WHO Traditional Medicine Summit 2023

PUNE, India – The World Health Organization’s (WHO) two-day summit on traditional medicine, held last week in the Indian city of Gandhinagar, was an attempt to start a dialogue about how to integrate evidence-based traditional medicine into modern medicine – but many were disconcerted about social media posts from the global health body that appeared to offer support for unproven treatments.

In addition, with India as summit co-host, Indian officials and programmes that have made controversial, unscientific claims were also given prominence.

At the start of the summit, WHO Director-General Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus urged delegates to “use this meeting as the starting point for a global movement to unlock the power of traditional medicine through science and innovation”.

“I urge you all to identify specific, evidence-based and actionable recommendations that can inform the next WHO traditional medicine global strategy,” said Tedros, adding that countries should commit to examining the best way to include traditional, complementary and integrative medicine (TCIM) into their national health systems.

Dr Bruce Aylward, WHO’s Assistant Director-General, Universal Health Coverage, also highlighted the need for a “stronger evidence base” that could enable countries to “develop appropriate regulations and policies around traditional, complementary, and integrative medicine.”

Despite WHO officials’ stress on evidence-based treatment, some of its social media messaging appeared to endorse contentious medical systems such as homeopathy. One such Twitter post (see below) had over 5.3 million views, and provoked thousands of comments.

Many critics said the post appeared to be promoting untested treatments. Timothy Caulfield, a Canadian professor of health law and science policy, said that he found the WHO tweet “frustrating”, and asked how naturopathy, homeopathy and osteopathy  could be considered “traditional”., and warned against “legitimizing harmful pseudoscience” such as homeopathy.

“The WHO social media posts are, after all, an extension of the organisation and might be seen as an official position of the organisation,” Dr Anant Bhan, a global public health and bioethics researcher based in Bhopal, told Health Policy Watch

“You cannot detract from your core messaging which is around evidence-based medicine and the need to support it, including for public health policy. Once that starts happening, it will cause confusion,” said Bhan, adding that many people would not be able to discern the finer details of the WHO tweet.

The WHO late conceded that its tweet “could have been better articulated” but did not remove it.

 

Controversial Indian officials and programmes

The summit also allowed co-host India to promote controversial officials at press conferences – most notably, joint secretary of the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare (MoHFW) Lav Agarwal. During the COVID-19 pandemic, Agarwal repeatedly linked rising COVID-19 cases to a meeting held by a Muslim group, driving misinformation and stigmatization in an already charged religious environment in the country. 

Lav Agarwal (second from left), a senior health official in the Indian government who has been a prominent presence in the run-up to the traditional health summit was responsible for misinformation and stigmatization in the early weeks of the pandemic.

India’s Ministry of Ayurveda, Yoga, and Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha and Homoeopathy (AYUSH) also announced at the summit that it is in discussions with Malaysia about how to cooperate on traditional medicine and homeopathy. The official inclusion of homeopathy in the Ministry of AYUSH has long been a subject of controversy in India. 

Integration opportunities and challenges

While this is the first global summit on traditional medicine, the WHO has made attempts to include traditional medicine since 2014 when the first global 10-year strategy for traditional medicine was approved, and Tedros told delegates that the summit is likely to be a regular event.

There is clearly a demand for such summits. Preliminary findings from the WHO Global Survey on Traditional Medicine 2023, which were shared at the summit, indicate that around 100 countries have TCIM-related national policies and strategies.  

“In many WHO member states, TCIM treatments are part of the essential medicine lists, essential health service packages, and are covered by national health insurance schemes.  A large majority of people seek traditional, complementary and integrative medicine interventions for treatment, prevention and management of non-communicable diseases, palliative care and rehabilitation,” the WHO noted in a media release after the summit, which ended last Friday.

The WHO envisions a complementary role for traditional medicine, one in which it can be used alongside modern medicine in preventive healthcare as well as rehabilitation. 

For example, Professor Stefano Masiero, who chairs the rehabilitation unit at the Padua University-General Hospital in Italy, told the summit that the integration of traditional and complementary medicine could create a comprehensive rehabilitation experience. 

Meanwhile, Dr Hans Kluge, WHO Regional Director for Europe, told delegates at the close of the summit that they have “gently shaken up the status quo that has, for far too long, separated different approaches to medicine and health.” 

“By taking aim at silos, we are saying we will collaborate all the more to find optimal ways to bring traditional, complementary and integrative medicine well under the umbrella of primary health care and universal health coverage,” said Kluge, urging the need for “better evidence on the effectiveness, safety and quality of traditional and complementary medicine”.

