 All right, my intrepid learners, today we're going to talk about this question. Is good health a human right? And we've talked about sort of what good health means. We've talked about that in our first lesson a little bit. We haven't really talked yet about human rights. What is a human right? This is a really big question that kind of has busied the world for many years and many decades and lots of people are still talking about what it means. But really if you kind of dive into sort of the modern definition it's something that is inalienable and universal. So that means that everyone has them and that there are no buts about it. So that means you don't say well they're you know they're a person but and no buts. It's inalienable, it's universal, everyone has a human right. And there are 30 of them set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. And we'll talk a little bit about that here in just a second. And just before we get started we're also going to talk about this a little bit later when we talk about this capabilities perspective coming up. But we're going to talk about how health doesn't necessarily equal health care. So how I'm going to make the sign here in math that means not equal to. Doesn't always mean health care. So we'll discuss the sort of nuance of that in a second. Alright so we're going to break it up into these three perspectives. We've got a legal perspective, sort of a international legal perspective, capabilities perspective right here, and then our economic perspective on this question. We'll start with the human rights one because kind of one of the older ones in terms of at least in terms of these three here. The first sort of big argument, the big international argument about this came in 1948. Or the world had just finished with World War II and they really weren't, they were needing sort of some sort of unifying documents and lots of them were written at this time. And one of them is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. In it they said in 1948, so this is a long time ago mind you, everyone has the right to be to a standard of living adequate for the health of him and his family. So obviously it's a little bit antiquated in this language here. We've got his and his. We probably wouldn't want to word it that way because women are just as important in this discussion. So we've got this document that sort of gives us the our rights sort of from a legal perspective. Now let's take a look at something that was sort of, it's a little bit newer. It's I think from the 70s if I remember right, but that's not very important actually. It's sort of developed by a famous economist and philosopher. He's from India. His name is Martya Sen. Talks a lot about development and written a lot about it as well over the years. And he talks about human rights and the right part of this thing as being not as much a legal right but of a social right or of a social sort of, I need to learn how to spell, I'm so bad when I'm doing these videos all of a sudden I can't spell anymore. It's a social ethic. So sort of like a human right in a way, but it's something that we as a society say people should have these rights because we're good people, we have resources, we should share them essentially. Something like that. And he also says that feasibility, again not spelling correctly, feasibility does not determine your rights. And this is a really important sort of thing. It's basically saying that just because you can't, you can't at this moment offer that in completely say okay you have the right to good health but it's not exactly deliverable at that moment doesn't necessarily mean you don't have that right. So many countries have something kind of like this about violence. So they say you know you have a right to live in a society where you're not being attacked all the time. But that doesn't mean that you might not get mugged on the street someday or that something bad will happen to you. So feasibility doesn't determine your rights. And Sen just sort of tries to draw a connection between healthcare and legislation. So he's thinking of this sort of in a big picture kind of way like what kind of policies and what kind of laws can we make that will create the sort of systems that we need to fix health. And there he's also sort of making a wall between those two things. He's saying healthcare is one way in which you can achieve this good health. But there are other ways and you can use legislation to get those in other ways other than healthcare. Or you can use legislation to strengthen healthcare. There's lots of different ways that you can do it. It doesn't necessarily mean that universal healthcare provided by the state is maybe the requirement. But the right of having good health is nonetheless a socially ethical right that everyone deserves. And that although it's not feasible, you still have that right. So that's kind of an interesting agreement or sort of a between. You'll see actually that it's kind of a bridge between these two in a lot of ways. That's why I put it in the middle. So we move over here to the economic perspective, which most economic institutions and pretty much anybody who is worth their salt in economics these days agrees on this right here. Organizations I'm gonna have to go fight my pen a little bit here when we get done with this video. So economic organizations and that means things like banks and big health organizations, big development organizations and small ones as well are sort of saying something that actually makes perfectly logical sense. And honestly, we could have come to this a lot earlier. And that is that health is a necessity. And what they mean by this is that in order to have a successful life, in order to do the things that you want to do, you need to be healthy. It's absolutely vital. And health is therefore in many ways a motor for economic growth and for positive development in a society. So if you don't have healthy people, they can't go to work. They can't take care of their families. They can't do the things they need to do to build a stronger society and get the better health that comes with having more resources. So it's kind of like this motor. And I'm just gonna write motor down here as sort of a so you guys can remember, it is a motor for development. It is a motor for sort of getting a country to a better place. And this is really a purely economic view. It's not necessarily saying like, oh, people have the right to it. Saying people need it. It's required. And that's actually, I think, probably one of the most interesting sort of ways of thinking about it. So why is this important? Well, there is something that people talk a lot about in development. And they talk about a gap. So we've got here health on one axis. I'm gonna make a little chart here in a second. Got health on one axis. We've got time on another axis. And let's make the poorest people in society. We're gonna give them the color green. And their health in general starts sort of here. And maybe it's slowly improving. And in general, it's actually getting better around the world. So it's kind of maybe slowly curving up towards the top here at the end. And in the meantime, the people who are attaining sort of a middle class or upper lower class status, their health is getting better like this. And then at some point, it kind of starts to plateau. And it's actually been doing this now for a few decades. And then you have the very richest people in any societies, anywhere around the world, where as soon as medical advancements became sort of a part of what happened in society, their health shot up and sort of has plateaued and kind of slowly steadily gotten a little better and a little worse throughout history. And the question is, is this gap right here, so the space between the poor and the rich, or the richer, is this ethical? And does it make sense when you're talking about money? And I'm gonna put dollar signs, but you can replace that with whatever currency you would like. Does it make sense in terms of money? Because you've got these people down here who are often sort of the lower sort of the motor of a society's for forward motion economically. And they're not doing so well. They're putting a lot of money into their health, a lot of money that they don't have. And they're not doing very well. And does that make sense then? Does that maybe in some ways also hold other people back, not just with their health, but economically? So that is one way of looking at it from sort of an economic and also brought back the ethical sort of into this graph as well. Alright, so that is a look at health as a human right. I mean, I think just to be completely honest, I obviously feel that it is. But you everyone's entitled to their sort of opinion, though, I guess I would maybe take a look at each one of these perspectives and give it a second thought if you're unsure.