Tag: health

Accessible, Affordable, and AI: How Artificial Intelligence Can Advance Healthcare Access

Between the Constitution of the World Health Organization, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights, the human right to a high standard of physical and mental health has been determinedly codified in international law. Providing this is more difficult. According to the World Health Organization, mostly low and lower-middle income countries will experience a healthcare shortage of 11 million workers within five years, and an estimated 4.5 billion people already lacked access to affordable essential care in 2021. Evidently, the global healthcare system needs a lifeline; with staff shortages and unmet needs, this help cannot come soon enough. Despite my criticisms of Artificial Intelligence’s implementation in healthcare due to data failures and biases, there is real potential for Artificial Intelligence to make the human right to health more accessible, affordable, and efficient. From wearable devices to Telehealth to risk and data analysis, the implementation of AI within healthcare systems can help relieve medical professionals from menial tasks, provide better access to health services for the disadvantaged, and aid in the overall efficiency of often bottlenecked healthcare systems.

REMOTE SERVICES & WEARABLE PRODUCTS

The access to one’s human right to adequate healthcare can be largely determined by geolocation; rural populations suffer significantly worse health outcomes than their urban counterparts, largely due to isolation from hospitals and medical professionals. People living in rural areas may not have the time or financial means to access efficient, affordable health services. Artificial Intelligence can help address this disparity by powering remote services such as Telehealth, aiding individuals in contacting physicians, and even potentially generating diagnoses without patients’ having to sacrifice their time or resources to travel. The primary use of AI within Telehealth aims to alleviate scheduling problems by training algorithms to match patients with the proper providers and ensure the smoothness of scheduling and accessing virtual appointments. This could significantly reduce the delay in access to Telehealth services that rural patients can experience.

A man measures his heart rate on an Apple Watch
Adobe Stock, DenPhoto, #290469935
A man measures his heart rate on an Apple Watch

In addition, wearable products utilizing Artificial Intelligence have shown potential in monitoring chronic conditions, eliminating the need for frequent check-ups, and reducing the burden on healthcare providers. Using data collected by wearable devices, AI algorithms can potentially detect signs of health problems and alert those with chronic conditions if their vitals are amiss. Patients can also receive AI-generated reminders to take medications and health check-ins to ensure proper care on a day-to-day basis.

The use of remote Artificial Intelligence technology to provide healthcare services also has the potential to increase access to mental health resources, especially in rural areas, where psychological help may be expensive, far away, or overly stigmatized. AI-driven personal therapists show potential to improve access to mental health services that traditionally are difficult to schedule and afford. Artificial intelligence has been used to analyze sleep and activity data, assess the likelihood of mental illness, and provide services related to mindfulness, symptom management, mood regulation, and sleep aid. 

ACCESSIBILITY

On top of increased accessibility for rural residents, various employments of Artificial Intelligence in healthcare have the potential to cater to the needs of those with cognitive or physical disabilities. Models can aid in simplifying text, generating text to speech audio, and providing visual aids to assist patients with disabilities as they receive care and monitor their conditions. The ability of Artificial Intelligence to streamline potentially incomprehensible healthcare interfaces and simplify information can also assist elderly patients in accessing health services. Older people can often be intimidated by the complexity of online healthcare’s technological hurdles, preventing them from effectively accessing their doctors, health records, or other important resources; Artificial Intelligence can be harnessed to adapt user personalization on websites and interfaces to best accommodate the problems an elderly or disabled person may experience trying to access online care.

Generative language models, a particular type of Artificial Intelligence that uses training data to generate content based on pattern recognition, has also been employed to overcome language barriers within medical education. The ability of Artificial Intelligence models to effectively translate educational curriculum has contributed to the standardization of medical practices and standards across countries. The digitalization of this process also makes medical educational material more accessible to those without direct access to a wealth of resources, furthering the World Health Organization’s Digital Health Guidelines, which aims to encourage “digitally enabled healthcare education.” The use of AI as a translation tool within healthcare also shows broader potential to be utilized for patient care, eliminating the need for costly translators and ensuring that non-native speakers fully comprehend their diagnoses and treatments. One example of this is the American company “No Barrier AI”, which employs an AI-driven interpreter to provide immediate, accurate, and cost-effective translation for those with little proficiency in English seeking healthcare.

Side view of a focused elderly man sitting before his laptop
Adobe Stock, Viacheslav Yakobchuk, #390382830
Elderly man accesses health portal from his laptop

PATIENT AND DATA ANALYSIS

A whole other blog post could be dedicated entirely to the use of Artificial Intelligence in hospitals and as an aid to medical professionals. Broadly, the integration of Artificial Intelligence into clerical and administrative tasks, health data analysis, and care recommendations has reduced the time and money spent on the slow, bureaucratic processes that weigh down medical professionals. Nearly 25% of healthcare spending in the United States is devoted to administrative tasks, but according to a McKinsey & Company study, the adoption of AI and machine learning could save the American healthcare industry $360 billion, mostly by assisting with clerical and administrative tasks. For instance, AI systems have proved effective in boosting appointment scheduling efficiency, speeding up an infamously difficult process. Because of its ability to detect, analyze, and predict patterns, Artificial Intelligence has also been utilized to track inventory and increase supply chain efficiency, ensuring proper amounts of essential medical supplies and medicines are in stock when they are most needed.

Beyond managerial and administrative duties, Artificial Intelligence has also been integrated into clinical decision-making, data and visual analysis, risk evaluation, and even the development of medicines. Trained models have proven capable of analyzing data from brain scans, X-rays, other tests, and patient records to detect and predict health problems; this ability to detect patterns and predict outcomes has also enabled early detection of diseases and conditions such as sepsis and heart failure. Medical professionals can take the model’s analysis into account while also considering treatment suggestions from Artificial Intelligence as they proceed with patient care. This can reduce the likelihood of clinical mistakes as doctors can compare their findings with those of the AI model. Artificial Intelligence has also been used in telesurgical techniques to improve accuracy and supervise surgeons as they operate. The integration of Artificial Intelligence has also advanced vaccine development, as it aids in identifying antigen targets, helps predict a particular patient’s immune response to specific vaccinations, creates vaccines tailored to an individual’s genetic makeup and medical needs, and increases the efficiency of vaccine storage and distribution.

These are only a few examples of the potential usefulness of Artificial Intelligence within healthcare settings. The examples are countless and increasing every day, and, as I believe, the potential for further advancement is immeasurable.

Two doctors analyze brain scans on a tablet.
Adobe Stock, peopleimages.com, #1599787893
Two doctors analyze a brain scan with suggestions from AI tech

WHAT WE MUST KEEP IN MIND

While these advancements in the accessibility, affordability, and efficiency of healthcare systems show undeniable promise in accessing the human right to health, the development and integration of these Artificial Intelligence technologies must be undertaken with equality at the center of all efforts. As I highlighted in my last post, it is imperative that underlying societal biases be accounted for and curbed within these models to prevent inaccurate results and further harm to individuals from marginalized groups. A survey at the University of Minnesota found that only 44% of hospitals in the United States conducted evaluations on system bias in the Artificial Intelligence models they employed. It is essential to pursue efforts to ensure that Artificial Intelligence promotes not only the human right to health, but also the human right to freedom from discrimination within healthcare practices, especially those aided by systems potentially riddled with bias based on age, race, ethnicity, nationality, and gender.

These technologies are as practical as they are exciting. Still, as the healthcare industry moves forward, Artificial Intelligence developers and healthcare providers alike must maintain the core ideals of the Human Rights framework– equality, freedom, and justice.

