Next Article in Journal
Introduction to the Special Issue on Gender and Geoethics in the Geosciences
Next Article in Special Issue
The Adoption of Roles by Primary Care Providers during Implementation of the New Chronic Disease Guidelines in Urban Mongolia: A Qualitative Study
Previous Article in Journal
Effects of 20 Selected Fruits on Ethanol Metabolism: Potential Health Benefits and Harmful Impacts
Previous Article in Special Issue
How Does Sex Influence Multimorbidity? Secondary Analysis of a Large Nationally Representative Dataset
Article Menu

Export Article

Open AccessCommentary
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2016, 13(4), 400; doi:10.3390/ijerph13040400

Economies through Application of Nonmedical Primary-Preventative Health: Lessons from the Healthy Country Healthy People Experience of Australia’s Aboriginal People

Centre for Remote Health, Flinders University, P.O. Box 4066, Alice Springs, NT 0871, Australia
Academic Editor: Harry H.X. Wang
Received: 17 November 2015 / Revised: 22 March 2016 / Accepted: 24 March 2016 / Published: 1 April 2016
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Chronic Diseases and Multimorbidity in Primary Care)
View Full-Text   |   Download PDF [308 KB, uploaded 1 April 2016]

Abstract

The World Health Organization reports noncommunicable disease as a global pandemic. While national and international health research/policy bodies, such as the World Health Organization and the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, emphasize the importance of preventative health, there is a continuing distortion in the allocation of resources to curative health as a result of government failure. Government failure is, in part, the result of a political response to individual preference for certainty in receiving treatment for specific health conditions, rather than the uncertainty of population-based preventative intervention. This has led to a failure to engage with those primary causative factors affecting chronic disease, namely the psychosocial stressors, in which the socioeconomic determinants are an important component. Such causal factors are open to manipulation through government policies and joint government-government, government-private cooperation through application of nonmedical primary-preventative health policies. The health benefits of Aboriginal people in traditional land management, or caring-for-country, in remote to very remote Australia, is used to exemplify the social benefits of nonmedical primary-preventative health intervention. Such practices form part of the “healthy country, health people” concept that is traditionally relied upon by Indigenous peoples. Possible health and wider private good and public good social benefits are shown to occur across multiple disciplines and jurisdictions with the possibility of substantial economies. General principles in the application of nonmedical primary-preventative health activities are developed through consideration of the experience of Afboriginal people participation in traditional caring-for-country. View Full-Text
Keywords: chronic disease pandemic; Indigenous; social benefit; psychosocial stressors; environmental benefit; noncommunicable disease chronic disease pandemic; Indigenous; social benefit; psychosocial stressors; environmental benefit; noncommunicable disease
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. (CC BY 4.0).

Scifeed alert for new publications

Never miss any articles matching your research from any publisher
  • Get alerts for new papers matching your research
  • Find out the new papers from selected authors
  • Updated daily for 49'000+ journals and 6000+ publishers
  • Define your Scifeed now

SciFeed Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Campbell, D. Economies through Application of Nonmedical Primary-Preventative Health: Lessons from the Healthy Country Healthy People Experience of Australia’s Aboriginal People. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2016, 13, 400.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

1

Comments

[Return to top]
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health EISSN 1660-4601 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top