INB negotiations underway in Geneva for a pandemic agreement

Civil society groups have urged World Health Organization (WHO) member states to “continue to advance a pandemic agreement that can lay the essential groundwork for equitable, collective preparedness and response” ahead of the 13th meeting of the negotiating forum on Monday  (17 February). 

Only 10 negotiating days are left until the World Health Assembly in May, which is due to adopt the pandemic agreement. 

“Despite geopolitical and policy challenges, do not walk away from this vital mission. We urge Member States to stay focused on the end goal. Bank and build on the promising consensus agreed thus far,” urged the Pandemic Action Network, Panel for a Global Public Health Convention, Spark Street Advisors and The Independent Panel for Pandemic Preparedness and Response in a statement.

The latest draft of the pandemic agreement (from INB12, 6 December) reflects that pathogen access and benefits sharing (PABS) and One Health remain sticking points as countries struggle to devise a global plan to advance pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response. 

However, the new draft also contains more detail about what is expected from each member state to prevent outbreaks from becoming pandemics – which is an anxiety for poorer nations who fear this might mean more onerous financial commitments.

Since the last meeting of the Independent Negotiating Body (INB) in December, “we have witnessed deepening outbreaks of mpox and H5N1 and new outbreaks of Sudan Ebola and Marburg viruses. Any one of these threats risks spreading further without strong and decisive leadership and action,” the groups note.

“The finish line is in sight. Pandemic threats remain. The world needs member states to agree to a historic pandemic agreement and demonstrate the solidarity essential to keep us all safer. We are counting on you to pull together and get the agreement done.”

While the US and Argentina have given notice that they intend to withdraw from the WHO,  the US has to give a year’s notice so it technically remains part of all WHO member state bodies. At the recent WHO Executive Board meeting, the US was represented by technical officers at the US Geneva Mission. But US delegates to the EB made just one statement, on Taiwan, along with voting on geopolitically charged issues, such as an Israeli motion to combine the annual debates on two resolutions related to the health situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, into the agenda of WHO’s broader emergency work – a motion which lost.

However, sources told Health Policy Watch that US diplomats would not attend the INB negotiations at all. In fact, the Trump executive order withdrawing from WHO explicitly states that the “while the withdrawal is in process, the US will cease negotiations on the WHO Pandemic Agreement and the amendments to the International Health Regulations [IHR], and actions taken to effectuate such agreement and amendments will have no binding force on the United States.”  Amendments to the IHR, intended to provide for faster notice by countries to WHO and more efficient global response on epidemic threats, were approved in fact at the 2024 World Health Assembly, so it’s unclear if the US can retroactively declare that those have no binding force.  See related story.

‘The World Has Won’: New International Regulations to Protect Against Pandemics Finally Approved

As for Argentina, there is in fact no process for members states besides the US to withdraw without first obtaining agreement of the World Health Assembly – remaining in WHO as an “inactive” member is an option a few member states have used in the past, said Chief Legal Counsel Steve Solomon in a WHO press briefing Wednesday.

Solomon explained that when the United States first joined the WHO in 1948, it did so with a condition that it was entitled to withdraw if it chose to do so, but no other member state made that a provision of their original membership.

Chinese assistance is recognised at the entrance to Masaka Hospital in Kigali

KIGALI, Rwanda – Behind blue scaffolding walls marked “China Aid for shared future”, a massive expansion of Masaka District Hospital is underway.

The hospital will expand from 330 to at least 830 beds, and it is destined to become the country’s top teaching hospital, with completion set for July.

China has provided a $42 million grant to the Rwandan government to expand the hospital, but it has a long association with Masaka, assisting to build it in 2011 and providing medical specialists for it since 2018.

The Chinese government is financing a $42 million expansion of Masaka District Hospital in Kigali

“The construction of the Masaka District Hospital is one of the largest China-aided projects in Rwanda, and it marks a milestone in health infrastructure cooperation between the two countries,” Chinese Ambassador to Rwanda Wang Xuekun said at the start of construction in 2023.

Chinese support is evident throughout Masaka. A billboard at the entrance features nine Chinese specialists currently based at the hospital.  A room offers Chinese medicine. (“Acupuncture,” explains a nurse.) 

China sends new medical staff to the hospital every year, says Dr Jean Damascene Hanyurwimfura, Director-General of the hospital.

A billboard at Masaka Hospital displays the Chinese doctors currently stationed at the hospital

China is Rwanda’s biggest trading partner. By 2022, the Rwanda Development Board had registered investments worth $182.4 million from China, an increase of 30% over the previous year.

Huge PEPFAR investment

There is a small US Agency for International Development (USAID) sign at the hospital’s entrance.

“The US has helped us in training and mentoring doctors and nurses in maternal and child health,” said Hanyurwimfura. “But since this month, that has stopped. It is not having such an impact yet because the people have been trained, but in future, there will be a gap.”

This follows the decision by incoming US president Donald Trump to suspend all foreign aid for 90 days from 20 January, followed by the dismembering of USAID by Trump appointee Elon Musk.

However, Rwanda has received significant funding from the US President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) since 2004. By 2020, it had received $1.45 billion from the plan. In 2022/ 23, it received over $67 million.

PEPFAR’s investment in Rwanda up to 2020 totalled $1.45 billion.

Unlike many other PEPFAR recipients, Rwanda delivers integrated health care, not a vertical programme focussed on HIV so PEPFAR funds have helped to build the country’s healthcare system and employ health workers.

After the initial shock following the US funds freeze, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio clarified that life-saving humanitarian programmes could continue.

On 1 February, a waiver notice was sent to PEPFAR implementing agencies and country coordinators clarifying that “life-saving HIV care and treatment services” covered HIV testing and counselling; prevention and treatment of opportunistic infections including tuberculosis, laboratory services; procurement and supply of medicines, and prevention of mother-to-child transmission services.

Despite walking back its freeze, the Trump administration’s dismantling of USAID means that the US staff ensuring payments and delivery of antiretroviral medicines is no longer there, so PEPFAR projects worldwide are experiencing disruptions.

In addition, support for certain key activities, such as services for sex workers and men who have sex with men, has been axed.

The US withdrawal from the World Health Organization (WHO) may also impact on Rwanda’s health sector. The WHO has supported Rwanda in various initiatives, most recently providing financial and technical support to address its outbreak of Marburg virus. The US funds a quarter of WHO’s emergency response so activities these will need to be cut back.

China’s ‘Health Silk Road’

China appears reluctant to step up at a multilateral level to fill the gap left by the US, baulking at the 20% increase in WHO membership fees at the recent executive board meeting – even though that had been agreed to by members in 2022.

But it is likely to assist countries left in the lurch by the US on a bilateral level, particularly those like Rwanda where it has invested substantially over a long period.

Between 2003 and 2018, China’s outbound foreign development investment in Africa has surged from $75 million to $5.4 billion, up 7100%, according to researchers Nader Habibi and Hans Yue Zhu.

