Scientific and practical interpretation of health as a basic socio-psychological conceptual category

Shantyr Yevhen PhD in Medicine Professor, Head of the Department of Psychology, Dnepropetrovsk Institute of Interregional Academy of Personnel Management 49018, Ukraine, Dnepropetrovskaya oblast', g. Dnepropetrovsk, per. Parusnyi, 19, kv. 30 shantyr@inbox.ru Other publications by this author

Introduction. Throughout the foreseeable history, one of the most significant indicators of the quality of human life is, of course, such a widespread and widely discussed concept as health. This term, as a conceptual category, also acquires special relevance in our time, when the modern world, unfortunately, is becoming increasingly unfriendly, aggressive, and events in it sometimes acquire a threatening character. Humanity is witnessing the emergence and increase of universal problems, the negative consequences of which are inevitably associated with the deterioration of human health on a global scale ^{[27, 51]}. And this is due not only to man-made impacts on nature and the deterioration of the ecological situation on our planet. Today, the problems of health and, consequently, the survival of mankind as such can no longer be considered separately from the state of the human psyche and those negative trends and various deformations of social consciousness that take place in the modern world ^{[6, 7]}.

Military-political conflicts, terrorism, various local and regional wars, pandemics, drug trafficking, gender confrontations, sexual transformations and many other adverse social phenomena inevitably lead to a variety of, including criminal actions against human life and health ^{[20, 31]}. Hence, it becomes clear that the growing concern that has been increasingly observed in the world community lately and the numerous cognitive efforts of scientists and specialists, as well as government and political figures in finding a real way out of the current crisis situations ^{[3, 50, 54]}. Underestimating the current situation and the destructive tendencies associated with it, downplaying their significance, insufficient awareness of society about existing problems and their consequences can put humanity, without exaggeration, on the verge between life and death.And, of course, this fully applies to human health, its current state, the study of it as a value, interpretation, as a social and scientific concept, and ultimately, the attitude of the person himself and society as a whole to it.

And these relationships, as a kind of mental state, manifest themselves constantly, since in real life almost any product of human activity somehow affects the health of a certain social or professional group of people, as well as a single individual ^{[21, 37, 52]}. At the same time, there is no doubt that without health, as the basis of life itself, all other interests, values and significance of humanity practically lose all common sense ^{[33, 45]}. And it is no coincidence that the understanding of health as a very important basic concept for the development of society and the formation of a person's personality is widely presented in various sources of information and is considered in detail in social, psychological, biomedical and even philosophical developments ^{[2, 29, 40, 46]}.It is difficult to overestimate the significance of this conceptual category and it is primarily due to the global social and, of course, individual necessity and the desire of everyone, without exception, to have good health and healthy offspring ^[11].

In addition, the interpretation of this concept is undoubtedly a key scientific aspect, because depending on what meaning is put into the term health, its further study, priorities and directions of research, the development of indicators, the assessment of the condition, the study of factors and patterns of manifestation, etc. depend.Therefore, it is extremely important for the entire world community to determine the cognitive unambiguity of the semantic content of the interpretation of health as a fundamental socio-psychological conceptual category.

After all, it is what we, society as a whole, and a particular person in particular, will understand by the term health that will ultimately determine the formation of attitudes towards it in everyday life. And in the future, this attitude, already as a set of social ideological beliefs, will be reflected in legislative documents, and they, in turn, will have a direct impact on the formation of the health status of the population, which is currently becoming more and more problematic all over the world, unfortunately ^{[28, 30, 34]}. And the reason for all these problems, negative phenomena and unfavorable trends, of course, is precisely in our worldview and those legislative acts that accompany it today.

Thus, in order to change the situation for the better in this area, it is necessary, first of all, to form in the public consciousness a fundamentally new value of the concept of health as a fundamental socio-psychological conceptual category. To this end, we have analyzed the currently existing scientific, social and legal interpretations of this conceptual category in the sources of information available to us, and in our developments we have proposed new theoretical approaches and corresponding definitions of the concept of health and its derivatives. 

The main material. In scientific and popular science literature, as well as on Internet sites, not a little information has been accumulated regarding the semantic load of the term health. Currently, there are over 300 definitions of this concept ^[40]. There is no need, of course, to analyze in detail the entire array of these judgments, especially since very often they are almost identical or quite close in their semantic meaning. We will give some of the most typical examples and combine a number of other interpretations that reflect, to one degree or another, in our opinion, the diversity of the currently existing definitions of this term.

Health, as a concept, has been interpreted by many, including the most prominent thinkers, scientists and specialists of almost all historical epochs and periods. "Valetudo bonum optimum," the ancients said. Health is the highest good. The ancient Greek philosopher Socrates argued that "Health is not everything, but everything without health is nothing." Pythagoras, a philosopher, mathematician and doctor, defined health as harmony, balance, and illness as their violation. Hippocrates, an ancient Greek healer, as well as a philosopher and a doctor, understood by health a certain equilibrium relationship between all the organs of the body ^[23].

