Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41378255›Full record

ArticleGlobal bioethics = Problemi di bioetica2025

Bioethics for a burning planet: why Planetary Health and One Health might not be the way to go.

Katharina Wabnitz, Bridget Pratt, Cristian Timmermann, Verina Wild

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Global bioethics = Problemi di bioetica, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Katharina WabnitzInstitute for Ethics and History of Health in Society, Medical Faculty, University of Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2394-101X
Bridget PrattQueensland Bioethics Centre, Australian Catholic University, Banyo, Queensland, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4934-3560
Cristian TimmermannInstitute for Ethics and History of Health in Society, Medical Faculty, University of Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7935-2823
Verina WildInstitute for Ethics and History of Health in Society, Medical Faculty, University of Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3012-7662

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Climate change, ecological degradation and global inequalities are symptoms of an eco-social polycrisis that threatens global health and health equity. This polycrisis is deeply rooted in Western value systems. These can be described as anthropocentric and individualistic and support the prevailing neoliberal economic model. Bioethics is now called to respond to the urgent health-related ethical challenges of the polycrisis and has recently begun to engage with Planetary Health and One Health in this regard. Both have mainly emerged in the Western scientific community and understand human health to be inextricably linked to the state of environmental and structural societal determinants. We argue that bioethics should indeed embrace holistic or integrated understandings of health but also carefully revisit the foundational Western value systems at the root of the polycrisis. If Planetary Health and One Health stay grounded in Western value systems, an extensive conceptual engagement might be problematic for bioethics. Instead of turning to Western concepts of health, bioethics should engage deeply with Indigenous and non-Western ways of knowing and critically reflect on its own role in inadvertently maintaining the status quo.

Indexed as

Bioethicsindigenous knowledgeOne HealthPlanetary Health

Identifiers

PMID41378255
PMCPMC12687894

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.