Training to Treatment: AI’s Role in Healthcare Inequities

My first English professor here at UAB centered our composition class entirely around Artificial Intelligence. He provided our groups with articles highlighting the technology’s potential capabilities and limitations, and then he prompted us to discuss how our society should make use of AI as it expands. Though we tended to be hesitant toward AI integration in the arts and service industries, there was a sense of hope and optimism when we discussed its use in healthcare. It makes sense that these students, most of whom were studying to become healthcare professionals or researchers, would look favorably on the idea of AI relieving providers from menial, tedious tasks.

AI’s integration in healthcare does have serious potential to improve services; for example, it’s shown promise in examining stroke patients’ scans, analyzing bone fractures, and detecting diseases early. These successes don’t come without drawbacks, however. As we continue to learn more about the implications of AI use in healthcare, we must take into account potential threats to human rights, including the rights to health and non-discrimination. By addressing the human rights risks of AI integration in healthcare, algorithmic developers and healthcare providers alike can implement changes and create a more rights-oriented system. 

A woman stands in front of a monitor, examining head and spine scans.
Adobe Stock #505903389 Gorodenkoff A woman stands in front of a monitor, examining head and spine scans.

THE INCLUSION OF INEQUALITIES

Artificial Intelligence cannot operate without data; it bases its behaviors and outcomes on the data it is trained on. In healthcare, Artificial Intelligence models rely on input from health data that ranges from images of melanoma to indicators of cardiovascular risk. The AI model uses this data to recognize patterns and make predictions, but these predictions are only as accurate as the data they’re based on. Bias in AI systems can often stem from “flawed data sampling,” which is when sample sizes of certain demographics are overrepresented while those of others, usually marginalized groups, are left out. For example, people of low economic status often don’t participate in clinical trials or data collection, leaving an entire demographic underrepresented in the algorithm. The lack of representation in training data also generally applies for women and non-white patients. When training datasets are imbalanced, AI models may fail to accurately analyze test results or evaluate risks. This has been the case for melanoma diagnoses in Black individuals and cardiovascular risk evaluations in women, where the former model was trained largely on images of white people and the latter on the data of men. Similarly, text-to-speech AI systems can omit voice characteristics of certain races, nationalities, or genders from training data, resulting in inaccurate transcriptions. 

A woman at a computer examines unequal data sets on two sheets of paper.
Adobe Stock #413362622 Source: Andrey Popov A woman at a computer examines unequal data sets on two sheets of paper.

The exclusion of certain groups from training data points us to the fact that AI models often reflect and reproduce already existing human biases and inequalities. Because medical data reflects currently existing healthcare disparities, AI models train themselves in ways that internalize these societal inequalities, resulting in inaccurate risk evaluations, especially for Black, Hispanic, or poor patients. These misdiagnoses and inaccurate evaluations create a feedback loop where an algorithm trained on poor data creates poor healthcare outcomes for marginalized groups, further contributing to healthcare disparities. 

FRAGMENTATION AND HALLUCINATION

Another limitation of the data healthcare AI models are trained on is their fragmented sourcing. Training data is often collected across different sources and systems, ranging from pharmacies to insurance companies to hospitals to fitness tracker records. The lack of consistent, holistic data compromises the accuracy of a model’s predictions and the efficiency of patient diagnosis and treatment. Other research highlights that the majority of patient data used to train algorithms in America comes from only three states, limiting its consideration of geo-locational factors on patient health. Important determinants of health, such as access to nutritious food and transportation, work conditions, and environmental factors, are therefore excluded from how the model diagnoses or evaluates a patient. 

A computer screen shows an AI chatbot, reading "Meet AI Mode"
Adobe Stock #1506537908 Source: Tada Images A computer screen shows an AI chatbot, reading “Meet AI Mode”

When there are gaps in an AI system’s data pool, most generative AI models will fabricate data to fill these gaps, even if this model-created data is not true or accurate. This phenomenon is called “hallucination,” and it poses a serious threat to the accuracy of AI’s patient assessments. Models may generate irrelevant correlations or fabricate data as they attempt to predict patterns and outcomes, resulting in overfitting. Overfitting occurs when models learn too much on the training data alone, putting weight on outliers and meaningless variations in data. This makes models’ analyses inaccurate, as they fail to truly understand patient data and instead manipulate outcomes to match the patterns they were trained on. AI models will easily fabricate patient data to create the outcomes that make the most sense to their algorithms, jeopardizing accurate diagnoses and assessments. Even more concerning, most AI systems fail to provide transparent lines of reasoning for how they came to their conclusions, eliminating the possibility for doctors, nurses, and other professionals to double-check the models’ outputs.

HUMAN RIGHTS EFFECTS

All of this is to say that real patients are complex, and the data that AI is trained on may not accurately represent the full picture of a person’s health. This results in tangible effects on patient care. An AI’s misstep in its analysis of a patient’s health data can result in prescribing the wrong drugs, prioritizing the wrong patients, and even missing anomalies in scans or x-rays. Importantly, since AI bias tends to target already marginalized groups such as Black Americans, poor people, and women, unchecked inaccuracies in AI use within healthcare can pose a human rights violation to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) provisions of health in Article 25 and non-discriminatory entitlement to rights as laid out in Article 2. As stated by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, human rights principles must be incorporated to every stage of AI development and implementation. This includes maintaining the right to adequate standard of living and medical care, as highlighted in Article 25, while attempting to address the discrimination that occurs within healthcare. As the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights states, “non-discrimination and equality are fundamental human rights principles,” and they are specifically highlighted in Article 2 of the UDHR. These values must remain at the forefront of AI’s expansion into healthcare, ensuring that current human rights violations are not magnified by a lack of careful regulation.

WHAT CAN BE DONE?

To effectively and justly apply Artificial Intelligence to healthcare, human intervention must ensure that fairness and accuracy remain at the center of these models and their applications. First, the developers of these algorithms must ensure that the data used for training is drawn from a diverse pool of individuals, including women, Black people, and other underrepresented groups. Additionally, these models should be developed with fairness in mind and should work to mitigate biases. Transparency should be built into models, allowing providers to trace the thought processes used to create conclusions on diagnoses or treatment choices. These goals can be supported by advocating for AI development teams and healthcare provider clinics that include members of marginalized groups. The inclusion of diverse life experiences, perspectives, and identities can remedy biases both in the algorithms themselves and the medical research and data they are trained on. We must also ensure that healthcare providers are properly educated about how these models operate and how to interpret their outputs. If developers and medical professionals do address these challenges, then Artificial Intelligence technology has immense potential to improve diagnostic accuracy, increase efficiency in analyzing scans and tests, and alleviate healthcare providers of time-consuming, menial tasks. With a dedication to accuracy and human rights, perhaps the integration of Artificial Intelligence into healthcare will meet my English classmates’ optimistic standards and aid them in their future jobs.

 

The Need of the WHO

On January 20th, 2025, President Donald Trump signed an Executive Order that withdrew the United States from the World Health Organization (WHO). This, however, was not President Trump’s first time withdrawing from the organization; in July 2020, he signed a similar executive order. However, due to the one-year notice for withdrawal, it never took place, as President Bident revered the order. The withdrawal took place primarily due to the mishandling of the COVID-19 pandemic and the “inability to demonstrate independence from the political influence of WHO member states.”

 

What is the WHO?

 

The WHO was established in 1948 as a specialized agency of the United Nations, consisting of 194 countries. The main role of the non-governmental organization is to set global health standards; serving as a multilateral organization motivates collaboration between all partner countries to coordinate international health response. This coordination also translates into supporting other partner countries during health crises.

One of the WHO’s roles is gathering and evaluating data from all over the world to understand the current status of health. This data spans regions and represents the holistic health of the world. Through these analyses, acute crises can be addressed in a streamlined way, and larger trends in health can be used as benchmarks to denote progress, ensuring sustained efforts.

Beyond the technical role of the WHO, it helps with on-the-ground support in countries across the world. By working to mobilize vaccines and drugs, individuals from underrepresented or marginalized communities can gain access to life-saving care. Beyond the mobilization of resources, the WHO helps coordinate humanitarian response and volunteers to ensure resources are being used appropriately. The holistic nature of the WHO and the support they provide ensures that countries worldwide are best equipped to support the health and well-being of their citizens.