In the future, health, as a conceptual category, was also in the focus of attention of many prominent scientists and specialists in this field, as evidenced by the work of a number of authors ^{[4, 10, 12, 14]}. Here are some, in our opinion, key examples of these scientific developments, which are currently very authoritative and quite relevant. 

Thus, the famous academician N.M. Amosov defined health as the absence of diseases and injuries, harmonious physical and mental development, normal formation of organs and systems, as well as high efficiency, resistance to adverse influences and sufficient ability to adapt to various loads and environmental conditions ^[2]. Russian scientist in the field of medicine and sociology, academician V.P. Kaznacheev considered health as a dynamic state, the process of preserving and developing its biological, physiological and mental functions, optimal working capacity and social activity with maximum life expectancy. Physiologist, academician Arshavsky I.A. associated with the concept of health such a state of the human body when the functions of all its organs and systems are balanced with the external environment and there are no painful changes ^{[23, 24]}.

Russian psychologist and specialist in the field of practical psychology of human professional activity, academician G.S. Nikiforov in his works interprets health as a certain ability of the body to adapt to constantly changing conditions of existence in the environment, as well as the ability to maintain the constancy of the internal environment of the body, ensuring normal and versatile vital activity, preservation of the living principle in the body ^[22]. A similar definition is given by a doctor, Professor V.I. Dubrovsky, who in his writings emphasizes that health is a state of the body in which a person is biologically full–fledged, able-bodied, the functions of all its components and systems are balanced, there are no painful manifestations ^[19]. The founder of valeology, Professor I.I. Brekhman, points out in his work that human health is his ability to maintain age–appropriate stability in conditions of sharp changes in quantitative and qualitative parameters of the flow of sensory, verbal and structural information ^[9]. Many other scientific developments and judgments are in tune with this approach, in which the authors single out a certain level of adaptation of the body to environmental conditions, physical and psycho-emotional stress as the main sign of health ^[1].

In philosophical literature, in turn, there are also quite a few different definitions of the concept of health, both similar in essence and distinctive in their philosophical content. Thus, the authoritative English philosopher and sociologist G. Spencer considered health as a result of the established equilibrium of internal relations to external factors ^[42]. The famous German philosopher G. Hegel wrote in his writings that "Health is a proportionality between the self of the organism and its initial being, that is, a state when all organs are fluid in the universal: it consists in a uniform ratio of the organic to the theoretical, when there is nothing inorganic for the organism that it could not overcome" ^[43]. A prominent specialist in philosophical and methodological problems of medicine, Doctor of Philosophy V.P. Petlenko points out that health is a state of balance between the adaptive capabilities of the body and constantly changing environmental conditions ^[33].

However, most often in the sources of information of philosophical content, health is considered exclusively as a kind of vital value that occupies the top step on the hierarchical ladder of human values in the system of such categories of human existence as interests and ideals, harmony and beauty, meaning and happiness of life, creativity, love, freedom, etc. ^{[43, 46]}. Thus, the French humanist philosopher and writer M. Montaigne in his works emphasizes that health is a jewel and, moreover, the only one for which it is really worth not only sparing time, effort, labor and all sorts of benefits, but also sacrificing a particle of life itself for it, because life without it becomes unbearable and humiliating. Without health, not only material goods fade and perish, but also wisdom, knowledge, joy, goodness, etc. It is this approach to health, as one of the highest values, that we see in many philosophical works ^{[36, 44]}.In medical practice, it is customary to associate health with established normal figures of various indicators of the functioning of organs, systems and tissues, as well as the body as a whole.

Usually, the diagnosis of "healthy" is made if, after the results of the study by all available methods, no deviations from the norm accepted in medicine are found. It should be noted here that the physiological norm for many body functions is largely determined by individual characteristics of a person: constitution, age, gender, physical fitness, etc. Therefore, certain functional indicators may be pathological for some, and for others – corresponding to the physiological norm ^{[5, 26]}. At the same time, some authors emphasize that normal figures of indicators and even well–being are only the quality of health, but there is also quantity. It is measured by "reserve capacities", i.e., the limiting values of the normal functioning of organs and systems of the body under appropriate physical and/or mental stress, as well as with significant changes in environmental parameters ^{[23, 35]}.Thus, noting all the diversity in approaches and interpretations of the term health, it can be confidently stated that at present there is no unified approach to the interpretation of health as a conceptual category, especially in its socio-psychological meaning, in the literature sources available to us and on numerous Internet resources.