While China named its multilateral cooperation programme the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), which indicated its focus on helping poorer countries with infrastructure development, over the past few years it has referred to the “Health Silk Road (HSR), which is regarded as a key element of China’s new BRI agenda”, according to Habibi and Zhu.

Elements of the HSR include “high-tech telecommunication infrastructure, medical equipment and healthcare services”, they note.

“Amid increasing geopolitical competition, and facing escalating US efforts to contain China’s global role, the Chinese government is using the HSR initiative in Africa and elsewhere to expand its global influence,” they argue.

China’s President Xi Jinping addresses the Forum on China-Africa Co-operation

At the opening of the Forum on China-Africa Co-operation in Beijing last September, China’s President Xi Jinping pledged to support the continent in 10 different ways, one being health.

“China is willing to establish a China-Africa Hospital Alliance with Africa and build a joint medical centre.,” said Xi

“China will send 2,000 medical teams to Africa, implement 20 medical and anti-malarial projects, promote Chinese companies to invest in drug production, and continue to provide assistance to the epidemic in Africa to the best of its ability,” said Xi.

“China will support the construction of the Africa Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and enhance the public health capabilities of African countries,” he added.

To implement its “Ten Partners Initiative” China will provide $50 billion in investment over the next three years.

US loses ‘soft power’

The dismantling of USAID has opened doors all over the world for China – not just in Africa.

China moved fast to assist a Cambodian project that is clearing land mines and unexploded bombs a few days after the USAID freeze, according to Newsweek.

Huge gaps in funding for Latin America following the aid withdrawal also offers opportunities for China to assist in a range of countries including Brazil, Colombia and Perua.

This week, Central Asia’s poorest country, Tajikistan, reported that its HIV, TB, malaria and maternal and child programmes had been disrupted.

“Until a mechanism for USAID’s further activities is determined, we will look for other ways to continue our work.” Minister of Health and Social Protection of the Population Jamoliddin Abdullozoda told a media briefing this week.

“Through its Health Silk Road initiative, strategic personnel placement, and growing influence among developing nations, Beijing is carving a path to global health leadership that doesn’t require writing big cheques to Geneva [for WHO membership],” argues Professor Yanzhong Huang, senior fellow for global health at the Council on Foreign Relations, and a professor at Seton Hall University.

Image Credits: Kerry Cullinan, US Embassy in Rwanda.

Dr. Ngashi Ngongo, head of Africa CDC’s Incident Support Team.

As Africa battles a relentless mpox outbreak, a sudden freeze in United States foreign aid is crippling containment efforts, threatening vaccine distribution, and leaving the hardest-hit regions scrambling for solutions, the Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (Africa CDC) warned on Thursday.

In conflict-ridden Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), the epicentre of the outbreak, mpox testing has plummeted due to the freeze in USAID activities.

In Uganda, an experimental new vaccine trial for the Sudan variant of Ebola offers a glimmer of hope of a means to prevent the deadly Sudan variant from spreading – one bright spot on the horizon.  

For years, US government funding—particularly through USAID and the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR)—has been a cornerstone of Africa’s disease surveillance and outbreak response. However, the recent political shifts in Washington DC dealt a significant blow to Africa CDC’s ability to manage the ongoing mpox outbreak. However, with multiple outbreaks raging and resources dwindling, Africa CDC warns that without urgent intervention, the situation could “spiral out of control.”

Transport of mpox tests impacted due to USAID demise

Dr Ngashi Ngongo, head of Africa CDC’s Incident Management Support Team, described the situation as “a major setback for the continent’s health security.”

In the DRC, which is the epicentre of the ongoing mpox outbreak on the continent, the ability to transport samples from remote districts to laboratories has been severely impacted since the USAID had been responsible for transporting samples from hotspots to the central laboratory.

Without timely testing, he said it becomes harder to contain the outbreak. He noted that testing rates have dropped dramatically in some of the hardest-hit areas in the DRC where only 29% of suspected cases are now being tested due to logistical constraints.

Uganda, which has recorded 4,131 suspected mpox cases this year with a test positivity rate of 60%, is experiencing similar disruptions. Even so, DRC recorded a 34% increase in mpox cases reported in the past six weeks, as compared to the six previous ones. Meanwhile, mpox cases in Uganda nearly doubled to 1219 and the Republic of Congo, South Sudan, Zambie and Sierra Leone also saw increases.   

Mpox evolution in DRC. Cases overall increased even if testing declined.

According to Africa CDC, the funding freeze could have further impacts on vaccine distribution and more severely hamper disease surveillance. With budget shortfalls, he argued that epidemiological field teams may not be able to swiftly respond to outbreaks, leading to delayed case detection and increased transmission risks.

Ability to quickly detect and respond to outbreaks weakened

Decrease in confirmed mpox cases reflects combined challenges of civil war and USAID cuts.

“Without adequate funding, our ability to quickly detect and respond to outbreaks is significantly weakened. Epidemiological field teams are already facing disruptions, and delays in case detection will inevitably lead to more transmissions,” Ngongo said.

Africa CDC also warned that the inability to maintain robust surveillance efforts due to funding shortages could lead to spillover effects. Uganda’s Ebola cases pose a potential risk to the DRC, given the movement of populations between the two nations. Similarly, mpox cases in South Sudan have highlighted the vulnerability of border control measures. Ngongo noted that insecurity in eastern DRC has already complicated outbreak response, and further funding gaps could make containment even more difficult.

“The ongoing funding shortages are not just an issue of logistics; they are a matter of regional security. The movement of populations across borders, especially between Uganda and the DRC, increases the risk of Ebola and mpox spillover. If we cannot sustain robust surveillance, we will see these outbreaks spiral further out of control,” Ngongo warned.

With the withdrawal of U.S. financial support, Africa CDC is intensifying efforts to secure alternative funding sources. Ngongo revealed that China, Japan, and South Korea have stepped in with emergency contributions, but stressed the need for a long-term solution.

To address the funding crisis, the African Union has approved funds from the Africa Epidemics Fund, which aims to provide a financial safety net for health emergencies. Additionally, Rwanda’s President Paul Kagame is leading discussions on bolstering domestic health budgets across the continent. African leaders are also looking into utilizing COVID-19 fund reserves to support ongoing outbreak response efforts. In a bid to secure sustainable financing, officials are exploring private-sector partnerships and innovative financing mechanisms.

Clinical trial underway in Uganda

Ebola virus in DRC – progression.

Clinical trials to evaluate new vaccines and therapeutics are also underway in Uganda to assess the effectiveness of a recombinant vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV) vaccine candidate. The trial, which builds on pre-existing vaccine research, involves 2,160 doses that were already in-country before an additional 10,000 doses were secured for expanded testing. Since the outbreak declaration on January 30, Sudan Ebola Virus in Uganda has led to nine confirmed cases, including five among healthcare workers. One patient has died, while eight remain in treatment.

