3.8 Letter

The global antimicrobial resistance response effort must not exclude marginalised populations

期刊

TROPICAL MEDICINE AND HEALTH
卷 51, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s41182-023-00524-w

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a global health crisis that causes approximately 700,000 deaths annually and could lead to 10 million deaths by 2050. Marginalised populations are disproportionately affected due to barriers such as socioeconomic and ethnic disparities, limited healthcare access, and inadequate living conditions. A comprehensive and inclusive response is crucial to address this issue, including equitable access to antibiotics, improved living conditions, education, and policy changes. Ignoring marginalised populations in the fight against AMR is both morally and strategically flawed. This article critically examines this oversight and emphasizes the urgent need for comprehensive action.
Antimicrobial resistance (AMR), a rising global health crisis causing about 700,000 deaths annually and potentially 10 million deaths by 2050, disproportionately impacts marginalised populations. Due to socioeconomic, ethnic, geographic, and other barriers, these communities often have restricted healthcare access, compounding the AMR threat. Unequal access to effective antibiotics, inadequate living conditions, and a lack of awareness exacerbate the crisis in marginalised communities, making them more susceptible to AMR. A broader, inclusive response is needed to ensure equitable access to antibiotics, improved living conditions, education, and policy changes to challenge the root socioeconomic disparities. Ignoring marginalised populations in the fight against AMR is both a moral and strategic failure. Therefore, inclusivity must be a central tenet in combating AMR. This article not only critically dissects this prevailing oversight but also urgently calls for comprehensive action to address this significant shortcoming in our response efforts.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据