Further, it is certainly important for us to familiarize ourselves with the interpretation of the concept of health in the definition of the World Health Organization (WHO), as well as in the current legislative documents of Russia and Ukraine.

First, let's look at the definition proposed by WHO. We find the following interpretation: "Health is a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being, and not only the absence of diseases and physical defects" ^[32]. This definition is given in the Preamble to the Charter of the World Health Organization, adopted by the International Health Conference, New York, June 19-22, 1946, signed on July 22, 1946 by representatives of 61 countries and entered into force on April 7, 1948.At the same time, we emphasize that this definition has not changed since 1948.The Law of Ukraine "Fundamentals of Ukrainian Legislation on Healthcare", article 3, completely duplicates the above interpretation of this concept by the World Health Organization.

The law "On the basics of protecting the health of citizens in the Russian Federation", Article 2, paragraph 1 states: "Health is a state of physical, mental and social well–being of a person in which there are no diseases, as well as disorders of the functions of organs and body systems."

Having analyzed the definitions of the concept of health mentioned above and very similar in content, with all our deep respect for them, we can draw only one conclusion arising from their semantic load: in these countries, and in general on the planet Earth, since the WHO definition refers to the entire human civilization, all people are practically sick. Only such a conclusion can be made on the basis of the currently legally approved definitions of the concept of health. Agree that in real life, it is unlikely that anyone will be able to find a person in a state of physical, mental (mental, according to the WHO definition) and social well-being, not to mention the fact that these documents do not say anything about what meaning the term "well-being" carries, especially complete, as indicated in WHO interpretations. It is also not entirely clear what is meant by the absence of a disease, as well as disorders of the functions of organs and body systems in the definition of health in Russian legislation. Is it the absence of a specific medical diagnosis for one reason or another, or even the presence of a certain lack of research, including modern diagnostic methods?     

And, in our opinion, it is absolutely socially unacceptable to consider a person sick, which follows from the WHO definition, if he has a physical defect. Of course, as a rule, a physical defect is, first of all, some limitations of possibilities in physical realization, but even then not always, but only in a certain individual sense of this realization for a particular person, but no more. To consider a person sick if he has a physical defect, in our opinion, is a priori an erroneous belief. For example, it is well known that the left leg of the world-famous football player M. Garrinchi was six centimeters shorter than the right one ^[15]. So that now, as a result of this physical defect, he has been a sick person all his life?  Of course not! Any physical defect, as a physical given of a particular person, cannot be cured, it can only be overcome by expanding to some extent the realization of their physical capabilities, which is what, for example, para-Olympians do all over the world. And they, of course, are healthy people, which, in our opinion, should be unequivocally confirmed and logically follow from the very essence of the interpretation of the conceptual category of health.

Thus, the erroneous idea of health is ultimately not realized, but inevitably generates a society of sick people. In other words, the definition of the concept of health through some desired well-being, which does not exist and a priori cannot exist as an unambiguous concept in reality, immediately forms a belief in the human psyche, again not consciously, that society consists of unhealthy, that is, "sick people". In essence, such an approach is nothing more than a psychological choice of modern civilization to consist of people with certain diseases: if health is well–being, and there is none, then it means it is a disease, and if it is a disease, then a diagnosis will eventually appear. It is precisely this erroneous worldview that is formed involuntarily under the influence of the above definitions of the concept of health. At the same time, these definitions have legislative force and, therefore, are the most significant, we emphasize this, and accordingly have a dominant influence on the state of the human psyche, which ultimately leads to a constant increase in the incidence itself, as a quantitative and qualitative variety of medical diagnoses among all segments of the population.   Today, of course, the spread of coronavirus infection is of particular concern and increased attention of all mankind.

 And here it is very important, in our opinion, for the whole society as a whole and for each individual to comprehend the events taking place in a new way and realize that the appearance, even if it is artificial, and the spread of Covid-19 all over the world is nothing more than an indisputable proof of the erroneous idea and erroneous attitude of humanity to its health and, in particular, to immunity. In other words, this epidemic, pandemic or even syndemia, as practice shows, cannot be finally defeated by any legislative acts, as well as social and medical measures. It is only possible to slow down its spread somewhat, and then with the help of timely and thoughtful anti-epidemic measures.This is explained by the fact that the main cause of this pandemic (this term is most often found in the media) is not at all a coronavirus mutation, these processes have always been and will be, as with other viruses, for example, the influenza virus.

The reason for these mass diseases is quite different, namely, a significant, sometimes even catastrophic decrease in the level of functional capabilities of the immune system of an increasing number of people in modern, and primarily in the so-called civilized society. It can even be said with a certain degree of irony that there is no pandemic of infectious coronavirus disease, there is a pandemic or even a syndemia of a massive significant deterioration in the state of immunity in modern humans. If this immunity is improved, its functional capabilities are increased, then these infectious and similar diseases will become few in number and, as a rule, will not pose any danger to health, but will only contribute to the fitness and strengthening of the human immune system.

