A New Perspective on One Health

The COVID-19 pandemic has changed how we think about health, leading many to consider a One Health approach. This idea recognizes that the health of people, animals, and the environment are deeply connected. However, the rise of this perspective comes from the reality that diseases often jump from animals to humans. Many of these outbreaks are tied to how humans interact with their surroundings, like habitat destruction and climate change. Social movements have grown stronger due to the pandemic, highlighting that infectious diseases are not just medical issues; they are influenced by social inequalities.

#The Need for a Broader View

One Health has traditionally focused on the medical side of health issues, often overlooking the broader social and environmental contexts. Experts recognize that we can't just look at diseases from a biological standpoint. While there have been efforts to expand One Health beyond just medicine, there isn’t a clear framework to guide research in this area.

In response, a group of leading organizations came together in 2021 to create a new plan for One Health. They aimed to come up with a definition that considers health as more than just medicine. This new definition tries to include social, political, and ecological dimensions but is mainly designed to guide policies rather than research.

Another group published a different definition in 2020 that focuses more on research. This definition touches on social issues but does not fully address how research itself should be conducted or how health systems interact with these broader contexts.

#Key Concepts in One Health

One Health refers to a combined effort to improve health for people, animals, and the environment. EcoHealth looks at the relationship between health and the environment, recognizing that all living things are interlinked. Planetary Health aims for a high quality of life for all through a focus on human and environmental systems.

However, One Health has faced criticism for not adequately addressing the environmental aspects of health. While it started with a broader vision that included social sciences, it has often been limited to human and animal health in practice, particularly concerning diseases that can spread from animals to humans. This narrow focus has led to a view that prioritizes human health over the health of other species. Animals are often seen as threats to human health instead of important contributors to health in their own right.

There are movements like Planetary Health that have emerged to fill this gap, but these also tend to focus on human-centered health and not the wellbeing of all species. EcoHealth, on the other hand, seeks to improve health for all living beings.

#A New Framework: Relational One Health

To address these gaps, a new theoretical framework called Relational One Health has been introduced. This framework challenges researchers to look beyond just biomedical issues and consider how health is distributed among humans, animals, and ecosystems. It recognizes that they all share an environment that influences health through various social and cultural factors.

Relational One Health aims to return to the original vision of One Health by integrating ecological, social, and political factors into health discussions. It suggests that understanding health requires looking at power dynamics and social structures that shape health outcomes.

#Research Review

A systematic review was conducted to evaluate existing frameworks related to One Health. The goal was to find models that go beyond simply looking at biological factors and consider the various influences on health. Researchers searched databases for relevant publications and applied strict criteria to select which ones to include in their review. Ultimately, they found a handful of frameworks that approach health in a more holistic way.

Some of these frameworks focus on specific social issues, such as trust in institutions and how that affects disease transmission. Others consider how historical and political contexts influence health outcomes, particularly in marginalized communities.

#Case Studies

#Case Study 1: Land Rights and Disease in Brazil

This case study looks at land rights among Quilombola communities in Brazil, which are made up of descendants from escaped slaves. Secure land rights are essential for communities facing dispossession. The research shows that land control affects ecosystem health and the spread of diseases like arboviruses. Poor land rights can lead to conflicts and exploitation, harming both the environment and health.

#Case Study 2: Trust and Zoonotic Diseases in Israel

In this study, researchers examined Bedouin communities in southern Israel. Many people in these communities have deep distrust of formal institutions, including health services. This distrust is rooted in political, racial, and economic factors. The structure of human-animal contact networks plays a critical role in the spread of diseases like Brucella. Understanding these networks can help identify ways to address disease transmission effectively.

#Case Study 3: Changing Camel Husbandry in Ethiopia

This case looks at how market demands and climate change affect camel husbandry among semi-pastoralist communities in Ethiopia. There is a growing need for camel products, leading to changes in traditional practices. These changes bring people and livestock closer to wildlife, increasing the risk of diseases spreading. The study highlights how political and economic factors shape these dynamics and ultimately influence health.

#The Importance of a Collective Approach

Despite the efforts to create a more integrated view of health, much work remains to be done. Many existing models do not adequately address environmental elements or social contexts. The Relational One Health framework offers a more comprehensive approach, encouraging researchers to investigate the complex relationships between people, animals, and the environment.

This new way of thinking is especially relevant in addressing challenges like pandemics, climate change, and biodiversity loss. These interconnected problems require more than just medical solutions; they need broad social and political changes.

Research that speaks to these issues can drive real change, but it must do so in a way that considers all aspects of health. Relational One Health serves as a strong foundation for guiding future studies, ensuring that they account for the various factors that contribute to health across different species.

#Conclusion

In conclusion, the One Health approach is evolving. As we better understand the connections between human, animal, and environmental health, it becomes clear that we need frameworks that reflect this complexity. The introduction of Relational One Health is a significant step forward, providing a lens through which researchers can create meaningful studies that address the root causes of health issues.

By focusing on the interconnectedness of all living beings and their environments, we are better equipped to tackle the pressing health challenges of our time. This shift in perspective is crucial as we continue to face pandemics, climate change, and other significant threats to health and wellbeing on our planet.