I agree with Albert Schweitzer in that "happiness is nothing more than good health and a bad memory." The reason why I agree is because I also agree with The Buddha in that "All that we are is the result of what we have thought. The secret of health for both mind and body is not to mourn for the past, worry about the future, or anticipate troubles, but to live in the present moment wisely and earnestly." I feel even in my life it is hard to not mourn for the past and in doing so I hold myself back from happiness. If anyone has ever seen "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind," you will know what I mean when I say I wish I had that special pill sometimes where I wake up and a preselected event or memory has been erased from my brain. This "bad memory" and good health leads to happiness according to Albert Schweitzer and hence why I agree with him.
I am shocked to see that one in four families has at least one member with a mental disorder and that nearly 1 million people commit suicide every year.
I definitely agree that poverty and mental disorders are linked in a vicious circle. I did a presentation along with 3 other classmates in my PM 563 class about Downtown Women's Action Coalition which has Mental Health as one of its priorities for homeless women in Skid Row. When researching about homelessness and mental health, we came to a huge wall. There was not much about the homeless. We definitely have to thank the amazing work done by Dr. Cousineau in assessing health and mental health status and access to care for the homeless adults and children in central Los Angeles (https://blackboard.usc.edu/courses/1/20071_pm_565_41128/uploads/_285588_1/neglect_in_the_streets_part_1.pdf )
and the mental health needs among homeless people in central Los Angeles (https://blackboard.usc.edu/courses/1/20071_pm_565_41128/uploads/_285589_1/usc-homeless-mental-health-2.pdf).
Shocking facts about homelessness in Los Angeles County:
•254,000 men, women, and children experience homelessness in one year
•80,000 people are homeless each night
•Los Angeles has a higher rate of homelessness than most other U.S. cities and counties
•Total homeless: Metro & South LA
•Homeless families: South LA & South Bay
•Homeless singles: Metro & South LA
•Homeless youths: Hollywood
•Families–Headed by single mothers
•Average age is around 40 years & Women tend to be younger than men
•Race/Ethnicity–African Americans are disproportionately represented while Latinos, Whites and Asians are underrepresented
•Education–About half graduated from high school
–LA appears to have a greater percentage of homeless adults with a college education (10%) than nationally (2%)
•Employment & Income–Prior to becoming homeless, 75-90% were poor
–16% to 20% are currently employed
•Public Benefits–42% to 77% of homeless people do not receive the public benefits to which they are entitled
•57.8% are homeless due to fleeing from domestic violence
•25% are victims of childhood physical or sexual abuse – a predictor of future violence
•Drug abuse and prostitution increase risk of victimization
•Social alienation and isolation exacerbate trauma
Causes of homelessness:
•Lack of affordable housing
•Poverty
•Low-paying jobs & labor market changes
•Unemployment
•Mental illness
•Substance abuse
•Changes & cuts in public assistance
•Domestic violence
•Changes in family structure
•Prison release
•Chronic health problems
•Lack of access to affordable health care
Of all the causes of homelessness, mind and behavior health constitutes a majority of the reasons to homelessness.
This is more than enough to prove that poverty and mental disorders are linked in a vicious circle.
We as global health leaders need to not only consider mind, mental health, and behavior when developing solutions to increase health and wellbeing, but realize that mental disorders and illness challenge health in both developed and developing countries and that though many of the risks that we are exposed to are entirely controllable and avoidable (smoking, alcohol, and drugs) others go deeper into social context which are entirely uncontrollable and hard to fix (poverty).
Saturday, February 17, 2007
Friday, February 16, 2007
Nutrition, Food Security, and Global Health
I am shocked that undernutrition is an underlying cause of 53% of deaths among children under five years of age. That alone should justify the importance of nutrition and food security in regards to global health. How do we expect people to function and cooperate in succeeding other global health issues and goals when people are not able to function at their best due to malnutrition?
Because malnutrition refers to undernutrition and overnutrition, it affects the whole word. The developing countries suffering more undernutrition and the developed countries suffering more overnutrition.