To put it bluntly, today medicine and society as a whole are not arbitrarily and out of ignorance of the consequences, having refused with the help of potent drugs from colds or with the help of vaccination, having eliminated in many cases, for example, the incidence of influenza, as a natural means of training natural immunity, has not consciously opened the doors for the emergence of another infectious principle, with which immunity is not familiar, but intended for the same purpose, that is, training and stimulation of the same, but already weakened immunity. As a result, we see a huge increase in the number of cases, a significant increase in various complications and, unfortunately, an increase in the number of deaths. And if the overwhelming majority of society continues to rely on medicines and vaccination, and not on the natural immunity of the body, then the next, even more dangerous one or another infection will inevitably come into our lives, due to the fact that the immune system will become even more vulnerable, and so it will be until human civilization will not change its worldview and practical attitude to its health in general and immunity in particular. Consequently, the reason for the increased risk of Covid-19 disease and its rapid spread lies not in the virulence of the virus itself, but in the weakness of the body's immune response, that is, in the currently significant, in many cases, loss of the ability of human immunity to withstand environmental factors, in this case microbiological, viral.

And this happens due to the unconscious substitution by a person of the body's own immune response to a pathogenic agent with various medical preparations, which, under the influence of appropriate advertising, are purchased in pharmacies at the first signs of acute respiratory infections, influenza, etc. colds, the natural purpose of which is to train the human immune system, otherwise it will atrophy, as it happens in many cases, including AIDS, that is, acquired immune deficiency syndrome. And the reason for this immune deficiency is not in the material world, where medicine is constantly looking for some factor (agent, virus), which is supposedly the root cause of the loss of immunity, sometimes finds some damaging beginning, begins to fight it, but alas, as a rule, unsuccessfully. Why? Yes, because the main reason for the weakness of immunity and, ultimately, its complete absence is actually quite different and it is, of course, in the human psyche. After all, it is there that a person cognitively, but without taking into account the consequences, and therefore unconsciously makes his choice in favor of using a medical drug in the fight against the antigens of colds instead of a full-fledged immune reaction of his own body. 

In other words, if a person renounces his natural immunity, even if he does not realize it, immunity from him will definitely go away, because this is the choice that the person himself made in relation to his immunity. And this choice of a person will sooner or later become a reality. Even if today some damaging factor contributing to the weakening or even complete destruction of immunity is already being found and in the future, in our opinion, scientists and specialists in this field of medicine will also be found, we, with all deep respect for their work, want to emphasize that this factor is not the root cause of the weakening or even the loss of immunity, it is secondary and appears only for one purpose, in order to carry out, albeit unconsciously, but a person's choice: the rejection of their own immunity.

Covid-19 just came to modern society to teach a lesson and draw the attention of mankind to the erroneous idea of health as a conceptual category, as a result of which, as a rule, the wrong attitude of a modern person to his health in general and to his immunity in particular is formed. And no vaccines can fundamentally change this situation. Of course, we are not against vaccination, including, alas, compulsory, but only as an exceptionally forced and temporary measure, and then only with one sole purpose – to stop the outbreak, that is, a one-time mass morbidity among the population. At the same time, it is necessary to be aware that a vaccinated person, having reduced to some extent his own risk with respect to a possible adverse course of the disease, at the same time can remain a carrier and in some cases be an even greater source of viral infection than an unvaccinated person, including the same Covid-19. We will also emphasize here the obvious fact that to vaccinate a person whose immunity can already cope with the pathogenic onset, for example, with the influenza virus or with the same coronavirus, means unequivocally harming his immune system with unpredictable consequences that may manifest over time as some kind of weakness of immunity, perhaps already to others bacteria, viruses or other damaging factors. Therefore, in the future it is necessary in such cases, at first it is possible to selectively by regions or certain social groups, but it is necessary to return to exclusively voluntary vaccination, including from Covid-19.Only the person himself can and should ultimately determine whether he needs vaccination in each specific situation or not, taking into account, of course, the state of his own health and the doctor's recommendations.

And here it is important, first of all, when making a decision on vaccination, to correctly assess the functionality of natural immunity, which today, for the time being, in most cases, the average person can easily and without any consequences cope with this pathogenic onset, as clearly evidenced by the current, including official statistics ^[25]. Thus, in the current situation, modern society and its relevant institutions must urgently develop and be guided by a fundamentally new worldview regarding health as a basic socio-psychological conceptual category.

