Question

the name of the course is road traffic and injuries and disabilities

Q. 1. Explain the Fundamentals of Disability Epidemiology and Concept of exposure?                                                                                         (Points: 7.5)

ANS:

Reference:

Q. 2. Discuss the differentiation of various disability perspectives and how these exist a relationship between public health and disability?               (Points: 7.5)

ANS:

Reference:

Answer 1

Q. 1. Explain the Fundamentals of Disability Epidemiology and Concept of exposure?   

Road traffic injuries are a major world wide, complex and most dangerous injury among population..In low and middle income countries deaths are expected to increase by 80% due to vulnerable road users- pedestrians,pedal cyclists and motorcyclist.

In high pay nations demise among vehicle ownpart higher hazard with powerless street clients are high..The fundamental effect of a hazardous street transport framework on general wellbeing and worldwide development..Road activity damage avoidance ought to be taken more consideration and it paid more medical problems in the event that it proceeded..

There are three primary objectives:

- government, proficient part and universal organizations should settle on awareness,commitment and educated basic leadership at all dimensions.. in powerful reaction worldwide test important to make development with worry in all dimensions.

- Research must be done about nature of the street movement damage issue and it's prevention..The impression of accomplishing portability and adaptability financial development,done with all encompassing belief system in street..

- make more secure street movement framework with successful organization particularly government and segments and non-administrative organisations..it implies making joint effort between areas of transport, open health,finance, legal and other concerned..

Reference: Ameratunga S, Hijar M, Norton R. Road-traffic injuries: Confronting disparities to address a global-health problem. [Last cited on 2011 June 27];Lancet. 2006 367:1533–40. Available from,

Q. 2. Discuss the differentiation of various disability perspectives and how these exist a relationship between public health and disability?

In the past 50 years, there has been burgeoning philosophical interest in well-being, health, and personal relationships. There has also been increasing philosophical writing on disability, particularly in relation to justice and equality.

As of not long ago, be that as it may, there has been minimal philosophical exchange of incapacity's pertinence to prosperity, wellbeing, or individual connections—as opposed to the developing grant on these themes in the sociologies. Until the previous decade, most philosophical exchanges of prosperity basically regarded inabilities as conditions that diminished it. Philosophical records of wellbeing and infection have made reference to handicap, however for the most part to regard it as a type of sickness or sick wellbeing; they have had little to say in regards to the perplexing, challenged connection among illness and inability. What's more, with the remarkable exemption of parental demeanors toward one's real or conceivable crippled kids, the job of incapacity in close to home connections has incited sparse philosophical intrigue.

This Entry will continue as pursues. Section 1 will talk about inability and prosperity. It will start by checking on discussions on the use of three standard records of prosperity to handicap. It will take note of the disparity among first-and third-individual appraisals of the effect of inability on prosperity under every one of these records and recommend a few explanations behind this difference. We will then analyze what we see as the most troublesome test to the case that numerous or most inabilities don't really decrease prosperity: the broadly held view that it is attractive to avert, revise, or moderate incapacities, and by and large bothersome to obtain one. The finishing up segment of Part 1 will analyze how suspicions about inability and prosperity educate various contemporary discussions in drug and social insurance. It will review different definitions of health and their implications for the question of whether it is necessarily unhealthy to be disabled. It will consider the few attempts that have been made to distinguish disability from disease. It will also note a tension for disability scholars in making the distinction between disease and disability: although that distinction provides a basis for separating the medical from the socially constructed aspects of disability, it can also oversimplify the experience of people with disabilities.

Reference:

• Albrecht, G.L. and G. Devlieger, 1999, “The disability paradox: high quality of life against the odds”, Social Science and Medicine, pp. 977–988.
• Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 1990, United States.