On his first day in office, President Donald Trump signed an executive order to pull the U.S. out of the World Health Organization (WHO). Experts warn that this decision could make both Americans and other countries more vulnerable to health threats like infectious diseases.
Dr. Ashish Jha, a public health expert, argues that even if the effects aren’t immediately clear, the U.S. needs the WHO’s support to fight disease effectively. “America cannot handle these challenges alone,” he says.
Dr. Tom Frieden, former CDC Director, echoes these concerns, stating that withdrawing from the WHO compromises safety for Americans as well as global populations. In response, the WHO expressed its disappointment, hoping the U.S. would reconsider its decision.
Background on Withdrawal
This isn’t the first time Trump has tried to exit the WHO. In 2020, he signaled a similar intent during the pandemic, but that withdrawal was reversed when President Biden took office. Trump’s latest order criticizes the WHO for its handling of the COVID-19 crisis and issues related to China.
The U.S. pays significant member dues—ranging between $100 to $122 million annually—more than any other nation. Trump claims this cost is unfair compared to what other countries pay.
Next Steps
The U.S. has a formal agreement with the WHO, requiring a year’s notice before leaving the organization. However, legal experts suggest Trump can’t unilaterally make this move without Congress’s approval. This opens up potential legal challenges regarding the withdrawal process.
Expert Opinions
Public health experts worry about the implications of this withdrawal. Dr. Michael Osterholm points out that the WHO plays a vital role in managing health responses globally. The U.S. benefits from the WHO’s efforts to control diseases overseas, which helps prevent outbreaks at home.
Despite criticism of the WHO’s efficiency, many in public health believe pulling funding won’t prompt necessary reforms. Paul Spiegel, from Johns Hopkins, argues that withholding support hinders improvement within the organization.
WHO’s Role
The WHO, with its 194 member countries, oversees critical health initiatives. For instance, it helps determine vaccine formulations for flu and COVID-19. By participating, the U.S. gains access to vital health data and resources essential for combating diseases. Jha notes that not being part of this network would limit the U.S.’s ability to monitor outbreaks globally.
Moreover, the WHO provides medical guidance to countries lacking resources for comprehensive health policies. Its collaborative approach allows for vital health discussions that might not happen elsewhere, strengthening global health practices.
History of WHO Withdrawals
The last significant withdrawal from the WHO occurred in 1949 with the Soviet Union during the Cold War, though they returned in 1956. Currently, Liechtenstein is the only U.N. member not part of the WHO.
Prospects for Reform
While experts like Jha give the WHO’s reforms a mediocre rating, they acknowledge some progress in emergency preparedness. Nonetheless, more needs to be done to adapt swiftly to health crises and emerging pathogens.
Potential Hazards of Withdrawal
Should the U.S. withdraw, the immediate risks include potentially increased hospitalizations and deaths from influenza due to a lack of up-to-date vaccine data. Jha warns this could lead to more widespread disease outbreaks that could spread from other countries to the U.S.
Additionally, the U.S. could lose its leadership role in global health discussions and programs, allowing other nations, like China, to step in and fill that gap.
Global Implications
The U.S. withdrawal would create a considerable financial gap for the WHO, as it’s a key funding source. Experts doubt other nations will make up for this loss, which would weaken global health initiatives.
Frieden highlights that U.S. involvement with the WHO permits much-needed collaboration in health, especially as global health threats increase due to factors like climate change and urbanization. These collaborations have historically led to advancements, such as eradicating diseases like smallpox.
In summary, cooperation through the WHO isn’t just beneficial—it’s essential for maintaining global health standards and safety. “What weakens WHO makes us all less safe,” Frieden concludes. “What strengthens WHO makes us safer.”
Source link
Public Health,healthscienceclimate