Mosoka Fallah, Acting Director of the Science and Innovation Directorate at Africa CDC, noted that 214 close contacts of confirmed Ebola cases have been identified and enrolled in the study, with researchers establishing eight vaccination rings to test immediate and delayed immunization strategies. The study aims to determine whether ring vaccination—an approach successfully used to combat Ebola—can effectively contain mpox outbreaks in Africa. The goal is to see how well this vaccine works in real-world settings where mpox is actively spreading. If successful, Africa CDC believes it could be a game-changer in controlling the outbreak, especially in high-risk populations.

“We have already established eight vaccination rings, and seven of them have begun immunization. The strategy follows both immediate and delayed vaccination models to assess how effectively the vaccine can contain further spread,” said Fallah.

The trial is being conducted in collaboration with global health organizations, with researchers closely monitoring vaccine safety, immune responses, and potential side effects. Experts hope that the results will inform broader vaccination strategies across Africa and strengthen the continent’s long-term epidemic preparedness.

Mpox rages on

Mpox evolution in Africa over past year.

The mpox outbreak itself continues to spread. In 2025 alone, 16,291 cases have been reported across Africa, with 4,203 confirmed cases and 143 deaths among suspected cases. The outbreak remains active in 13 out of 22 affected countries, with Uganda and the DRC experiencing the highest case burdens.

The DRC remains the hardest-hit country, with 71,704 total notified cases, 15,539 confirmed infections, and 1,443 deaths. The ongoing conflict in the region makes tracking and containing cases even more challenging. Uganda has emerged as a growing hotspot, where young adults aged 18–39 account for 80% of cases.

Urban centers such as Kampala and Wakiso have been identified as key transmission zones. Meanwhile, South Sudan recently reported its first confirmed case of mpox, raising concerns over cross-border spread. In contrast, Burundi is one of the few countries seeing a decline in cases, with a 51% drop in new infections over the past six weeks.

“The numbers speak for themselves—this outbreak is far from over. The Democratic Republic of Congo remains the epicenter, with conflict further complicating response efforts. Uganda is also seeing a sharp increase, particularly among young adults in urban centers. Meanwhile, South Sudan’s first confirmed case is a stark reminder that without urgent intervention, mpox will continue spreading across borders,” Ngongo said.

While the pace of mpox vaccine delivery and distribution had picked up since last October when vaccination began, rollout efforts remain uneven due to logistical challenges. Rwanda received 5,800 doses in early February, while the DRC took delivery of 200,000 doses, though delays in distribution have slowed immunization efforts. Uganda has prioritized sex workers and other high-risk groups, successfully administering 9,000 doses in one week. Liberia, however, is still preparing for vaccine deployment, meaning not all affected countries have begun immunizing at-risk populations.

Mpox vaccines, the pace of distribution which had picked up, is threatened again now in DRC and Liberia.

Despite logistical hurdles, Ngashi noted that public acceptance of mpox vaccination has been overwhelmingly positive. In Uganda, 86% of vaccine recipients are young adults aged 20–49, indicating strong demand for immunization in the most affected demographic.

“The demand for mpox vaccines is high, and we are seeing strong acceptance across affected populations. In Uganda, young adults have responded particularly well to the immunization campaign. However, logistical challenges, especially in the DRC and Liberia, are slowing down the rollout, and we must address these gaps urgently to prevent further spread,” he said.

Beyond mpox, Africa is grappling with multiple concurrent health emergencies, further stretching already limited resources. Among those, Angola is facing a worsening cholera outbreak, with 2,259 cases reported and 75 deaths. Children under 15 account for 40% of all cases and 35% of fatalities. In Tanzania, the Marburg virus continues to pose a threat. Although no new cases have been reported since January 21, 2025, all ten confirmed cases resulted in fatalities, marking a 100% case fatality rate.

Image Credits: Africa CDC .

Robert F Kennedy Jr, Trump’s pick for US Health Secretary, was confirmed Thursday morning after weeks of contentious debate.

WASHINGTON, DC – The US Senate on Thursday voted to confirm Robert F Kennedy Jr as the next Secretary of Health and Human Services – with most Republicans setting aside concerns about his long record of vaccine hesitancy as well as skepticism of scientific research on infectious diseases. 

Republic Senator Mitch McConnell, himself a polio survivor, cast the sole Republic vote against Kennedy, a former Democrat, turned independent who then aligned himself with Donald Trump in the final stages of his campaign. Some 47 other senators –all Democrats – voted against his confirmation.

Kennedy, an environmental lawyer, has for decades been the face of a vocal anti-vaxxer movement claiming that even the polio vaccine had killed more people than it had saved. 

But in the past months, he has re-entered America’s political consciousness with his promise “to make America healthy again (MAHA).” After a failed bid for president as an independent, Kennedy joined Donald Trump’s campaign. President Trump vowed to let Kennedy “go wild” on healthcare. 

With his MAHA refrain, Kennedy quickly gained his own national following with his vow to “put the health of Americans back on track,” citing America’s growing chronic disease rates.  During Senate confirmation  hearings last month, he did not entirely renounce his anti-vax views, but said that he would not curtail Americans’ access to vaccines. 

While many of Kennedy’s critics have said that while his interest in addressing the triple American crises of obesity, mental health and substance abuse, is welcome, his reluctance to apply scientific solutions to infectious diseases could threaten Americans’ health very immediately – particularly if a virus like H5N1 avian flu, which has infected millions of poultry and dairy cattle across the United States, spins out of control.

Schumer kennedy debate
Senate Minority leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), called Kennedy “of the least qualified people” to ensure America’s health.

Speaking just before the vote on Thursday, Senate Minority leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), called Kennedy “of the least qualified people” to ensure America’s health. In his final appeal to colleagues, Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) also warned that a vote for Kennedy could spell the end of Medicare for older Americans and healthcare coverage for American children – as the Kennedy would not stand in the way of Trump administration plans to slash funding for long standing entitlement programs.

Overseeing a $1.7 trillion agency 

As head of HHS, Kennedy would oversee a $1.7 trillion agency that manages domestic Medicare and Medicaid programs, as well as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the National Institutes of Health (NIH).

The latter three not only manage public health but also play a major role in funding and supporting scientific research that has made the US a leader worldwide in the development of new treatments, medicines and vaccines for a range of conditions. 

That leadership role is now threatened with a string of recent Trump administration actions that have seen the muzzling of CDC domestic and foreign scientific exchanges as well as public health communications, and just last week, an order imposing severe cuts on NIH grants. 

Kennedy, has nonetheless pledged to cut the NIH workforce by some 600 people– while turning his attention to chronic diseases.

“I’m gonna say to NIH scientists: God bless you all,” Kennedy said in 2023 to a crowd of supporters during his presidential bid. “Thank you for public service. We’re going to give infectious disease a break for about eight years.”

Days of grueling hearings 

Robert F Kennedy Jr (RFK Jr) day 2 confirmation hearing
Robert F Kennedy Jr on Day 2 of his Senate Confirmation hearings for the nomination of Secretary of Health and Human Services.