 

Photo 1: Photo of WHO Poster in 1988Source: Flickr
Photo 1: Photo of WHO Poster in 1988
Source: Flickr

What has the WHO accomplished?

 

The WHO has tussled with many different diseases worldwide. For example, the WHO has helped eradicate smallpox worldwide. From leveraging the vaccine developed by Edward Jenner in 1796 to intensifying the vaccine mobilization plan in 1967, smallpox was eradicated by 1980, with the last known natural case in Somalia in 1977. This hallmark success for global health represents the first and only infectious disease ever to be eradicated.

The WHO has contributed to many other successes in the past as well, one being helping reduce polio cases worldwide by 99% since 1988. As of 2022, the number of endemic countries decreased by 123, representing the power of the WHO in reducing the global disease burden. 

The visible and less visible responsibilities of the WHO were most recently put on the front stage during the COVID-19 crisis. At the pandemic’s peak, the WHO collected data from across the world to analyze its outcomes and progress made through community health initiatives and vaccine rollouts. Beyond this, the WHO consistently released situational reports, reporting on the research they have collected thus far. Though the incidence of COVID-19 has decreased significantly and is no longer a public health emergency of international concern, the WHO still works to contain the illness and reduce adverse outcomes.

 

What is the impact of the US withdrawing from the WHO?

 

The US is one of the largest contributors to the WHO. Supporting around 12%-15% of the budget in the fiscal year 2022-2023, the US has contributed to the investment of millions of jobs, work opportunities, and streamlining functions. Without the US, all of these opportunities will stop in the upcoming fiscal year.

This support is not new to the US. Since World War II, the US has held this top funder spot, serving as a leader in global diplomacy. In an ever-globalized world, this role in the WHO affects our allies and our nation domestically. With this, the international community will suffer and have poorer health; without the investment in life-saving interventions and preventative systems, health is on the line for everyone.

Beyond the tangible impact of the withdrawal, if a decrease in health resilience is observed, there will be an increase in mistrust and a reduction in international cooperation. The withdrawal in both 2020 and 2025 resulted in increased mistrust by partnerships and organizations like Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, and COVAX, as well as our geopolitical allies. By increasing the vulnerability in our relationships, there is an increased risk of adverse outcomes that will compromise the health of millions worldwide. This distrust may result in the withdrawal of other vital multilateral agreements; demonstrating a lack of cooperation may result in other countries questioning their commitment to the WHO and the overall responsibility to global health.

Beyond the political and financial nuances of the US withdrawing from the WHO, the most tangible impact is the compromise of future pandemic preparedness and the creation of vulnerabilities in the global health landscape. The WHO’s holistic role relies on support to share data and track emerging health threats. Without US support, these threats cannot be effectively analyzed and will result in weakened systems.

 

Photo 2: Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus responding to questions from journalists, during the post-election press conference.Source: WHO
Photo 2: Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus responding to questions from journalists during the post-election press conference.
Source: WHO

What can we learn from the 2025 withdrawal from the WHO?

 

As it is still early in the year, there is no promise about the legislation’s longevity. However, it reminds us all about the need for bipartisan commitment to global health and development. Not only is this a safeguard to protect our own nation, but it also helps us in terms of international engagement. US foreign policy should prioritize funding for health initiatives regardless of political leadership, working to legislate commitments to our global partners.

With lack of accountability being cited as the primary reason for withdrawal, it is integral for all entities to seek avenues to increase financial transparency and independence without compromising the organization’s day-to-day operations. Collective problem-solving is reinforced by working to advocate for improvements rather than abandoning the WHO.

The temporary absence of the US in the WHO has created a void that has weakened global health cooperation in a matter of weeks. Though the official withdrawal will take around a year to feel the impact, the impact is already being noted in the attitudes and perspectives on the global stage. There is a need to uphold health as a universal human right; developing policies prioritizing equitable healthcare access reinforces the idea that we cannot combat global health alone now without the US; there is a lot of vulnerability in the unknown space.

The Eradication of Malaria in Egypt: A Triumph for Public Health and Human Rights

When thinking about malaria, we tend to forget its impact across the world. Especially living in the global north, my experience with malaria has been restricted to my coursework; however, the reality of the disease is that it exists and poses a prominent issue in many countries across the world. The illness, spread by a mosquito vector, had over 247 million cases in 2021; this spanned across many regions worldwide, primarily impacting Africa.

In recent years, the WHO (World Health Organization) has worked in many different countries to eradicate malaria and has successfully done so with their WHO Guidelines for Malaria. An example of these guidelines being successful is Algeria, which reported its last case in 2013. However, a recent accomplishment in the world of malaria has been noted, which is the eradication of the disease in Egypt. For decades, Egypt had struggled with the disease and the associated outcomes.

Image 1: Receipt of malaria-free certification in WHO Eastern Mediterranean Region.Source: WHO
Image 1: Receipt of malaria-free certification in WHO Eastern Mediterranean Region. Source: WHO

Malaria’s History in Egypt

The nature of Egypt had made it susceptible to the fruition of the illness. Historically, the disease was tested around the Nile Delta and Upper Egypt, tracing back to 4000 B.C.E. As most of the population was concentrated in these areas, it led to the development of disease impacting millions of individuals. In recent history, the illness has contributed to the fragility of the country, ranging from increased economic losses, inflated healthcare costs, and decreased labor productivity.

The first ever effort to control malaria can be dated to 1950, with the introduction of dichloro-diphenyl-trichloroethane (DDT). This initial intervention was an insecticide that was used to help not only reduce the mosquito population but also address the development of typhus and other insect-borne diseases. However, this intervention resulted in some resistance amongst the community and additional environmental concerns; as of 2001, the intervention was observed as a possible human carcinogen and has since been banned in Egyptian agriculture.

In 1969, the creation of the Aswan Dam posed a new risk for the development of disease, all of which resulted in the need for new interventions. With additional adjustments to the approach against malaria, in the 1980s, the WHO helped push towards the eradication of malaria in Egypt with their eradication program. This program included regions like Africa, the Americas, Asia-Pacific, and the Middle East and Eurasia. This resulted in outcomes such as reducing the number of cases by 300,000 between 1980 and 2010. Though these outcomes are significant, those with limited access to healthcare were still disadvantaged in the global conversation.

Image 2: Doctors in Egypt are conducting malaria tests on elderly patients in rural Egypt.Source: WHO
Image 2: Doctors in Egypt are conducting malaria tests on elderly patients in rural Egypt. Source: WHO

The New Approach to Malaria

Building upon previous interventions, additional interventions have been explored in the past few decades; these have contributed meaningfully to the eradication of malaria in the country. Before mobilizing interventions, it is important to educate communities about what malaria is and develop trust in proposed interventions. The Egyptian government, in collaboration with different NGOs (Non-Governmental Organizations), launched different campaigns that reached communities all across the country; these talked about prevention, symptoms, and where people can find diagnostic centers. These were taught in schools, local community centers, and other locations to ensure that populations were able to access the information needed to become a part of the solution. This resulted in an 80% increase in malaria case reporting in disproportionately impacted areas by 2020.

These education opportunities are coupled with healthcare access and monitoring. By improving the healthcare infrastructure, treatment facilities were able to strengthen their interventions for those impacted by malaria. However, with recent inflation and economic instability in the country, with the support of international supporters, these interventions became even more accessible by being low-cost or even free. With the additional investment into data collection and monitoring systems, the Egyptian Ministry of Health was able to monitor trends in malaria incidence and collaborate with healthcare providers to mobilize and target interventions for those who need them most. With the compounded efforts of treating and monitoring malaria, strides were made to help understand the spread of malaria in the country.