But Dr Shyama Kuruvilla, lead for the WHO Traditional Medicine Global Centre, said “we have a long journey ahead in using science to further understand, develop and deliver the full potential of TCIM approaches to improve people’s health and well-being in harmony with the planet that sustains us.”

India currently holds the presidency of the G20 group of countries and the Traditional Medicine Global Summit coincided with the meeting of the health ministers of the G20 countries, who represent around two-thirds of the world’s population.

Image Credits: WHO, Ministry of AYUSH, India.

Two-thirds of US adults say either they or a family member have been addicted to alcohol or drugs – but the impact of alcohol still substantially out-paces that of drugs, despite the country’s massive opioid epidemic.

This is the finding from a survey of a representative sample of US adults conducted last month by KFF, which was released this week.

More than half of those (54%) polled said someone in their family had been addicted to alcohol, and 13% reported that they may have been addicted to alcohol.

Slightly over a quarter reported family members who were addicted to an illegal drug (27%) or prescription painkillers (24%) while 5% said they may have been addicted to prescription painkillers, and 4% reported a possible addiction to illegal drugs.

Opioid impact

US overdose deaths reached record levels in 2022, with almost 110,000 people dying – mostly as a result of fentanyl overdoses.

In the survey, 42% of people reported they or a family member have experienced opioid addiction in comparison to 30%  in suburban and 23% in urban areas. 

More Whites (33%) than Hispanics (28%) or Blacks (23%) report personal or familial experience with opioid addiction. 

Among those who say they or a family member experienced addiction to prescription painkillers, alcohol, or any illegal drug, less than half (46%) report they or their family member got treatment for the addiction. 

However, more Whites (51%), than Blacks (35%) or Hispanics (35%) received treatment. 

“Experiences with addiction and overdose are widespread, with large shares across income groups, education, race and ethnicity, age, and urbanicity all reporting some experience, though some groups report higher incidence than others,” notes KFF. 

“Overall, one in five adults (19%) say they have personally been addicted to drugs or alcohol, had a drug overdose requiring an ER visit or hospitalization, or experienced homelessness because of an addiction.

“The share increases to a quarter (25%) among adults with a household income of under $40,000 a year.”

This KFF Health Tracking Poll was designed and analyzed by public opinion researchers at KFF. The survey was conducted between 11-19  July online and by telephone among a nationally representative sample of 1,327 US. adults in English and Spanish.

Image Credits: Chuttersnap/ Unsplash.

A mural appeals for South Africans to get vaccinated against COVID-19.

The South African High Court has ordered the country’s health department to hand copies of all its COVID-19 vaccine procurement contracts, negotiations and agreements to a non-governmental organisation, Health Justice Initiative (HJI).

The Pretoria High Court ruling on Thursday comes in response to a court application by HJI for access to the contracts, arguing that the government had a constitutional requirement to be transparent and adding that it wanted to assess the legality and cost-effectiveness of the contracts.

The health department has 10 days to provide HJI with copies of all its COVID-19  vaccine procurement contracts, memoranda of understanding and agreements relating to a wide range of pharmaceutical companies and vaccine procurement groups.

These include Pfizer, Janssen/ Johnson & Johnson, Serum Institute of India, local generic company Aspen, China’s Sinovac, as well as the African Union Vaccine Access Task Team (AU AVATT) and COVAX.

Judge Anthony Millar said that the contracts were in the public interest as more than 30 million vaccines had been administered in South Africa with a budget of R10 billion (around $530 million) being allocated to cover this in 2021 alone, according to GroundUp.

Inflated prices, onerous terms

“This is a massive victory for transparency and accountability,” said HJI in a media release on Thursday.

“The contracts concern substantial public funds, and the contracting process has been marred by allegations that the government procured vaccines at differential, comparatively inflated prices and that the agreements may contain onerous and inequitable terms including broad indemnification clauses, export restrictions, and non-refundability clauses.”

In 2021, the South African health department itself complained about the onerous indemnity requirements that Pfizer had tried to extract in exchange for vaccines.

Then health minister Zweli Mkhize had told parliament that Pfizer had demanded that it be indemnified against civil claims from citizens with adverse vaccine effects and that the government put up sovereign assets as collateral to settle such cases, as reported by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism.

After a public outcry, Pfizer backed down on its demand for government assets as collateral but was still believed to have been indemnified against claims in many countries.

In fact, the global vaccine access platform, COVAX, established a No-Fault Compensation Program for Advance Market Commitment (AMC) Eligible Economies to ensure that people who experienced serious adverse effects from COVID-19 vaccines in poorer countries could receive compensation.