Kennedy’s confirmation came after a series of grueling Senate hearings last week, and on Wednesday, a late-night debate over Kennedy’s controversial statements on vaccines, abortion, and other issues.  

In Wednesday’s debate, a long lineup of senate Democrats implored their fellow Republicans on the other side of the aisle to vote ‘no’ on the nomination, which they said could set Americans’ public health back generations. 

“I don’t know if this is going to mark one of the most important public health moments in American history, but I can’t think of another time where we actually have the technology, we have the medicine, we have the science, we have the distribution system. We have the public infrastructure to keep people safe, and we just decide by a vote of 53 to 47 to make people unsafe,” said Brian Schatz, Democrat from Hawaii, speaking about how Kennedy’s anti-vaccine activism in Samoa in 2019 led to the deaths of 83 children from a measles epidemic.

RFK JR kennedy senate debate 2025
Brian Schatz, of Hawai’i, notes that 83 children died of measles in Samoa after vaccine hesitancy swept the island.

“He’s not talking about whether or not it’s appropriate to require masks in public – which  Democrats and Republicans are still arguing about. He’s talking about stuff like, if you’re a parent, and now you don’t know whether when your kid goes to school, they’ve reached herd immunity stuff that goes way, way, generations back,” he said, referring to measles, polio and other vaccine-preventable diseases. “So if you think it’s a good idea to leave all of these diseases in the rear view mirror, then this is a very very bad person to be running the Department of HHS.”

Cervical cancer vaccine at risk 

Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, pointed to Kennedy’s refusal to renounce past statements questioning the safety of the HPV vaccine that protects women against cervical cancer – as well as his financial interest in ongoing litigation over the vaccine’s side effects, as just one example of Kennedy’s “concerning” stances. 

The vaccine, “has become routine for young people about 20 years ago,  and since then, it has successfully cut cervical cancer rates into just a fraction of what they were before the drug came to market,” Wyden noted. 

But when queried about his stake in the lawsuits during the first Senate hearings in late January,  “he refused to answer questions about his 10% stake in any settlement agreements – instead passing them off to his son.  He refused to recuse himself from taking any actions that might affect his family’s financial interest,” Wyden said. 

At the hearings, Kennedy said he’d give up his 10% share in the litigation to his son.

 “All of this adds up to a future HHS secretary who stands to profit off undermining this vaccine, and the result raised cervical cancer rates, to quote my Republican colleague, Senator Cassidy, a physician, Mr. Kennedy is financially vested in finding fault with vaccines.”

Research support in question

Kennedy debates
Heinrich Martin (D-NM) lamented the loss of millions of dollars of research funding should the Trump administration’s budget cuts go through.

Other Democrats expressed concerns about how Kennedy’s appointment would affect the US biomedical research – as well as public health. 

“HHS plays a critical role in overseeing Medicare, overseeing Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act,” said Martin Heinrich, D-New Mexico.

“But HHS also supports the medical research that helps us to develop the next vaccine, prevent the next pandemic and find cures to cancer and chronic diseases like diabetes. We have already seen President Trump, Elon Musk and his DOGE minions target scientific and medical research at agencies like the National Institutes of Health. 

“Just last week, we saw them announce an estimated $4 billion cut for health research at universities across the nation, including an estimated $17 million impact at the University of New Mexico alone. And just like many of the unilateral and illegal actions of this emboldened Trump administration. This one received a temporary halt from the federal judge. 

“But whether this particular attack holds up in court or not, the Trump administration’s intention is clear, dramatic cuts to medical research into treatment cures that countless Americans are depending on to save their lives. Mr. Kennedy plans to lead this effort and even to expand on it.”

Kennedy floats different vaccine schedule for African Americans

Kennedy black children vaccines statement
“Black children already have lower vaccinations than their peers,” noted Angela Alsobrooks (D-MD), calling Kennedy’s views. “dangerous.”

Angela Alsobrooks, D-Maryland also expressed alarm at Kennedy’s remarks to the effect that Black Americans needed a different vaccine schedule than their White counterparts – a contention that she noted had been debunked by the very scientists that Kennedy had cited in support of his claims. 

“Just three years ago, Kennedy said, and I quote, ‘we should not be giving black people the  same vaccine schedule that’s given to whites because their immune system is better than ours. 

“When I asked him this question, Mr. Kennedy referenced a study…. he assured me….  that, indeed, certain races required a different vaccine schedule. That was a lie. In fact, the study’s own authors stated the data doesn’t support a change in vaccine schedule based on race. Mr. Kennedy’s response was damning and his response was dangerous.

“Black children already have lower vaccinations than their peers,” noted Alsobrooks. “That is why I said, your claims on this issue were dangerous.”

Polio survivor lone Republican to vote ‘nay’

While a number of leading Republican senators pushed back on Kennedy’s anti-vax and anti-research statements in the lead-up to today’s vote, 52 Republicans voted for the nominee, including Senators Susan Collins (R-ME) and Bill Cassidy (R-LA). 

John Fetterman, a Democrat for Pennsylvania, who earlier had spoke favorably about Kennedy’s views on chronic disease, sided with party colleagues against the nominee. 

The sole exception was Senator Mitch McConnell, who had spoken out against Kennedy’s claims about the side effects of the polio vaccine earlier in the confirmation process. McConnells’  childhood battle against polio before the development of the vaccine made him particularly sensitive to Kennedy’s debunked rhetoric claiming that vaccines cause autism. 

McConnell released a statement after the vote, saying “I’m a survivor of childhood polio. In my lifetime, I’ve watched vaccines save millions of lives from devastating diseases across America and around the world. I will not condone the re-litigation of proven cures, and neither will millions of Americans who credit their survival and quality of life to scientific miracles.

“Individuals, parents, and families have a right to push for a healthier nation and demand the best possible scientific guidance on preventing and treating illness. But a record of trafficking in dangerous conspiracy theories and eroding trust in public health institutions does not entitle Mr. Kennedy to lead these important efforts.

Opening statements centered on healthcare access

Senate vote for RFK Jr
52 senators voted for RFK Jr, confirming his appointment as HHS Secretary.

Thursday’s final statements centered on healthcare access. 

“On issue after issue, Mr. Kennedy has demonstrated a profound lack of knowledge at best, and deeply dangerous views at worst,” said Senator Wyden (R-OR) in opening statements. “Mr. Kennedy was given ample opportunity to share how he would improve these programs [Medicare and Medicaid], lower costs, save taxpayers money, and improve care. Instead, he showed a complete lack of basic understanding of Medicare and how it functions.”

“Republicans, with Donald Trump at the helm, are steering this country towards a healthcare cliff.” Wyden then accused Republican colleagues of plans to take away Medicare and Medicaid.

Mike Crapo (R-ID) countered that the Senate debates late last night were about securing the border, not about taking away Medicare. He defended Kennedy’s past anti-vaccine statements, saying that the secretary “just wants to see that the research on them [vaccines] is done, and done well.”