I am interested in the "Double Burden: Households with Underweight and Overweight Members" chart. I am confused how this is a possibility. I always assumed that underweight or overweight affects the family as a whole and not individually impacted within a family. I always linked access to food with social context and family as a whole. I imagined food as being shared and a common variable within a family. I really would like to hear insight on this.
With all the statistics and charts we have been shown, the "Estimated Contribution of Major Determinants to Reductions in Child Malnutrition, 1970-95" chart was not as surprising as the other charts. Approximately 55% of the reductions in child malnutrition was affected by the mother. It is not a surprise that the more educated the mother, the less child malnutrition occurs.
I feel micronutrient malnutrition ("Hidden Hunger") is becoming more and more pertinent in global health. The scary thing about micronutrient malnutrition is that it is hard to detect especially if the person has other comorbidities. The comforting thing about micronutrient malnutrition is that methods of prevention are cheap and simple. I remember working with UNICEF in raising money to eradicate iodine deficiency. UNICEF has goals to fix micronutrient malnutrition globally specifically iodine, iron, and vitamin A (http://www.unicef.org/nutrition/index_iodine.html).
While reading the UNICEF website I found another reason why nutrition and food security is of great importance in global health.
"HIV-infected mothers face an agonizing choice when deciding how to feed their infants. Without preventative interventions, about 5-20 per cent of infants born to infected mothers will contract the virus through breastmilk if breastfed for two years. (Every year 200,000 infants become HIV+ in this way.) At the same time, if a mother does not breastfeed, her infant will face a six times greater chance of dying in her or his first two months of life from infectious diseases such as diarrhoea and respiratory infections." (http://www.unicef.org/nutrition/index_HIV.html)
We as global health professionals need to realize that malnutrition is the underlying cause of a great portion of deaths among people in the world. I am not sure if it is possible to calculate how big this portion is but with all the facts about malnutrition linked to diseases, we can definitely assume and imagine the magnitude of impact. Nutrition and food security is extremely important to global health if not the most important!
Because malnutrition affects 1/8 of the children in developing worlds and 4 out of the 8 will die, I feel Liyan's article "Local production and provision of ready-to-use therapeutic food (RUTF) spread for the treatment of severe childhood malnutrition" brings light to an important solution. This article is future-focused and innovative. More research should be done to find ways to fund this new innovation but I look forward to hearing more about the progress of this solution in severely malnourished children of developing countries.
Last but not least, as I have mentioned in my previous entries, I am all for policy limiting restaurants to serving actual portion sizes rather than "bigger is better". This will help the malnutrition (overnutrition) problem in the United States while possibly distributing the food to developing countries to help the malnutrition (undernutrition) problem in those parts of the world.
Because malnutrition refers to undernutrition and overnutrition, it affects the whole word. The developing countries suffering more undernutrition and the developed countries suffering more overnutrition.
I am interested in the "Double Burden: Households with Underweight and Overweight Members" chart. I am confused how this is a possibility. I always assumed that underweight or overweight affects the family as a whole and not individually impacted within a family. I always linked access to food with social context and family as a whole. I imagined food as being shared and a common variable within a family. I really would like to hear insight on this.
With all the statistics and charts we have been shown, the "Estimated Contribution of Major Determinants to Reductions in Child Malnutrition, 1970-95" chart was not as surprising as the other charts. Approximately 55% of the reductions in child malnutrition was affected by the mother. It is not a surprise that the more educated the mother, the less child malnutrition occurs.
I feel micronutrient malnutrition ("Hidden Hunger") is becoming more and more pertinent in global health. The scary thing about micronutrient malnutrition is that it is hard to detect especially if the person has other comorbidities. The comforting thing about micronutrient malnutrition is that methods of prevention are cheap and simple. I remember working with UNICEF in raising money to eradicate iodine deficiency. UNICEF has goals to fix micronutrient malnutrition globally specifically iodine, iron, and vitamin A (http://www.unicef.org/nutrition/index_iodine.html).
While reading the UNICEF website I found another reason why nutrition and food security is of great importance in global health.