South Africa and other low- and middle-income countries were unable to procure vaccines for some months after they were available in Western countries as they had relied on COVAX. COVAX had ordered vaccines from the Serum Institute of India (SII). However, the Indian government banned SII from exporting its COVID-19 vaccines in April 2021 during the height of that country’s pandemic.

The collapse of the COVAX-SII deal forced South Africa to scramble to procure vaccines directly from pharmaceutical companies, paying a suspected premium for these.

Noting increasing reports of corruption within the healthcare sector, HJI added that “we cannot have a healthcare system shrouded in secrecy.  Procurement must be held in check, as it will involve powerful multinational companies, particularly from the pharmaceutical industry.”

During the pandemic, Health Minister Mkhize himself was forced to resign after it emerged that his family had benefitted from a COVID-19 communication contract the health department had awarded to a company run by a close friend.

Precedent for pandemic accord negotiations?

The HJI added that the judgement would assist in bolstering “provisions on transparency and accountability” in the current pandemic accord negotiations “where worrying attempts are being made to water down transparency”.

HJI had previously tried to get access to the contracts via the Promotion of Access to Information Act (PAIA), but the health department had refused to release the information, describing it as “confidential”.

Meanwhile, the judgement has been hailed by the People’s Vaccine Alliance.

“Pharmaceutical companies should never be allowed to operate without public scrutiny, particularly in a pandemic. But in South Africa and many other countries, governments were forced to sign up to strict secrecy clauses for their populations to access lifesaving vaccines and medicines,” said Mohga Kamal-Yanni, policy co-lead for the People’s Vaccine Alliance.

“This landmark decision shows that the public can take on powerful pharmaceutical companies and win. We hope to see more cases like this around the world.”

Noting that “transparency and equity must be at the heart of the world’s response to health crises”, Kamal-Yanni added that “people have a right to know how much pharmaceutical companies are charging them for lifesaving vaccines and medicines, and that right must be enshrined in the pandemic accord and the International Health Regulations.”

The South African Department of Health said that it “will study the judgement and respond in due course”.

Image Credits: Medecins sans Frontieres.

Dr Hans Kluge, WHO Regional Director for Europe.

Dr Hans Kluge, regional director of the World Health Organization (WHO) in Europe,  has warned member countries to maintain their COVID-19 infrastructure and genomic surveillance amid a “gradual increase in cases, including hospitalizations, in some European countries”. 

“COVID has not gone away. While its impact currently isn’t as severe as earlier, millions, especially the most vulnerable, remain unprotected in the WHO Europe Region. Worryingly, barely 11% of people across Europe & Central Asia have gotten their second booster shot,” Kluge noted in a media release.

Kluge cited infrastructure such as early warning systems, variant tracking and vaccine boosters for at-risk groups. 

“Key to reducing the risk of COVID-19 & other respiratory viruses is better ventilation in our buildings. That’s why WHO Europe is facilitating our region’s first-ever indoor air conference in Bern on 20 September 20, with the Geneva Health Forum,” said Kluge.

Globally, nearly 1.5 million new COVID-19 cases and over 2500 deaths were reported in the last 28 days (10 July to 6 August 2023), an increase of 80% and a decrease of 57%, respectively, compared to the previous 28 days, according to the WHO’s latest weekly COVID-19 report

While five WHO regions have reported decreases in the number of both cases and deaths, the Western Pacific Region has reported an increase in cases and a decrease in deaths. As of 6 August 2023, over 769 million confirmed cases and over 6.9 million deaths have been reported globally. 

 

Image Credits: WHO.

Dense smoke over Sudan’s capital, Khartoum, which has been the centre of conflict between warring factions over the past four months.

As the war in Sudan enters its fifth month, the leaders of 20 United Nations (UN) agencies and humanitarian organisations are urging the warring parties and the international community to urgently scale up peace efforts for the sake of Sudanese civilians.

Violence in Sudan has spiralled out of control since April when a power struggle between the Sudanese army and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF) erupted into a full-blown war. 

The fighting has displaced more than four million people, left 14 million children in need of humanitarian aid, and pushed six million Sudanese people “one step away” from famine, the UN said on Tuesday. 

Around 4,000 people — including at least 435 children — have been confirmed dead, though many more are believed to have been caught in the cross-fire. Some 1.5 million children are expected to fall into crisis levels of hunger by September, while women and girls have been left at the mercy of paramilitaries known to use rape as a weapon of war.

“People have witnessed their loved ones gunned down. Women and girls have been sexually assaulted,” the UN and humanitarian agency leaders said in a joint statement on Tuesday. “People are dying because they cannot access health care services and medicine. And now, because of the war, Sudan’s children are wasting away from lack of food and nutrition.” 

