LiveJournal, a pioneering blogging platform, was founded by Brad Fitzpatrick, who transformed a journaling application he created for personal use into a website that others could use as well.

The platform allowed users to publish their own and comment on other people's records, conduct collective blogs, add other users to friends, and follow their records in the "friends feed".

At its peak, LiveJournal had a significant number of active accounts, although the exact number is not specified in the provided sources.

LiveJournal's unique features, such as its focus on community-building and user interaction, made it different from other blogging platforms.

However, the platform's popularity declined over time, and by 2005, most of the English-speaking world had forgotten about it, with the exception of a few dedicated users.

The decline of LiveJournal can be attributed to the rise of other social media platforms and the failure of the platform to adapt to changing trends and user preferences.

Despite its decline, LiveJournal still maintains a presence in some parts of the world, such as Kazakhstan, where access to the platform was restored after the administration removed illegal materials.

Today, LiveJournal is no longer a dominant player in the social media landscape, having been surpassed by other platforms such as Facebook and Twitter.

The history of LiveJournal serves as a reminder of the rapidly evolving nature of the internet and the importance of adapting to changing user needs and preferences.

LiveJournal, a pioneering blogging platform, was founded by Brad Fitzpatrick, who transformed a journaling application he created for personal use into a website that others could use as well.

Title:

Content: Regulators Seem to Think That Facebook Is the Internet

That’s a problem.

In 1997, SixDegrees.com was the first real attempt at social networking, creating a space where users could upload their information and list their friends. The site peaked at approximately 3.5 million users before it shut down in 1999.

Since then, a series of social networking business models have emerged, each time offering more advanced tools for user interaction. LiveJournal, a site for keeping up with school friends, combined blogging and social networking features inspired by the WELL; Friendster was a social network that allowed for increased interaction and control by users; Myspace had open membership and gave users the freedom to customize their pages. In 2005, it—and its 25 million user base—was sold to News Corp. But within three years, Myspace had been surpassed by Facebook, which launched in 2004 for college students and opened to everyone in 2006.

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

As that history shows, in the early days of the internet, disruption was profound and constant: New companies emerged in music, video, e-commerce, publishing, and telephony on an almost yearly basis. The internet appeared to be a space where competition could thrive.

Not anymore.

Today, disruption happens in much smaller ways. The examples are getting fewer because economies of scale have concentrated innovation in the hands of a few players.

More often, disruption comes from regulation—for better or, often, for worse. Current regulation attempts focus on the actions and behavior of some actors—chiefly Facebook—while creating unintended consequences for the internet, particularly fragmentation, or the splintering of the global internet into one that more closely hews territorial borders.

Advertisement

It’s understandable that both the public and regulators might think that regulating “the internet” means focusing on the biggest players. Much of it has to do with the fact that users are often exposed to various types of illegal behavior and content through some of the most popular services that exist on the internet. Fix misinformation, or extremism, or ideological silos, or security on Facebook, the thinking goes, and you’ve fixed it on the internet as a whole.

Advertisement

But this is an unhelpful and misguided narrative. First, the internet is not a monolith, so treating it as if it is simply will not work. Second, many of the issues regulators are trying to address are not internet problems; they are societal. Terrorism, child abuse, and mis- and disinformation are not an offspring of the internet; they existed before the internet, and they will continue to exist after it as they are ingrained in human societies. Yet, they are treated as if they are exclusively internet problems. Third, and most importantly, regulators should stop thinking of the internet as Facebook and treating it as such. In the internet regulatory landscape, there is a mixed bag of different issues, and Facebook’s involvement in all of them, direct or indirect, adds to the current complexity. Content moderation, privacy, intermediary liability, competition, encryption—these are all broader issues related to the internet, not just Facebook. Yet, the pattern that has emerged is to treat them as Facebook issues. What this means is that, instead of focusing on trying to address them in ways appropriate for the entire internet ecosystem, they are addressed through the Facebook lens. This has been quite accurately characterized as the “Facebook Derangement Syndrome.”

Advertisement
Advertisement

The global regulatory agenda is replete with such examples. In the United Kingdom, the Online Safety legislation wants to ban end-to-end encryption because of Facebook’s plan to introduce it as a default setting in its Messenger service. On the other side of the Commonwealth, Australia recently introduced a media bargaining code mainly targeting Facebook. Facebook famously “left” the country before renegotiating a new agreement. Similarly, in what seems to be a coordinated effort, Canada has vowed to work with Australia in an attempt to impose regulatory restrictions on Facebook.

And this trend is not limited to the Commonwealth.

India’s new intermediary guidelines aim at tightening a regulatory grip on Facebook and its partner company WhatsApp while Brazil’s fake news bill, which got approved by the Senate, is focusing on content moderation on Facebook and traceability on WhatsApp. In France, there have been conversations about the introduction of “new rules” for Facebook, while Germany’s Network Enforcement Law—NetzDG—was drafted with the primary focus of taming Facebook. Finally, in the United States, the Trump administration issued an unsuccessful executive order that aimed to regulate Facebook for bias.

Advertisement

This approach of limiting regulation to Facebook is not entirely unusual. It reflects the principal-agent conundrum that, over the years, has allowed companies like Facebook to  propose policies and deploy tools that can have an impact on the way regulation gets to be enforced. The principal-agent problem is predominantly characterized by conflict of interest and moral hazards. Due to information asymmetries, the agent holds the bargaining power, and this creates a few unknowns: The principal is in no position to know the information the agent holds. Even when she does, she cannot be certain that the agent is acting to her best interest. So, the principal ends up focusing squarely on the agent, disregarding any peripheral issues that might be significant.

Advertisement
Advertisement

The principal-agent problem may help explain why governments appear ready to introduce regulation targeting Facebook; however, it does not help explain why, in the process of doing so, the main loser is the internet and its users.

Over the past couple of years, Facebook has said, “We support regulation,” and “we want updated internet regulations to set clear guidelines for addressing today’s toughest challenges.” This statement would be significant if it did not come across as self-serving. At this stage, regulation is inescapable and Facebook knows it—as does the rest of big tech. In an effort to adapt to this new reality, companies often take advantage of their dominant position to drive regulatory processes, often at the expense of regulation itself.

Advertisement

In this context, the question we should be asking is not whether regulation is appropriate, but what are the real implications of regulating in such a manner? There is already an argument that focusing on a few, big players has an impact on the health of innovation and the ability of newcomers to compete. And, then, there is the internet. The internet’s global reach is one of its main strengths. It is a feature, not a bug. Among other things, it allows the maintenance of supply chains all over the world; it allows people to communicate; it lowers costs; and it makes information sharing easier, all the while helping to address societal issues like poverty or climate change.