Republicans praise his emphasis on chronic diseases 

Throughout the two week confirmation process, Senate Republicans praised Kennedy’s  emphasis on addressing the chronic disease burden in the US, and expanding rural health care access. “Mr Kennedy, you represent a voice for an inspiring coalition of Americans who are deeply committed to improving the health and well-being of our nation,” said committee chair Senator Mike Crapo (R-Idaho). Crapo continued his praise for Kennedy in the opening statements prior to the vote.  

But others questioned his shifting stance on abortion, vaccines, and food policy, accusing Kennedy of switching his views for political and monetary gain.

As founder of the non-profit Children’s Health Defense, Kennedy has repeatedly cast doubt on the safety and efficacy of childhood vaccinations, and his organization continues to push the debunked claim that vaccines cause autism. 

Even so, Kennedy insisted in the hearings that he was not “anti-vaccine”, and that he merely supports more testing and safety studies.

“News reports have claimed that I am anti-vaccine or anti-industry. Well, I am neither; I am pro-safety … All of my kids are vaccinated, and I believe vaccines have a critical role in healthcare,” said Kennedy in his opening statement in Senate hearings in late January. 

A chance to “make America healthy again”

At the same time, he said he’d find new ways to tackle high drug prices, and address the root causes of America’s obesity and addiction epidemics with healthier foods and more mental health services – messages that clearly resonated with many senators.

As part of that, he has also pledged  to tackle unhealthy processed foods to “make America healthy again” – as well as confronting big Pharma and high drug prices – messages that clearly resonated with many senators.

Kennedy also described how his experience as an environmental lawyer working with hunters,  fisherman and farmers along the Hudson River had sensitized him to the health impacts of pesticides and environmental pollutants early in his career. 

“Something is poisoning the American people and we know that the primary culprits are our changing food supply, highly processed foods,” he said, citing the unusually high proportion of obese people in the US in comparison to other developed nations, something that he called an “existential threat”.

He stressed that the government needed to support a transition away from agriculture dependent on heavy chemical inputs to “regenerative” agriculture to support healthier food production.

But it’s unclear how much leeway he’d really have to move such a massive agenda in the new Trump administration – which is deeply indebted to big food and the pharma industry for supporting Trump’s election campaign.

Last updated 13 February 2025.

Image Credits: Associated Press, Economic Times.

Dancers at the opening of the NCD Alliance Forum in Rwanda

KIGALI, Rwanda – At least two-thirds of the cost of treating non-communicable diseases (NCDs) is carried by patients, and civil society advocates are pressurising governments to step up.

Over 700 NCD advocates from 89 countries have gathered in Kigali for the Global NCD Alliance Forum to press for meaningful targets to be adopted at the United Nations High-Level Meeting (HLM) on NCDs in September.

One billion people are living with obesity, 1.3 billion with hypertension, a billion are living with a mental health disorder, and half a billion people living with diabetes and chronic respiratory diseases. 

“In the five short years since we last held the forum, in Sharjah in the UAE, we have lost 215 million people to NCDs. To put that in context, that is the population of Nigeria,” said NCDA CEO Katie Dain.

NCD Alliance CEO Katie Dain

“We live in an era of polycrisis, with pandemics, climate change, conflicts and humanitarian crises locking horns across the globe.

“The Trump administration’s recent freeze on development aid and the potential dismantling of USAID has sent a shockwave through the global health community,” added Dain at a media briefing on Thursday shortly before the forum opened.

“It is paralysing health programmes that are providing lifesaving medication and treatment to people and turning upside down the health financing landscape as we knew it. Any hit to global health financing is a hit for all health issues, including NCDs.”

Describing the last five years as a “policy success but an implementation failure”, Dain outlined the NCDA’s five priorities for the HLM.

The first is the accelerated national implementation of evidence-based NCD policies.

Breaking down silos in global health, sustainable financing, accountability for delivery and community engagement make up the other priorities.

Kenyan cancer survivor Prisca Githuka drew attention to the “financial toxicity” faced by African patients living with NCDs, highlighting that her breast cancer treatment cost around $35,000.

“African patients are told to go and buy their own drugs. Where do you get chemotherapy drugs in Kenya? There are also problems with the radiation machines. You can wait three months to get treatment then the machine breaks down,” Githuka told the media briefing.

Rwanda’s NCD successes

Rwanda’s Minister of State for Health, Dr Yuvan Butera, opens the NCD Alliance Forum

Rwanda was chosen as the first African country to host the forum because of its success in addressing NCDs.

Just this week, the government doubled its tax on tobacco products and imposed a 65% tax on beer, Dr Yuvan Butera, Rwanda’s Minister of State for Health, told the opening plenary.

Through taxes and curbs on smoking in public, the number of smokers has been reduced from 13% in 2012 to only 7% currently. It has also managed to reduce diabetes slightly.

Almost 60% of Rwandans are now dying from NCDs, and the country has reoriented its health system from treatment to prevention, said Butera.

The health system has been decentralised to ensure people can get treatment close to their homes at health posts (primary health clinics staffed by a few nurses). Staff at district hospitals have been trained to manage NCDs.

The bottom rung of the health system is community health workers, over 58,000 of them spread in over 14,000 villages 

Over 90% of people are covered by Community-Based Health Insurance (CBHI), with a sliding payment scale based on income. The country is incrementally increasing what the CBHI can cover and recently extended coverage to kidney dialysis and heart surgery.

Focus on prevention

Dr Uwinkindi Francois, NCD Division Manager at the Rwanda Biomedical Center (left) and Rwanda NCD Alliance head Dr Joseph Mucumbitsi.

Over 95% of Rwandans get the required exercise of at least 150 minutes a week, although this is mostly through their work, explained Dr Uwinkindi Francois, NCD Division Manager at the Rwanda Biomedical Center.

But exercise features big in the country’s NCD programme. Since 2016, the capital city of Kigali has held “car-free days” in the city – currently twice a month – to reduce air pollution and promote exercise. During this time, screenings are also offered for various NCDs. Every Friday, work ends at 3pm in the city to enable people to exercise.

NCD awareness is also integrated into school health programmes.

But it is struggling to contain alcohol consumption and hypertension.

In preparation for the HLM, Butera urged stakeholders to work together to take action against NCDs.

“Governments need to increase financing and integrate prevention and treatment of NCDs into universal health coverage,” said Butera, while urging the private sector to invest in innovative solutions to bridge access gaps to treatment.

“Civil society must amplify patients’ voices.”

Image Credits: Rwandan Biomedical Center.

Mpox vaccines arrive in Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo. USAID’s dismantling has further hindered vaccination and outbreak response following the M-23 rebel encroachment into large swathes of eastern DRC, WHO officials say.

From the deadly mpox outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo to the composition of the next seasonal flu vaccine, the collapse of USAID and the US CDC communications blackout are creating new challenges for WHO and its partners to respond in disease emergency hotspots – well beyond the direct loss of financial support.

That was the key message of the first WHO press conference since the cascade of new US executive orders send shock waves through the global health world.