Overflowing morgues in the capital, Khartoum, are leaving thousands of corpses rotting on the streets, as doctors and medical organizations warn the decaying bodies and arrival of the rainy season risk unleashing a cholera outbreak the country’s medical infrastructure is not prepared to handle. 

Nearly all hospitals in Khartoum have been rendered inoperable, Save the Children said in a statement this week, a grim reality that has persisted since the conflict began. Medical staff numbers in the country are also dangerously low, and those facilities that remain operational are at the mercy of frequent power outages.

The closure of hospitals across Sudan is also forcing pregnant women to make a harrowing choice: either risk a dangerous journey through war-torn streets to reach a functioning medical facility, or give birth at home, often without any medical assistance.

“Medical supplies are in scarce supply. Time is running out for farmers to plant crops that will feed them and their neighbours,” UN and humanitarian agency leaders said. “The situation is spiraling out of control.” 

A ‘senseless’ war

Protestors chant for “peace, freedom, and justice” in front of the military headquarters of 30-year dictator Omar al-Bashir during Sudan’s 2019 revolution.

The humanitarian crisis caused by the war stands in stark contrast to the hopes ignited just five years ago by the civilian overthrow of dictator Omar al-Bashir. 

Bashir’s brutal 30-year rule over Africa’s third-largest country looked set to end with a transition to democracy, but in 2021, General Abdel Fattah Burhan and Mohammed Hamdan “Hemeti” Dagalo – the two men now vying for control of Sudan – jointly ousted the civilian-led transitional government, dashing hopes for a brighter future and raising fears of a civil war.

Volker Türk, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, said in a statement on Tuesday that the “senseless” war in Sudan was “born out of a wanton drive for power”. 

This war of egos has led to “disastrous” results, including “thousands of deaths, the destruction of family homes, schools, hospitals and other essential services, massive displacement, as well as sexual violence, in acts which may amount to war crimes”, Türk said.

Sudanese women faced a sharp increase in sexual violence after Burhan and Hemeti’s coup in 2021.

A year after the military takeover, the International Service for Human Rights reported that Sudanese women – whose bravery became the face of the revolution against al-Bashir just a couple of years earlier – were facing “an unprecedented crisis with escalating gender-based violence, conflicts, hunger and political instability”.

“After the revolution, whenever women talked about representation or participation or [the need] to include women’s rights … [male] politicians just said ‘this is actually not the right time’ and ‘these women are so annoying,” Linda Marwan, a women’s rights activist who was arrested during the revolution against al-Bashir in 2019 told Foreign Policy

Then the war arrived.

Women pay the price for a war of men

Sudanese women, many of whom became leaders of the 2019 revolution in the hope of securing their rights, are being targeted by soldiers using rape as a weapon of war.

Reports of sexual assault in Sudan have increased by 50% since the war began, according to the UN Population Fund.

Liz Throssell, a spokesperson for the UN Human Rights Office, told reporters in Geneva on Tuesday that the UN has verified at least 28 cases of rape. Amnesty International has confirmed reports of rapes and abductions of girls as young as 12 years old. 

The Sudanese government’s Unit for Combating Violence Against Women (CVAW) warned last month that verified rape cases may represent as little as 2% of the total. Data on rapes and sexual assaults during conflicts is notoriously inexact; a fact that underscores the UN Security Council’s characterization of rape as “war’s oldest, most silenced and least condemned crime”. 

Rapes and gender-based violence surge during conflicts. UN data, which is incomplete, estimates that between 250,000 and 500,000 women and girls were raped in the 1994 genocide in Rwanda, and at least 200,000 in the Democratic Republic of Congo since 1996. 

A recent investigation by Al Jazeera into the use of rape as a weapon in the war in Sudan found that the conflict is no exception to the historical pattern of sexual violence escalating during wartime.

Z, a human rights researcher in Sudan who works with rape victims who spoke to Al Jazeera on the condition of anonymity, said: “Rape is being used as a weapon by both sides. The reports we’re getting now are just the tip of the iceberg.”

“You’re dealing with a conservative Muslim community, where women’s bodies are a symbol of honour, of purity … the symbolism is very complicated,” Z said. The cultural context enmeshed in the conflict has made women’s bodies “part of the battlefield”, she explained.  

In a report published earlier this month, Amnesty International found almost all reports of rape accused the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF), though Sudanese army personnel were blamed in a minority of cases. 

The RSF is a descendant of the feared Janjaweed militia that participated in the genocide in Darfur, in which around 300,000 people were killed. 

Hemedi, the general who heads the RSF, led Janjaweed paramilitaries that burned villages, killed civilians and raped ethnic Africans across his native Darfur. These crimes led to the indictment of his then-commander, al-Bashir, by the International Criminal Court for war crimes and genocide. 