"HIV-infected mothers face an agonizing choice when deciding how to feed their infants. Without preventative interventions, about 5-20 per cent of infants born to infected mothers will contract the virus through breastmilk if breastfed for two years. (Every year 200,000 infants become HIV+ in this way.) At the same time, if a mother does not breastfeed, her infant will face a six times greater chance of dying in her or his first two months of life from infectious diseases such as diarrhoea and respiratory infections." (http://www.unicef.org/nutrition/index_HIV.html)
We as global health professionals need to realize that malnutrition is the underlying cause of a great portion of deaths among people in the world. I am not sure if it is possible to calculate how big this portion is but with all the facts about malnutrition linked to diseases, we can definitely assume and imagine the magnitude of impact. Nutrition and food security is extremely important to global health if not the most important!
Because malnutrition affects 1/8 of the children in developing worlds and 4 out of the 8 will die, I feel Liyan's article "Local production and provision of ready-to-use therapeutic food (RUTF) spread for the treatment of severe childhood malnutrition" brings light to an important solution. This article is future-focused and innovative. More research should be done to find ways to fund this new innovation but I look forward to hearing more about the progress of this solution in severely malnourished children of developing countries.
Last but not least, as I have mentioned in my previous entries, I am all for policy limiting restaurants to serving actual portion sizes rather than "bigger is better". This will help the malnutrition (overnutrition) problem in the United States while possibly distributing the food to developing countries to help the malnutrition (undernutrition) problem in those parts of the world.
Saturday, February 10, 2007
Changing Trends in Non-Communicable Diseases: Implications in Global Health
First I would like to say that I really enjoyed the "Pharmacogenomics in Admixed Populations" presentation by Andrea.
I am personally fascinated by this topic. I am looking forward to the development and the utilization of this technology and the numerous interesting and controversial debates that are bound to rise from genetic information gathering.
I believe the technology is becoming more and more pertinent and applicable to the population of today and the future. The population of the United States and slowly the rest of the world is becoming mixed. I know in my family I have "happa" cousins (half Asian and half Caucasian).
With the many 1 mix, 2 mix, 3 mix, and so on, people out there, pharmacogenomics will definitely be more beneficial and with the trend of our nation and slowly the other nations, mixes will definitely become more and more common and even possibly the majority in some cases.
Pharmacogenomics are also beneficial to non-mixed populations. Looks can be deceiving. Just because you may look "white" and check the "white" box, your genetics may be different. Just because you look more "white" and consider yourself "white" when you are in fact "happa", your genetics may actually be more similar to your "other half" than the half you associate with the most.
To reassure the public and protect misuse of information, laws and regulations should definitely be put in place first.
In regards to equitable sharing of benefits of genomics, I feel regulations will prevent costs to be driven up and only accessible by those who are able to afford it.
In regards to ethics of genetic testing, I believe this will be a highly debated topic. Because ethics whether professional or moral are quite vague and subjective to individuals, ethics of genetic testing will not differ in subjectivity. Because of this subjectivity, misuse of genetic information is likely to occur. Those with high ethics, professional or moral, will refrain from misusing genetic information and will inform patients of potential irregular findings. Those with low ethics, professional or moral, will likely misuse genetic information and do not feel a moral duty to inform patients of potential irregular findings.
Personally I believe pharmacogenomics is where we are headed and if we can brainstorm possible problems we may face in the future, we are able to put interventions, regulations, and laws to prevent the proposed problems from rising. Through a cost to benefit analysis, the pharmacogenomic technology has more benefits than costs after regulations and laws are put in place to prevent predicted problems.
Before working with big pharma this summer, I never knew nor heard of pharmacogenomics. I am glad Andrea shared this with our class because pharmacogenomic technology is definitely future focused and innovative.
The question that was asked repeatedly by the subjects I worked with in my big pharma clinical trials was "Do I have the fat gene?" I know there are clinical trials to determine if there is a gene linked to obesity, but is that really the solution? Should we just identify the fat gene and zap it or should we raise awareness and empower individuals to take responsibility for their own health through changes in lifestyle (exercise) and nutrition (diet)?
For our instant gratification population, identifying the fat gene and zapping it may be the most appealing and marketable for businessmakers, it is our job as global health leaders to prevent this "treating the disease" mentality and promoting the "prevention through lifestyle and nutrition changes" mentality.
