Connecting Different Perspectives on Health

One of this course’s main goals has been to connect topics from different areas of study and apply them to a broader understanding of health and disease. This is similar to how I have approached previous courses like medical anthropology and epidemiology. Although these subjects examine health from different perspectives, they often fill in gaps in one another and make the other easier to apply. 

Through studying Ayurveda, metabolism, the gut microbiome, and diabetes, I have developed a better understanding of how biological processes interact. Before this course, I tended to think of these topics separately. For example, metabolism as the body's use of energy and diabetes as a problem with blood glucose. Connecting these topics has helped me reiterate that health cannot be fully understood by only examining one system or process in isolation. My main takeaway is that a comprehensive understanding of health requires combining biological knowledge with an understanding of the individual’s environment and access to healthcare.

One of the first concepts that stood out to me was the relationship between Ayurveda and homeostasis. During the Ayurveda lecture, we discussed how the mind and body interact and how various systems like the nervous system and immune system work together to maintain internal balance and overall health. I tend to think of homeostasis as maintaining balance or stability throughout the body, not just at a cellular level. Ayurveda approaches health through a broader framework that emphasizes balance and overall well-being. I thought the underlying similarities between the two were interesting.

I think of Ayurveda as a general philosophy of holistic health, especially in the context of this course. As a philosophy, holistic health emphasizes that overall health is influenced by our environment as well as our physical and mental health. This idea of holistic health connects with my understanding of biological systems. The body is continuously interacting with itself and its environment. Changes in one area of the body can produce effects elsewhere; the body does not function as independent parts. For example, our bodies’ digestion is affected by more than just the digestive organs. This even includes the gut microbiome, cells that are not our own. 

One idea that interested me was viewing the microbiome as a separate organ or a second human genome. It emphasizes how much microorganisms contribute to our body functions. I was particularly interested in the relationship between our diet, our microbiome, and obesity. Research has identified differences in gut microbial communities between groups of people with obesity and those without. However, this relationship is not currently fully understood. Diet can influence the microbiome, while microbial activity can affect how the body processes its food. This raises the possibility of a feedback loop in which diet and microbial communities influence one another.

I also wondered whether gut microorganisms could affect food cravings or eating behaviors. The idea is loosely based on how parasites can impact the behavior of their host. The concept of this is interesting: the feedback loop of sorts between diet and microbiome going both ways. Our diet not only impacts our microbiome, but the microbiome also reinforces our diet. The existing research discusses our diets' effect on the microbiome and not the inverse. 

The lectures on metabolism refreshed my understanding of how the body builds, breaks down, and recycles molecules to maintain its normal function. I further researched some specific metabolic disorders. For example, galactosemia, which involves the inability to properly metabolize galactose. The disease can cause serious complications in infancy because the infant cannot metabolize a part of their only food source. Disruptions in individual biochemical pathways that seem small can have serious consequences throughout the body. Especially over time, as these compounds build up. 

The lectures on diabetes connected metabolism to a disease with consequences throughout the body. In both type 1 and type 2 diabetes, blood glucose regulation becomes impaired, although the underlying mechanisms differ. This is another example of how a disruption in one physiological process can affect multiple systems throughout the body. 

However, the economic costs of diabetes introduced another perspective. The paper described the substantial financial burden associated with diabetes, including direct medical spending and indirect costs such as reduced productivity and premature death. The high cost of hospital care stood out to me. I wondered whether more affordable access to medication, glucose-monitoring supplies, and routine medical care could reduce hospitalizations and the costs associated with that level of care.

This question connects to my previous coursework in medical anthropology. In that class, we discussed how socioeconomic status is associated with health outcomes, including asthma. Low income, poor housing conditions, environmental exposures, and limited access to healthcare can contribute to unequal risks of asthma. Similar factors can influence diabetes outcomes. Having limited access to nutritious food can increase the risk of diabetes and make managing it more difficult. High medication costs are another potential barrier. Even when people understand how to manage a disease, financial barriers can prevent them from following medical recommendations.

It is important to consider the problem beyond explanations that solely focus on individual responsibility. Physical activity and dietary habits are important for metabolic health, but people do not make these choices under the same circumstances. Someone living in a neighborhood in which they do not feel safe will be less likely to go out and exercise. Also, someone experiencing food insecurity will not have access to quality food. This connects to the holistic perspective I found interesting in Ayurveda. Both holistic health and public health encourage consideration of the overall circumstances beyond isolated symptoms. A person’s disease risk, treatment, and health outcomes are not determined by their biological systems alone. I see diabetes as both a biological and a social issue.

Studying Ayurveda and applying it to lecture topics has impacted how I think about health and disease. Biological systems interact in complex ways to influence health outcomes, which are also influenced by individual conditions. Ayurveda provided a framework for approaching a more holistic view of well-being. My main takeaway from this first section of class is that no single thing can fully explain health. That requires examining both the biological processes involved and the wider circumstances that influence them.