“Enough is enough,” Fatima Hashim, a leader in the grassroots movement to overthrow al-Bashir and women’s rights activist, told Foreign Policy. “I think men have destroyed Sudan. What has the army done? The war in South Sudan. The war in Darfur.” 

“It’s been 67 years since independence, and those men haven’t done anything [for] Sudan,” she said. “They made it worse.” 

Image Credits: CTNSIS, Ola A .Alsheikh, CC.

Pharmacy in Kenya; more consistent regulatory rules across the African continent can also expedite access to new medicines and formulations.

Three more countries, Kenya, Cape Verde and Democratic Republic of Congo, have ratified the African Medicines Agency (AMA) Treaty recently – and Kenya’s ratification now means that most major East African countries are on board with the treaty.

Twenty-six countries have now fully ratified the treaty, one of the steps required for the establishment of the specialised agency of the African Union (AU) dedicated to improving access to quality, safe and efficacious medical products in Africa.

Countries are required to both sign and officially ratify the AMA Treaty in their parliaments in order for it to become applicable in their country.

As of August 2023, 37 countries have formally supported the AMA treaty, including 26 ratifications, the latest by Kenya, Cape Verde and the Democratic Republic of Congo.

“Specifically, Kenya’s signing and ratification is a huge milestone in the journey to regulatory harmonisation being that this is one of the biggest economies in our region. AMA needs more support from the big economies,” Maureen Okoth, project coordinator for the Coalition for Health Research and Development (CHReaD), told Health Policy Watch.

In terms of what it takes to bring the “big countries” on board, Okoth said that one of the gaps experienced when engaging with different countries is the fact that AMA needs to be demystified over and over, “We need to demonstrate practically what and how the different countries will benefit from AMA.

Strengthening advocacy efforts

“This is exciting… We continue to strengthen our advocacy efforts so that we have more ratifications being done. We’re doing advocacy to ensure that we really talk to the member states that have ratified and those that haven’t,” said Chimwemwe Chamdimba, head of the Africa Medicines Regulation Harmonization (AMRH) programme, during a webinar on the next steps in operationalisation of AMA.

Chamdimba said that a lot of advocacy was underway with member states to encourage those that have not signed to do so, as well as to encourage those that have signed but not ratified the treaty to take that final step.

While the process of countries’ signing and ratification, which began in 2019, may seem prolonged, the AMA Treaty has received more support, faster, than almost any other treaty in AU history, Chamdimba noted. 

“It just tells you why everybody realised that we need this, especially after the COVID pandemic,” she added.

Chimwemwe Chamdimba, head of the Africa Medicines Regulation Harmonization (AMRH) programme

The approval process has been outpaced only by the treaty approving a continent-wide free trade area that was launched on 30 May 2019.

However, Okoth observed that details of AMA operationalization need to be shared more widely – including the cost implications to build confidence and enable countries to make informed choices. 

AMRH expects that the AMA will help Africa to access quality, safe products and leverage pharmaceutical markets.

Operationalising the AMA 

In a wide-ranging discussion, Chamdimba and other participants also discussed the next steps in AMA operationalisation, including the division of work between the AMA and national regulatory authorities, the appointment of AMA’s Executive Director and how to include patient voices.  

AMRH revealed that the Rwandan government has provided a fully furnished building with a space to expand for AMA. The Rwandan government won the bid to host AMA in 2022. Uganda, Algeria, Egypt, Morocco, Tanzania and Zimbabwe also submitted expressions of interest but did not succeed.

Administratively, the secretariat is setting up systems and structures and systems – including human resources, finances, procurement – that are required for the organisation to function. 

The AMA Treaty mandates the AU Commission to drive the operationalization of AMA. 

AMA will pick up from what the AMRH has been doing over the years, ensuring that it is now done within an organisation that is more sustainable and systematic for the continent.

Currently, Chamdimba says, there is an AU task team on AMA formed by the different entities of the AU, including the AU Commission to guide AMA’s operationalization.

“We also have the Conference of State Parties, which has been meeting in the last two years to provide leadership in setting up the structures of the AMA. The Conference of State Parties is composed of ministers of health from countries that are parties to the treaty,” Chamdimba said.

Appointment of AMA board and staff

Currently, AMRH is in the process of setting up the AMA Board. Nominations from the different regions have been received, and the board is expected to be functional in the next two months.

The board will take up the responsibility of recruiting AMA’s Director General (DG). The terms of reference have been finalised but are currently waiting for the Board to be set up so that it can provide oversight on the DG recruitment. The DG will then be responsible for the recruitment of the rest of the staff, dealing with AMA structural and administrative issues, according to AMRH.