The meaning of this worldview is that all existing colds caused by widespread bacteria and/or viruses in nature are just given to us by Nature in order to train our immunity, maintain its functional state, that is, to enable the body itself to cope with the pathogenic principle, and not quickly "recover" in a day-two, eliminating colds with the help of well-advertised medicines, thereby refusing, not consciously, of course, from adequate functioning and training of their own immunity.       

No one, of course, is against medicines, but they should be used exclusively for vital indications and under medical supervision. We must remember that the human body is the best pharmacy created by Nature itself, and all we need, including in the current situation, is to learn how to contribute to it, this natural pharmacy, first of all, functioning in our body. Otherwise, medicines and, including vaccines, will become more and more necessary in the life of a modern person, and his, in this case, his own immunity will become more and more weak for a simple reason: everything that does not train, respectively, is not loaded, for example, the muscular system, inevitably over time, it will lose its functional ability, up to complete atrophy.

It is not by chance that with Covid-19 we see the failure of immunity in relation to the upper respiratory tract and lungs (pneumonia), because it is here that this very immunity is most often ignored by modern man to one degree or another, that is, it is replaced by medicines or becomes generally not in demand as a result of vaccination. As a consequence, the immune response of the body in this place weakens, or even disappears altogether, which means that over time, when inhaling even a small amount of the pathogenic origin, a person will inevitably get sick even from the most common and widespread bacteria and/ or viruses with all the ensuing consequences, including life-threatening ones. We emphasize the obvious fact that today, with any vaccination, the pathogenic principle enters the body in an unnatural form and not in a natural way, which inevitably affects the response of the human immune system.

A full-fledged immune response is possible only to a natural pathogen. Vaccination has only an effect, including, of course, a positive one, on human immunity, but this effect, like the immune response itself, has not yet been sufficiently studied, especially taking into account possible long-term consequences, for example, such as autoimmune diseases, which for some reason every year there are more and more reasons for which medicine is not yet known to science ^[53].

That is why, in order to eliminate at least to some extent these disadvantages of injectable vaccination, many specialized medical institutions are currently seeking to develop nasal forms of vaccination against coronavirus. And today, the Ministry of Health of Russia has already registered such the world's first nasal vaccine against Covid-19, this is the nasal form of Sputnik V, developed at the Gamaleya Center.

The nasopharynx is the "entrance gate" through which viruses and/or bacteria enter the human body. According to many scientists and specialists, inhalation of powder or aerosols of a particular vaccine will contribute to the appearance of the necessary local immunity and thereby prevent the infection from further entering the body and at the same time, which is very important, a nasally vaccinated person will not be a carrier of the pathogen, since local immunity as a result of "training" exposure to it is not virulent the pathogenic agent can be strong enough to cope with a specific pathogen of infection, which means that in this case a person will not be a carrier of this infection itself.      

All these components of the immune system are absent during vaccination through a syringe, and, consequently, a person vaccinated by injection, without being ill himself or more in a mild form, can quite often be a rather dangerous source of the spread of the pathogenic origin. Thus, the current certificate of vaccination against Covid-19 is just a document that indicates that a person has influenced, hopefully, only positively, his own immunity. At the same time, in no way does this document claim guaranteed safety for other people from infection with coronavirus through this vaccinated person, because he may be a carrier of this infection. In other words, injectable vaccination is just an attempt by a person to improve the functional state of his own immunity in relation to a specific pathogen.

And if during vaccination associated with particularly dangerous infections (diphtheria, tetanus, etc.), such an injectable approach is certainly justified and the expediency of such vaccination is confirmed, including by nature itself, since a person, as a rule, forms persistent lifelong immunity, then in the case of widespread bacteria and viruses that have become dangerously pathogenic to human health and even life itself precisely as a result of the weakness of his immunity, such a positive effect, alas, is absent, that is, no persistent or even more or less prolonged immunity after vaccination is observed either with influenza or with the same Covid-19.

Hence, according to some doctors and specialists, a person needs to be vaccinated every year, or even once every six months. Such an approach, in our opinion, contains more commercial interest than real concern about human health. After all, nature itself points us to the fact that bacteria and viruses widespread in the external environment should not develop persistent immunity at all, since they are designed to have a completely different effect on the human body, namely, to maintain immunity in a certain functional state, acting as a kind of constant load that contributes to the training of the immune system to pathogenic the beginning.

It is not possible to develop vaccines for all viruses, especially those that are constantly mutating in nature.Seven main strains of the same coronavirus are already known today: alpha, beta, gamma, delta, etc. and at the same time, new varieties of it periodically appear: omicron, telc-omicron, deltacron, strain XE. Where is the guarantee that the effectiveness of vaccines that have already been developed against coronavirus infection will be the same for all its strains, including those that are not yet known, reappearing? It is quite possible that in this case the effectiveness of vaccination may be quite insignificant or even absent. At the same time, it should also be noted that in the world today there are more and more new challenges regarding health and, in particular, immunity, and they are most likely connected with the state of the immune system of modern man. So, most recently, cases of hepatitis of unknown origin were detected in 15 European countries.

