On April 13 and 14, the World Health Organization and the World Bank held a conference in Washington, D.C. with the goal of prioritizing mental health in the same way they have previously prioritized HIV/AIDS in the international development agenda. This movement came in response to limited mental health care in developing countries and increasing frequency of mental illness worldwide — especially in conflict zones and among refugees. According to an April 12 New York Times article, some economists predict that an investment in global mental health care would lead to large returns for the economy as a result of improved productivity. Do you agree with these economists’ prediction, and what do you think of an initiative giving precedence to mental health when efforts have previously focused on physical health?

Beth He ’16

In global development, the WHO and World Bank carry incredible influence in the public policy of various countries. I think it is an empowering step forward for such organizations to recognize the importance of mental health as equitable to physical health. Mental illness can be as debilitating as physical diseases and greatly impacts an individual’s ability to be as productive as possible. I am in full support of these economists’ predictions and I am hopeful that more funding will be allocated toward research or mental illness. The fight against HIV/AIDS not only came with great scientific research but also with billions of dollars in investments in developing countries to ensure proper infrastructures were in place. I believe it is equally as essential to invest in health and governmental infrastructure to improve access, quality and price of mental health care globally.

Beth He ’16 is the campus chairperson and president of Brandeis Global Brigades. She is also a Health: Science, Society and Policy major.

Alec Hoyland ’18

I wholeheartedly support the World Health Organization and the World Bank prioritizing the research, diagnosis and treatment of mental illness. First, I wish to dispel any vestiges of the mind-body problem. Depression, anxiety and autism are linked to changes in gut bacteria, and schizophrenia is associated with the immune system. Treating mental illness is just as important and sometimes indistinguishable from treating physical illness. 25 percent of American adults suffer from mental illness in a given year. Factors that exacerbate mental illness include low socioeconomic status and proximity to conflict zones. The total cost of treating mental illness — including unemployment, social welfare/homelessness, etc. — cost upwards of $273 million per year. Placing emphasis on treating mental illness would help the economy and also provide a better standard of living, especially for low socioeconomic status communities. Investing in mental health is not only a fiscal responsibility but also a moral obligation.

Alec Hoyland ’18 is the president of the Brandeis Neuroscience Club.

Eva Ahmad ’16

There is no physical health without good mental health. In the 1990s, the World Health Assembly developed an international agenda for the prevention and control of the following four illness types: cardiovascular disease, diabetes, respiratory illness and cancers. This set a precedent for the exclusion of mental illnesses from all future World Health Organization discussions on noncommunicable diseases. It is so critical to focus our efforts on increasing awareness on mental health, which is often goes unrecognized and untreated. In the workplace, this could decrease work injuries, employee turnover and sick days. I can only see this working should these efforts work for the long-run. I fear, however, that our focus could be limited to benefiting a company’s financial health.
Eva Ahmad ’16 is the founder and president of the Brandeis chapter of United Against Inequities in Disease.

Diana Langberg ’17

This meeting signifies a social shift destigmatizing an overlooked health condition deemed a “myth.” Its agenda faces the real implications of mental health, places the responsibility on the global community and presents a global conversation to destigmatize mental illness. There is a moral imperative and financial incentive to consider the economic potential for more mental health care awareness and spending. Most of our cost in the mental health system is a loss of productivity in the labor force. Addressing this sunk cost could mean a surge in GDP growth as those individuals would be able to work and contribute to the economy. As Dr. Alan Bollard of the Asia­Pacific Economic Cooperation highlighted, there is a $2 trillion deficit due to mental health, and in years to come, the cost could be greater than the cost of cancer, pulmonary diseases and diabetes combined. The most robust governments spend as much on all these physical illnesses combined as they lose on the productivity loss due to mental health systems. With economic incentives, perhaps governments will be more likely to get behind this global mental health movement.

Diana Langberg ’17 was a mental health research intern at the Massachusetts Health Council. She is also a Health: Science, Society, and Policy major.