I am personally fascinated by this topic. I am looking forward to the development and the utilization of this technology and the numerous interesting and controversial debates that are bound to rise from genetic information gathering.
I believe the technology is becoming more and more pertinent and applicable to the population of today and the future. The population of the United States and slowly the rest of the world is becoming mixed. I know in my family I have "happa" cousins (half Asian and half Caucasian).
With the many 1 mix, 2 mix, 3 mix, and so on, people out there, pharmacogenomics will definitely be more beneficial and with the trend of our nation and slowly the other nations, mixes will definitely become more and more common and even possibly the majority in some cases.
Pharmacogenomics are also beneficial to non-mixed populations. Looks can be deceiving. Just because you may look "white" and check the "white" box, your genetics may be different. Just because you look more "white" and consider yourself "white" when you are in fact "happa", your genetics may actually be more similar to your "other half" than the half you associate with the most.
To reassure the public and protect misuse of information, laws and regulations should definitely be put in place first.
In regards to equitable sharing of benefits of genomics, I feel regulations will prevent costs to be driven up and only accessible by those who are able to afford it.
In regards to ethics of genetic testing, I believe this will be a highly debated topic. Because ethics whether professional or moral are quite vague and subjective to individuals, ethics of genetic testing will not differ in subjectivity. Because of this subjectivity, misuse of genetic information is likely to occur. Those with high ethics, professional or moral, will refrain from misusing genetic information and will inform patients of potential irregular findings. Those with low ethics, professional or moral, will likely misuse genetic information and do not feel a moral duty to inform patients of potential irregular findings.
Personally I believe pharmacogenomics is where we are headed and if we can brainstorm possible problems we may face in the future, we are able to put interventions, regulations, and laws to prevent the proposed problems from rising. Through a cost to benefit analysis, the pharmacogenomic technology has more benefits than costs after regulations and laws are put in place to prevent predicted problems.
Before working with big pharma this summer, I never knew nor heard of pharmacogenomics. I am glad Andrea shared this with our class because pharmacogenomic technology is definitely future focused and innovative.
The question that was asked repeatedly by the subjects I worked with in my big pharma clinical trials was "Do I have the fat gene?" I know there are clinical trials to determine if there is a gene linked to obesity, but is that really the solution? Should we just identify the fat gene and zap it or should we raise awareness and empower individuals to take responsibility for their own health through changes in lifestyle (exercise) and nutrition (diet)?
For our instant gratification population, identifying the fat gene and zapping it may be the most appealing and marketable for businessmakers, it is our job as global health leaders to prevent this "treating the disease" mentality and promoting the "prevention through lifestyle and nutrition changes" mentality.
Friday, February 9, 2007
Changing Trends in Communicable Diseases: Implications for Global Health
When I was reading the article by Peeling, "Rapid tests for sexually transmitted infections (STIs): the way foward," this stuck with me:
"Recognising the tremendous burden of bacterial sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and the lack of access to laboratory diagnositc services in the developing world, in 1993 the Rockefeller Foundation posted a prize of US$1 million for the development of an inexpensive rapid simple test to detect genital chlamydial or gonococcal infection. The prize was never claimed and was withdrawn in 1998. In stark contrast, ultra sensitive and specific assays such as nucleic acid amplified tests were developed and became widely and effectively used in the developed world to screen for these infections and facilitate treatment."
Why is it that even money doesnt appeal to the greedy to help the developing world?
Yes I understand prevention and control of STIs in the developing world is rather complex and multidimensional, but why is it that according to the 2004 World Development Report lack of access and unaffordability are two major reasons why laboratory services fail which I see simple and direct solutions for. People in the developed world needs to stop being greedy and share the wealth and luxuries many take for granted. I am in full support of the Sexually Transmitted Diseases Diagnostics Initiative (SDI).
I really like Jeffrey Sachs' quote "Life doesn't come with one problem neatly separated from the rest. Specialization is helpful, but you've got to see the web."
