Based on a recent correspondence of the journal, Maboloc claims that public health concerns are not just the physical but also the ‘total well-being of persons’.¹ This holds true with the broader implications and critical link between natural hazards and public health. It is important, however, to remember that the impact of natural hazards extends beyond immediate health needs. Disaster response and recovery are not restricted to rescue operations and attending to the physical health of victims; otherwise, it will exacerbate and ignore other discrete health concerns such as trauma, mental instability and high-risk coping mechanisms over time. Alcántara-Ayala argued that ‘natural hazards are threatening events, capable of producing damage to the physical and social space where they take place not only at the moment of their occurrence, but on a long-term basis due to their associated consequences.’² Thus, hazards demand a multidisciplinary approach to emergency response and healthcare and long-term resilience-building efforts.

The 2013 Typhoon Haiyan (locally known as Super Typhoon Yolanda) is a case in point. The Haiyan typhoon ‘caused both physical and mental health problems as well as social consequences for the survivors. Mental health problems were more frequently reported than physical injuries.’³ The varied effects are disproportionate and extensive on vulnerable populations who lacked access to health care and other basic needs in post-typhoon. Natural hazards such as Typhoon Haiyan worsened the economic situation of Eastern Visayas, placing the region as the country’s poorest region.⁴ Even on the speculation of establishing a Haiyan Museum, a survivor-curator suggests that ‘careful analysis and consideration of many things/factors should be observed—careful that it may not be traumatic and hurtful to the people who are still suffering the pain of that historic and painful event.’⁵ This is a problem when the government and society ignore and neglect the compounding effects (e.g. poverty, socio-economics and environmental harm) of a hazard and solely assess the public health and government management on physical survival.

The well-being of the Filipino public is better addressed through an interactive and comprehensive approach that mitigates the adverse effects and promotes resilience in the face of environmental challenges. In doing so, all Philippine social institutions and sectors shall be consulted by the government rather than through top-down decision-making. Here, we proposed the following practices to supplement the existing public health blueprint in the country and in the region: (i) partnerships between executive agencies and collaborate/partner with non-government and community-based organizations for disaster readiness and response initiatives; (ii) investment in research and innovation by provincial, congressional, city or municipal government in collaboration with foreign funding agencies in areas of economics, gerontology, public health and engineering for evidence-oriented policies and sustainable projects in disaster recovery; (iii) adoption of data analytics and epidemiological surveillance to inform health intervention against emerging or existing health threats among disaster survivors and (iv) launch a national Comprehensive Assistance for Reliable Education and Advisory on Diseases (CARE-READ) project to deliver education and advisory services on diseases in areas with no proper health resources and services.