Aside from its continental operations, AMA will also operate at the national level, where a member state’s national regulator will make decisions and at the regional level, where the regional economic communities will build their capacity to support and implement AMA decisions.

“AMA will not deal with 55 countries alone but depend on already available country capacities… So we look at these three levels being able to be interlinked, interrelated, sharing information and working together,” Chamdimba said.

AMA is also not expected to deal with all medical products, but “provide support where there’s limited capacity” – such as providing guidance on traditional medicine and responding to emergencies. 

But some products will be dealt with by member states and regional economic communities.

Patient involvement

During the webinar, International Alliance of Patient’s Organisations CEO Kawaldip Sehmi, asked how the AMA framework will provide for meaningful engagement with patients and academia in Africa.

Chamdimba assured Sehmi, who has passed away since the webinar, that patient groups and non-governmental organisations will be involved in AMA operationalisation.

“It would be a missed opportunity if we don’t even consult on the set-up terms. So when we have a draft ready, we would like to open for comments. We will ensure to reach out for input so that patients are effectively represented,” she said.

“[Patients’] lived condition can effectively contribute to setting the AMA systems. Whatever decisions made may directly impact on them.”

AMRH has been working on harmonised standards and regulations in the regional economic communities namely the East African community, Southern African Development Community (SADC), the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), and the Economic Community of Central African States.

“We have tested harmonisation systems in the regional economic communities. They’re working. But we realise that there’s also a need for cross-leveraging and cross-harmonisation so that we look at Africa as a whole. Then move from the regional economic communities to one continent, especially when it comes to sharing of capacities across the regions,” said Chambimba.

To assist with the preparation of AMA, an Africa Regulatory Conference is being held from 12-15 September with the theme ‘Together for patients – Transforming the regulatory ecosystem in Africa’.

The AMA Treaty was adopted by the AU Assembly on 11 February 2019 and a minimum of 15 member states needed to ratify the AMA Treaty in their national parliaments for AMA to come into force.

Image Credits: Marco Verch/Flickr, Luigi Guarino .

 How history influences women’s health advocacy

How does the past tie into current health policy? At a time when women’s health and reproductive rights are being debated globally, it is important to examine how historic policies impact the world today.

In the latest episode of the Global Health Matters podcast, host Garry Aslanyan spoke with two sexual and reproductive health advocates.

Carmen Barroso, a lifetime advocate, researcher and implementer for sexual and reproductive health, talked about the importance of using history as a tool for current activists. “I think it’s crucial that current and future leaders look at history and learn the lessons, both from the mistakes and from what was achieved,” Barroso said. “What we’ve learned from sexual and reproductive health in the past is fundamental because it’s an area that always faced a lot of opposition.”

Now 78 years old, Barroso has worked with many campaigns and organizations throughout her life. In 1990, Barroso became Director of the Population and Reproductive Health Program of the MacArthur Foundation, where she provided support for women’s organizations in Latin America, Africa and Asia. Although retired now, she still participates in advocacy work.

Dakshitha Wickremarathne agreed on the great significance of past activists’ work, like Barroso, on the current public health climate. “When you look particularly at sexual and reproductive health and rights, there are a lot of old challenges historically coming up in our conversations which are also currently relevant,” Wickremarathne said.

Wickremarathne is a senior technical lead overseeing the implementation of FP2030’s Asia Pacific Hub at the UN Foundation, a global movement working to advance access to reproductive health services.

Aslanyan brought up the value of certain policies over the past few decades, specifically the Alma-Ata Declaration of 1978 and the 1994 Cairo Conference.

Both Barroso and Wickremarathne stressed the impact of the conferences on shaping the way sexual and reproductive health issues are framed — not just as a medical issue, but as a human rights issue.

“Women then became right-holders,” Barroso said. “They were no longer seen as just the uterus. They were human beings with multiple needs, responsibilities and rights. They had the right to decide.”

Policy is not the only influence on women’s health rights. Social factors change constantly, and it is important to look at surrounding issues in relation to sexual and reproductive health. “I think many other social movements and external factors, such as the racial justice movement, LGBTIQ rights movement, have also influenced the way we look at health,” Wickremarathne explained. “Not just from a very siloed approach, but from a very inclusive and intersectional approach.”

While some factors have remained prevalent throughout recent history, such as funding for sexual and reproductive health services, Wickremarathne also brought up facets unique to today which impact sexual and reproductive health policy, such as climate change, migration and refugee crises and technological and digital advances.

“So within this context, with all the old and new challenges, there is a lot for us to learn from the historical context and events and influences of global health,” Wickremarathne noted.