I also am a strong believer in the Pro-Poor Package. Even though there are areas of concern with the package, I feel the package was creatively designed and the benefits outweigh the risks.
I am all for the holistic approach! :o)
"Recognising the tremendous burden of bacterial sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and the lack of access to laboratory diagnositc services in the developing world, in 1993 the Rockefeller Foundation posted a prize of US$1 million for the development of an inexpensive rapid simple test to detect genital chlamydial or gonococcal infection. The prize was never claimed and was withdrawn in 1998. In stark contrast, ultra sensitive and specific assays such as nucleic acid amplified tests were developed and became widely and effectively used in the developed world to screen for these infections and facilitate treatment."
Why is it that even money doesnt appeal to the greedy to help the developing world?
Yes I understand prevention and control of STIs in the developing world is rather complex and multidimensional, but why is it that according to the 2004 World Development Report lack of access and unaffordability are two major reasons why laboratory services fail which I see simple and direct solutions for. People in the developed world needs to stop being greedy and share the wealth and luxuries many take for granted. I am in full support of the Sexually Transmitted Diseases Diagnostics Initiative (SDI).
I really like Jeffrey Sachs' quote "Life doesn't come with one problem neatly separated from the rest. Specialization is helpful, but you've got to see the web."
I also am a strong believer in the Pro-Poor Package. Even though there are areas of concern with the package, I feel the package was creatively designed and the benefits outweigh the risks.
I am all for the holistic approach! :o)
Wednesday, February 7, 2007
Globalization, Development and Health
This week was a little nerve racking. Liyan and I went first to facilitate the case study on globalization. Even though the experience did not go as well as we planned it, I am definitely glad it is over with.
I really like the quote "There are only 2 families in the world, as my grandmother used to say: the haves and the have-nots," by Sancho Panza. We are definitely fortunate to be born into the families of haves. I never really thought of the globe as having a North-South divide in terms of socio-economic and political division between the wealthy developed countries and the poorer developing countries. After class this divide stuck with me. I feel with globalization, "the North" or wealthy developed countries exploit "the South" or poorer developing countries. It is hard for us to tell the poorer developing countries not to follow in our footsteps when all they want is to experience just a slight portion of our lifestyles in which we take for granted.
With globalization comes the "increased interdependence and integration of economic, demographic, social, cultural, political, and environmental systems across geographical boundaries; the trend away from discrete local or national economic units toward one huge interdependent global market." Because we are all becoming one big global village, information exchange will increase, knowledge and expertise will increase, and money, jobs, and people will cross national boundaries.
Globalization can have both positive and negative implications for different countries and for different populations within countries. Most developing nations have been marginalized and experience negative implications of globalization. I feel only the most developed nations have benefited and experience positive implications of globalization. However, in lecture we learned that the general rule is that "those who have learnt how to play the new global game have benefited, while those who have not have tended to be marginalized." I believe it takes resources developing nations do not have access to in order to learn how to play the new global game.
I agree that "we have an ethical and moral responsibility to work to ensure that every human being has the opportunity to maximize her/his potential and has the same options and choices that we take for granted for ourselves and for our loved ones."
I realized through the many discussions of my classes that we feel we know best and that is just not true. Yes, we do have lots of knowledge and tools but we are not deeply rooted to the culture of that nation for us to say that we know best. We should assist and empower the individual nations to learn how to play the new global game for them to benefit and experience the positive implications of globalization.
I feel leaders of countries need to have broader perspectives on the positive and negative implications globalization had on other countries before adoption of new globalization plans. As public health professions, we should consult others and be open to suggestions in order to improve our own individual country while contributing to our world.
I really like the quote "There are only 2 families in the world, as my grandmother used to say: the haves and the have-nots," by Sancho Panza. We are definitely fortunate to be born into the families of haves. I never really thought of the globe as having a North-South divide in terms of socio-economic and political division between the wealthy developed countries and the poorer developing countries. After class this divide stuck with me. I feel with globalization, "the North" or wealthy developed countries exploit "the South" or poorer developing countries. It is hard for us to tell the poorer developing countries not to follow in our footsteps when all they want is to experience just a slight portion of our lifestyles in which we take for granted.
