Addressing today’s global health challenges requires more than funding and innovation—it demands humility, open communication, and a shared commitment to collective action, according to IFPMA Director-General David Reddy.

Reddy, speaking at an IFPMA side event during the 78th World Health Assembly, acknowledged the socio-political and financial barriers facing global health systems. However, he urged the audience not to lose sight of the hard-earned lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic.

“Some of the lessons during the pandemic were hard, and they cost this global community a lot,” Reddy said. “We shouldn’t let what they have taught us about the importance of health care slip out of mind so easily.”

The evening’s event explored how health can serve as the foundation for driving economic growth and national security, through partnership and political leadership.

The panel discussion featured three speakers, each offering a unique perspective: Dr Ricardo Baptista Leite, president of the UNITE Parliamentarian Network for Global Health, Dr Kerri Elgar, senior policy analyst at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and Dr Jenelle Krishnamoorthy, MSD’s head of global public policy.

Leite painted a complex picture of the current global health landscape. On one hand, he noted, public trust in institutions is eroding. On the other, “too many political actors… are proactively contributing to misinformation and are provoking what I would call intentional disruption.”

He went on to explain that defense spending now dominates the priorities of many governments—diverting critical resources away from health. This shift, he warned, puts low- and middle-income countries at heightened risk, as their health systems often depend not just on funding but on infrastructure and support from international partners—many of whom are now pulling out.

“The United States is the main actor cutting off without giving an opportunity for transition. And this has devastating effects,” Leite said. “When we look at that, the ripple effects will mean millions of lives will be disrupted, lives will be lost in this process.”

Leite called for an immediate rethinking of global health funding models, urging innovative and inclusive approaches.

“We have to have all hands on deck and find how we do that,” he said. “Unusual actors that haven’t been stepping up, now we have to find them and bring them on board, and we have to have more of a collaborative effort to redesign the way we deliver health and care altogether.”

He also criticized the “broken disease model” of today, warning that it is not fit for the future. Without sustainable investment in health systems, he said, the world is headed toward a two-tiered reality where the wealthy receive care, and the rest are left behind.

“That’s not the world any of us wants,” Leite said.

Alternative health financing channels

This conversation is not new, but the urgency around health funding has escalated due to the budget cuts implemented this year. Elgar noted that many global actors have been calling for alternative channels for external health financing for some time.

In addition, the healthcare funding dialogue needs to be reframed to focus on prevention and view healthcare as a sound investment rather than a liability or budgetary burden, said Krishnamoorthy.

“We have to take a step back and think: We are on the verge with research and development to find some of the most amazing cures and ways that we can live longer, fuller, healthier lives,” Krishnamoorthy said.

“That is so exciting, but I think we understand in the private sector that that’s only the first step. It’s a tough first step, but you have to make sure individuals have access to these medicines and vaccines.”

Krishnamoorthy highlighted that if, in 2025, the world adequately funded the top five non-communicable diseases (NCDs), by 2030 the global economy could save $47 trillion—roughly 20 times the current global health budget.

“We don’t usually think of it like that,” she said, offering a relatable comparison to car maintenance.

“Would you ever take a car out of a lot? Drive it but not get the oil changed, never get your tires turned, never change the filters until the engine just freezes up and you throw it out?” Krishnamoorthy asked.

She argued that too many national healthcare payment systems are structured in exactly that way.

“IFPMA commissioned an analysis that showed that adult immunization programs yield up to a 19 to one return on investment. So you know, these are some basic things,” she said.

Spending to save

To encourage governments to invest more in healthcare, the economic case must be made demonstrating the potential returns on investment that can be achieved through better policies, smarter spending, and prioritizing value for money, explained Elgar.

“It’s not just what you might spend in general, it’s what you might spend to save,” she said. “Increased investment in patient safety, for example, can reduce diagnostic error by around half and represent a direct cost saving of almost 8% in health budgets, which is huge.

“Efficient use of digital tools, including AI, are expected to improve productivity by five percent to 10% and then for every dollar invested in AMR [antimicrobial resistance] for example, and the intervention packages for AMR, the rate of return is $10.

“These are the sorts of arguments that appeal to finance ministers,” Elgar continued.

However, Leite acknowledged that some responsibility lies with policymakers themselves.

He said many parliaments have “gone too lazy” and stopped exploring innovative models of healthcare financing—particularly those that incentivize long-term health and well-being rather than short-term fixes.

To move forward, Reddy stressed the importance of maintaining open dialogue and collaboration.

“Effectively, we’re a family… But in times of crisis, families pull together—and that’s what we need to do at this time,” he said.

Image Credits: Maayan Hoffman, Joy Corthesy, IFPMA.