Alas, there is a rather dangerous situation in the world today, in our opinion: if medical specialists and society as a whole continue to mistakenly treat their health and, first of all, as a basic conceptual category, that is, in other words, they will not learn the current lesson and will not change their ideological beliefs in this area, it is inevitable that another kind of strain of coronavirus or some other virus will appear in nature, for example, orthomyxovirus, adenovirus or rhinovirus, the consequences of the spread of which will be even more disastrous for human civilization, not because their virulence has increased, but because human immunity with the current attitude to it will become even more much weaker. After all, almost all diseases are given to humanity, as a rule, not in order to treat them, although this, of course, should be done, but still their main purpose is overwhelmingly, according to clinical psychology and the same Vedic medicine, first of all, to help a person realize the fallacy of one or another of their to develop new and more advanced ideological approaches for their further development ^[13].

And first of all, in our opinion, it concerns the interpretation of the concept of health and the practical attitude to it in modern human civilization.      At the same time, of course, we emphasize this once again, we are not at all opposed to the use of medicines in all their clinical diversity, but we unequivocally assert that they should be used exclusively for vital indications, and not replace certain functions, including immune, of the human body.

After all, the best pharmacy, we emphasize this again, is precisely the body itself and by Nature itself, this body is designed to resist environmental factors and produce all the necessary substances for this and, moreover, in the most optimal and effective doses. It is only necessary to learn both doctors and each person individually in the conditions of advertising and pharmacy abundance not to interfere with the natural qualities of the human body to maintain at the proper level all the necessary functional states of its organs, tissues and systems. And to follow such an approach, even in the most difficult life circumstances, will become much easier, in our opinion, if the concept of health in society and for each person individually has its own specific semantic interpretation in accordance with its true natural purpose, which will ultimately determine the right choice of actions in relation to health as a specific person, and the human community as a whole.Further, it should be noted that other narrower concepts may be derived from the general conceptual category of health, which are its most important components and integral components.

Thus, the system of attitudes, values and motives of human behavior is very often considered by the authors as a concept of social (moral, spiritual, etc.) health of a person or the population as a whole ^{[14, 16]}. Health can be classified by gender (male, female), depending on age (children, adolescents, youth, pensioners, etc.), by professional and any other affiliation (miners, athletes, doctors, families, certain communities, clubs, etc.), as well as by certain functions and systems the human body. Within the framework of this work, of course, there is no need to give the entire list of classifications and terms existing in this regard that reflect certain aspects of the health of certain strata and strata of society or the body of a particular person. The most significant of them, in our opinion, are such concepts as Mental Health, Physical Health, Reproductive Health and Sexual Health. These conceptual categories, in a variety of interpretations, are quite often found in relevant literary sources, as well as on Internet sites. Let's briefly consider the semantic content of these terms and, first of all, in the legal field of the current legislation.

The results of our analytical review of information sources indicate that currently there is no definition of these conceptual categories in the legislative acts of Russia, and in Ukraine only the term "reproductive health" is legislatively approved (the law of Ukraine "On the realization of reproductive rights and assisted reproduction of a person"), but in this case the article of the law is completely duplicates the definition of this term, which was previously present in the WHO materials. However, today, perhaps due to the process of updating the site, there is no interpretation of the concepts of Reproductive and Sexual health on the resource. Previously, the definition of these conceptual categories on the WHO website was as follows:Reproductive health is a state of complete physical, mental and social well–being, and not just the absence of diseases in all areas related to the reproductive system, its functions and processes (WHO).

Sexual health is a state of physical, mental and social well–being associated with sexuality (WHO).

 Further, as our analysis has shown, the interpretation of the concept of Physical health in legislative acts, including in WHO documents, is currently not found anywhere, however, on Internet sites and in the literature, this term is present quite often and in a very different interpretation.

The most generalized version of the semantic content of this conceptual category is given, in our opinion, in the work of Professor Davidenko D.N., where it is said that "physical health is the current state of the constituent structural elements of an integral organism (cells, tissues, organs and organ systems of the human body), the nature of their interaction with each other and mutual interaction" ^[17]. In other sources, this concept is also usually understood as a certain level of development or functional state of the organs and systems of the body, which is measured by the degree of physical fitness, physical fitness of a person, his fitness, physical activity, physical well-being, etc.The interpretation of the concept of Mental health has acquired particular relevance at the present time, due to a whole complex of existing socio-political and psychological reasons.

The following definition is given on the WHO website of this conceptual category.Mental health is a state of well–being in which a person realizes his abilities, can withstand ordinary life stresses, work productively and contribute to his community ^[38].