With globalization comes the "increased interdependence and integration of economic, demographic, social, cultural, political, and environmental systems across geographical boundaries; the trend away from discrete local or national economic units toward one huge interdependent global market." Because we are all becoming one big global village, information exchange will increase, knowledge and expertise will increase, and money, jobs, and people will cross national boundaries.
Globalization can have both positive and negative implications for different countries and for different populations within countries. Most developing nations have been marginalized and experience negative implications of globalization. I feel only the most developed nations have benefited and experience positive implications of globalization. However, in lecture we learned that the general rule is that "those who have learnt how to play the new global game have benefited, while those who have not have tended to be marginalized." I believe it takes resources developing nations do not have access to in order to learn how to play the new global game.
I agree that "we have an ethical and moral responsibility to work to ensure that every human being has the opportunity to maximize her/his potential and has the same options and choices that we take for granted for ourselves and for our loved ones."
I realized through the many discussions of my classes that we feel we know best and that is just not true. Yes, we do have lots of knowledge and tools but we are not deeply rooted to the culture of that nation for us to say that we know best. We should assist and empower the individual nations to learn how to play the new global game for them to benefit and experience the positive implications of globalization.
I feel leaders of countries need to have broader perspectives on the positive and negative implications globalization had on other countries before adoption of new globalization plans. As public health professions, we should consult others and be open to suggestions in order to improve our own individual country while contributing to our world.
Emerging Trends in Global Health
According to the "Achieving the Millennium Development Goals" by Christian Picciolini, "In September 2000, 189 nations came together and agreed on 8 Goals that must be achieved by 2015 to ensure the world is a better place for everyone."
From the video, I noticed the poor, the children, and the women are the most affected negatively. We as public health professionals and human beings have lots to do to bring the standards of the poor, the children, and the women up to par with the rest of the world who take their lives for granted.
The MDG #1 Eradicate Extreme Poverty and Hunger was the most shocking to me. How can 1.2 billion people live on $1 a day or less and about 800 million people suffer from hunger worldwide if world food production has doubled since the 1970's? This makes me believe that worldwide hunger is due mainly to unequal distribution of food. Logically, if food production has doubled since the 1970's and distribution of the food was equal then there should be less people suffering from hunger. It is definitely obvious that there is an unequal distribution of the food being produced. It is more than obvious that the food being produced is unequally distributed to those who are able to afford it rather than those who need it.
I see myself look around the restaurants every time I go out and feel disgusted by how much we take for granted. I remember my parents telling me, "Don't waste your food. Finish what's on your plate. There are millions of children around the world without food." I grew up making sure not to waste food and making sure those around me do not waste food either. I have been told by some people that they are against taking left-overs home to reheat because its not as "fresh" or they do not see themselves finishing it later. All I can say is if you know you are that type of person, DO NOT ORDER SO MUCH FOOD OR SHARE! I am a girl and I know I am unable to finish the big portions given to me so I am a big believer in sharing. To prevent wasting I would even go as far as mandating restaurants to serve real servings. This would not only prevent food waste from those who take our lifestyles for granted, but also help eliminate the growing obesity epidemic in developed countries.
Being a big believer in "Children are our future," I am excited in seeing the improved outcomes of the MDG #2 Achieve Universal Primary Education, MDG #4 Reduce Child Mortality, and MDG #5 Improve Maternal Health.
It is definitely shocking to see that over 1 billion people still live without safe drinking water. How is this MDG # 7 Ensure Environmental Sustainability? I am shocked that safe drinking water is still a problem for people in the world. This is a BARE NECESSITY. This should not be a MDG. This should have been solved a long time ago! How are we expecting to achieve all the other MDGs when over 1 billion people still live without the BARE NECESSITY of safe drinking water??? We should definitely focus a big portion of our efforts if not all of our efforts in making sure people are living with safe drinking water.
As we have seen, a key driver in changing trends in health is the technological advances like biomedical and diagnostic advances and information technology. The MDG #8 Develop a Global Partnership for Development states that "In cooperation with the private sector, the benefits of new technologies can be made available." The key word I believe is GLOBAL. We NEED to work TOGETHER globally to help EVERYONE to improve health rather than the developed countries exploiting the resources of the developing countries.