Although there is still a great deal of work to be done in women’s health rights, Barroso feels encouraged by how far the world has come in the past few decades. “If we only see the tremendous obstacles that are real and continue to exist, we lose perspective and we lose hope, and without hope, we don’t do anything.”

Read about and listen to more episodes on Health Policy Watch.

This article is part of our TDR Supported Series.

Image Credits: TDR.

Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyusus meeting with IMF Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva

The World Health Organization’s (WHO) Director-General Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus recently announced he would not run to be the next United Nations (UN) Secretary General, adding that a woman should take that role. But what is the state of women’s representation in global health governance, and what does gender parity entail?

Last week, Tedros told the news agency Bloomberg that he would campaign for a woman to seek the top role at the UN. He added that since becoming minister of health in Ethiopia in 2005, he had barely taken time off and wanted to spend time with his family.

WHO spokesperson Christian Lindmeier denied that there were other motivations for Tedros’s decision, including criticism of his handling of sexual abuse and exploitation by staff during emergency response to the Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo. 

“WHO is exemplary in organising the response to sexual abuse,” he told Health Policy Watch last Friday. “The steps WHO has taken in the recent months, encouraging staff and potential victims and survivors of sexual abuse or harassment are exemplary throughout the UN.”

The comments on the need for female leadership at the UN by WHO’s chief were echoed by Helen Clark, a former New Zealand prime minister and advocate for gender equality. In a tweet, she commended Tedros for his leadership, adding “it’s time” for a woman to head the UN.

The senior management team of the current UN Secretary-General, António Guterres, who took office in 2017, is 60% female, though entry-level jobs in recent years have been filled predominantly by men.  Guterres was re-appointed in 2021 without any opposition, and Tedros was also reappointed last year without anyone challenging him.

Roopa Dhatt, a co-founder of Women in Global Health, a group seeking to reduce gender disparities in global health governance, recalled that when Tedros had first announced his goal of achieving gender parity within WHO, “it caused a lot of rumbles.”

“After the first announcement, some people were saying: ‘Look, incompetent women are being appointed with some of them being potentially unqualified’ and ‘what will happen to the men in the organisation?’,” she said. 

“No one asks when there are men being appointed, are they qualified, what will happen to the women?  The default male bias in global health makes it such that women deliver health and men lead it.”

“From the first days, Dr Tedros made a commitment publicly… and it was a game-changing commitment because very few global health organisations had gender parity.”

Addressing the roots of gender inequity

But Dhatt emphasised that gender parity alone was not enough. “The organisation and its programme (needs to be) driving a gender transformative agenda, which means going to the root drivers of gender inequities.”

A report published in March by her organisation stressed the importance of women’s leadership in global health. Some 70% of healthcare jobs are held by women globally, and women represent 80% of jobs as nurses and midwives, yet only 25% of senior management roles in the sector are held by women.

Women in Global Leadership Health Pyramid

In the WHO itself, Dhatt said Tedros’ senior management in his first cabinet had been around 67%. In contrast female representation on WHO’s Executive Board, which is made up of member states’ appointees, was only 6% in January 2022 at the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic. 

“That’s astonishing,” she commented. “I repeat 6%!”

Currently, the proportion of women on the 34-member Executive Board – responsible for issues such as endorsing reform and staffing policies –  represents less than a third of members.

Meanwhile, Dhatt said that she was glad to hear Tedros supporting the idea of having a woman as the next UN secretary general, senior male leaders also have to show that they are ready to take on roles in the supporting cast. 

“It’s great when you have men practice leadership by leaning out. But it’s also about supporting women and willing to be the deputy, the behind the scenes person supporting them, either in formal or informal roles.”

Parity in the works

Dr Gaya Gamhewage, WHO’s Director of Prevention and Response to Sexual Misconduct.

Advocates for women’s rights have said that sexual harassment and exploitation, such as that allegedly committed by WHO staff and contractors in the DRC during the Ebola crisis between 2018-2020, deserved more attention. 

Following the DRC allegations, an independent commission was set up by the WHO that went on to interview over 3000 women and girls and 12 men, ultimately concluding that 83 Ebola emergency responders, including 21 WHO employees of consultants, had been involved in rape, coercion and exploitation.

Tedros said he assumed “ultimate responsibility” for the behaviour of WHO aid workers and apologised to the women who said they were abused. However, some critics said that the WHO had protected some leadership figures and had been slow to respond to the allegations.

Gaya Gamhewage, appointed by Tedros as WHO Director of Prevention and Response to Sexual Misconduct after the Ebola scandal, has instituted reforms in the policy and implemented training of staff.

Hounded by accusations of a lack of transparency in how accusations were being processed, a publicly-accessible website now lists the number of cases of misconduct, but with few other details.