“A significant part of who’s response to health emergencies in Uganda, DRC, Gaza, Sudan and elsewhere, is supported by funding from the United States. As we have said, we regret the announcement that the United States intends to withdraw from WHO, and we would welcome the opportunity to engage in constructive dialogue,” said WHO Director General Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus.

But he stressed that US moves in other health and development arenas, unrelated to the US withdrawal, are also having a cascading series of impacts on WHO emergency response.

“For example,” he said, “the suspension of funding by PEPFAR, the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, caused an immediate stop to HIV treatment, testing  and prevention services in the 50 countries that PEPFAR supports based on bilateral agreements. Although a waiver has been granted for life saving services, it does not include prevention services for some of the most at risk groups.

WHO Director General Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus at a WHO Presser Wednesday.

“Despite the waiver, clinics are shuttered and health workers have been put on leave,” he said. “WHO is gathering data on service disruptions and supporting countries with mitigation measures, including by filling gaps in supplies of antiretrovirals.

“The sudden suspension of us funding and the sudden disengagement of US institutions is also affecting the response to global efforts to eradicate polio and the response to mpox epidemics in Africa,” he added.

“In Myanmar, almost 60,000 people, most of them women and children, have been left with no access to life saving [health] services. And we have limited information about the spread of avian influenza among dairy cattle in the US or human cases,” he stressed.

Appeal to continue funding for most severe emergencies

While Elon Musk, head of the new Trump administration “Department of Government Efficiency” told Whie House correspondents last night that US aid to Uganda’s Ebola response was being resumed, Tedros said that’s just one trouble spot of many. He asked the US “to consider continuing its funding” on other burning crises at least until other solutions can be found

In the eastern DRC city of Goma and the surrounding North and South Kivu regions, for instance, only 1/3 of people who need health services have been able to access them, following the conquest by the M-23 rebel group of much of the region. At thes ame time, USAID supported NGOs that previously operated in the area have now seen their funds cut off.

“Pregnant women cannot reach health facilities or save delivery. And the threat of infectious diseases, including mpox and cholera, has multiplied,” Tedros said. “Hospitals and morgues are overwhelmed. Some health workers have had to flee, while others have been working around the global days. WHO remains on the ground, although insecurity is limiting our operations, anticipating an escalation of violence, we have been working since November to pre position supplies, including medicines and fuel. However, the supplies are running out, and others are running dangerously low.”

US CDC’s participation in global influenza network has ceased

WHO’s Dr Maria Van Kerkhove, health emergencies lead.

Collaborations between the US Centers for Disease Control and  WHO on seasonal influenza’s spread have also ceased, said WHO’s Maria Van Kerkhove, of WHO’s Department of Health Emergencies.

The group is preparing for a March meeting to establish the formula for the next flu vaccine, based on reporting to date.

“CDC right now is not reporting influenza data through the WHO global platforms, Flunet, that they’ve been providing information for many, many years, and we have not had direct communication with CDC related to influenza,” Van Kerhove said.

“There are national influenza centers in 133 member states. They’re sharing information about circulating viruses, and all of that information over the course of the six months a year is actually utilized in making that decision about the vaccine composition for either the northern hemisphere or the southern hemisphere. So yes, there is a pause in the reporting of information from the US, as we’ve said. We hope that that resumes. We hope that that technical exchange resumes.

“We are communicating with them, but we haven’t heard anything back.”

She added that CDC has reported a handful of human cases of the more deadly H5N1 avian flu through WHO’s emergency alert networks, and with regards to animal infections “USDA has published some information online,” but the information remains spotty and partial:  “As DG has said, we welcome active technical exchange with our colleagues in the US and there are very important meetings that are taking place.”

Mpox, Ebola and beyond

WHO’s Dr Abdi Rahman Mahamud – more than financial aid has been impacted.

As for response to the deadly DRC outbreak of mpox, some $7.5 million directly allotted by the US to the outbreak response has been lost. “But more importantly, it is the humanitarian crisis,” said Abdi Rahman Mahamud, director of WHO’s Global Alert and Response network.

“A lot of the NGO partners depend heavily on the USAID and US partners funding. But it’s more than even the funding. As we speak today in Uganda, the Global Alert and Response network (GOARN), was started by us, CDC and WHO coming together.  And through that mechanism, CDC has deployed almost 842 US experts to countries that will never have been accessed. The continuous exchange between the two sister organizations been very critical. So while we’re very happy to see us CDC experts come into the field, joining us in Tanzania and in Uganda, I think this is in a very critical, important collaboration that needs to be further strength, and it’s beyond even the financial, which has direct impact on our partners and who, but there’s technical collaboration that will be lost for both.”

WHO tries to mitigate problems caused by PEPFAR disarray

Meg Doherty, head of WHO’s global HIV programme.

As for HIV/AIDS, while limited waivers for some PEPFAR-supported services have been issued, many services remain paralyzed, said Meg Doherty, Director of WHO’s HIV programme, at the briefing.

“Right now, there are limited waivers that have come forward to allow access to life saving treatment, including antiretroviral therapies, mother to child transmission, but there has been confusion in countries, and certainly with the furloughed healthcare workers [who also depend on USAID support], some of the services have not been able to get started again.” she said.

“So what we’ve been doing at our coordination is having contact with countries ministries, and when there are requests for other antiretrovirals, we seek support from country to country for ARV sharing. 

“This is a very short term limited approach that we did during COVID to ensure life saving medicines were available. But over the long term, there’s going to need to be greater coordination, especially with other resources and some of the domestic resources that are now going into antiretroviral programs. So this will be an evolving story, and I think each day we learn something new.”

Tedros Responds to Trump’s ‘ASKS’ of WHO

With respect to the US withdrawal, Tedros also noted that the agency had already responded to two key issues raised by President Donald Trump in his withdrawal announcement – internal reform of the organization and, related to that, a more equitable and reliable stream of financial support.

In terms of the historically high rate of US payments to WHO, stepwise increases in fixed financial support through all member states’ “assessed contributions” would gradually redistribute the load more evenly, Tedros noted. As part of that, the recent WHO Executive Board meeting had confirmed yet another 20% increase in those stepwise payments – despite opposition from China, which will be assessed at a far higher rate – and one comparable to the US –  in the future. See related story:

China’s 2026 WHO Fee Could Match US Levels Today – But Beijing Resists Planned Increase

As part of the reform, WHO has also launched the WHO Foundation, allowing it to receive donations from the private sector that it cannot accept directly. And it has launched its “investment round” to broaden the base of voluntary donations from philanthropies and member states. Tedros also said he was “in the early stage” of floating the idea of a $US 50 billion endowment fund, which could generate $1.5-2.5 billion a year in reliable income, similar to the basis on which the noted UK philanthropy, Wellcome, operates.

“If the US wants to pay less, it’s actually in line with what we’re doing as part of our reform,” Tedros said.  because we have started in 2017 the sustainable financing reform that is helping us to broaden donor base. And when this succeeds, the contribution of  traditional donors, including the US, could decline.