From the video, I noticed the poor, the children, and the women are the most affected negatively. We as public health professionals and human beings have lots to do to bring the standards of the poor, the children, and the women up to par with the rest of the world who take their lives for granted.
The MDG #1 Eradicate Extreme Poverty and Hunger was the most shocking to me. How can 1.2 billion people live on $1 a day or less and about 800 million people suffer from hunger worldwide if world food production has doubled since the 1970's? This makes me believe that worldwide hunger is due mainly to unequal distribution of food. Logically, if food production has doubled since the 1970's and distribution of the food was equal then there should be less people suffering from hunger. It is definitely obvious that there is an unequal distribution of the food being produced. It is more than obvious that the food being produced is unequally distributed to those who are able to afford it rather than those who need it.
I see myself look around the restaurants every time I go out and feel disgusted by how much we take for granted. I remember my parents telling me, "Don't waste your food. Finish what's on your plate. There are millions of children around the world without food." I grew up making sure not to waste food and making sure those around me do not waste food either. I have been told by some people that they are against taking left-overs home to reheat because its not as "fresh" or they do not see themselves finishing it later. All I can say is if you know you are that type of person, DO NOT ORDER SO MUCH FOOD OR SHARE! I am a girl and I know I am unable to finish the big portions given to me so I am a big believer in sharing. To prevent wasting I would even go as far as mandating restaurants to serve real servings. This would not only prevent food waste from those who take our lifestyles for granted, but also help eliminate the growing obesity epidemic in developed countries.
Being a big believer in "Children are our future," I am excited in seeing the improved outcomes of the MDG #2 Achieve Universal Primary Education, MDG #4 Reduce Child Mortality, and MDG #5 Improve Maternal Health.
It is definitely shocking to see that over 1 billion people still live without safe drinking water. How is this MDG # 7 Ensure Environmental Sustainability? I am shocked that safe drinking water is still a problem for people in the world. This is a BARE NECESSITY. This should not be a MDG. This should have been solved a long time ago! How are we expecting to achieve all the other MDGs when over 1 billion people still live without the BARE NECESSITY of safe drinking water??? We should definitely focus a big portion of our efforts if not all of our efforts in making sure people are living with safe drinking water.
As we have seen, a key driver in changing trends in health is the technological advances like biomedical and diagnostic advances and information technology. The MDG #8 Develop a Global Partnership for Development states that "In cooperation with the private sector, the benefits of new technologies can be made available." The key word I believe is GLOBAL. We NEED to work TOGETHER globally to help EVERYONE to improve health rather than the developed countries exploiting the resources of the developing countries.
Monday, February 5, 2007
Finally!
Hi Everyone!
I finally got my computer back. I always knew liquid and laptops do not mix but I definitely found out the hard way. I know I have lots of blogging to do to catch up to all you crazy bloggers and I definitely will be doing so this week. Please check back periodically this week for the interesting insights I have come up with and been keeping in my head to post up for when I get my computer back. I hope I can keep y'all entertained.
First I would like to thank Andrea for the delicious fruit tarts on my birthday. I would also like to thank Farah and Liyan for coming out to my birthday festivities on Friday. Lastly, thank you to those who wished me a happy birthday. I am finally a quarter century minus one.
I am sick and it is past my bedtime so please stay tuned for more official posting tomorrow.
Good night all :o)
I finally got my computer back. I always knew liquid and laptops do not mix but I definitely found out the hard way. I know I have lots of blogging to do to catch up to all you crazy bloggers and I definitely will be doing so this week. Please check back periodically this week for the interesting insights I have come up with and been keeping in my head to post up for when I get my computer back. I hope I can keep y'all entertained.
First I would like to thank Andrea for the delicious fruit tarts on my birthday. I would also like to thank Farah and Liyan for coming out to my birthday festivities on Friday. Lastly, thank you to those who wished me a happy birthday. I am finally a quarter century minus one.
I am sick and it is past my bedtime so please stay tuned for more official posting tomorrow.
Good night all :o)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
