What Matters in Global Health

Gordon Brown Urges US to Reconsider WHO Withdrawal Amid Global Health Challenges

In a compelling critique of President Trump’s decision to withdraw the United States from the World Health Organization (WHO), former UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown warns of the dire consequences for global health security. Highlighting recent outbreaks of infectious diseases like mpox and Marburg virus, Brown asserts that the world needs the WHO now more than ever to tackle cross-border health emergencies.

“Another pandemic is coming – it’s not a matter of if, but when,” Brown cautions. He underscores the WHO’s critical role in identifying and mitigating threats, from emerging pathogens to ongoing challenges like tuberculosis, polio, and neglected tropical diseases. Reflecting on the WHO’s successes, he points to its leadership in eradicating smallpox and dramatically reducing AIDS-related deaths, achievements that would be impossible without coordinated international efforts.

President Trump’s justification for leaving centres on perceived financial inequities. He claims the US contributes disproportionately to the organisation, citing that “China pays $39 million while we pay $500 million – you think that’s a good deal?” However, Brown counters this argument, explaining that the US contributes 18% of WHO’s overall funding, a figure proportional to its 27% share of the global economy. He emphasises that the funding formula, based on economic size, is consistent with those used for other global institutions like the UN and World Bank.

Brown also rebuts accusations of WHO bias towards China during the COVID-19 pandemic. He notes that WHO Director-General Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus has consistently pressed China for greater transparency on the virus’s origins, even at the risk of Beijing’s ire. “The WHO is not beholden to China,” Brown states. Instead, he calls for a strengthened “pandemic action accord” to enhance international health collaboration.

President Trump’s executive order tasks US agencies with finding alternatives to WHO functions, but Brown questions the feasibility of replacing a global body with 194 member states. “There is no other organisation equipped to coordinate health efforts on this scale,” he argues, noting the WHO’s role in conflict zones, climate-affected areas, and biosecurity.

Given increasing globalisation, urbanisation, and environmental pressures, Brown urges richer nations to adopt a fair burden-sharing model for WHO funding. He highlights efforts by low-income African and Asian countries, which have already contributed to the WHO’s latest investment case, as a beacon of hope. “If the poorest can contribute, so can the richest,” he declares.

Brown’s message is clear: abandoning the WHO jeopardises American interests and global health security. He calls on the US to reconsider its withdrawal, warning that without the WHO’s leadership, the world risks being unprepared for the next pandemic. “We need the WHO to stand as the first line of defence against global health threats,” he concludes, underscoring the urgency of collective action in an interconnected world.

HIV’s Gains at Risk: A Call for Vigilance and Action

Advances in HIV prevention and treatment are at risk of being undone as political, social, and economic challenges mount globally. While scientific breakthroughs, such as a long-acting injectable drug providing six months of protection against HIV, mark significant progress, the rise of regressive policies and rights restrictions threatens decades of hard-won progress in combating the virus.

The President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), which has saved an estimated 26 million lives, is now under scrutiny in the United States. Critics, motivated by political agendas, jeopardise the funding of this life-saving initiative. Beatriz Grinsztejn , President of the International AIDS Society , warns that undermining such programmes could unravel global progress against HIV and leave millions vulnerable. The National Institutes of Health’s HIV research also faces scepticism, with some policymakers dismissing peer-reviewed science in favour of unsubstantiated opinions.

Compounding the issue, anti-gay laws in countries like Uganda, which recently upheld harsh legislation against LGBTQ+ individuals, and discriminatory policies in Russia contribute to heightened HIV transmission rates. “Punitive laws and discrimination harm the most vulnerable and sabotage prevention and treatment efforts,” says Grinsztejn. Regions with restrictive policies see some of the highest global HIV burdens, reflecting the devastating intersection of human rights abuses and public health crises.

The challenges are not limited to rights violations. Shrinking support for civil society organisations poses another critical threat. These organisations, often the lifeline for marginalised populations, face restrictive foreign funding laws in over 50 countries. Civil society activism has long been integral to the HIV response, but as space for such engagement diminishes, so does the effectiveness of health interventions.

Global health policies have also been entangled in geopolitical struggles. Efforts to negotiate a pandemic treaty to address health inequities exposed by COVID-19 remain stalled. Additionally, the potential reinstatement of the US Global Gag Rule could exacerbate the crisis by restricting funds for organisations providing reproductive health services, indirectly fuelling new HIV cases.

Despite the setbacks, Grinsztejn remains optimistic, urging collective action to defend science, human rights, and equitable health policies. “Progress depends on inclusive, collaborative approaches,” she emphasises. “We must build on the legacy of activism and solidarity to prevent a resurgence of HIV.”

As global interconnectedness deepens, addressing the multifaceted challenges of the HIV epidemic requires a renewed commitment to evidence-based policies and international cooperation. Failure to act decisively could herald a resurgence of HIV, reversing decades of global health progress.

Concerns Over Rising Human Metapneumovirus (HMPV) Cases in China Amid Immunity Gaps

China has reported a decline in infections from the flu-like human metapneumovirus (HMPV) in its northern regions, following a surge that raised concerns about the possibility of a new health crisis. International scholars have called on China to share pathogen data and conduct genetic research to ensure the virus has not evolved into a new or more dangerous variant. Although HMPV is not new—it was first identified in 2001—its recent uptick highlights the potential consequences of immunity gaps left by strict COVID-19 lockdowns.

“HMPV is a common virus that typically causes mild symptoms such as watery eyes, coughing, sneezing, and chest congestion,” said medical experts. While most children contract the virus by the age of five and develop immunity, it can cause severe illness in young children, older adults, and individuals with underlying health conditions. Despite its risks, it is considered less serious than influenza or COVID-19.

Health officials in China suggest stringent lockdown measures may have reduced routine exposure to respiratory viruses, leaving a larger population susceptible to infections. “The usual cycles of acquiring immunity during winter respiratory seasons were interrupted,” experts noted. This immunity gap could explain the higher infection rates among individuals who stayed home during lockdowns.

China has assured the international community that the number of patients seeking medical care for HMPV is lower than last year. However, concerns persist about the lack of targeted treatments or vaccines for the virus. Doctors recommend that individuals experiencing breathing difficulties should seek immediate medical attention.

As the world continues to navigate the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic, the resurgence of common viruses like HMPV underscores the importance of global cooperation in monitoring and responding to potential health threats. “Even if it’s not a new virus, it could be a new variant,” experts cautioned, emphasising the need for transparent data sharing and collaborative research to mitigate risks and prepare for future challenges.