One Health. Группа авторов
and Forster, 2008; Scoones, 2010).
Through the 2000s, these two sets of agendas became increasingly intertwined, and since the end of the decade they have increasingly shared the broader, snappier and more widely used banner of ‘One Health’ (Zinsstag et al., 2005; FAO et al., 2010). The recent adoption of the language of One Health by key organizations across the worlds of veterinary and human medicine, international health and other agencies, national governments and research funding bodies, represents the integration of these various agendas. Advocates, based particularly in the USA and Switzerland, have organized workshops, conferences, reports, websites and journal publications to promote it. As an organizing concept, it has proved flexible enough to encompass very different languages, ideas and working practices, yet coherent enough to enable communication across disciplinary and organizational divides (Lebouef, 2011; Chien, 2013). However, questions remain about the long-term viability, practical utility, sustained interdisciplinarity and persistent anthropocentrism of One Health (Lee and Brumme, 2013; Bardosh, 2016; Cassidy, 2016; Manlove et al., 2016; Kamenshchikova, 2019), as well as how it can productively engage with questions of colonial and post-colonial legacies, power, and ongoing tensions between local and ‘global’ approaches to health (Scoones, 2010; Green, 2012; Beinart and Brown, 2013; Yates-Doerr, 2015; Cunningham et al., 2017; Rock et al., 2017).
Like its predecessors, the rise of One Health cannot be explained solely by advocacy, internal scientific logic, or as the natural and inevitable outcome of long-standing efforts to bring humans, animals and the environment closer together. A product of 21st-century concerns, it forms part of a wider cluster of research and policy agendas, including ‘food security’, ‘biosecurity’, ‘global health’ and ‘translational medicine’, which also aim to break down barriers between disciplines. Intriguingly, each of these addresses issues relevant to, or even overlapping with One Health, but is oriented towards a different group of disciplines (e.g. ‘food security’ tends to appear in the environmental and agricultural sciences.) Rather than competing for resources or legitimacy, these agendas may instead be mutually reinforcing. Jointly, they could be described as part of a collective response to a (re)-emerging set of highly complex concerns which extend across traditional disciplinary boundaries – over environmental damage, climate change and scarce resources, food availability and disease/health (Bardosh, 2016; Cairns and Krzywoszynska, 2016; Cassidy, 2016; Felt et al., 2016; Harrison et al., 2019; Senanayake and King, 2019) and finally, how animals contribute to shape modern medicine (Cassidy et al., 2017; Woods et al., 2018; Kirk et al., 2019; Koch, 2019; Schoefert, 2019). This is the arena in which the future of One Health will be forged, but in looking ahead, we should not forget its multiple historical precedents, and their influence on the present.
Notes
1 For another balanced historical perspective on this topic, see Kirk and Worboys (2011).
2 Numerous papers on this topic were delivered to the 2012 Congress of the World Association for the History of Veterinary Medicine. For a summary see Woods (2012).
3 Today Pennsylvania Vet School has its own trademarked slogan, ‘Many Species, One Medicine’TM, attributed broadly to another 19th-century ‘founding father’, Benjamin Rush MD (Hendricks et al., 2009).
References
Allam, M.W. (1966) The M.D. and the V.M.D. Pennsylvania Medicine 69(8), 57–60.
Allbutt, C. (1924) The integration of medicine. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine (Section of Comparative Medicine) 17, 1–3.
Anderson, W. (2004) Natural histories of infectious disease: ecological vision in 20th century biomedical science. Osiris 19, 39–61.
Bardosh, K. (ed.) (2016) One Health: Science, Politics and Zoonotic Disease in Africa. Routledge, London.
Beinart, W. and Brown, K. (2013) African Local Knowledge and Livestock Health: Diseases and Treatments in South Africa. Boydell & Brewer Ltd, Woodbridge, UK.
Bernard, C. (1957) An Introduction to the Study of Experimental Medicine. (English translation of 1865 text). Courier Dover Publications, New York.
Beveridge, W.I.B. (1969) Comparative medicine in theory and practice. WHO Chronicle 23(12), 547–553.
Beveridge, W.I.B. (1972) Frontiers in Comparative Medicine. Oxford University Press, London.
Bradley, O.C. (1927) What is Comparative Medicine?Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine 21(1), 129–134.
Bresalier, M. (2018) From healthy cows to healthy humans: integrated approaches to world hunger, 1945–1965. In: Woods, A., Bresalier, M., Cassidy, A. and Mason Dentinger, R. (eds) (2018) Animals and the Shaping of Modern Medicine: One Health and its Histories. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham, Switzerland, pp. 119–160.
Bresalier, M. and Worboys, M. (2014) ‘Saving the lives of our dogs’: the development of canine distemper vaccine in interwar Britain. British Journal for the History of Science 47(2), 305–334. doi: 10.1017/S0007087413000344
Bynum, W. (1990) ‘C’est un malade’: animal models and concepts of human diseases. Journal of the History of Medicine 45, 397–413.
Bynum, W. (1994) Science and the Practice of Medicine in the 19th Century. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Cairns, R. and Krzywoszynska, A. (2016) Anatomy of a buzzword: the emergence of ‘the water-energy-food nexus’ in UK natural resource debates. Environmental Science & Policy 64, 164–170.
Cameron, T.W.M. (1938a) Veterinarians and medicine. Canadian Journal of Comparative Medicine 2, 119–120.
Cameron,