Gamhewage stressed the importance of women occupying key roles in the organisation. “It’s not just about achieving gender parity, but it’s really about changing the culture of the organisation. When women are in decision-making powers, like in my area of work, this addresses a number of institutional issues.”

She told Health Policy Watch that while at the country-office level, gender parity has not yet been achieved, across the board, slightly over 50% of WHO’s employees were women in 2022.

But she said that given the challenges which women often face in accessing healthcare, ensuring gender-responsive management of the sector is essential: “Within the organisation itself, our culture has to evolve so that men and women are equally contributing to the big changes that are really underway.”

Increasing the proportion of women working in emergency response still needed to be addressed across UN agencies, she said, as well as supporting a pipeline of female senior managers.

When asked about whether the person succeeding Tedros should be a woman once again, Gamhewage said she would like the most suitable candidate for public health to be selected. “But what is most important is really to get gender parity across all of the grades and geographical locations of the organisation.”

Image Credits: Mark Henley/ IMF, Israel in Geneva/ Nathan Chicheportiche.

Image Credits: Lily Hyde/ The New Humanitarian.

DRC President Félix Tshisekedi (left) welcomed the appointment of the DRC’s Dr Jean Kaseya (right) as head of the Africa CDC.

Controversy continues to surround Dr Jean Kaseya, the new Director-General of the Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (Africa CDC), although the organisation described the allegations as “unverified and baseless” over the weekend.

Last Friday, online platform Devex reported on a letter from a group of Africa CDC staff to the head of the African Union (AU) sent on 26 July accusing Kaseya of harassment, intimidation and “unlawful termination of staff contracts based on personal ego and interest”.

The anonymous group, calling itself the AU Leadership Focus Group, also alleged that Kaseya had requested irregular payments, was abusive to staff, failed to provide leadership and was trying to replace current staff with his “allies”.

Fall-out with former employer

This followed a report by Devex in June about Kaseya’s acrimonious fall-out with his former employer, the Clinton Health Access Initiative (CHAI) after it decided not to renew his contract as senior country director in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). 

The Africa CDC’s 16-member senior management team issued its own letter last week in response to the staff allegations, describing them as “unsubstantiated”, calling on staff to use the centre’s grievance procedures and “institutional governance mechanism and control measures” to address their problems.

Over the weekend, the Africa CDC also issued a statement in which they described the allegations against Kaseya as “baseless” and questioned the motives of those making them.

“Unfortunately, over the past 100 days since the Director General took office, Africa CDC has noted a repetitive, deliberate and ill-intent smear campaign by a well-identified media house linked to anonymous entities, whose aim seems to destabilise the organisation by disseminating unverified and baseless allegations directed towards the leadership and staff of the organisation,” said the Africa CDC.

“The Africa CDC strongly condemns the smear campaigns and assures all staff, AU Member States, the AU family and our valued partners that the institution remains strong and focused on delivering on its mandate. Be assured, that the asserted crusades will never distract nor deter Africa CDC leadership and its staff from meeting its mandate in health security on the continent,” it added.

Controversial from the start

However, Kaseya’s four-year appointment has been dogged by controversy since he was appointed ahead of Dr Magda Robalo, the former health minister of Guinea-Bissau with extensive global health experience, who had been widely expected to succeed Dr John Nkengasong.

Kaseya was appointed by African Heads of State following an election that took place on the sidelines of the 36th session of the African Union, which was held in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 18-19 February. While a total of 180 candidates vied for the position, Kaseya and Robalo were the finalists for the position. 

In early March, Rwanda’s President Paul Kagame wrote a letter to the AU chairperson condemning the fact that, at the AU summit where Kaseya had been appointed, “no debate was allowed on the appointment of the Director General of Africa CDC, even though three member states had requested to speak”.

Writing in his capacity as leader of the AU institutional reform process, Kagame noted that this agenda item was the only one in which discussion was “forbidden”.

“Moreover, the report given by the legal counsel on the deliberations of the committee of the heads of state and government on the Africa CDC gave no indication for why the first ranked candidate, a woman, was not selected,” added Kagame, whose government has a tense relationship with the DRC.

“More troubling, besides yourself, no heads of state or government took part in the committee meeting, and delegated officials were mostly below ministerial level,” he added.

After Kaseya was appointed, a statement by DRC’s presidency described it as “an epilogue of a long, secret diplomatic battle waged for six months by President Félix Tshisekedi”.

DRC President Félix Tshisekedi congratulates the new Director General of the Africa CDC, DRC’s Dr Jean Kaseya.

Image Credits: DRC Presidency, Presidency, DRC.