Beyond education and monitoring, it is valuable to identify interventions that would be accessible to the population. These interventions must be easily understood to ensure they are efficacious. Vector control is noted to be central to Egypt’s strategy. Leveraging the use of insecticide-treated bed nets was the most prominent intervention; by 2019, 3 million of these nets had been distributed to reduce the incidence of malaria, especially in high-risk areas. This, coupled with indoor spraying, helped reduce malaria cases by 90% in over 2 decades.

Malaria Eradication is a Victory for Human Rights

As outlined in the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights, the right to health is fundamental to human existence. By working to eradicate malaria in the country, Egypt has made strides to fulfill this right for its citizens of all socioeconomic classes.

Egypt’s victory brings hope to the fight against malaria; not only can public health interventions align with human rights, but they can create a sustainable model for health equity. Many countries in the global south are in a place that Egypt was in not too long ago; as global communities begin to face the amplification of health issues, Egypt’s framework and history of eradication can be seen as a success and applied to other countries.

Now that malaria is off the docket of issues Egypt faces, it is not time to focus on addressing other inequities the country is facing. As health equity is improved in the country, issues such as mental health, maternal and child health, and non-communicable diseases can be addressed with the utmost efficiency, helping improve outcomes in the country.

 

A Succinct Discussion on Global Poverty

 

small houses
(source: yahoo images)

Everyone has heard of global poverty and its horrendous consequences; however, for some people, that is where their knowledge ends. In this blog, I am going to undertake the task of succinctly compiling facts and statistics about this incredibly broad topic. My hope is that, after reading this blog, you are more inclined to speak out on global poverty and educate others on the topic. 

A Rudimentary Understanding

a desert overview
(source: yahoo images)

Global poverty is an umbrella term for poverty that exists throughout the entire world. That was the easy part: defining global poverty. However, defining poverty is a tad bit more tricky. We can surely say that poverty is a status: the status given to those whose annual income falls under a bar; however, poverty is more than just low annual income. 

The United Nations, in particular, has defined poverty as, “a denial of choices and opportunities, a violation of human dignity. It means a lack of basic capacity to participate effectively in society. It means not having enough to feed and clothe a family, not having a school or clinic to go to, not having the land on which to grow one’s food or a job to earn one’s living, not having access to credit. It means insecurity, powerlessness, and exclusion of individuals, households, and communities. It means susceptibility to violence, and it often implies living in marginal or fragile environments, without access to clean water or sanitation.”

In addition, when discussing poverty, there is a distinction between relative deprivation and absolute deprivation. Relative deprivation is a function of inequality and can be defined as “the lack of resources (e.g. money, rights, social equality) necessary to maintain the quality of life considered typical within a given socioeconomic group.”

Absolute deprivation, on the other hand, is when one’s income falls below a level where they are unable to maintain food and shelter. Studies have shown that relative deprivation, or the inability to live up to the basic standards of living set forth within a particular community of reference, can be just as harmful to health outcomes as absolute deprivation. For example, research suggests that diabetes – a disease associated with modernization – is not a function of poverty, as the poorest countries show the lowest incidence among the global population. It is in nations that exhibit increasing political-economic and social inequality, including the United States, that diabetes has emerged as a leading cause of death and a serious public health threat.

Therefore, it should go without saying that our goal should be to diminish all forms of deprivation globally.

Statistics and Facts

a desert view of a tree
(source: yahoo images)

Personally, what I find most disturbing about global poverty is its breadth. Grounding this point is the fact that, according to the World Bank and WorldVision, “About 9.2% of the world, or 689 million people, live in extreme poverty on less than $1.90 a day.”

Practically one in ten people within the world are living in poverty.

To better understand the magnitude of this issue, imagine the following scenario: you live in this fantasy world where, in an effort to promote international toleration and cooperation, 30 children from all around the world get arbitrarily placed together into a classroom. Out of those 30 children, three of them would be living on less than $2 a day. If you are reading this blog, then you naturally have access to some sort of electric device. Those three children, in a year, will not have accumulated enough money to purchase your device. 

A logical question that might follow from the preceding scenario is that it is wrong of me to solely include children in made-up scenarios because adults, after all, also live in poverty.  While that is undeniably true, they by no means make up the majority. Over two-thirds of those living in poverty are children. Of those children, women represent the majority. 

Let us quickly look at local poverty—specifically, poverty within the United States. In the United States, as of 2019, around 10.5% of people live in poverty. The poverty line in the United States is around $13,000, and thus, each person living in poverty makes around $35 a day. Let us make note that these statistics are from 2019, meaning they are pre-pandemic. In 2020, the percentage of people living in poverty went up by one point to 11.4%. Ostensibly, that raise seems miniscule; however, it accounts for 3 million new  Americans who entered poverty, also now making less than $35 a day. 

All poverty is bad: that is undisputed. However, one who lives in America might confuse American poverty with global poverty as it might be what they encounter daily.  This presents a problem because this cannot be done as they are by no means the same. Those in poverty in America statistically make ten times more a day than those living in poverty abroad. That is a big difference; we can not equate the two.

Education

a view of UNESCO
(source: yahoo images)

Education is a human right; that is undeniable. Every human who walks this Earth has the right to get an education and develop individually. However, living in poverty makes education incredibly difficult. 

One study has found that, of those who live in poverty and are over the age of 15, 70% have only a basic education with no formal schooling. That means that if you are born into poverty and have no way of elevating out of this status, then, statistically, you are unlikely to get an education. This is an immense issue due to the fact that, according to UNESCO, education is the key to climbing out of poverty. In fact, UNESCO stated that, “if all students in low-income countries had just basic reading skills (nothing else), an estimated 171 million people could escape extreme poverty. If all adults completed secondary education, we could cut the global poverty rate by more than half.”

The dilemma is that the path out of poverty is through education; however, living in poverty makes education harder to achieve. 

However, in the past years, steps have been made in the correct direction, and education rates have indeed increased. A rise in education is beneficial to not just those living in poverty, but the nations they live in as well. In fact, a study published by Stanford University and Munich’s Ludwig Maximilian University shows that, between 1975 and 2000, 75% of the increase in a nation’s gross domestic product (GDP) can be attributed to the increase of math and science skills amongst the population. 

Therefore, education not only improves the lives of those in poverty, but also the well-being and economy of the nation and its people. It is for those reasons, amongst many more, that education is, and should forever remain, a human right.

Impacts

a picture of trees
(source: yahoo images)

In addition to the lack of education, those living in poverty face a multitude of other negatives. For one, a study found that adults living in poverty are at a “higher risk of adverse health effects from obesity, smoking, substance use, and chronic stress. [IN ADDITION], older adults with lower incomes experience higher rates of disability and mortality.”

In addition, this same study found that those living in the top 1% generally have a life expectancy 10 years greater than those living in poverty. Moreover, one study found that, for children and adolescents, poverty can also cause differences in structural and functional brain development, which impacts “cognitive processes that are critical for learning, communication, and academic achievement, including social emotional processing, memory, language, and executive functioning.”

Therefore, with the aforementioned facts in mind, it is easily concluded that poverty is an immense issue, and political leaders should be doing more to help relieve the issue. 

So, naturally, one might ask: why is nothing being done? One response to this question comes from the World Systems Theory. This theory is complex, so I will try my best to briefly discuss it. The theory states that all nations are divided into three systems: the core, the periphery, and the semi-periphery. Essentially, the theory states that the core nations, which are the most politically and economically powerful, use the periphery and semi-periphery nations, which are filled with developing nations, for cheap labor and resources. The core rewards the periphery for their resources and labor, but not enough that the nations develop at such a pace that they become equal to the core nations. This in turn causes a dilemma in which the periphery depend more on the core than vice versa. Some might argue that this in turn perpetuates global poverty as the core nations are doing the least to help developing nations. In other words, the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, thus exacerbating both absolute and relative forms of deprivation and sustaining the cycle of poverty.