Advertisement
Advertisement

To this end, the attempt to regulate based on one—or a handful—of companies can jeopardize this very important goal of the internet. It can create fragmentation, in the sense of not allowing data to flow across borders or networks to interconnect, and this can be very real and have a very big impact. It can impose limits on the way information and data gets to be shared and the way networks may interoperate. These are significant trade-offs, and they must be part of any regulation’s process.

Advertisement

So where do we go from here?

For sure, the answer cannot be to stop regulating. We must accept, however, that the current approach often generates unintended consequences that only superficially affect those who must be regulated.

In this light, a possible way forward is to experiment with regulation. Experimental regulation is a relatively underused approach, yet it is flexible enough to accommodate dynamic markets, like the internet. Originally associated with the work of John Dewey, this idea is premised on the fact that, in policymaking, the way we approach theories and strategies of justice depends on “the experience of their pursuit; it is these changes that then allow us to consider how best to achieve our objectives.” The advantage of this thinking is that it considers unintended consequences as an opportunity to better define appropriate regulatory frameworks and how to achieve the desired goals.

Advertisement

Internet regulation does not experiment enough, and when it does, it appears to have the wrong focus. In Australia, for instance, the effort to ensure robust journalism in an age of disinformation in social media platforms led to a “link tax” that undermines the architecture, history, and economics of the internet. This is partly due to the role big tech companies play in the regulatory process. One of the immediate things one can observe with internet regulation is the process some actors deploy: In the beginning, they operate in favor of sustaining existing policies and bureaucracies. The thinking is that longevity brings legitimacy, and as a result, the policy becomes its own cause. Once this strategy is embedded in process, these powerful forces move toward pushing their own regulatory agenda.

Advertisement

It is for this reason that there is a certain appeal toward flexible regulatory systems that allow different units to experiment with different approaches and make room for assessments that separate the relevant from the nonrelevant and preexisting rules. Although experimentation neither offers a drastic approach nor aims to replace traditional routes of regulation, it can limit the risks of politicization, as politics become more context focused.

One of the first things we need is an internet impact assessment that looks at the different parts of the internet’s infrastructure and the effect that regulation may have. It is no longer just about regulating a few actors. It is about protecting the global infrastructure that we all depend on daily.

The internet has a Facebook problem, but the internet is not Facebook.

This article represents the views of the author and not those of his employer, the Internet Society. Facebook is an organization member of the Internet Society.

Future Tense is a partnership of Slate, New America, and Arizona State University that examines emerging technologies, public policy, and society.

Advertisement

The platform allowed users to publish their own and comment on other people's records, conduct collective blogs, add other users to friends, and follow their records in the "friends feed".

Title:

Content: LiveJournal is back in Kazakhstan
519
Anna VLADIMIROVA
Access to the "Live Journal" was restored after the administration of the LiveJournal blog platform executed the decisions of the judicial authorities of Kazakhstan on the removal of illegal materials posted on the resource.
Representatives of LiveJournal reported on the removal from the blogging platform of materials containing signs of propaganda of terrorism and religious extremism, public calls to commit acts of terrorism and the manufacture of explosive devices.
Earlier, the Saryarka court of Astana issued a decision to close access to the “Live Journal ” from August 20, 2011 due to the distribution of these materials.
As a result, the Committee of Communications, Informatization and Information of the Ministry of Investment and Development of the Republic of Kazakhstan decided to resume access to the resource on the territory of Kazakhstan from November 11 this year.
LiveJournal also plans to open a representative office in Kazakhstan and develop the Kazakhstan segment of the blogging platform.
For reference: “Live Journal ” is a blogging platform for keeping online diaries (blogs).
Provides the ability to publish your own and comment on other people ’ s records, conduct collective blogs (“communities ”), add other users to friends and follow their records in the“ friends feed ”.
Popular
All
More than 2,000 killed in Morocco earthquake
Kazakhstan - Northern Ireland: live broadcast of the match can be viewed at EXPO
Unfavorable weather conditions are expected in two cities of Kazakhstan
Kassym-Jomart Tokayev congratulated Kazakhstanis on Family Day
Morocco declares three days of mourning for earthquake victims
Kazakhstan chess players made their way to the semifinals of the World Cup 2023
A powerful causative agent of tumor growth was vitamin C
The Ministry of Emergency Situations told the details of the fire in the bath complex in Almaty
In the south-east of Turkey fell meteorite
Cristiano Ronaldo's New World Record
Kazakhstan became the champion of tennis tournament in Prague
Shootout in a cafe in Almaty: the state of the victims told in the city health
Two visitors of the cafe were injured in a shootout in Almaty
Three people were burned in a fire in Astana
It was a drought, and now it rains.
A benevolent atom
A number of tasks were set for the new akim of Aktobe region
The archive that filmmakers have been waiting for
Heavy rains flooded Las Vegas
Tokayev appointed the head of the new Ministry of Industry and Construction
Shandong is the third trade regional partner of Kazakhstan in China
Creativity is now at a price.
Impostor Trash
Tens of thousands of people are stuck at the festival in the United States because of the rains
Typhoon Haikui is approaching Taiwan
Businessmen want to pay for water as pensioners
Fair within Days of Culture of Tajikistan in Kazakhstan to be held in Astana
Minister of Education of the Republic of Kazakhstan spoke about wearing the hijab in schools
Kazakhstanis will be able to transfer license plates to the new owner online
Muza Kayuma Mukhamedkhanova
"Golden mine" in the vicinity of Maralda
How to learn a language and make friends
Presidents Tokayev and Rahmon visited the Main Mosque of Astana
Dinmukhamed Kunaev: I believe in my people, their future is bright
Where to watch live the fight Kosobutsky - Adjagba
A foreigner who was on the run for 15 years was detained in Astana
The fire at the mine "Kazakhstan": what kind of help will the affected miners receive
Rescuers found a tourist missing in the mountains of Kok-Zhailau
Behind the wheel of a service car and without a license removed a relative of a police chief in Shymkent
Residents of Semey demand to cancel the entrance fee to the cemetery
Tajik citizens arrested in Almaty for robbery
In Semey, the memory of the victims of nuclear tests was honored
Dead girl found mushroom pickers in Kostanay region
Double murder in Arys: detained the alleged customer and executors
5-year-old niece beaten by girl in Astana – reaction of police and children ’ s ombudsman
A military driver saved a teenage girl from suicide in Astana
Read also
Pricing in life
I swear I will burn my tongue!
Another palace.
Icebreaker
Do not deprive the living space
Archive
• [[year]]
• [[month.label]]
• [[day]]

At its peak, LiveJournal had a significant number of active accounts, although the exact number is not specified in the provided sources.

LiveJournal's unique features, such as its focus on community-building and user interaction, made it different from other blogging platforms.

