Health Issues in Decade.
As we enter a new decade, it is crucial to take a closer look at the major health issues that will likely impact global communities. Despite the advancements in healthcare, new challenges are emerging, and some existing ones are becoming more complex. In this article, we will discuss the major health issues that will shape the next decade.
Aging Population and Chronic Diseases
One of the most significant health issues of the coming decade is the rapidly aging population. The proportion of people aged 65 years and above is expected to increase from 9% in 2020 to 16% in 2050. This demographic shift presents challenges in the management of chronic diseases such as cancer, diabetes, and cardiovascular diseases, which are more prevalent among the elderly. Chronic diseases are responsible for more than 70% of global deaths, and the burden is expected to rise in the coming decade.
Mental Health
Mental health disorders such as depression, anxiety, and bipolar disorders are expected to become a significant health concern in the coming decade. The COVID-19 pandemic has increased the prevalence of mental health disorders, and the effects may be felt for years to come. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), depression is the leading cause of disability globally, and it is estimated that 1 in 4 people will experience a mental health problem at some point in their lives. The stigma associated with mental health disorders also prevents many people from seeking help.
Climate Change
Climate change is not only an environmental issue but also a major health concern. The effects of climate change such as extreme weather events, air pollution, and the spread of infectious diseases have a significant impact on human health. Heatwaves, for instance, can cause heat exhaustion, dehydration, and in severe cases, heatstroke. Air pollution has been linked to respiratory diseases such as asthma and lung cancer. The spread of infectious diseases such as dengue fever and malaria is also expected to increase due to climate change.
Antibiotic Resistance
Antibiotic resistance is a growing public health concern, and it is expected to become more prevalent in the coming decade. The misuse and overuse of antibiotics have led to the emergence of antibiotic-resistant bacteria, making it harder to treat bacterial infections. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), at least 2.8 million people in the US get antibiotic-resistant infections each year, and more than 35,000 die as a result.
Non-Communicable Diseases
Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) such as cancer, diabetes, and cardiovascular diseases are expected to become a major health concern in the coming decade. NCDs are responsible for more than 70% of global deaths, and the burden is expected to rise due to factors such as urbanization, sedentary lifestyles, and unhealthy diets. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), an estimated 422 million adults worldwide have diabetes, and the prevalence is expected to increase to 642 million by 2040.
Emerging Infectious Diseases
Emerging infectious diseases such as Ebola, Zika, and COVID-19 are expected to continue to pose a significant health threat in the coming decade. The emergence of new infectious diseases is often linked to factors such as population growth, urbanization, and climate change. The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the need for better preparedness and response to emerging infectious diseases.
Health Inequalities
Health inequalities are a persistent problem globally, and they are expected to remain a significant health issue in the coming decade. The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed the disparities in health outcomes between different socioeconomic groups, with people from marginalized communities being disproportionately affected. Addressing health inequalities requires a multi-sectoral approach that addresses the root causes of these disparities.
About the Creator
Keep reading
More stories from Hasna Shahreen and writers in Earth and other communities.
Higgs Boson
Higgs Boson Discovery. Higgs boson, also known as the God particle, is a subatomic particle that was predicted to exist by the Standard Model of particle physics. It was finally discovered in 2012 by the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN) in Switzerland.
By Hasna Shahreen3 years ago in Earth
Chameleon: Nature’s Master of Disguise
Few creatures in the animal kingdom capture the imagination quite like the chameleon. Known for its ability to change color, its slow, deliberate movements, and its incredible eyes that move independently, the chameleon is one of nature’s most extraordinary reptiles. These small but remarkable creatures have inspired scientists, photographers, and animal lovers for centuries.