“Of course, it will take some years, but will but it will decline, because the burden will be shared. So if this is what the US wants, then again, cooperation and being with WHO will be the answer, meaning we’re asking exactly the same thing ‘share the burden’. And the US is saying, ‘share the burden’, so there is no difference at all.”

Image Credits: BBC/YouTube.

NIH research building
The NIH is the world’s leading public funder of biomedical research, spending some $48 billion annually on universities, hospitals, labs, and other institutions.

WASHINGTON, DC – The abrupt decision by the United States National Institutes of Health to slash funding for overheads to the nation’s research centers and universities has provoked a fresh outcry among leading US researchers, global health experts and even some Republican politicians  – with leading one expert saying this latest move could “seriously jeopardize” the US’s global dominance in biomedical research and innovation.

“If the Trump administration goes ahead with its plan to slash NIH research funding, it would seriously jeopardize the standing of the US worldwide,” said Lawrence Gostin, Distinguished University Professor in Global Health Law at Georgetown University, in a statement to Health Policy Watch. 

Similar reactions echoed across the research world after NIH’s Friday announcement cutting grants to research institutions for their “indirect costs” – which include expensive laboratory equipment and technologies vital to cutting edge research.  The cuts to biomedical research investments followed a shock list of recent Trump measures to drastically curtail the public health watchdog activities of the US Centers for Disease Control, as well as dismantle USAID and related global health programs

Susan Collins, a Republican  from Maine, who chairs the powerful Senate Appropriatiations commitee, also expressed opposition to what she called “the poorly conceived directive imposing an arbitrary cap on the indirect costs,” adding that the Congressional act under which the NIH allocations are made, also forbids arbitrary alterations. But even so, she posted a statement saying that she would vote to approve PresidentDonald Trump’s nominee Robert F Kennedy Jr, a vaccine skeptic who has also questioned the solidity of research underpinning recent vaccines, as Secretary of Health and Human Services, when the issue comes before the Senate, presumably later this week. 

Judge temporarily freezes NIH funding cuts 

Researcher
A researcher tests the efficacy of a generic drug. 80% of the NIH’s budget goes to universities, hospitals, or other research institutions.

On Monday, a Massachusetts judge  issued a nationwide order, temporarily halted the directive to slash the NIH grants from the Office of the Director, just before it was due to take effect. The suspension came as 22 state attorney generals sued the federal government for violating the 2018 Congressional appropriations law, which prohibits the NIH from altering its indirect cost rates “without proper authorization,” according to the filing. US District Judge Angel Kelley scheduled a hearing for 21 February for further arguments. 

Another lawsuit was filed on Monday on behalf of private and public universities and hospital systems, which stand to lose millions in federal dollars. The American Association of Universties, American Council on Education, Brandeis, Brown, George Washington, Cornell, Johns Hopkins, University of Rochester, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and the University of California, among others, joined in filing suit against HHS, NIH, and the acting heads of these two agenices. These also argue that the funding cuts violate the Congressional appropriations law, and breaks prior negotiated indirect costs rates.

Across the country, from Birmingham to Buffalo, NIH research dollars fuels economic growth, medical innovation, and offers jobs to millions of Americans. In 24 states, hospital or university systems are the single largest employers, and leading the US’s global dominance in cancer, cardiovascular, and public health research. 

The storm unfurled Friday, after the Office of the Director of the National Institutes of Health, under an order by the Trump administration, issued a notice limiting the indirect costs biomedical research relies on to fund laboratories, equipment, facilities, new faculty, and software, to a standard 15% across all grants and institutions receiving them. 

The move was widely condemned by universities, research institutions, and medical centers who said that the one-size-fits all payment fails to reflect the real costs of research, in terms of investments in laboratories, technology and other hardware. 

Chipping away at the NIH’s status as the ‘envy of the world’

NIH funding impacts graphic
24 US states have hospital or university systems as their largest single employer.

At stake, critics say, is the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the US biomedical research operation’s preeminence as the leading research innovator in the world, at the forefront of cancer therapies, personalized medicine, and brain health, to name a few domains. The administration’s moves have deeply rattled the NIH, with  the number two official, Dr. Lawrence Tabak to resigning 12 February. 

“The NIH is the envy of the world and sets the gold standard for scientific research and innovation. NIH funding has led to breakthroughs, ranging from treatments for cancer and cardiovascular diseases to vaccines for infectious diseases, and so much more,” said Gostin. 

The economic and scientific impacts could reverberate across the country – and in cancer clinical trials and drug-development labs. 

“NIH does incredible work, and this seems like it’s an obscure overhead issue. It is not,” said Senator Mark Warner (D-Virginia) in a town hall for residents.

“If these cuts, without any congressional review go through, we will have less research, less cures.” The senator pointed out that institutions have already negotiated and signed contracts at existing indirect cost rates. “You cannot arbitrarily change the reimbursement level for existing contracts by executive order.” Warner alluded to the multitude of Trump-issued executive orders that violate the law.

Ttop universities and medical centers stand to lose “$100 million a year or more” if the sweeping changes to how the National Institutes of Health reimburses research costs takes effect, according to an analysis from STAT news

White House claims moves allows ‘more money and resources available for legitimate scientific research’

In a post on X, the NIH framed its decision as a cost-cutting move, given that elite universities have tens of billions of dollars in endowment funds. Even so, research institutions at Harvard University, Yale University, and Johns Hopkins University all receive indirect rates over 60%, the NIH said. The post highlights that the 15% cap would save $4 billion per year. About $9 billion of the $35 billion awarded to researchers through grants in 2023 was in the form of indirect costs.

“Contrary to the hysteria, redirecting billions of allocated NIH spending away from administrative bloat means there will be more money and resources available for legitimate scientific research, not less,” said White House spokesperson Kush Desai in a statement to Fox News Digital. The comment implies that the administration does not believe that current scientific research is not “legitimate.”

And on X, Elon Musk, the un-elected billionaire who leads Donald Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), echoed this sentiment, saying over the weekend “Can you believe that universities with tens of billions in endowments were siphoning off 60% of research award money for ‘overhead’? What a ripoff!”

But most universities are not Harvard, Gostin countered, saying, “Most small to medium sized universities actually take a loss in taking NIH dollars even with indirect payments,” he said in a statement to Health Policy Watch

“Research costs an enormous amount, including paying researchers, running laboratories, and conducting large clinical trials. Many universities could not afford to take NIH research grants with such low indirect costs. That means the pipeline of research innovation could dry up.”

“What administrative bloat?” he asked. 

Collins, Britt, say cuts could harm Republican states 

 

The NIH distributes about 80% of its $48 billion budget to research institutions in the US – in Republican as well as Democratic-majority states. As a result, lawmakers from both parties have scrambled to the defense of universities, hospitals, and institutions that rely on NIH funding.

“I oppose the poorly conceived directive imposing an arbitrary cap on the indirect costs that are part of NIH grants and negotiated between the grant recipient and NIH,” said Senator Susan Collins (R-Maine) in her statement, saying she’s heard from laboratories and research institutions and other schools in Maine about the cuts, which “would be devastating, stopping vital biomedical research and leading to the loss of jobs.”