However, the platform's popularity declined over time, and by 2005, most of the English-speaking world had forgotten about it, with the exception of a few dedicated users.

The decline of LiveJournal can be attributed to the rise of other social media platforms and the failure of the platform to adapt to changing trends and user preferences.

Title:

Content: 23 / 06 / 2023 - 13: 25
The rise and fall of social networking sites: major projects that have faded over the past years
In recent years, the Internet has seen the rapid rise and subsequent disappearance of social media platforms, which according to studies can be attributed to the failure to adapt to changing trends, privacy concerns, intense competition, and the emergence of more alternatives.
(Getty)
The rapid development of the digital age has brought many changes to the ways of communication over the past years, as the Internet world has witnessed the rise and fall of various communication sites, platforms that once flourished and flourished but eventually faded into oblivion.
In recent years, the Internet has seen the rapid rise and subsequent disappearance of social media platforms, which according to studies can be attributed to the failure to adapt to changing trends, privacy concerns, intense competition, and the emergence of more alternatives, which also indicate the rapid pace of technological progress and the need for continuous innovation.
MySpace has enjoyed unprecedented popularity during the mid-2000s, providing users with a platform to connect, share media and express themselves creatively, however, the decline of MySpace began when Facebook emerged as a dominant force in the social media landscape, studies show that MySpace failed to adapt to the changing preferences of their user base. This resulted in a loss of relevance and decreased user engagement.
Launched in 2004, Orkut was a pioneer in social networking, particularly in countries such as Brazil and India, and despite its early success, Orkut struggled to combat spam, privacy concerns and the rise of rival platforms such as Facebook and Twitter.
As studies indicate, the lack of innovation and failure to address these issues eventually led to their demise in 2014, which also happened with the site "First Messenger" which was once an integral part of the lives of many people on the Internet, allowing users to communicate in real time and facilitate conversations and enhance communication between users. Like WhatsApp and Facebook Messenger, they have wiped out the site ’ s last hope of survival, amidst this massive and rapid technological development.
In 2011, Google Plus was launched, which was aimed at competing with Facebook and creating a social network within Google ’ s ecosystem, and despite the company ’ s vast resources, it failed to attract a large user base, which led to the fall of the application in 2019, which led to the company ’ s closure of the project due to a decline in the number of users.
In another example, Vine had gained immense popularity with its unique six-second videos, which served as a breeding ground for budding creators and led to numerous viral trends, however, Vine ’ s downfall is attributed to its failure to monetize content effectively, and the emergence of rival and powerful platforms such as Instagram and Snapchat.
Delicious is a harsh example of the fall of a social media platform, where the site faced major challenges due to the lack of effective monetization strategies, and the emergence of new competitors on the platform, which led to a sharp decline in the user base, and ultimately sold and re-launched, under new ownership.

Despite its decline, LiveJournal still maintains a presence in some parts of the world, such as Kazakhstan, where access to the platform was restored after the administration removed illegal materials.

Today, LiveJournal is no longer a dominant player in the social media landscape, having been surpassed by other platforms such as Facebook and Twitter.

The history of LiveJournal serves as a reminder of the rapidly evolving nature of the internet and the importance of adapting to changing user needs and preferences.


The history of LiveJournal is a fascinating story of how a personal journaling application transformed into a popular blogging platform, only to decline in popularity over time.

LiveJournal was founded by Brad Fitzpatrick, who initially created the application for his own use, but later transformed it into a website that others could use as well.

At its peak, LiveJournal had more than 2.5 million active accounts, but its peak was almost 10 years ago, in early 2005, and since then, most of the English-speaking world seemed to have forgotten about it, with the exception of a few notable users, such as George R. R. Martin.

What made LiveJournal different from other blogging platforms was its unique features, such as friend interactions, community building, and content sharing, which allowed users to connect with each other and share their thoughts and ideas.

LiveJournal also had a strong focus on community, with users able to join and participate in various communities related to their interests, which helped to foster a sense of belonging and connection among users.

However, despite its initial popularity, LiveJournal's user base began to decline, and the site became less relevant, especially with the rise of other social media platforms, such as Facebook and Twitter.

The decline of LiveJournal can be attributed to various factors, including the failure to adapt to changing trends, privacy concerns, intense competition, and the emergence of more alternatives.

In recent years, the internet has seen the rapid rise and subsequent disappearance of social media platforms, which can be attributed to the failure to adapt to changing trends, privacy concerns, intense competition, and the emergence of more alternatives.

For example, MySpace, which was once a popular social networking site, failed to adapt to the changing preferences of its user base, resulting in a loss of relevance and decreased user engagement.

Similarly, Orkut, another social networking site, struggled to combat spam, privacy concerns, and the rise of rival platforms, such as Facebook and Twitter, ultimately leading to its demise in 2014.

The story of LiveJournal serves as a reminder of the importance of adapting to changing trends and user preferences, as well as the need for continuous innovation and improvement in order to remain relevant in the ever-evolving online landscape.

In conclusion, the history of LiveJournal is a complex and fascinating story of how a personal journaling application transformed into a popular blogging platform, only to decline in popularity over time due to various factors, including the failure to adapt to changing trends, privacy concerns, intense competition, and the emergence of more alternatives.

The history of LiveJournal is a fascinating story of how a personal journaling application transformed into a popular blogging platform, only to decline in popularity over time.

Title:

Content: Regulators Seem to Think That Facebook Is the Internet

That’s a problem.

In 1997, SixDegrees.com was the first real attempt at social networking, creating a space where users could upload their information and list their friends. The site peaked at approximately 3.5 million users before it shut down in 1999.

Since then, a series of social networking business models have emerged, each time offering more advanced tools for user interaction. LiveJournal, a site for keeping up with school friends, combined blogging and social networking features inspired by the WELL; Friendster was a social network that allowed for increased interaction and control by users; Myspace had open membership and gave users the freedom to customize their pages. In 2005, it—and its 25 million user base—was sold to News Corp. But within three years, Myspace had been surpassed by Facebook, which launched in 2004 for college students and opened to everyone in 2006.

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

As that history shows, in the early days of the internet, disruption was profound and constant: New companies emerged in music, video, e-commerce, publishing, and telephony on an almost yearly basis. The internet appeared to be a space where competition could thrive.

Not anymore.

Today, disruption happens in much smaller ways. The examples are getting fewer because economies of scale have concentrated innovation in the hands of a few players.

More often, disruption comes from regulation—for better or, often, for worse. Current regulation attempts focus on the actions and behavior of some actors—chiefly Facebook—while creating unintended consequences for the internet, particularly fragmentation, or the splintering of the global internet into one that more closely hews territorial borders.