In other materials, especially on the Internet, one can find the most diverse interpretation of this term in terms of content ^{[35, 39, 41]}.

At the same time, a number of authors generally propose in their works to divide by meaning and separately interpret the term Mental Health as a more medical concept related to mental processes, and the term Psychological health as a more psychological concept related to the qualities of a person as a person. Thus, according to I.V. Dubrovina, psychological health is the psychological aspects of mental health, that is, a set of personal characteristics that are prerequisites for stress resistance, social adaptation, successful self-realization ^[18].

Of course, all the existing and the above-mentioned approaches to the interpretation of the concept of health and its derivatives, which are its most important components and integral components on the grounds of belonging to a particular social group, by gender, age, profession, various functions and body systems, etc., clearly represent a certain scientific interest. At the same time, their practical influence on the formation of psychological values and priorities in society that contribute to the preservation and strengthening of human health does not, in our opinion, have proper social significance. And this is explained by the fact that in all the diversity of the existing and discussed above definitions of these conceptual categories, in their semantic interpretation, they usually contain a list of undoubtedly important and necessary qualities and properties for the human body and psyche, but they do not contain a psychologically motivated sense of practical attitude to these qualities, and even more so ways their achievements.

And first of all, this concerns definitions that are approved by law and, therefore, have the greatest psychological impact on the formation of priority ideological beliefs in society. As we can see, in their content, all of them almost similarly reflect the definition of the concept of health, which is given by WHO, and they are based, again, on a certain concept of "well-being", which, in our opinion, does not have a specific meaning, which inevitably forms erroneous ideas about these conceptual categories and, ultimately, It leads to a whole complex of ever-increasing adverse consequences, which, unfortunately, modern society faces in relation to its health ^{[7, 28]}.Thus, today it is extremely important to develop fundamentally new worldview approaches for interpreting the concept of health as a basic socio-psychological conceptual category, as well as derivatives of health as its integral socially significant conceptual components.

Conclusion and conclusions.

Based on an analytical review of the literature and Internet resources, as well as the above analysis of the current social and medical situation in this area, we propose to interpret the concept of health as follows:Health is the ability to resist environmental factors in order to develop a person as a person.

Personality, as a socially significant conceptual category, we have considered in detail in previous works ^{[47, 48]}.

Here we will only emphasize that a person is a person as a carrier of creative consciousness. The solution to any problem is always associated with a conscious choice, that is, creativity in the broadest sense of the word. By making this choice in his life, in one area or another, a person becomes a Person. In other words, it acquires a social, psychological and pedagogical category of personality, as already a scientific concept. When choosing one's worldview beliefs regarding the interpretation of health and practical attitude to it, a person also acts as a person, that is, namely, as a carrier of creative consciousness. Consequently, making a particular choice, in this case, in relation to his health throughout his life, a person develops as a person, and health itself at the same time acts as one of the main factors of personal growth of a particular person and, ultimately, of society as a whole.In our opinion, the external environment should be understood as the whole complex of natural factors, including artificial ones (physical, chemical, microbiological), as well as the whole set of social factors in all their diversity (political, social, industrial, gender, etc.).

And finally, the most important thing that I would like to emphasize in the context of our proposed definition is the presence in it of an important psychological determinant for a person, which interprets the conceptual category of health unambiguously in meaning, that is, as a person's ability to resist environmental factors. It is this Ability, already as a result of a person's choice of priority beliefs and their practical implementation in relation to their health, that fully characterizes this conceptual category. And since this is an ability, then it, this ability, every person needs to develop, strengthen, train, etc., in other words, mentally and practically competently treats it, take care of this ability, otherwise it will be lost to one degree or another, which we observe, unfortunately, in modern human civilization ^{[17, 34]}.Consequently, when the ability to resist environmental factors is impaired, various symptoms of disorders of the functions of organs and body systems arise, which in the future, in the absence of adequate actions, can lead to the disease itself, as already a nosological form of medical diagnosis.

At the same time, it is important to realize that the disorders themselves and even the disease itself do not always indicate a deterioration in health, as the ability to resist environmental factors. The determining value here, as a rule, is the intensity, as well as the duration of the adverse effect. Therefore, in many cases, taking into account the above, symptomatic disorders, like the disease itself, can only indicate a necessary, that is, an adequate reaction of the body to a damaging environmental factor and display the natural state of the same immune system to a viral or bacterial attack. And the microbiological agent itself, as in this example, which caused the painful condition, acts only as a nature-provided load necessary to support the fitness of the human immune system.It should also be emphasized here that in our interpretation, health, as a conceptual category reflecting the ability to resist environmental factors, does not disappear anywhere with any degree of decrease in this ability and the presence of one or another disease, even if incurable according to current concepts.

