Download PDFPDF

Decolonising global health: if not now, when?
Compose Response

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g.
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests


  • A rapid response is a moderated but not peer reviewed online response to a published article in a BMJ journal; it will not receive a DOI and will not be indexed unless it is also republished as a Letter, Correspondence or as other content. Find out more about rapid responses.
  • We intend to post all responses which are approved by the Editor, within 14 days (BMJ Journals) or 24 hours (The BMJ), however timeframes cannot be guaranteed. Responses must comply with our requirements and should contribute substantially to the topic, but it is at our absolute discretion whether we publish a response, and we reserve the right to edit or remove responses before and after publication and also republish some or all in other BMJ publications, including third party local editions in other countries and languages
  • Our requirements are stated in our rapid response terms and conditions and must be read. These include ensuring that: i) you do not include any illustrative content including tables and graphs, ii) you do not include any information that includes specifics about any patients,iii) you do not include any original data, unless it has already been published in a peer reviewed journal and you have included a reference, iv) your response is lawful, not defamatory, original and accurate, v) you declare any competing interests, vi) you understand that your name and other personal details set out in our rapid response terms and conditions will be published with any responses we publish and vii) you understand that once a response is published, we may continue to publish your response and/or edit or remove it in the future.
  • By submitting this rapid response you are agreeing to our terms and conditions for rapid responses and understand that your personal data will be processed in accordance with those terms and our privacy notice.
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

  • Published on:
    Human rights based approach for addressing structural violence
    • John Oldroyd, MPH Co-ordinator Australian Catholic University
    • Other Contributors:
      • Aarya Desai, MPH Student
      • Dr. Sundeep Manoth, MPH student

    To the editor
    We read with interest the article by Büyüm AM, Kenney C, Koris A, et al. (Decolonising
    global health: if not now, when? BMJ Global Health 2020;5:e003394. doi:10.1136/
    bmjgh-2020-003394) Although it is not contested that Black, Indigenous and People of Color are most disadvantaged by structural oppression, we would argue that a human rights-based approach is a more inclusive approach to global health inequity than decolonising global health.

    The economic impacts of COVID mediated by the structural determinants will see recent gains in poverty reduction lost (1). Structural determinants within key service institutions such as the police service, prison system as well as those affecting gender will result in widespread suboptimal health. For example, black people are 40 times more likely to be stopped and searched in the UK under powers that allow officers to search people if serious violence is anticipated (2). In the US, a study examining all fatalities resulting from the use of lethal force by on-duty law enforcement officers between 2009 to 2012 across 17 U.S. states found that while whites were killed more frequently, the fatality rate was 2.8 times higher among blacks than whites (3). In the US, the First Step Act prison reforms have resulted in some benefits for prisoners, but ironically, highlighted the disproportionate incarceration of blacks (38%) who comprises 13% of the US population (4). There is evidence COVID disproportio...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.