Inadequacy of the Right to Health

The right to health is a pillar of human rights, recognised in numerous international instruments — notably the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR). It obliges States to guarantee access to quality health services, promote prevention, and create conditions conducive to good health.

However, this right suffers from a fundamental inadequacy: it is typically framed as an obligation of means rather than an obligation of results. The State must put health systems and prevention policies in place, but it is not required to guarantee that each individual achieves or maintains an optimal physiological state.

This distinction has concrete consequences:

• Failure to recognise individual deficiencies: A person may suffer from magnesium deficiency, low vitamin D, or a hormonal imbalance — but if the healthcare system offers no specific solution or considers it a non-priority, their right to health is technically not violated.
• Inaccessibility of corrective interventions: Even where treatments exist (supplements, hormones, medications), they may be costly, unreimbursed, or subject to restrictive criteria. The right to health does not necessarily guarantee access to these interventions.
• Focus on disease, not physiological imbalance: Healthcare systems are designed to treat declared diseases, but routinely neglect subclinical imbalances which, though not classified as pathologies, profoundly affect quality of life and functional capacity.

Physiological rights aim to close this gap by imposing an obligation of results for measurable physiological parameters. The issue is no longer merely providing means, but guaranteeing that every person has access to the interventions necessary to maintain or restore their organism’s normal physiological balance.