgery

• Compared the logistics of expanding the global surgery subsection in the “surgery” article vs starting a new “global surgery” article

Fri 3/4 WP-WIP #1

• Begin literature review, start finding reliable sources for citations

• Verify what is already written on Wikipedia with the citations and identify errors and room for expansion

• For example, global surgery being described as the ‘neglected stepchild of global health’ is mistakenly attributed to Halfdan T. Mahler, instead of Paul E. Farmer who coined the term in his 2008 article. In fact, the provided reference (#72) where this phrase is mentioned even cites Dr. Farmer's article.

Wed 3/9 WP-WIP #2

• Have started revising and writing the introductory paragraph

• Update the statistics from the landmark 2015 Lancet Commission on Global Surgery or newer studies

• Incorporate the Lancet Commission Global Surgery 2030 visions/goals

Wed 3/16 WP-WIP #3

• Seek out a peer reviewer

• Continue to review literature, potentially adding future directions as a conclusion with the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on global surgery

Mon 3/21 WP-WIP #4

• Incorporate peer review feedback

• Begin putting finishing touches by utilizing software such as Grammarly (already have) or Hemingway (new) for readability

Fri 3/25 Course Wrap-up

• Will have published final edits

• Reflect on what I accomplished, learned, will take forward with me into the future, and anything I would have done differently — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pjypark21 (talk • contribs) 19:06, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

Peer Review
Hey Paul, this is Caleb Edwards here.

Wanted to say excellent job on keeping the section succinct, especially given that you were considering doing a whole new Wiki page on Global Surgery.

Overall, the flow of the piece and the content in and of itself works great. Checked references and all links worked out well with none being original research. Wouldn't describe there to be any bias either since it was more or less reporting facts and consensus from groups like Lancet Commission.

First thought I had critique-wise was to cut off the last sentence in Dr. Halfdan's quote. Not really sure if adds much given the previous sentence and makes quote pretty long.

Speaking of long, some of your sentences ending up being pretty lengthy, particularly in the 2nd paragraph.

Other small edit is first sentence of that paragraph, where you say 'significant progresses have been made', think it should be 'significant progress has been made'.

Also, I know that the paper you cited stated "Bellwether" procedures but unsure that's a term that could easily be understood as for example, Merriam Webster states that Bellwether means 'one that takes the lead or initiative' which does not seem apropos if I'm reading context correctly.

Lastly, I'd consider adding some info in the Health Interventions section if there are some in the pipeline that the public might want/need to know for full picture

Best Simpeh523 (talk) 14:54, 21 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Dear Caleb,
 * Thank you for your peer review!
 * In response: I have shortened the Mahler quote. Checked the grammar and I've broken down some sentences for easier reading as suggested. Elaborated on the key term "Bellwether procedures." Included one of the key interventions (e.g. NSOAP) that have been the guiding framework for global surgery without going into too many specific details of all the different work being done.
 * I appreciate your time. Pjypark21 (talk) 15:19, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Introduction to Policy Analysis - Summer Session23
— Assignment last updated by Binkosd (talk) 02:32, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Research Process and Methodology - FA23 - Sect 202 - Thu
— Assignment last updated by Jz5863 (talk) 16:05, 10 November 2023 (UTC)