Advertisement

It’s understandable that both the public and regulators might think that regulating “the internet” means focusing on the biggest players. Much of it has to do with the fact that users are often exposed to various types of illegal behavior and content through some of the most popular services that exist on the internet. Fix misinformation, or extremism, or ideological silos, or security on Facebook, the thinking goes, and you’ve fixed it on the internet as a whole.

Advertisement

But this is an unhelpful and misguided narrative. First, the internet is not a monolith, so treating it as if it is simply will not work. Second, many of the issues regulators are trying to address are not internet problems; they are societal. Terrorism, child abuse, and mis- and disinformation are not an offspring of the internet; they existed before the internet, and they will continue to exist after it as they are ingrained in human societies. Yet, they are treated as if they are exclusively internet problems. Third, and most importantly, regulators should stop thinking of the internet as Facebook and treating it as such. In the internet regulatory landscape, there is a mixed bag of different issues, and Facebook’s involvement in all of them, direct or indirect, adds to the current complexity. Content moderation, privacy, intermediary liability, competition, encryption—these are all broader issues related to the internet, not just Facebook. Yet, the pattern that has emerged is to treat them as Facebook issues. What this means is that, instead of focusing on trying to address them in ways appropriate for the entire internet ecosystem, they are addressed through the Facebook lens. This has been quite accurately characterized as the “Facebook Derangement Syndrome.”

Advertisement
Advertisement

The global regulatory agenda is replete with such examples. In the United Kingdom, the Online Safety legislation wants to ban end-to-end encryption because of Facebook’s plan to introduce it as a default setting in its Messenger service. On the other side of the Commonwealth, Australia recently introduced a media bargaining code mainly targeting Facebook. Facebook famously “left” the country before renegotiating a new agreement. Similarly, in what seems to be a coordinated effort, Canada has vowed to work with Australia in an attempt to impose regulatory restrictions on Facebook.

And this trend is not limited to the Commonwealth.

India’s new intermediary guidelines aim at tightening a regulatory grip on Facebook and its partner company WhatsApp while Brazil’s fake news bill, which got approved by the Senate, is focusing on content moderation on Facebook and traceability on WhatsApp. In France, there have been conversations about the introduction of “new rules” for Facebook, while Germany’s Network Enforcement Law—NetzDG—was drafted with the primary focus of taming Facebook. Finally, in the United States, the Trump administration issued an unsuccessful executive order that aimed to regulate Facebook for bias.

Advertisement

This approach of limiting regulation to Facebook is not entirely unusual. It reflects the principal-agent conundrum that, over the years, has allowed companies like Facebook to  propose policies and deploy tools that can have an impact on the way regulation gets to be enforced. The principal-agent problem is predominantly characterized by conflict of interest and moral hazards. Due to information asymmetries, the agent holds the bargaining power, and this creates a few unknowns: The principal is in no position to know the information the agent holds. Even when she does, she cannot be certain that the agent is acting to her best interest. So, the principal ends up focusing squarely on the agent, disregarding any peripheral issues that might be significant.

Advertisement
Advertisement

The principal-agent problem may help explain why governments appear ready to introduce regulation targeting Facebook; however, it does not help explain why, in the process of doing so, the main loser is the internet and its users.

Over the past couple of years, Facebook has said, “We support regulation,” and “we want updated internet regulations to set clear guidelines for addressing today’s toughest challenges.” This statement would be significant if it did not come across as self-serving. At this stage, regulation is inescapable and Facebook knows it—as does the rest of big tech. In an effort to adapt to this new reality, companies often take advantage of their dominant position to drive regulatory processes, often at the expense of regulation itself.

Advertisement

In this context, the question we should be asking is not whether regulation is appropriate, but what are the real implications of regulating in such a manner? There is already an argument that focusing on a few, big players has an impact on the health of innovation and the ability of newcomers to compete. And, then, there is the internet. The internet’s global reach is one of its main strengths. It is a feature, not a bug. Among other things, it allows the maintenance of supply chains all over the world; it allows people to communicate; it lowers costs; and it makes information sharing easier, all the while helping to address societal issues like poverty or climate change.

Advertisement
Advertisement

To this end, the attempt to regulate based on one—or a handful—of companies can jeopardize this very important goal of the internet. It can create fragmentation, in the sense of not allowing data to flow across borders or networks to interconnect, and this can be very real and have a very big impact. It can impose limits on the way information and data gets to be shared and the way networks may interoperate. These are significant trade-offs, and they must be part of any regulation’s process.

Advertisement

So where do we go from here?

For sure, the answer cannot be to stop regulating. We must accept, however, that the current approach often generates unintended consequences that only superficially affect those who must be regulated.

In this light, a possible way forward is to experiment with regulation. Experimental regulation is a relatively underused approach, yet it is flexible enough to accommodate dynamic markets, like the internet. Originally associated with the work of John Dewey, this idea is premised on the fact that, in policymaking, the way we approach theories and strategies of justice depends on “the experience of their pursuit; it is these changes that then allow us to consider how best to achieve our objectives.” The advantage of this thinking is that it considers unintended consequences as an opportunity to better define appropriate regulatory frameworks and how to achieve the desired goals.

Advertisement

Internet regulation does not experiment enough, and when it does, it appears to have the wrong focus. In Australia, for instance, the effort to ensure robust journalism in an age of disinformation in social media platforms led to a “link tax” that undermines the architecture, history, and economics of the internet. This is partly due to the role big tech companies play in the regulatory process. One of the immediate things one can observe with internet regulation is the process some actors deploy: In the beginning, they operate in favor of sustaining existing policies and bureaucracies. The thinking is that longevity brings legitimacy, and as a result, the policy becomes its own cause. Once this strategy is embedded in process, these powerful forces move toward pushing their own regulatory agenda.

Advertisement

It is for this reason that there is a certain appeal toward flexible regulatory systems that allow different units to experiment with different approaches and make room for assessments that separate the relevant from the nonrelevant and preexisting rules. Although experimentation neither offers a drastic approach nor aims to replace traditional routes of regulation, it can limit the risks of politicization, as politics become more context focused.

One of the first things we need is an internet impact assessment that looks at the different parts of the internet’s infrastructure and the effect that regulation may have. It is no longer just about regulating a few actors. It is about protecting the global infrastructure that we all depend on daily.

The internet has a Facebook problem, but the internet is not Facebook.

This article represents the views of the author and not those of his employer, the Internet Society. Facebook is an organization member of the Internet Society.

Future Tense is a partnership of Slate, New America, and Arizona State University that examines emerging technologies, public policy, and society.

Advertisement

LiveJournal was founded by Brad Fitzpatrick, who initially created the application for his own use, but later transformed it into a website that others could use as well.

At its peak, LiveJournal had more than 2.5 million active accounts, but its peak was almost 10 years ago, in early 2005, and since then, most of the English-speaking world seemed to have forgotten about it, with the exception of a few notable users, such as George R. R. Martin.