Moving Forward

a view of the road
(source: yahoo images)

As mentioned previously, global poverty has indeed been decreasing. According to WorldVision, “Since 1990, more than 1.2 billion people have risen out of extreme poverty. Now, 9.2% of the world survives on less than $1.90 a day, compared to nearly 36% in 1990.” 

We are still heading down this path of poverty reduction, and it is vital that we continue to do so. Perhaps, one day, we will live in a world free of poverty—a world in which every single person is educated, well-nourished, and does not have to fear starvation. It is my hope that after you finish reading this blog, you will share any knowledge and statistics you may have learned with others. The first step in resolving  an issue–and continuing to resolve it—is acknowledgement. If more people are aware of how detrimental poverty is, more people will in turn be inclined to help fix it. We need more support and commitment to a world in which poverty is mere history. 

Environmental Successes Throughout the Years

a picture of mountains in germany
(source: yahoo images)

Typically, when you hear “human rights” in a sentence, it is either preceded or followed by words with negative connotations — crises, violations, atrocities, etc. However, this blog will aim to highlight positives and focus on the environment. 

After reading many articles about environmental issues, some people might be unaware that we have made environmental progress throughout the year. As the Earth is home to all humans, any sort of environmental success, no matter how small, benefits the human species as a whole.

The Ozone

a picture of earth from space
(source: yahoo images)

Perhaps one of the most remarkable environmental victories was the recovery of the Ozone layer. The Ozone layer is located in Earth’s atmosphere and is responsible for blocking excess ultraviolet light from reaching life on Earth. Without the Ozone, the ultraviolet radiation would harm all life on earth, including plants.

In 1985, scientists discovered what seemed to be a hole forming in the Ozone. If the formation of this hole had not been stopped, the Ozone  could have depleted significantly enough to allow ultraviolet radiation to penetrate Earth’s atmosphere and reach life on Earth.

The Ozone layer was depleting due to human emissions of chlorofluorocarbons, which are found in refrigerators, air sprays, and other common items which humans use.

While chlorofluorocarbons pose a menacing threat to the environment, thankfully in 1987, almost 200 nations signed the Montreal Protocol, which prohibited the use  and production of items containing chlorofluorocarbons. 

This act of international cooperation proved to be beneficial, as the Ozone recovered significantly in the coming years. In fact, the United Nations (UN) predicts that by 2035, the Ozone will be fully replenished in the Arctic and Northern Hemisphere.

This is why swift actions of nations are vital to correct threats to the environment.  This collaborative effort by the nations to join forces to solve this issue with the Ozone makes it one of the most remarkable environmental successes of all times?

The Rise of Environmentally-Friendly Fuel

a picture of a chevron gas station
(source: yahoo images)

Another environmental success was one that originated in the United States in the 1970s. The United States (US) decided to federally ban the use of a certain type of lead in gasoline which had potent toxins encoded within it.

After the US ban, Canada and some European nations followed suit. Again, due to this combined effort, lead levels dropped from the air, which resulted in a decrease in respiratory diseases invoked by lead..Additionally, evidence of lead levels decreased in human blood, allowing gasoline users (which was anyone who drove a car or made contact with gasoline) to live healthier lives.

Needless to say, the  international effort to stop using lead gasoline was a great environmental success for lead gasoline, according to what the  World Health Organizations once deemed was “the mistake of the 20th century.” 

Renewable Energy

a picture of windmills
(source: yahoo images)

While gas that does not contain toxic lead surely is a success; not using gas at all is even a greater  success. Gas and fossil fuels will inherently create pollution, which will eventually harm the environment, regardless of how eco-friendly the gas/fossil fuel happens to be.

However, recently, there has been more of a push than ever for renewable energy rather than rely on fossil fuels for energy. Many nations have started utilizing solar and wind power, both which do not harm the environment.

This push for renewable energy has allowed it to become more accessible and the prices low. In fact, since 2010, the cost of installing solar power has decreased by 85% and the cost of wind power has fallen by 50% so renewable energy is now cheaper than fossil fuels. This is a major accomplishment for all of humankind. We have reached a point where fossil fuels, which are harmful to the environment,are rarely used in comparison to renewable energy. Years ago, many would have viewed this change as an impossible feat. However, an impossible feat it is not, it is another environmental victory.

The Bottom Line

trees in sweden
(source: yahoo images)

While this blog only lists a couple environmental successes, they are by no means the only ones. Throughout the years, there have been hundreds of success stories that have helped keep our environment healthy and prosperous.

However, even with these successes in mind, environmental problems are still incredibly prevalent. Global warming, despite all of the successes mentioned, still prevails.

These environmental problems are dire, and they need to be solved as soon as possible. Thankfully, as we have seen happen throughout the years, environmental problems can be solved. 

It is for those reasons that it is important to make note of environmental successes. It is not simply just for peace of mind—it is so that we are all well aware that we have been able to solve problems in the past, so this should inspire us to continue tosolve problems in the future.

As our Earth grows older, it is plausible that it might face more dangers and we are capable of overcoming environmental threats. While the Earth indeed grows older, so do we. As our technology advances, we should be confident that we are equipped to handle the environmental  challenges that come our way.  

World Diabetes Day

A hand pointing to text underneath it which reads "World Diabetes Day"
World Diabetes Day. Source: Ashley Huslov, Creative Commons

World Diabetes Day is recognized globally on November 14th. It’s important to recognize the progress we’ve made in managing diabetes. In the past, a diagnosis of diabetes was devastating in many ways: type I and insulin-dependent type II diabetes were often fatal until the discovery of insulin in 1921; gestational diabetes drastically worsened pregnancy outcomes for women and their babies; and other types of type II diabetes resulted in severe complications. Diabetes now has become known as a serious, but treatable, disease. While medically we’ve come a long way with the treatment of diabetes, there are still improvements that need to be made in relation to the social treatment.

Despite the great strides made in the medical community in regard to diabetes, people with diabetes still face hardships and discrimination in the workplace, the classroom, and in the health sector. Many people with diabetes need accommodations in the workplace that are protected by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). For example, many people with diabetes have rapid drops or spikes in blood sugar—hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia, respectively—and they need to take time to remedy it. If an employer does not accommodate these needs, they are in direct violation of the ADA. There are exceptions, such as when hyperglycemia, hypoglycemia, or the breaks make the employee unable to do the essential function of the job. However, in many workplaces, these breaks are possible.

Kristine Rednour was hired as a reserve paramedic for the Wayne Township Fire Department (WTFD). When she was hired, she let the WTFD know that she had type I diabetes. She was promoted to full time, and during work had two hypoglycemic episodes within the same year, which affected her ability to respond as a paramedic. She was put on paid leave, during which she was required to have the medical director clear her. He cleared her for restricted duties and with workplace accommodations, which the WTFD refused to put in place and instead fired her. She sued the WTFD for violating the ADA and won. This is just one of many examples of workplace discrimination that people with diabetes face.

The ADA also protects children at school that have disabilities, including diabetes. However, like with employment discrimination, discrimination at school still occurs. Schools that receive federal funding are required to be able to make accommodations for students with diabetes, such as allowing them to have snacks and having staff that is qualified to administer care.

Some schools don’t offer these accommodations, especially the latter, which can put children at risk for life-threatening medical complications. Some schools even tell parents that their children will not receive medical assistance from staff even if the complications have become so severe that they are unconscious. Often, parents have to put their jobs on hold to be able to make trips to school to check on their children, potentially placing them under increased financial strain.

Blood Glucose Monitors can send blood sugar levels to an app that the child can download and have more immediate updates on their blood sugar. For some children with severe type I diabetes, they can find out life-saving information about what would otherwise be a severe drop in blood sugar. However, many schools are unwilling to accommodate students by letting those with diabetes access their phones or the Wi-Fi, which puts them at risk for missing a life-threatening drop in blood sugar.

