One Medicine: How understanding animals can save our lives

Product Information

We owe animals so much, it's time to focus on examining how they live and what we still have to learn from them. A better shared understanding of how our species coexists with millions of others can lead to untold medical advances, help both humans and animals and improve the world for all creatures from single-celled bacteria to a 30,000 kg whale. Who knows, maybe a kiss from a frog will save your life? Kahn Laura H, Kaplan Bruce, Monath Thomas P. One Health Initiative—One World One Medicine One Health: About the One Health Initiative. 2012. [Accessed May 11, 2015]. http://www ​.onehealthinitiative ​.com/about.php.

One Medicine: How understanding animals can save our lives

Anyone interested in a One Medicine approach will find this book an interesting introduction. Reciprocity is not just what animals can do for humans, but what humans can do for animals. We are stronger together and that is why Dr Morgan’s book is a wonderful step in that direction' Tiwari R, Dhama K, Sharun K, Iqbal Yatoo M, Malik YS, Singh R, Michalak I, Sah R, Bonilla-Aldana DK, Rodriguez-Morales AJ. Tiwari R, et al. Vet Q. 2020 Dec;40(1):169-182. doi: 10.1080/01652176.2020.1766725. Vet Q. 2020. PMID: 32393111 Free PMC article. Review.

Kaplan Bruce, Kahn Laura H, Monath Thomas P, editors. ‘One Health-One Medicine’: Linking Human, Animal and Environmental Health. Veterinaria Italiana. 2009; 45(1) http://www ​.izs.it/vet_italiana ​/2009/45_1/45_1.htm.

One Medicine by Dr Matt Morgan | Waterstones

It is clear that authors were starting to use OH as a standalone term from 2008, and following the FAO/WHO/OIE joint statement in 2010, OH overtook its predecessors and became adopted much more widely. Data for 2014 suggest an acceleration of this trend, with citations using the term OH nearly doubling to 173 per year, although usage of OM and OWOH persists at much lower levels. At Medicalstudyzone.com, we take user experience very seriously and thus always strive to improve. We hope that you people find our blog beneficial!Even with experimental therapies, such as for cancer, if we share what we already know from veterinary clinical practice and consensual clinical trials with animals, we have the potential to save the lives of both humans and animals without the need to sacrifice a healthy animal’s life.

One Medicine, One Health, One World - PMC One Medicine, One Health, One World - PMC

Perhaps the most widely used working definition is the one put forward by the One Health Initiative, a U.S.-based advocacy group including veterinarians, physicians, and public and environmental health professionals: “The One Health concept is a worldwide strategy for expanding interdisciplinary collaborations and communications in all aspects of health care for humans, animals and the environment” ( Kahn et al. 2012). This definition is strikingly broad, promoting “interdisciplinary collaboration” without specifying who should be collaborating with whom and on what, or indeed how they should actually go about it. This is reflected in varying references to OH as a “concept,” as illustrated earlier, but also as an “approach,” a “movement,” and even a “paradigm.” In recent years, the language of OH has been adopted by a series of powerful actors in biomedicine and global health, including the U.S. government’s Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ( CDC 2013), international organizations including the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), World Health Organization (WHO), and World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) ( FAO et al. 2008, 2010), and the biomedical research funders Wellcome Trust (2010) and Gates Foundation (2013).Given the influence of these institutions in shaping health research, policy, and practice globally, it is important to understand why OH has had so much traction with these actors. Perhaps they have been convinced by the arguments—even if the main priority is to improve human health, understanding why and how, for example, infectious diseases move between multiple species can bring obvious benefits. However, arguments about why we should think across humans and animals about health and medicine are far from new, and have been advanced from time to time ever since veterinary medicine emerged as a separate profession during the late eighteenth century ( Woods and Bresalier 2014; Bresalier et al. 2015). Animals have regularly played important roles in the history of medicine, as bodies to experiment on, as sources of theoretical insight, and as objects of inquiry in their own right ( Hardy 2003; Kirk and Worboys 2011). This raises an obvious question: given that ideas about the convergence of human and animal health have had such a long history, why have they gained significant international and institutional traction only so recently? In other words, the key question is not why OH, but why OH now.