A bolder One Health: expanding the moral circle to optimize health for all

One Health Outlook

Benjamin John Coghlan¹  Anthony Capon²  Peter Singer³  Simon Coghlan⁴ 

[1] Burnet Institute, Melbourne, Australia;Monash Sustainable Development Institute, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia;Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, USA;University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia;

关键词: One Health;    Ethics;    Anthropocentrism;    Philosophy;    Health determinants;    Radical change;   

DOI  :  10.1186/s42522-021-00053-8

来源: Springer

【 摘 要 】

One Health is a ground-breaking philosophy for improving health. It imaginatively challenges centuries-old assumptions about wellbeing and is now widely regarded as the ‘best solution’ for mitigating human health problems, including pandemic zoonotic diseases. One Health’s success is imperative because without big changes to the status quo, great suffering and ill-health will follow. However, even in its more ambitious guises, One Health is not radical enough. For example, it has not embraced the emerging philosophical view that historical anthropocentrism is an unfounded ethical prejudice against other animals. This paper argues that One Health should be more imaginative and adventurous in its core philosophy and ultimately in its recommendations and activities. It must expand the circle of moral concern beyond a narrow focus on human interests to include nonhuman beings and the environment. On this bolder agenda, progressive ethical and practical thinking converge for the benefit of the planet and its diverse inhabitants—human and nonhuman.

【 授权许可】

CC BY