Some children have been denied entrance into schools because they have diabetes, which violates the ADA if the school receives federal funding. Many students are sent to schools that they are not zoned for because the schools closest to where they live do not have staff trained to take care of them, despite the requirement of this accommodation. This means that parents have to drive their students to a school farther away, potentially disrupting their ability to get to work. Some schools participate in this type of discrimination knowingly, while others do not understand enough about diabetes or the ADA. Regardless, denying entry into a school because of a disability is a direct violation of the ADA.

Due not only to the discrimination those with diabetes face, but also the stress and anxiety of not knowing when they’ll have a drop or spike in blood pressure, people with diabetes often suffer from worsened mental health, which according to many sources, including the UN, is a human right. This lessened mental health takes many forms: people with diabetes are two to three times more likely to suffer from depression; diabetes distress can occur when a person with diabetes feels controlled by their illness instead of the other way around; and when physical health gets worse, mental health often follows. It is important for people with diabetes to know they can seek medical attention for their mental health as well as their physical health.

The final place people with diabetes face a violation of their human rights is in the healthcare setting. Healthcare is expensive even without taking into account chronic diseases, especially medication. Insulin is a relatively cheap and easy medication to make. In the 1990s, a one month supply was less than $50, whereas now it’s upwards of $200, which is not accounted for by inflation. For people without insurance, or those that are underinsured, this can put a huge financial burden. This has led to people with insulin-dependent diabetes to ration their insulin, which can lead to death. For example, a nurse, who knew how to manage her diabetes, was found dead due to not using enough insulin. For people with insulin-dependent diabetes, insulin is a human right, which is being denied to many by the sharp increase in prices.

People with diabetes now are able to live happy and healthy lives, especially compared to a hundred years ago. However, they are still set back due to discrimination and human rights violations. It is important as a society to work towards removing the barriers that people with diabetes, among other disabilities, face so that they have access to health, both mental and physical.

Republic At Risk: COVID-19 in India

While the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) has impacted almost every corner of the globe, parts of Asia are still just beginning to see the systemic effects of the pandemic. As the second most populous country in the world, India has experienced a rise in COVID-19 cases and deaths which magnify current injustices across the country. This blog addresses India’s importance within the COVID-19 pandemic and its relationship with human rights issues concerning feeble governance, police brutality, migrant displacement, and Islamophobia.

As of late-July, over 1.4 million Indians have been diagnosed with COVID-19, while over 32,000 have died from the virus. India’s western state of Maharashtra is currently the country’s epicenter with over 375,000 confirmed cases of COVID-19. On the southern coastline, the state of Tamil Nadu has the country’s second-largest number of confirmed cases (210,000+), while the capital territory of Delhi in the northwest has recently exceeded 130,000 confirmed cases. Additionally, the southeastern state of Andhra Pradesh has confirmed over 95,000 cases of COVID-19. Interestingly, India’s most populous state, Uttar Pradesh, has only confirmed just over 65,000 cases which triggers questions about access to COVID-19 testing and essential resources throughout the country.

A National Lockdown

In late-March, the Indian government issued a nationwide lockdown that lasted two months. Inconveniently, the country’s 1.3 billion inhabitants were given less than a 4-hour notice of this initial 3-week lockdown. The effects of this tall order were apparent on day one since so many people throughout the country live on a daily wage or in extreme poverty. As food supply chains became compromised and manufacturing facilities closed, the country’s unemployment rate reached a 30-year low. All the while, facilities such as schools and train coaches have been converted into quarantine centers. These attempts have seemingly delayed the inevitable spike of COVID-19 cases. However, it is speculated that the low number of confirmed cases is the result of low testing rates.

This outcome has been attributed to lax contact tracing, stringent bureaucracy, and inadequate health service coordination, namely in Delhi where cases have recently surged. However, as India reopens, the number of confirmed COVID-19 cases has increased. Additionally, the introduction of newly-approved antigen kits have allowed for rapid diagnostic testing, although testing is not to be distributed proportionately. More specifically, family members and neighbors of people who have tested positive for COVID-19 claim they are not being tested. Also, in several instances, the family members of people who have tested positive for COVID-19 were not being informed about their loved one’s diagnosis. After much scrutiny, however, local health authorities in Delhi have attempted to pick up the pieces by using surveillance measures such as door-to-door screenings, drones, and police enforcement.

Policing the Police

While the recent murder of George Floyd sent shockwaves across the world, India has been confronting its own relationship with police violence. In June, two Tamil Nadu shopkeepers, J Jayaraj and his son Bennicks Immanuel, were arrested for keeping their business open past permitted hours during the national lockdown. They were then tortured while in police custody and died days later in the hospital. Due to this event garnering considerable attention and protesting, six police officers have since been arrested for their deaths. Also, Tamil Nadu police officers with questionable track records will now undergo behavioral correction workshops. However, this incident is no anomaly. According to the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), nine Indians die in judicial or police custody every day. In comparison, official government crime data claims 70 people were killed in Indian police custody in 2018. This striking differential in reported custodial deaths suggests India’s law enforcement entities lack accountability and are riddled with corruption.

Much like the United States, India has a history tainted with police violence that disproportionately affects minority groups, namely people from the lowest Dalit caste, indigenous groups, and Muslims. With no choice but to work during the national lockdown, many of India’s poorest citizens were beaten by police. Videos of these violent acts surfaced across social media. In opposition, there have been over 300 reported incidents of attacks on police officers alone in Maharashtra. These recent events highlight the need for the Indian government to pass anti-torture legislation that curbs police violence. By ratifying the United Nations Convention Against Torture, the Indian government can help remove the colonial vestiges of power and punishment that have plagued the country for generations.

Migrant Displacement

The sudden announcement of a national lockdown had tremendous repercussions for the tens of thousands of daily-wage migrants throughout India. Overnight, businesses closed and transportation systems suspended throughout the country, placing many migrant workers in precarious economic conditions. Men, women, and children hunkered down in urban centers across the country as they waited for their workplaces to reopen but to no avail. In response, India’s major cities experienced an exodus of migrant workers attempting to return to their home states on foot, many living hundreds, even thousands, of miles away. As thousands trekked home, many died due to dehydration, exhaustion, sunstroke, and traffic accidents. Reports of pregnant women delivering, and subsequently carrying, their children in these horrific conditions have also surfaced.

A recent Supreme Court order has urged the well-being of India’s 100 million internal migrant workers affected by the hardships of COVID-19 by requiring the government to register, feed, shelter, and transport them until they return home. However, these efforts are seemingly inadequate because most internal migrant workers have not qualified for these “relief packages”, while those who have qualified are experiencing limited coordination between state governments. All the while, India has ended its national lockdown and many migrant workers are trying to return to their places of employment. Some employers are sponsoring the return of their lost workers, while some must find their own means to return. As such, some states have sought local help to accommodate the loss of migrant workers which places many Indians in even greater economic uncertainty.

Migrant workers walking on the shoulder of a highway during the nighttime.
The Indian Lockdown Migration – IV (PB1_4728). Source: Paramvir Singh Bhogal, Creative Commons.

Pathologizing Islam

COVID-19 in India has contributed to a surge in anti-Muslim rhetoric that suggests this religious minority group is purposely spreading the virus.  The rumors began after Tablighi Jammat, a Muslim missionary group, held a congregation outside of India and, soon after, many members tested positive for COVID-19 in New Delhi. Videos on WhatsApp and various television channels have proliferated this misinformation to the Indian public alongside the usage of phrases such as “corona jihad” and “corona terrorism”. To make matters worse, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-led government, which is notorious for its Hindu nationalist sentiments, has begun incorporating Tablighi Jamaat-related statistics to its daily COVID-19 briefings. Such rhetoric has influenced a slew of Islamophobic acts such as prohibiting neighborhood entry, restricting sales by street vendors, and even violent attacks.

