We must harness the power of social and behavioural science against the growing pandemic of antimicrobial resistance.

Social and behavioural science offers a valuable toolkit for combating pandemics, but has not been broadly applied to tackle the rising pandemic of antimicrobial resistance.Antimicrobial resistance occurs when microorganisms (such as bacteria, fungi and viruses) adapt to survive exposure to medicines that normally kill them or inhibit their growth, which in turn makes these medicines less effective over time. Left unmitigated, antimicrobial resistance will reverse previous gains in modern medicine and increase global mortality from currently treatable diseases. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), antimicrobial resistance is one of the most important threats to global health, food security and development today1. In 2019, antimicrobial resistance is estimated to have contributed to the deaths of approximately 4.95 million people: 1.27 million deaths were directly attributed to it2. By comparison, the WHO estimated that — on the basis of excess deaths statistics — COVID-19 was associated with 3 million deaths in 2020 (ref. 3). If no immediate measures are taken to reduce the spread of antimicrobial resistance, by 2050 it could contribute to up to 10 million deaths annually4. The burden is not distributed equally, as it disproportionally affects people from low- and middle-income countries2

We must harness the power of social and behavioural science against the growing pandemic of antimicrobial resistance

No description supplie

The globalizability of temporal discounting.

Economic inequality is associated with preferences for smaller, immediate gains over larger, delayed ones. Such temporal discounting may feed into rising global inequality, yet it is unclear whether it is a function of choice preferences or norms, or rather the absence of sufficient resources for immediate needs. It is also not clear whether these reflect true differences in choice patterns between income groups. We tested temporal discounting and five intertemporal choice anomalies using local currencies and value standards in 61 countries (N = 13,629). Across a diverse sample, we found consistent, robust rates of choice anomalies. Lower-income groups were not significantly different, but economic inequality and broader financial circumstances were clearly correlated with population choice patterns