By Aarif Lasharia day ago in Earth
Supreme Court to Review Monsanto’s Bid for Immunity in Roundup Lawsuits
The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to review Monsanto’s appeal seeking immunity from lawsuits related to its popular herbicide, Roundup. This decision marks a critical moment for both the company and individuals claiming health damages from the chemical, which contains glyphosate—a substance under scrutiny for potential links to cancer. The review could have wide-reaching implications for corporate accountability, public health, and the legal landscape surrounding chemical products. Background on Roundup and Legal Challenges Roundup, a herbicide produced by Monsanto (now owned by Bayer), has been a staple in agriculture and home gardening for decades. Glyphosate, its active ingredient, was introduced as a highly effective solution for weed control. However, in recent years, scientific studies and lawsuits have raised concerns about its potential carcinogenic effects. Thousands of plaintiffs have claimed that exposure to Roundup caused non-Hodgkin lymphoma and other health issues. Numerous state and federal courts have seen extensive litigation, with some plaintiffs receiving multimillion-dollar verdicts. Monsanto has consistently defended the product, emphasizing that regulatory agencies worldwide have deemed glyphosate safe when used as directed. Monsanto’s Bid for Immunity Monsanto is appealing for legal immunity, arguing that its use of Roundup was regulated and approved by federal agencies, and therefore the company should not be held liable in civil lawsuits. The company contends that federal oversight should preempt individual claims, a legal doctrine known as federal preemption. In essence, Monsanto is asserting that because the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has evaluated and permitted glyphosate use, states or courts should not hold the company personally accountable for alleged harm. Why the Supreme Court’s Review Matters The Supreme Court’s decision to hear the case is significant for several reasons: Corporate Accountability: A ruling in favor of Monsanto could strengthen corporate defenses in cases where products are federally regulated, potentially limiting lawsuits against companies producing similar chemicals or pharmaceuticals. Public Health: Plaintiffs and advocacy groups argue that a corporate victory could undermine accountability for harmful products and reduce incentives for companies to rigorously test safety. Legal Precedent: The case could set a nationwide precedent regarding federal preemption, influencing how courts balance regulatory approval with civil liability. The Supreme Court’s interpretation could reshape the legal landscape for product liability and consumer protection in the United States. Stakeholder Perspectives Plaintiffs and Advocacy Groups For those affected by Roundup, the Supreme Court review is a critical opportunity to hold a powerful corporation accountable. Many plaintiffs argue that Monsanto failed to adequately warn users of the potential risks associated with glyphosate exposure. “People shouldn’t have to choose between using a product as intended and risking their health,” says Laura Mitchell, an attorney representing multiple plaintiffs in Roundup lawsuits. “A ruling that shields Monsanto from liability could leave victims without recourse.” Advocacy groups, such as environmental and cancer prevention organizations, emphasize that transparency and accountability are essential, particularly for chemicals widely used in agriculture and landscaping. Monsanto and Bayer Monsanto, now part of Bayer, maintains that Roundup is safe when used according to label instructions. Bayer has publicly stated that legal challenges have cost billions but that the company continues to stand behind its products. The firm argues that courts must respect federal regulatory authority to avoid creating conflicting standards between federal law and state-level lawsuits. “If companies could be held liable despite following federal regulations, it would set a concerning precedent for innovation and regulatory compliance,” a Bayer spokesperson said. Broader Implications The Supreme Court review has implications far beyond Monsanto and Roundup: Agricultural Industry: Glyphosate and similar herbicides are widely used in crop production. Legal outcomes could influence labeling, usage guidelines, and liability risk for other companies in agriculture. Consumer Products: The ruling could affect cases involving pharmaceuticals, chemicals, and other regulated products, particularly when federal agencies approve them. Regulatory Authority vs. Civil Liability: The decision may clarify the balance between federal oversight and state-level tort claims, potentially shaping how courts interpret the limits of corporate immunity. Previous Court Decisions Lower courts have issued mixed rulings in Roundup lawsuits. Some courts awarded substantial damages to plaintiffs, while others limited awards or found in favor of Monsanto. These inconsistent outcomes underscore the complexity of balancing scientific evidence, regulatory approval, and legal responsibility. Federal appeals courts have previously sided with both sides in separate cases, making Supreme Court intervention necessary to establish uniform legal standards nationwide. Public and Media Reaction Media coverage of Monsanto’s legal challenges has been extensive, reflecting public concern over chemical safety and corporate responsibility. Many reports highlight the tension between regulatory approvals and individual health claims, questioning whether federal endorsements automatically protect companies from lawsuits. Public sentiment is divided. Supporters of corporate immunity argue that companies need protection to operate and innovate without fear of excessive litigation. Opponents worry that such immunity could prioritize corporate interests over public health. What to Expect The Supreme Court will now evaluate key questions: Does federal regulatory approval preempt state-level claims of harm? Can companies be held liable even if they followed federal guidelines? How should courts balance scientific uncertainty with civil justice? The decision, expected within the next year or two, will be closely watched by lawyers, plaintiffs, corporations, and advocacy groups alike. Conclusion The Supreme Court’s review of Monsanto’s bid for immunity in Roundup lawsuits represents a landmark moment in American legal history. The case has the potential to redefine corporate liability, influence public health policy, and set precedent for future disputes involving federally regulated products. For plaintiffs, the stakes are deeply personal—seeking justice for alleged health impacts caused by widespread chemical exposure. For Monsanto and other corporations, the outcome could determine the limits of accountability in a regulated marketplace. As the Supreme Court deliberates, the nation watches closely, recognizing that the ruling will resonate far beyond Monsanto, affecting consumers, companies, and the broader debate over safety, regulation, and responsibility in the United States.
By Muhammad Hassan4 days ago in Earth
Comments
There are no comments for this story
Be the first to respond and start the conversation.