Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
5.4
Journals
IJERPH
Special Issues
The Interface of Public Health Promotion, Regulatory Policy, and Ethics
ijerph-logo
Submit to IJERPH Review for IJERPH Propose a Special Issue

Journal Menu

► Journal Menu

Journal Browser

► Journal Browser
share announcement

The Interface of Public Health Promotion, Regulatory Policy, and Ethics

A special issue of International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (ISSN 1660-4601). This special issue belongs to the section "Global Health".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (30 September 2022) | Viewed by 16954

Special Issue Editors

Prof. Hadii M. Mamudu

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Department of Health Services Management and Policy, College of Public Health, East Tennessee State University, Johnson City, TN 37614, USA
Interests: tobacco use and control; public health; global health governance; global tobacco control; health policy; cardiovascular health management; patient-center outcomes research/comparative effectiveness research
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals
Prof. Dr. Donley Studlar

E-Mail Website
Co-Guest Editor
Department of Community and Behavioral Health, College of Public Health, East Tennessee State University, Johnson City, TN 37614, USA
Interests: comparative public policy; public health; tobacco use and control; alcohol; obesity; and reproductive health

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

We are organizing a Special Issue on the interface of public health promotion, regulatory policy, and ethics in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (IJERPH). The venue is a peer-reviewed scientific journal that publishes articles and communications from across disciplines that are designed to improve health and public health. For detailed information on the journal, we refer you to https://0-www-mdpi-com.brum.beds.ac.uk/journal/ijerph.

 

The health of individuals and societies has always been part of human existence. The 1948 Constitution of the World Health Organization (WHO) defines health as “a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity”. The notion of health has evolved from negative health that emphasizes the absence of disease with a focus on diagnostics and treatment of individuals with ailments to positive health that emphasizes the prevention of disease and the promotion of healthy living, especially with the focus of the 1978 Alma-Ata Declaration on health promotion. As such, health is not exclusively about the individual’s well-being but also those of communities/societies and population sub-groups. Several approaches exist to the attainment of both negative and positive health of individuals and communities around the world, including medicine/medical practices through public health and complementary and alternative medicine with its emphasis on traditional practices. The attainment of individuals and communities’ health has become intermeshed with politics/policy with the United States’ Institute of Medicine (IOM) reporting in 2011 that laws and regulations are important mechanisms to attaining the health of communities, and the recent COVID-19 pandemic demonstrating that the individual and community’s health is inseparable from politics/policy. However, all politics and policy are not equal, ethically speaking. Public health emphasizes the health of the whole community. Nonetheless, with limited resources, priorities must be established, and sometimes ethical dilemmas arise. Thus, what is ethical decision-making in public health? Further, research evidence indicates that disparities increasingly exist in health outcomes/risks with disproportionate burden on low socioeconomic individuals, groups, and communities as well as vulnerable populations. Oftentimes, these low socioeconomic individuals/groups and vulnerable populations benefit the least from advancements in science, medicine, and public health, which raises issues of fairness and protection of the health of vulnerable populations and makes ethics intertwined with the efforts to attain the health of individuals and populations around the world. Therefore, this Special Issue is particularly interested in papers at the intersection of health/public health, politics/policy/regulatory science, and ethics.

Prof. Hadii M. Mamudu
Prof. Dr. Donley Studlar
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2500 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • Disadvantaged populations
  • Equality
  • Equity
  • Ethics
  • Ethical conflicts
  • Ethical decision-making
  • Ethical dilemmas
  • Health
  • Health disparities
  • Health promotion
  • History
  • Law
  • Medical history
  • Morality
  • Medicine/medical practice
  • Politics/policy
  • Policy priorities
  • Public health
  • Public health law
  • Public policy
  • Regulation
  • Regulatory science
  • Social justice
  • Vulnerable populations

Published Papers (4 papers)

Download All Papers
Order results
Result details
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Jump to: Review

13 pages, 601 KiB  
Article
Attitudes of Polish Doctors towards Brain Death
by Krzysztof Leśniewski, Beata Antoszewska and Bożena Baczewska
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19(21), 13729; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijerph192113729 - 22 Oct 2022
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1245
Abstract
Brain death has been one of the most controversial issues in the medical and bioethical debate globally for more than fifty years. There is no unanimous acceptance of the understanding of brain death, and a single set of neurological criteria for the determination [...] Read more.
Brain death has been one of the most controversial issues in the medical and bioethical debate globally for more than fifty years. There is no unanimous acceptance of the understanding of brain death, and a single set of neurological criteria for the determination of human death that is accepted worldwide has yet to be established. Physicians from different specialisations understand brain death differently. Therefore, research is needed to understand and typologically classify their points of views as regards brain death. In Poland, this research is particularly important, as the views of anaesthesiologists, neurologists and transplantologists, who fully accept and support brain death as being synonymous with biological human death, have dominated the scholarly debate on this issue. This study presents the opinions of Polish physicians with various medical specialisations in relation to brain death. Free-form interviews with 28 doctors were conducted. Participants expressed their personal views on brain death, while exhibiting at the same time various emotions. We discuss our findings in relation to the existing framework of knowledge and debate concerning brain death and the Polish legal regulation in force when the interviews were carried out. Although participants had different beliefs with regard to brain death, the research team managed to classify their statements and opinions into five attitudes, taking into account what for them were the most important, namely: the escapist–protective attitude, the scientistic–medical attitude, the accepting–critical attitude, the ignorant–agnostic attitude, and the ambiguous attitude. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue The Interface of Public Health Promotion, Regulatory Policy, and Ethics)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