These recent events fuel an existing fire that posits Muslims as reproducing at a pace to outnumber Hindus and compromising “Mother India”. However, recent efforts between Muslim Indians and allies has been quick to respond to this COVID-19 misinformation because they have been protesting India’s new citizenship law that offers amnesty to various non-Muslim immigrants and a nationwide citizen count that necessitates proof of documentation dating several years back. The BJP has made it apparent that Muslims are not welcome in India and weaponized the COVID-19 pandemic as a part of its Islamophobic campaign. As such, these efforts corner Muslim Indians into political and economic insecurities that pressure apartheid at a time when unity is paramount.

Masked medical professionals walking with a crowd in the background.
coronavirus-india-rep-image-hyd. Source: Anant Singh, Creative Commons.

Human Rights in India

As displayed, India has an array of prevalent human rights issues that have compounded since the arrival of COVID-19. Among the efforts that could protect Indians from these concerns are labor protections, health care reform, civil rights for minority groups, food security, and income equality. However, Prime Minister Narendra Modi has propagated a narrative of self-reliance that undermines these systemic inequalities. Service provision has highlighted these discrepancies because resources are scarce, and those with power and privilege are placed to the front of the line. In addition, many Indians cannot abide to the recommended sanitation and social distancing measures due to living in poor, dense settlements in the heap summer when water sources are limited.

Although tearing through communities and disrupting daily life in India, the COVID-19 pandemic can be viewed as an opportunity for social change. More specifically, it is well within the power of Parliament, the media, civil society, and local governments to right these wrongs by ending communal bias and impartiality within state institutions. Addressing these corrupt and oppressive practices will not only remediate the effects of COVID-19 but help shape an equitable future for a country that is rapidly becoming a global super power and expected to be the most populous country in the world by 2027. Real change and equity in the world’s largest democracy could send a much-needed shockwave of justice across the globe.

Pigmented Pandemic: Racial and Ethnic Disparities in COVID-19

Ubiquity of the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) has drastically changed the way we behave in almost every corner of life. One silver lining drawn into these unprecedented times is that many people are more appreciative of their families, friends, and communities. However, the odds of being in a social network that knows someone who has been diagnosed or died from COVID-19 are greater if you are a racial/ethnic minority living in the U.S. As such, this blog focuses on COVID-19’s disproportionate effect on communities of color and how a human rights approach can help address racial/ethnic health disparities.

Racial/ethnic minorities are particularly vulnerable to reduced access of health services and the psychosocial stressors of discrimination which is why some argue that racism is a fundamental cause of health inequalities. These disparities are largely due to the disadvantaged economic and social conditions commonly experienced by many racial/ethnic minorities. Compared to Whites, racial/ethnic minorities are more likely reside in densely populated areas, live further from grocery stores and medical facilities, represent multi-generational homes, and be incarcerated. Additionally, racial/ethnic minorities disproportionately represent essential worker industries and have limited paid sick live. As a result, the living and working conditions for many racial/ethnic minorities put them at odds with threat of COVID-19.

Vestiges: Black American Health Disparities

Black Americans have disproportionate rates of COVID-19-related risk factors such as diabetes, hypertension, and obesity. As such, they are disproportionately dying of COVID-19 in many counties across the U.S. These disparities are even more alarming at the state-level. For example, in Georgia, 83% of all COVID-19 cases linked to a hospitalization were Black patients despite the community only representing a third of the state’s population. Also, in Michigan, Blacks represent 14% of the state’s population but 41% of the COVID-19 deaths. On a national level, Blacks (13% of the total population) represent 33% of all COVID-19 hospitalizations, while Whites (60% of the total population) represent 45% of all COVID-19 hospitalizations.

Not only do Black Americans disproportionately live in many of the U.S.’s early COVID-19 hotspots (e.g., Detroit, New Orleans, and New York), they are also more likely than their White counterparts to experience poverty and have no health insurance. For centuries, the labor of Black Americans has been deemed “essential”, while the COVID-19 pandemic adds insult to injury. In the medical field, Blacks are less likely to be health professionals and more likely to represent personnel that cleans, provides food, or work in inventory. As such, Black essential workers who are not on the frontlines are more likely to acquire COVID-19 in the pernicious form of regularly contacting cardboard, clothing, or stainless steel. Thus, health disparities in the Black community demonstrate how the legacy of slavery and segregation thrive in the social and economic conditions of COVID-19.

Segmented: Latino American Health Disparities

Many Latinos in the U.S. have immigrant status and work in high-risk essential industries such as agriculture, food service, and health care. This largely explains why Latinos are up to three times more likely than Whites to be infected and hospitalized by COVID-19. These striking outcomes are compounded when considering that Latinos face other disproportionate hurdles such as inadequate communication resources and language barriers. Also, Latinos often socialize in “mixed status” immigrant networks which means those who are undocumented are not eligible for COVID-19 stimulus funding.

A recent Pew poll found that Latinos are almost 50% more likely than the average American to have been laid off or lost a job due to the pandemic. This is particularly salient to Latinos with a high school education or less and those ages 18-29. However, immigrant Latinos were less likely to lose their jobs but more likely to take a pay cut. As a result, the Latino experience during the COVID-19 pandemic is not only fraught with social and economic drawbacks, much like other communities of color, but complicated by the fact that their large immigrant population is ineligible for needed resources and often relied on in the essential workforce. These outcomes suggest the social and economic consequences of COVID-19 are uniquely challenging to Latinos, namely immigrants with limited access to resources that are often afforded to citizens.

Overlooked: Native American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander Health Disparities

Often overlooked in the racial health disparities conversation are outcomes for Native Americans. Some state health departments (e.g., Texas) classify Native American COVID-19 statistics as “other” which ultimately dismisses the unique health profile of this underserved population. However, early statistics from Arizona and New Mexico suggest Native Americans represent a disproportionate number of COVID-19-related deaths and cases, respectively. Reports from health authorities in Navajo Nation, which is comprised of areas in Arizona, Utah, and New Mexico, indicate this community’s confirmed COVID-19 prevalence rate is the highest in the country, although they have a test rate higher than most U.S. states.

In March, the Seattle Indian Health Board requested medical supplies from local health authorities but instead received body bags and toe tags. This callous response demonstrates that local authorities in Washington state have actively devalued the lives of Native Americans during these trying times. The Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe in South Dakota have responded to their state’s negligence by refusing to end COVID-19 highways checkpoints across tribal land. Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe Chairman Harold Frazier argues that the checkpoints are the best thing the tribe has to prevent the spread of COVID-19 because they are only equipped with an eight-bed facility for its 12,000 inhabitants. The nearest critical care facility is three hours away.

Also overlooked are COVID-19 outcomes among Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders (NHPI). Early reports from California, Hawaii, Oregon, Utah, and Washington indicate that NHPI have higher rates of COVID-19 when compared to other ethnic groups. A precursor to these outcomes is that NHPI have some of the highest rates of chronic disease which puts this demographic at higher risk of COVID-19. Much like other racial/ethnic minority groups, NHPI are more likely to work in the essential workforce and live in multi-generational households. Thus, these conditions allow COVID-19 to proliferate among NHPI enclaves.

Person with a protective mask preparing food with a front door sign that reads "No Mask, No Entry".
Thank you essential workers! Source: spurekar, Creative Commons

Health and Human Rights

Health is argued to be a fundamental human right. Ways this can be achieved is through creating greater access to safe drinking water, functioning sanitation, nutritious foods, adequate housing, and safe conditions in the workplace and schools. As such, health exists well outside the confines of the typical health care setting. However, the U.S. has yet to officially ratify the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which ultimately prevents the government from being held accountable for the socioecological influences that generate health disparities across racial/ethnic minority groups.