In other words, illness is also a certain state of health. Even if a person has a disease, health, as a specified conceptual category, is always present, just his ability to resist environmental factors to one degree or another and for one reason or another is lost, therefore, the disease arises as a kind of natural objective signal that encourages a person to develop new cognitive qualities, develop a new worldview based on them and a corresponding practical attitude to the state of one's health and, if necessary, to the whole of life as a whole.The advantages of such a conceptual interpretation of health, in our opinion, are obvious.

Firstly, since health is an ability, then the human psyche, with all the variety of individual characteristics, as a rule, will automatically adjust to maintain this ability, since it is well known that any ability necessarily deteriorates or even loses completely if it is not trained. Secondly, with this approach, which is very important, there is always a psychological justification for a positive perception of the current situation, because any lost human ability, in the vast majority of cases, can be restored and even improved with a timely and correct attitude of a person to it, in this case to his health, as to a kind created by nature ability to resist environmental factors. Of course, sometimes it is not at all easy to regain this ability, that is, lost health, but it is important to choose this path and make efforts to find your own, sometimes strictly individual approaches to its restoration, even in the presence of the most severe (incurable) diseases, there are quite a lot of examples of healing in these cases ^[8]. And thirdly, there is no need for a social and medical interpretation of the so-called quality of health. After all, any quality, that is, a person's well-being or a certain state of well-being, a priori does not and cannot have its own specific definition and depends not only on the psychophysiological state of the organism as a biological object, but also on the presence in a person's life of many other material and spiritual (psychological) factors that are priority for him.Thus, all medical instrumental and laboratory indicators reflect only physiological and/or biochemical criteria characterizing the state of the human body at the time of their study, which is undoubtedly important for the diagnosis and the choice of treatment tactics.

However, to use these indicators to characterize health as the ability to resist environmental factors, it seems to us, due to all of the above, is not advisable and even an erroneous approach. And hence, accordingly, the attitude to them, that is, to these medical indicators, should not be as health indicators, but as some specific information, of course, important and necessary for the organization and conduct of adequate treatment, as well as the entire complex of therapeutic and preventive measures.Consequently, health, as the ability to resist environmental factors, is always a quantitative conceptual category, in other words, a certain psychophysiological and biochemical reserve of capabilities that a person needs to develop and train throughout his life.

It is this approach to the concept of health, in our opinion, that over time will be able to ensure the formation of the necessary social, medical and research priorities, which ultimately will contribute to strengthening human health in general and his immunity in particular.The other conceptual categories mentioned above, derived from the concept of health, should also, in our opinion, have their own socially significant definitions, which would form in modern society appropriate ideological beliefs aimed at preserving and strengthening health and its integral components.

 Based on theoretical research and an analytical review of the information sources available to us, we propose the following interpretations of these concepts:Mental health is the ability to resist the factors of the social environment in order to develop a person as a person.

Derived from this concept are such frequently encountered categories as social, psychological, spiritual and moral health.

Of course, other options are possible, reflecting certain aspects of the ideological priorities of the human psyche.Physical health is the ability to withstand environmental factors in order to develop a person as a person.

It should be noted here that in real conditions, natural and social factors, as a rule, are closely interrelated and present almost simultaneously, and therefore in most such cases we can only talk about a certain predominant, that is, the leading influence on a person of some social or natural factors in his specific life situation. But there is still a difference, and it is fundamental, since in the first case, when we talk about mental health, a person is mainly affected by social factors and this is primarily a load on his psyche, and in the second case, when we talk about physical health, natural factors (physical chemical, microbiological), and this is already a load on the protective mechanisms of the human body and, in particular, on its immunity.Reproductive health is the psychophysiological ability to reproduce healthy offspring in order to develop a person as a person by gender.

Sexual health is a psychophysiological ability for sexual realization, with the aim of developing a person as a person by gender.

In this definition, the concept of "sexuality", in turn, requires further analytical research and the development of a specific terminological identification for this conceptual category, corresponding both to the very nature of sexual gender relations and contributing to the development of a person as a person by gender.

In our opinion, our work "Interpretation of sexuality as a fundamental socio-psychological conceptual category" will be devoted to this topic, which is relevant for today.In conclusion, we would like to emphasize that our definitions in no way deny the diversity of existing interpretations of these conceptual categories, which, of course, may be interesting and useful to many scientists and specialists in various fields of science and practice.

At the same time, the definitions proposed by us have, in our opinion, a more pronounced psychological and social determinant for the formation of a new worldview in modern society regarding the concept of health and its derivatives, which will, as a result, significantly strengthen the health of the population, increase the individual and collective level of immunity and improve, ultimately, the quality of the the realization of a person in all spheres of his life.