17 pages, 393 KiB  
Article
Governance of Heritable Human Gene Editing World-Wide and Beyond
by Yang Xue and Lijun Shang
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19(11), 6739; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijerph19116739 - 31 May 2022
Cited by 3 | Viewed by 8401
Abstract
To date, the controversy surrounding the unknown risks and consequences of heritable genome editing has grown, with such work raising biosafety and ethical concerns for future generations. However, the current guideline of global governance is limited. In the context of the new framework [...] Read more.
To date, the controversy surrounding the unknown risks and consequences of heritable genome editing has grown, with such work raising biosafety and ethical concerns for future generations. However, the current guideline of global governance is limited. In the context of the new framework for the governance of human genome editing developed by the World Health Organization (WHO) committee, this paper presents further analysis by highlighting predicaments of governance on germline engineering that merit the most attention: (1) building a scientific culture informed by a broader set of values and considerations in the internal scientific community at large, such as codes of ethics, and education, in addition to awareness-raising measures; and (2) reflecting on and institutionalizing policies in grassroots practice according to local conditions in external governance, such as the experimentalist governance, which is a multi-layered model of governance that establishes an open-ended framework from the top and offers stakeholders the freedom of discussion. The key to achieving these goals is more democratic deliberation between the public and the inclusive engagement of the global scientific community, which has been extensively used in the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention (BTWC). On a global scale, we believe that practicing heritable human genome editing in accordance with the WHO and BTWC appears to be a good choice. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue The Interface of Public Health Promotion, Regulatory Policy, and Ethics)
9 pages, 992 KiB  
Article
The Progressive Public Measures of Saudi Arabia to Tackle Covid-19 and Limit Its Spread
by Anwar A. Sayed
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18(2), 783; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijerph18020783 - 18 Jan 2021
Cited by 29 | Viewed by 4121
Abstract
Since the beginning of the global novel coronavirus disease (Covid-19) pandemic, the response of governments has varied significantly across the world. This was one of the main reasons behind the difference in the disease fatality rates between countries. In this study, the public [...] Read more.
Since the beginning of the global novel coronavirus disease (Covid-19) pandemic, the response of governments has varied significantly across the world. This was one of the main reasons behind the difference in the disease fatality rates between countries. In this study, the public progressive measures taken in Saudi Arabia (SA) are described in detail. This is a descriptive study in which measures were retrieved via the government official news agency—Saudi Press Agency (SPA). The total number of Covid-19 cases and its fatality rate were obtained/calculated from the Saudi Ministry of Health (MoH) official Covid-19 port, as well as the WHO COVID-19 dashboard. SA took active measures in order to interrupt the spread of Covid-19 which were strict, rapid, and progressive in nature. Social distancing was at the heart of almost every measure taken by the government. The main themes of these interventions are as follows: travel bans, suspending religious activities, closure of non-essential shops, enforcing changes at workplaces, and imposing curfews. This was followed by the gradual return to working life with various precautions to prevent a spike in the number of cases. The imposed measures in SA succeeded in reducing the burden of Covid-19 and its fatality rate. Comparatively, the fatality rate in SA was significantly lower compared to developed countries with better healthcare infrastructure such as the United States and United Kingdom. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue The Interface of Public Health Promotion, Regulatory Policy, and Ethics)
►▼ Show Figures

Graphical abstract

Review

Jump to: Research

17 pages, 400 KiB  
Review
Historical Aspects of Herbal Use and Comparison of Current Regulations of Herbal Products between Mexico, Canada and the United States of America
by Patricia Rojas, Helgi Jung-Cook, Elizabeth Ruiz-Sánchez, Irma Susana Rojas-Tomé, Carolina Rojas, Arely M. López-Ramírez and Aldo Arturo Reséndiz-Albor
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19(23), 15690; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijerph192315690 - 25 Nov 2022
Cited by 4 | Viewed by 2283
Abstract
Increased life expectancy and high costs of medicines and medical care have led to the use of herbal products. However, these items may contain toxic compounds that have an impact on public health. We will focus on the regulatory aspects and differences of [...] Read more.
Increased life expectancy and high costs of medicines and medical care have led to the use of herbal products. However, these items may contain toxic compounds that have an impact on public health. We will focus on the regulatory aspects and differences of these products marketed in the North American region (USA-Mexico-Canada) from government websites and selected literature. Mexico has an ancestral tradition of using plants for the treatment, improvement, and maintenance of human health as compared with Canada and the USA Currently, the use of herbal products in this region has a regulatory framework. The legal framework in these three countries is related to their history, idiosyncrasies, socio-economic and cultural aspects. Therefore, there are different public policies for herbal products consumed in the region. Mexico has a more specific classification of these products. In Canada, all herbal products are classified as natural health products and the safety and efficacy must be scientifically proven. In the USA, the development of botanical drugs is very recent. In particular, both herbal products classified as food supplements in Mexico and dietary supplements in the USA may have risks in both safety and efficacy. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue The Interface of Public Health Promotion, Regulatory Policy, and Ethics)
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
 
Displaying articles 1-4
Back to TopTop