These health disparities are not debatable and even acknowledged by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. In response, national efforts, state-level policies, and public health programs have successfully reduced these disparities but have only made modest progress. Thus, comprehensive, systemic, and coordinated strategies must be implemented to achieve health equity. Although solving this daunting task cannot achieved by the U.S. government alone. It must also incorporate non-profit and philanthropic on-the-ground efforts already seeking this goal as well as greater public awareness about the impact social and economic policies have on racial/ethnic health disparities.

Despite these discrepancies, the COVID-19 pandemic serves as an opportunity for social change. More specifically, these unprecedented events bring greater light to issues such as poverty, homelessness, unemployment, and migration, all of which disproportionately affect communities of color. As a result, the ubiquity of COVID-19 has gathered people from every corner of the justice community to declare that health is a human right, thus bringing us one step closer to true equity and inclusion.

An Argument for Decriminalizing Sex Work

Abstract of a red light
Abstract at a Red Light. James Loesch. Creative Commons for Flickr.

Different human rights groups support or have called for the decriminalization of sex work. Some of which include Amnesty International, World Health Organization, UNAIDS, International Labour Organization, the Global Alliance Against Trafficking in Women, the Global Network of Sex Work Projects, the Global Commission on HIV and the Law, Human Rights Watch, the Open Society Foundations, and Anti-Slavery International.

Picking on one, the Human Rights Watch supports the full decriminalization of consensual adult sex work in support and defense of human rights relating to personal autonomy and privacy as, “A government should not be telling consenting adults whom they can have sexual relations with and on what terms.” Joining 61 other organizations, they recently advocated for a bill that would decriminalize sex work in Washington, DC. This Community Safety and Health Amendment Act intends to repeal statutes that criminalize adults who voluntarily and consensually engage in sexual exchange, while it upholds and defends the legislature which prohibits sex trafficking. The HRW affirms that adult consensual sexual activity may be covered by the concept of privacy, rejecting the idea that criminalization was a protective measure against HIV and STIs, and conveying that it was more likely to drive a vulnerable population underground.

However, the demands of these organizations and supporters of sex workers have surfaced controversy around sexuality, health, economics, and morality. Often the idea of sex work may be tied to or conflated with sex trafficking, child sex abuse, and rape. Open Society Foundation simply defines sex workers as “adults who receive money or goods in exchange for consensual sexual services or erotic performances, either regularly or occasionally.” Sex work encompasses a wide range of professions and activities which include the trade of some form of sexual activity, performance, or service for a client to a number of fans for some kind of payment (including prostitution, pornography, stripping, and other forms of commercial sex). It is clearly separated from those services that utilize “the threat or use of force, abduction, deception, or other forms of coercion for the purpose of exploitation”. Decriminalizing sex work would call for the “removal of criminal and administrative penalties that apply specifically to sex work, creating an enabling environment for sex workers’ health and safety.” Amnesty International expands on these definitions in this report.

Many members of society view sex work as immoral or degrading to women, arguing that sex work is inherently exploitative of women, even if these workers find it profitable or empowering- even simply as the power to creatively express one’s sexuality. When we think of sex workers, we tend to assume they were forced into it or assume a desperate narrative with no other options. Then, maybe, we judge their appearance while tying it to their worth or a fantasized idea of sex workers opposed to the ordinariness we associate with other professions and community members. A simple argument says that, like any profession, there are extremely different motivations to pursue these professions and, in the end, it’s a job or choice of work with its own pros and cons for each lifestyle (affording many lifestyles). Also, anyone and any personality can be a sex worker.

People enter and remain in this work for a multitude of reasons creating each individual experience of sex work; however, many face the same response and abuse in the workplace or trade. Owning to the stigma associated with the profession, not many can come out and say they are a sex worker. They must fight to be recognized beyond the stigma or continue to repress or hide their daily lives from their community or society. Sex workers report extreme violence and harassment from clients, managers, police and society and even more cannot report these violences, facing incrimination or even incarceration. Ironically, laws on sex work undermine governments’ own efforts to reduce high rates of violence against women and reduce rates of HIV infection in sex worker populations.

Repressive policing not only further marginalizes sex workers as a whole, but it also reinforces what it promises to remove as it exposes sex workers to different abuses and exploitation by police or law enforcement officials who may arrest, harass, physically or verbally abuse, extort bribes and sexual services, or deny protection to sex workers avoiding the eyes of the law. Some sex work may be illegal because it is viewed as immoral and degrading, but people governed by these laws do not share the same moral beliefs. As police fail to act on sex workers’ reports of crimes, or blame and arrest sex workers themselves, offenders may operate with impunity while sex workers are discouraged from reporting to the police in the future. Then there is the financial toll of criminalization as repeating fines or arrests push some further into poverty. People may be forced to keep selling sex as potential employers will not hire those with a criminal record. Also, if the need for money found some sex workers in the streets, how will fines deter the work?

The work entails forming relationships with a wide range of clients at different levels of intimacy. Unfortunately, sex work offers comfort to predators, or those who mean harm, who also understand and exploit the workers paralleling relationship with police. Working in isolation, workers’ lives are threatened as they avoid the police and are denied these protections in their workplace and, off the hook, predators continue to harm more even those outside of the sex trade. Facing arrest or prosecution themselves, any client may protect themselves from blocked numbers leaving workers in the dark with no evidence of whom they are dealing with, surrendering that safety. Some laws advocate helping sex workers by removing the option of work as it criminalizes only those who buy sex. Now, to incentivize clients and income, workers may be forced to drop prices, offer more risky services, or reach out to potentially abusive third-party management.

Woman holding poster reaing "Sex Workers Demand Safe Spaces"
Sex Workers Demand Safe Spaces. Fibonacci Blue. Creative Commons for Flckr.

Decriminalizing and regulating the work of sex workers would allow them the right to choose their clients and negotiating power or power to cease the service when they feel uncomfortable or unsafe. Criminalization, or the threat of it, complicates and weakens workers’ power to negotiate terms with their clients or collaborate with others for safety. So, for example, it may increase the chance for workers to engage in sex with clients without a condom (which may be used as evidence of the crime). Although variable in different contexts, in low and middle-income countries on average, sex workers are 13 times more at risk of HIV, compared to women of reproductive age (age 15 to 49), so their ability to negotiate condom use is important.

According to a study led by the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine and published by the American Association for the Advancement of Science, sex workers who had been exposed to repressive policing had a three times higher chance of experiencing sexual or physical violence by anyone, including clients and partners. They were also twice as likely to have Sexual Transmitted Infections than those who avoided repressive policing.

In order to be protected from exploitation by third party managers and dangerous clients, to be informed on sexual transmitted infection and other health concerns or vulnerabilities, to be able to unionize and self-manage, and to be able to reach out to law enforcement, sex work should be regulated by the same occupational safety and health regulations that benefit workers in other labor industries. Dedicated efforts must consider the elevated or unique risks, vulnerabilities, and intersectional stigmas surrounding different sex workers, including men, transgender, and other gender identities and portions to improve health outcomes and human rights. Wider political actions are needed to address inequalities, stigma, and exclusion or marginalization that sex workers face even past the criminal justice system to health, housing, employment, education, domestic abuses, etc.

We are faced with opposing or contradictory narratives of the sex work experience, but we have chosen some to represent the entire concept especially those tailored to our own feelings of sex and commerce without concern or consideration of those even more immediately affected. The conversation of sex work needs to open up to understand and share the message to all that the labor itself is the commodity, not the laborer and it requires workers more considerate rights and regulations. If sex work is legally accepted with due rights and respect, it can become something that benefits- even especially vulnerable or marginalized- women and humanity.

“What sex workers need is not condescension and invasion into their private lives, but support in achieving decent working conditions.”

Additional Sources:

Open Society Foundations

Vox