What made LiveJournal different from other blogging platforms was its unique features, such as friend interactions, community building, and content sharing, which allowed users to connect with each other and share their thoughts and ideas.

LiveJournal also had a strong focus on community, with users able to join and participate in various communities related to their interests, which helped to foster a sense of belonging and connection among users.

However, despite its initial popularity, LiveJournal's user base began to decline, and the site became less relevant, especially with the rise of other social media platforms, such as Facebook and Twitter.

Title:

Content: 23 / 06 / 2023 - 13: 25
The rise and fall of social networking sites: major projects that have faded over the past years
In recent years, the Internet has seen the rapid rise and subsequent disappearance of social media platforms, which according to studies can be attributed to the failure to adapt to changing trends, privacy concerns, intense competition, and the emergence of more alternatives.
(Getty)
The rapid development of the digital age has brought many changes to the ways of communication over the past years, as the Internet world has witnessed the rise and fall of various communication sites, platforms that once flourished and flourished but eventually faded into oblivion.
In recent years, the Internet has seen the rapid rise and subsequent disappearance of social media platforms, which according to studies can be attributed to the failure to adapt to changing trends, privacy concerns, intense competition, and the emergence of more alternatives, which also indicate the rapid pace of technological progress and the need for continuous innovation.
MySpace has enjoyed unprecedented popularity during the mid-2000s, providing users with a platform to connect, share media and express themselves creatively, however, the decline of MySpace began when Facebook emerged as a dominant force in the social media landscape, studies show that MySpace failed to adapt to the changing preferences of their user base. This resulted in a loss of relevance and decreased user engagement.
Launched in 2004, Orkut was a pioneer in social networking, particularly in countries such as Brazil and India, and despite its early success, Orkut struggled to combat spam, privacy concerns and the rise of rival platforms such as Facebook and Twitter.
As studies indicate, the lack of innovation and failure to address these issues eventually led to their demise in 2014, which also happened with the site "First Messenger" which was once an integral part of the lives of many people on the Internet, allowing users to communicate in real time and facilitate conversations and enhance communication between users. Like WhatsApp and Facebook Messenger, they have wiped out the site ’ s last hope of survival, amidst this massive and rapid technological development.
In 2011, Google Plus was launched, which was aimed at competing with Facebook and creating a social network within Google ’ s ecosystem, and despite the company ’ s vast resources, it failed to attract a large user base, which led to the fall of the application in 2019, which led to the company ’ s closure of the project due to a decline in the number of users.
In another example, Vine had gained immense popularity with its unique six-second videos, which served as a breeding ground for budding creators and led to numerous viral trends, however, Vine ’ s downfall is attributed to its failure to monetize content effectively, and the emergence of rival and powerful platforms such as Instagram and Snapchat.
Delicious is a harsh example of the fall of a social media platform, where the site faced major challenges due to the lack of effective monetization strategies, and the emergence of new competitors on the platform, which led to a sharp decline in the user base, and ultimately sold and re-launched, under new ownership.

The decline of LiveJournal can be attributed to various factors, including the failure to adapt to changing trends, privacy concerns, intense competition, and the emergence of more alternatives.

In recent years, the internet has seen the rapid rise and subsequent disappearance of social media platforms, which can be attributed to the failure to adapt to changing trends, privacy concerns, intense competition, and the emergence of more alternatives.

For example, MySpace, which was once a popular social networking site, failed to adapt to the changing preferences of its user base, resulting in a loss of relevance and decreased user engagement.

Similarly, Orkut, another social networking site, struggled to combat spam, privacy concerns, and the rise of rival platforms, such as Facebook and Twitter, ultimately leading to its demise in 2014.

The story of LiveJournal serves as a reminder of the importance of adapting to changing trends and user preferences, as well as the need for continuous innovation and improvement in order to remain relevant in the ever-evolving online landscape.

In conclusion, the history of LiveJournal is a complex and fascinating story of how a personal journaling application transformed into a popular blogging platform, only to decline in popularity over time due to various factors, including the failure to adapt to changing trends, privacy concerns, intense competition, and the emergence of more alternatives.


Medication shortage is a growing global concern, impacting both developing and developed countries, with a record high of 323 drugs in short supply in the first quarter of 2024.

The French medicines regulator signalled 4,925 drug shortages in 2023, compared to 3,761 in 2022 and 2,160 in 2021, indicating a worsening situation.

A 2024 survey from France Assos Santé found that 44 per cent of people in France said they had faced a drug shortage this year.

In the United States, the FDA pointed to 111 drug shortages, including heart disease drugs, antibiotics, and chemotherapy drugs.

The shortage of drugs has forced hospitals to delay, cancel or ration care, with 99% of hospital pharmacists reporting some drug supply shortages.

The reasons behind the shortages include manufacturing and quality problems, supply chain gaps, and downtime, as well as a lack of transparency from pharmaceutical companies.

The FDA has released draft guidelines to prevent the risk of defects, requiring manufacturers to notify the agency of changes in the manufacturing process of drugs and APIs.

Healthcare systems have coped with the shortages by offering therapeutic alternatives, buying different vial sizes or concentrations, and rationing medicines.

The American Society of Health System Pharmacists has called for more transparency from pharmaceutical companies and for Congress to require manufacturers to be more transparent on any supply chain issues.

The global health workforce is also facing shortages, with an estimated 6.4 million doctors missing worldwide, and a significant increase in the number of health workers needed to achieve universal health coverage.

Medication shortage is a growing global concern, impacting both developing and developed countries, with a record high of 323 drugs in short supply in the first quarter of 2024.

Title:

Content: General Supervision
Elham Aboul Fath
Editor-in-Chief
Thank you for your patience.
General Supervision
Elham Aboul Fath
Editor-in-Chief
Thank you for your patience.
An Unexpected Catastrophe in the World ’ s Largest Country: The Complete Story of U.S. Drug Shortages
The deficit is at a record level.
According to data from the American Society of Health System Pharmacists and the University of Utah Drug Information Service, organizations began tracking drug shortages for the first time in 2001. Steady since 2021 – now reaching a record high of 323 drugs in the first three months of 2024.
Paul Abramowitz, CEO of the American Society of Health System Pharmacists, wrote in a blog post on Thursday: “It ’ s been a long time to end drug shortages, ” and wrote:“ All drug classes are vulnerable to shortages, some of the most worrisome shortages include sterile injectable generic drugs, including cancer chemotherapy drugs and emergency drugs stored in hospital vans and procedural areas. It is dangerous for doctors and patients. ”
In addition to the 32 chemotherapy drugs that are deficient, the five categories of drugs with the greatest deficiency include central nervous system stimulants, antimicrobials, hormonal agents, and intravenous fluids. [1] The Drug Deficiency Database maintained by the American Society of Health System Pharmacists and the University of Utah is based on voluntary reports from practitioners, patients, and others that have been confirmed by manufacturers. The U.S. drug is in short supply, because it captures broader effects on service providers and patients.
The crisis has lasted a year and a half.
More than half of the treatment shortages have lasted for more than two years, according to an analysis by health consultancy IQVIA, and the average shortage affects at least half a million patients, many of them elderly, according to the US Office of Health and Human Services under the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, which shared its analysis with Congress in May.
Growing demand can play a role in drug shortages, as with the recent shortage of weight-loss drugs, but often manufacturing and quality problems, such as supply chain gaps and downtime, are the root cause. And varied.
But the American Society of Health System Pharmacists has “serious concerns ” about parts of this proposal, especially financial sanctions imposed on hospitals that lack the resources to comply with the recommendations, Abramowitz wrote:“ We all know that managing shortages is not enough and is not a sustainable solution to the worsening crisis, and there is still a lot of work to be done at the federal level to fix the root causes of drug shortages. ”
Why Shortage Occurs
Shortages can be caused by high demand, as with the recent shortage of weight-loss drugs, but this is not usually the main problem.
The FDA also blames manufacturing and quality problems, supply chain gaps, and downtime, and Dr. Emily Tucker, a drug shortage expert and an assistant professor of industrial engineering at Clemson University, says that when there is an indication of shortages, large health systems often also proactively place large orders, adding to the system ’ s stress.
“I don ’ t blame anyone.
“When I talk to all the stakeholders – whether it ’ s wholesalers, manufacturers, or the government – everyone wants this problem to end, ” she said.
Lack of transparency
Dr. Julie Grallo, chief medical officer and executive vice president of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, told the House Committee earlier that the shortage puts providers in a terrible position: “The drug shortage crisis is forcing providers to make impossible choices, and it is also hindering the development of new drugs. Health drugs are purchased only on a price basis, and manufacturers do not have to disclose the source of their acquisition of the ingredients.
The shortage of this generic chemical drug came due to the closure of one factory in India that manufactures the active ingredient after a surprise FDA inspection found “significant quality issues, ” says Jarallo:“ We didn ’ t know, and there was no transparency regarding the company ’ s supply of the majority of active pharmaceutical ingredients to all manufacturers across the board.
Knowing this in advance, we could have responded much faster, ” Dr. Steven Schundlemeyer, director of the PRIME Institute of the University of Minnesota School of Pharmacy, which focuses on economic and management issues, told the committee that as with defense contractors in the United States, New Zealand requires manufacturers to disclose their suppliers, and that information is required.
Easily accessible in the database.
Related Topics

The French medicines regulator signalled 4,925 drug shortages in 2023, compared to 3,761 in 2022 and 2,160 in 2021, indicating a worsening situation.

Title:

Content: French health groups put forward proposals to limit the damage of worsening drug shortages

Medicines such as cough syrup, lozenges and ointment are seen on a table in an apartment in Berlin, Tuesday, December 20, 2022. Copyright Stephanie Pilick/dpa via AP
Copyright Stephanie Pilick/dpa via AP
By Lauren Chadwick
Share this articleComments
Share this article

Pharmaceutical companies’ lack of transparency leads to rising drug prices and less control over public resources, the group of health organisations say.

ADVERTISEMENT

A group of French organisations have called for more transparency from pharmaceutical companies as drug shortages increase.

In a joint report, 14 civil society organisations outlined their recommendations to solve a “situation that has only worsened” since 2018.

The French medicines regulator signalled 4,925 drug shortages in 2023, compared to 3,761 in 2022 and 2,160 in 2021.

A 2024 survey from France Assos Santé, which represents patients, found that 44 per cent of people in France said they had faced a drug shortage this year.

One of the pharmacy unions in France has even planned a strike at the end of the month over drug shortages and what they say is worsening access to care.

Each health organisation contributed an article with recommendations for dealing with the drug shortages.

The League Against Cancer urged complete transparency on drug shortages and potential substitutions for health professionals.

They also called for monitoring of medicine stocks and their location in the country to guarantee equal access.

The organisation found in a survey published in February that 78 per cent of health professionals in oncology had been faced with a drug shortage.

Drug shortages or delays have led to anxiety among cancer patients, lost time, and worsening symptoms, the organisation said.

France Assos Santé, meanwhile, wrote that an urgent response should not be to support “the industrial sector which bears serious responsibilities” for abandoning the production of less profitable drugs, relocating drug production, and keeping insufficient medicine stocks.

They would like any cost increases justified by production costs or the risk of withdrawing a drug from the market due to it being unprofitable. They called for cost evaluations to be made public.

Their concerns also range from the use of public money to bring drug production to Europe to new government plans to prevent shortages.

Some changes at the EU level criticised

Last year, the European Commission announced several measures to reform the pharmaceutical industry and address critical drug shortages.

The European Parliament went on to adopt a position on pharmaceutical reform last month, that included “incentives for innovation” and an effort to limit overuse of antibiotics.

The non-profit organisation Prescrire, which focuses on information about medicine, wrote in a chapter they contributed to the report that while some of the European Commission’s measures were welcome, others were concerning.

One of the many measures they rejected included the Commission’s proposal to reduce the number of days of scientific evaluation of drugs from 210 to 180, which they said was necessary time rather than an “administrative obstacle”.

While the NGO welcomed some measures such as government drug shortage prevention plans, it said the Commission should allow EU states to require pharmaceutical companies to have safety stocks of medicine and sanction those that do not respect them.

ADVERTISEMENT

French consumer organisation UFC-Que Choisir and the European Consumer Organisation (BEUC) said that they had hoped MEPs would shorten the length of time for “data protection” to allow generic medicines to be marketed more quickly.

Instead, MEPs approved shortening the period to 7.5 years, “which is almost the same duration as the current 8 years [yet] within the framework of the text adopted by Parliament, companies can gain additional months of protection under certain conditions to reach a total of 8.5 years,” UFC-Que Choisir said.

Share this articleComments

You might also like

A 2024 survey from France Assos Santé found that 44 per cent of people in France said they had faced a drug shortage this year.

In the United States, the FDA pointed to 111 drug shortages, including heart disease drugs, antibiotics, and chemotherapy drugs.

