Blog

By Dr. Bamijoko-Okungbaye Abiola 20: 05: 2023.

Study links Rising Mental Disorders amongst Afro-Europeans to Inequities.

A new study suggests that health inequities are deep-rooted in Europe. For the study published in the Journal of Health and Social Sciences, Sofia University, mental health researcher Dr Abiola Bamijoko-Okungbaye demonstrates the unexpected connection between unfair policies and structural racism, exacerbating European health inequities.   According to the paper, the ramifications of these inequities on the mental health of Afro-Europeans or people of African origin are immense. 

The impact of health inequities on Afro-Europeans' mental health is enormous and will disadvantageously put them at serious risk for other illnesses, explains Bamijoko-Okungbaye in the Journal of Health and Social Sciences.

The author adds: "The paper shows that people of African origin in Europe are at greater risk of developing illnesses due to structural racism and unfair policies, which are factors amplifying inequities. "

For instance, people of African origin are more likely to struggle with mental illness in Europe than the white majority, supported by research data in the United Kingdom, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, France and Spain—mental disorders attributed to inequities.

"That sets in motion a significant wave of illnesses and worsening health problems amongst the group. It would require meaningful policies to reduce the impact of inequities on the mental health of Afro-Europeans. All forms of racism must be verboten. Europe must confront structural racism and unfair policies, which are elemental causes of health inequities head-on to achieve equitable care for all," said Dr Bamijoko-Okungbaye.

Bamijoko-Okungbaye shows how structural racism and unfair policies are associated with European health inequities. In the paper, Bamijoko-Okungbaye presents findings showing the interpenetration of interpersonal racism and structural racism within the structural apparatus designed to perpetuate racism without intent or actions.

Besides, occurrences of racism against Afro-Europeans are seen as aggression and structural violence on the group. People of African origin in Europe do not need to experience racism individually to feel its impact on their health. Evidence suggests this to be a factor in the higher level of mental disorders registered in the group. The findings call for existing failed policies to be changed, and the paper provides actionable solutions to address them. 

The ambitious Oxford initiative to address structural racism is a positive step. 
 

 Black Academic Future is a bold and exciting new programme that practically demonstrates Oxford's unequivocal commitment to tackling structural racism and inequality, both within our own organisation and the sector more broadly, said Dr Rebecca Surender, University Advocate for Equality and Diversity. 
 

However, to address structural racism and inequity, Dr. Bamijoko-Okungbaye shows that meso and macro-level intervention will be necessary to effect change. The focus should be on meaningful policies rather than mechanisms. 

In a pluralistic society, culture valorises individuals. It would be appropriate to study how culture affects the mental health-seeking attitude among people of African origin; this could open mental healthcare barriers and help close the existing health inequalities gap in mental health. The care of minority groups is beyond the rules, as history reinforces this assertion. Europe should initiate inclusive policies, recalibrate existing policies to reduce the impact of discriminatory experiences on the mental health of Afro-Europeans, hence reducing health inequities," he said.   

ARE GENE-EDITED BABIES THE FUTURE?

By Dr. Bamijoko-Okungbaye Abiola 28: 11: 2018. 

Just imagine for a second going to your doctor and telling her what kind of biological features you want your baby to have. For example, you want a baby that is resistant to malaria, flu, cough, and the most important thing, you want a super baby. Maehle Andreas Holger and Geyer-Kordesch Johanna were right sixteen years ago when they said new technologies create new ethical dilemmas.

We could be on the verge of something that raised serious ethical questions in 2018. Recently, Chinese researcher, He Jiankui released information that confirms the birth of two children whose DNA was edited to make them more resistant to HIV. This research raised a lot of ethical questions, but I will enumerate two on this blog: Can we fine-tuned or touch human embryos and gametes to give us a biological print we want?

Is it ethically permissible to add those embryos that were not successful during the initial experimental procedure for gestation? The methods used in China to edit the genes of the twins are not permissible in the US considering the DNA changes can be transferred to future generations and this can affect other genes.

As the lead researcher in China puts it: 

" I intend to eliminate gene called CCR5 which will make the baby resistant to HIV, smallpox and cholera"



 I must say the information that we are getting from China is blurred in the sense that research of this magnitude needs to be peer reviewed to validate its hypothesis and at the moment, we are still waiting on peer-reviewed results;  this might change later.  


If the information is correct, the birth of the first genetically altered humans would be a stunning medical achievement simultaneously controversial. In this case, we have babies that are genetically altered, but at the same time, the babies have all the risks. Are we ready to deal with the uncertainty such experiment brings? My readers must have noticed that I supported experimental therapy in the case of Charlie Gard because of the potential treatment was under the strict guidelines of the United States healthcare agency.


My concern about such experimental research is whether the guidelines put in place cover the ambiguity and uncertainty of all the parties involved during the research design process. This was addressed by Arthur Caplan when he suggested a lack of oversight and Craig Klugman goes further to propose putting a global measure in place to prevent embryo tourism. The legal questions raised in case of an unknown outcome like disease.Are the researchers liable for causing the problem? 
We must also address how far we can go with gene-editing experimentation.

I do not have a problem with gene-editing per se if applied under stringent guidelines, that is, under strict ethical and scientific guidelines. The challenge remains that this could lead to designer babies and eugenics rebranded.