Title:

Content: US supply chain crisis continues, FDA points to 111 drug shortages
Global Social Hotspot 16: 35 2021 / 12 / 05
Share:
The supply chain crisis in the United States continues, and many goods are facing shortages.
The US media said that the US pharmacies have a number of critical prescription drugs in stock. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) pointed out that about 111 drugs are out of stock in the United States. The FDA stressed that it will continue to take measures to monitor the supply chain.
【 Omicron variant 】 Travellers must have a negative test within 48 hours for entering the United Kingdom 【 Next 】
The Federal Reserve warned on Wednesday that large parts of the United States had begun to be affected by supply chain disruptions and labor shortages last month.
According to the FDA website, 111 drugs are out of stock in the United States, including the heart disease drug digoxin injection, the chemical drug Dacarbazine and some antibiotics.
The authorities say there are many reasons for the shortage, including production problems, quality problems, drugs and even the suspension of production.
According to the FDA, about 80% of the manufacturers of active pharmaceutical ingredients are located overseas, and the manufacturers have provided the FDA with most of the drug shortage information.
The Administration will also work closely with these manufacturers to address the drug shortage.
【 Omicron variant 】 Study: Omicron carries a cold virus gene or helps avoid the immune system 【 Next 】
Long Island Newspaper Newsday quoted Tom D'Angelo, president of the New York State Association of Pharmacists, as saying the shipping of a large number of medicines, including those for common blood pressure and for the treatment of colds and flu, was blocked.
Because of supply chain problems, the owner of a New York drugstore said there were fewer brands for some drugs, including Ibuprofen.
The National Association of Community Pharmacists (NCPA) released a survey last month that found that most non-chain pharmacies are struggling to fill employee vacancies and cope with supply chain disruptions.
Sixty percent of pharmacies surveyed said they were dealing with supply chain disruptions, and nearly 70 percent said it was difficult to fill staff vacancies.
Stay abreast of the latest development of mutant virus and epidemic vaccine, download the Hong Kong Economic Times App for free now 【 Click here
Editor-in-Chief: Cheng Kam-ling
Follow the latest financial news analysis, like hket Facebook
Subscribe to the Hong Kong Economic Times email newsletter
Receive first-hand financial news Learn more about investment and financial knowledge Submit my consent to receive promotional messages from Hong Kong Economic Times Group. You may also check the privacy policy of this website Terms of Use

The shortage of drugs has forced hospitals to delay, cancel or ration care, with 99% of hospital pharmacists reporting some drug supply shortages.

Title:

Content: As drug shortage list grows, many hospitals face tough decisions on rationing care

More than half of hospital pharmacists are reporting a critical shortage of chemotherapy drugs and nearly all are reporting overall medicine supply gaps as prescription drug shortages near an all time high, according to a new survey.

Hospital pharmacists said drug shortages have forced 1 in 3 health systems to delay, cancel or ration care or switch to alternate drugs to continue to treat patients. And 99% are reporting some drug supply shortages, an American Society of Health-System Pharmacists survey of more than 1,000 pharmacists released Thursday found.

The organization reported shortages of 309 drugs, near the all-time high of 320 shortages in 2014. The scarcity of key drugs is prompting hospitals to find or substitute drugs and change treatment plans as needed.

“In some cases, there are no alternatives to the affected drugs, which puts patients at risk," ASHP Chief Executive Officer Paul W. Abramowitz said in a statement. "This issue requires quick action from Congress to address the underlying causes of shortages and ensure patients have the medications they need.”

Cancer drug shortages

In June, the Food and Drug Administration said it will temporarily allow overseas drug manufacturers to import some chemotherapy drugs.

The FDA allowed Qilu Pharmaceutical, a drug manufacturer in China, to import the injectable chemotherapy drug cisplatin in 50-milligram vials. Toronto pharmaceutical company Apotex Corp. will distribute the medication in the United States.

More than a dozen cancer drugs have been in shortage in recent months, including cisplatin and carboplatin, used to treat lung, breast, prostate and gynecologic cancers. The National Cancer Institute said cisplatin and similar drugs are prescribed for 10% to 20% of all cancer patients.

In June, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network released a survey of 27 academic cancer centers that found 93% reported shortages of carboplatin and 70% faced shortages of cisplatin.

When cancer hospitals face such shortages, they attempt to make sure there's enough medication for patients to finish the course of treatment, said Mike Ganio, ASHP's senior director of pharmacy practice and quality.

Cancer hospitals facing such shortages might change medications for new patients starting on chemotherapy, said Ganio, a former pharmacy manager at an academic cancer center.

"You try to keep that patient on the same regimen as much as you can, unless they're failing it for some reason, and then you would switch," Ganio said.

Steroids, hormonal drugs also in short supply

More than 1 in 5 hospital pharmacists also reported shortages for steroids, hormonal drugs and oral liquids such as lidocaine, ibuprofen and amoxicillin.

A smaller number of pharmacists said heart medications, emergency prefilled syringes and drugs used for intensive care unit patients were in short supply. Others reported shortages of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder medicines, antimicrobial drugs and injectable opioids.

In all, about two-thirds of pharmacists said the shortages were "moderately impactful," which means they are managing shortages but patients are affected.

Pharmacists are managing the shortages by offering therapeutic alternatives, buying different vial sizes or concentrations and rationing medicines.

This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Survey: Drug shortages are widespread, hospitals ration care

The reasons behind the shortages include manufacturing and quality problems, supply chain gaps, and downtime, as well as a lack of transparency from pharmaceutical companies.

The FDA has released draft guidelines to prevent the risk of defects, requiring manufacturers to notify the agency of changes in the manufacturing process of drugs and APIs.

Title:

Content: FDA gave instructions to pharmaceutical manufacturers to prevent the risk of defects
The FDA has released a draft guideline that will allow pharmaceutical manufacturers to more accurately report disruptions to the production of drugs and APIs.
In particular, it specifies who should contact the regulator in case of a failure in production and on which products it is necessary to transmit information.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has issued draft guidelines to pharmaceutical manufacturers to prevent the risk of flaw.
According to the instructions, they will notify the agency of changes in the manufacturing process of drugs, biological products or active pharmaceutical ingredients (API).
In the United States, FD & C. It requires manufacturers to notify the agency of interruptions in the supply of products or APIs.
The FDA ’ s new guidelines provide clarifications.
Manufacturers must submit a notice to the FDA at least six months before stopping drug production, which could lead to their shortages on the market.
If it is not possible to notify the agency six months in advance, it should be done “as soon as possible ”.
If interruptions in production may affect the supply situation, the manufacturer should assess the situation only on the basis of its capabilities.
It should not take into account the capacity of other manufacturers, the amount of product on the market or market demand.
The guidelines also state what specific product or API information manufacturers should report when informing the FDA.
CBS, citing a report from the US Senate, writes that by the end of 2022, the shortage of drugs in the US had reached a five-year peak and affected almost 300 pharmaceutical products.
This is due to the fact that the United States moved production to China, India and other countries.
According to the American Society of Health System Pharmacists, products such as sodium chloride solution, the antibiotic amoxicillin and albuterol inhalation solution are now in short supply.
Nikolay Sokolov
pharmvestnik

Healthcare systems have coped with the shortages by offering therapeutic alternatives, buying different vial sizes or concentrations, and rationing medicines.

The American Society of Health System Pharmacists has called for more transparency from pharmaceutical companies and for Congress to require manufacturers to be more transparent on any supply chain issues.

Title:

Content: Meitu
The first quarter of the United States serious drug shortage 323 drugs urgent cancer patients also have to be diverted and rationed!
CHU HENG NETWORK NEWS CENTER 2024-04-16 10: 42
According to the latest data from the American Society of Health System Pharmacists (ASHP) and the Utah Center for Drug Information Services, a total of 323 drugs in the United States were in severe shortages in the first quarter of this year, surpassing the record of 320 in 2014.
Among the drugs affected are the widely used diabetes drugs Ozempic and Mounjaro, the allergy treatment drug adrenaline, the common antibiotic amoxicillin for children, chemotherapy drugs and injections commonly used in hospitals in intensive care.
ASHP CEO Paul Abramowitz said in a statement that almost all categories of drugs are facing shortages, with non-patented sterile injectable drugs, including cancer chemotherapy drugs, and emergency drugs stored in hospital emergency vans and operating areas, the shortage of such drugs is the most worrying.
According to the American Cancer Society, chemotherapy is one of the top five drugs most affected by the shortage, which threatens to have a devastating impact on patients, and some hospitals and clinics say doctors have had to divert patients to ration their medications because of a shortage of some chemotherapy drugs.
In addition, ASHP noted that the continued nationwide shortage of ADHD drugs is “a problem for clinicians and patients. ”
The shortage of popular drugs is even more acute, with Mounjaro, the diabetes drug known as the “slimming pill ”, already in dire straits.
In response, Lilly said that the “unprecedented surge in demand ” for Mounjaro and its similar drug Zepbound has led to a shortage in the market, which the company is struggling to cope with.
Lilly is ramping up investments to boost production at Mounjaro and Zepbound in the second half of 2024.
The company said it expects intermittent supply disruptions in the near term due to unprecedented demand.
How to cure the drug shortage
The last major “drug shortage ” in U.S. history occurred in 2014, and it has only been alleviated in the years since.
Since 2021, the drug shortage situation seems to be increasing, and scholars in the field of medical health and economics in the United States believe that the reason for most drug shortages in the United States is the fragmentation of the drug supply chain.
The White House this month proposed spending between $3.26 billion and $5.11 billion over the next decade to help address the nation ’ s drug shortage.
The bill requires approval and funding from the U.S. Congress.
U.S. researchers and policymakers believe that a complete solution to the “drug shortage ” may require changes to the business model of the U.S. pharmaceutical industry, including measures to increase the price of generic drugs to attract more drug manufacturers.
Policymakers recommend giving the FDA more power to access more information about drug shortages and impending shortages.
Currently, the FDA relies primarily on phone calls to manufacturers asking if they can increase their supply to understand the situation.
The American Society of Health System Pharmacists said it is working with the federal government to advise the government on measures to address the drug shortage, including that Congress should require manufacturers to be more transparent on any supply chain issues and encourage more diversity in supply chains.
According to Abramowitz, “The federal government still has a lot of work to do to fundamentally address drug shortages, and the American Society of Health System Pharmacists will continue to engage regularly with policymakers to guide them in drafting and passing new legislation to address drug shortages and continue to advocate vigorously for proven solutions on behalf of our members. ”

The global health workforce is also facing shortages, with an estimated 6.4 million doctors missing worldwide, and a significant increase in the number of health workers needed to achieve universal health coverage.

Title:

Content: A global study by The Lancet found that there are about 6.4 million doctors missing in the world.
To date, more than 12.8 million specialists with a medical diploma work in the field of health care, but much more is needed.
Staffing capacity
The study, titled “Measuring human resource affordability for health and its relationship to universal health coverage for 204 countries and territories from 1990 to 2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study, ” was published May 23 in The Lancet.
The authors studied the number of doctors, nurses and midwives, dental and pharmaceutical staff and found that as of 2019, there were shortages of doctors in 132 countries.
Globally, there are more than 43 million health workers missing when we compare the current level of coverage with the targets needed to achieve universal health coverage.
“This is the most comprehensive and comprehensive assessment to date of the global health workforce.
Adequate numbers of health workers are necessary for the normal functioning of health systems, so it is important to own such data so that countries can make informed decisions and plan for the future, ” said the study ’ s senior author, director of health organization at the Institute of Health Metrics and Assessment (IHME) at the University of Washington School of Medicine, Dr. Rafael Lozano.
As of 2019, there were 104 million healthcare workers worldwide, including 12.8 million doctors, 29.8 million nurses and midwives, 4.6 million dental workers, and 5.2 million pharmacists and pharmacists.
The study revealed more than a tenfold difference in the availability of health workers across regions and between countries.
The greatest shortage of doctors is in South Asia, where there is a shortage of 2.57 million doctors; in sub-Saharan Africa, there is a shortage of about 1.92 million doctors, in Southeast Asia, East Asia and Oceania - 995,000, in North Africa and the Middle East - 636,000 doctors.
On average, there are 16.7 doctors per 10,000 people in the world.
Density ranges from 2.9 physicians per 10,000 population in sub-Saharan Africa to 38.3 per 10,000 in Central and Eastern Europe and Central Asia.
Cuba unexpectedly stands out among other countries with an indicator of 84.4 doctors per 10 thousand people (for comparison: 2.1 doctors per 10 thousand in Haiti).
The availability of health workers in general is closely related to the level of social and economic development of the region, the authors of the study noted.
Health standards
“There are various strategies and policy approaches that can help address staffing shortages, and they need to be tailored to the individual situation in each country.
We hope that these assessments can be used to prioritize policy actions and inform future planning.
Achieving high levels of effective health coverage requires a significant increase in the number of health workers worldwide, ” the press release said.
Experts assessed staffing based on the UN Sustainable Development Goals and the WHO Health Personnel 2030 strategy.
The authors of the study called on the leaders of countries to pay attention to the problem of shortage of medical workers and to develop comprehensive programs to solve it
Overall, experts estimate that an additional 6.4 million doctors, 30.6 million nurses, 3.3 million dentists and 2.9 million pharmacists and pharmacists are required to reach the minimum thresholds.
“We do not consider these minimum thresholds mandatory, rather desirable.
We propose to use them as guidelines, and then the program developers in each country should take into account their own situation and their own experience.
In some places, the healthcare system works better with fewer staff, and in some places worse with more staff.
The threshold is a convenient and innovative metric for determining gaps, but it should be remembered that this is not only a matter of quantity, but also of quality, ” the study says.
Share the link:
Padtrymats “People ’ s Will ”