Collins, who chairs the Senate Appropriations Committee, and noted that the fiscal 2024 appropriations law, which funds the federal government, “includes language that prohibits the use of funds to modify NIH indirect costs,” indicating that the NIH is not allowed to arbitrarily change its funding policies.

Still supporting Kennedy for Secretary of HHS

Despite her opposition to the NIH’s cap, Collins said she would support Robert F Kennedy Jr, Trump’s nominee for Secretary of Health and Human Services. Kennedy’s record of support for biomedical research has been uneven, at best, expressing skepticism over vaccine studies, in particular. Even so, Collins said she had contacted Kennedy about the cuts, and said he pledged to “reexamine” the issue.

During his Senate confirmation hearings, Kennedy repeatedly dodged questions as to whether he would continue NIH’s funding for vaccines, including the cutting-edge mRNA technology developed for the COVID-19 vaccines. And in the months following his nomination, Kennedy said he would cut 600 NIH jobs

Kennedy could afford three “no” votes from Republicans and still be confirmed. 

Alabama Senator also expresses misgivings over NIH cuts

Another Republican senator and Trump ally, Katie Britt of Alabama, also expressed misgivings over the funding cuts.

“While the administration works to achieve this goal at NIH, a smart, targeted approach is needed in order to not hinder life-saving, groundbreaking research at high-achieving institutions like those in Alabama,” Britt told AL.com, an Alabama-based news agency. Alabama is home to several research universities who receive billions in NIH funding.

The University of Alabama is the single largest employer in the state. 

The University is an example of how universities and hospitals often support entire towns, cities, or even states. 

In Western New York, the University of Rochester is the largest private employer in the region, generating approximately 56,000 jobs across Upstate New York. And in Pennsylvania, the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center system creates nearly a million jobs, and is the largest employer in the state.

In their filings against the NIH, leading US universities disclosed they received up to $1 billion dollars in NIH funding, in the case of Johns Hopkins. The University of Rochester disclosed receiving $188 million in fiscal year 2024, and with the current indirect cost rate at 15%, it stands to lose $40 million. The filing also revealed that universities in conservative states would lose tens of millions – the University of Florida would lose $70 million in funding.   

Department of Defense, philanthropies, and private companies unable to fill funding void

NIH Research
Scientist conducting coronavirus vaccine research at NIAID’s Vaccine Research Center, Moderna’s original collaborator on the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine.

With the rationale of government efficiency, DOGE has singled out the NIH’s funding structure as the leading public funder of biomedical research. Some observers hope that the Department of Defense (DOD), a frequent partner, could pick up some of the slack with its $800 billion budget. The DOD spent $1.5 billion on such biomedical research in fiscal year 2021.

But Trump has instructed DOGE to turn its attention to Defense spending next, saying in an interview on Friday “And I’ve instructed him [Musk] to go check out Education, to check out the Pentagon, which is the military. And you know, sadly, you’ll find some things that are pretty bad.”  Others have suggested that the private sector might step into NIH’s shoes. But historically,  private sector investors have not been eager to fund the kind of basic research that NIH supports – which often then lead to the breakthroughs, such as mRNA vaccine technology, that the private sector later develops.  

As for the DOD, Gostin notes that “it is possible that the DOD would expand its research portfolio but Musk will probably also cut Defense spending. But the main point is there is no substitute for the NIH. Many scientists want peer-to-peer relationships with NIH scientists and may be leary in getting too close to military applications of their research.”

The US has been the world’s leader in research and biomedical innovation for over 80 years. 

In a letter to the university community, Harvard president Alan M. Garber expressed the widespread sentiment: “At a time of rapid strides in quantum computing, artificial intelligence, brain science, biological imaging, and regenerative biology, and when other nations are expanding their investment in science, America should not drop knowingly and willingly from her lead position on the endless frontier.” 

Last updated 12 February.

Image Credits: NIH, FDA/Michael Ermarth, Kristy Ainslie, NIAID.

WHO Director General Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus at the Executive Board meeting this week in Geneva.

WHO’s Director General Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus appealed for a second time to the United States to “reconsider” it’s decision to withdraw from the UN global health agency.

Speaking Tuesday at the close of a fractious meeting of WHO’s 34-member Executive Board, the WHO DG said, “we regret the announcement by the United States, of its intention to withdraw, and it was also sad to see them participating less this week. I think we all felt their absence.

“We very much hope they would reconsider, and we would welcome the opportunity to engage in constructive dialogue,”  Tedros said.  While the US delegation attended the proceedings they remained silent throughout almost all of the proceedings – with the rare exception being a statement in support of Taiwan’s re-admission as a WHO observer.

The final hours of the eight-day long session  were wracked by some of the same geopolitical and culture wars that have shadowed recent WHO proceedings.

African and Middle Eastern member states, backed by Russia, protested WHO’s recognition last year of the US-based reproductive health rights group, the Center for Reproductive Rights, as a group in “Official Relations” with WHO as well as the renewal of ties with a second NGO “Women Deliver”  – saying that the groups contradict their values.

“We have some reservations of few names on the list, one of them is, Woman Deliver,” said Somalia. “Unfortunately, after revising the engagement report, 2022, 2024 and reviewing these organizations, interpretation to some terminologies and ideologies, it has came clear to us that we cannot accept this organization’s advocacy and promotion, fields of work. And hence we came to conclusion that such engagements with this organization would contradict gravely with our region’s values, culture and principles.”

‘Protecting sexual rights is a very contentious issue’

Egypt – will raise the WHO’s recognition of two reproductive health rights NGOs again at the WHA.

Added Russia: “The issue of protecting sexual rights is a very contentious issue within the WHO, and this concept is not acceptable for the majority of countries and this affects a whole host of spheres of activity. We would draw attention to the fact that one area of work, the association Women Deliver, talks about is gender diversity, which contradicts with the priorities that have been agreed on by all member states for this organization. So in this regard, we would ask for solidarity. We would express a solidarity with the position as expressed by Somalia” said the Russian Federation.

Egypt’s delegate said that it would raise the issue again before the World Health Assembly, the full member state body, at the annual meeting in May.

Meanwhile, Israel also protested the continuation of WHO relations with the International Federation of Medical Students Associations (IFMSA), in light of the global group’s decision in August 2024 to suspend relations with its Israel-affiliate body, The Israel Medical Students Association, in protest over the Gaza war.  However, the matter was set aside after WHO’s administration said that the IFSMA had recently written to the WHO, saying that it will table a motion to lift the suspension of the Israeli affiliate at the upcoming IFMSA General Assembly, scheduled for March.

The eight-day long meeting saw frequent geopolitical sparring over the Israel-Hamas war in Gaza as well as over remarks by some member states supporting Taiwan’s re-admission to the WHA as an observer.  The initiative, hotly opposed by China, was the sole issue that drew a United States statement during the entire EB session.

Budget crisis overshadows proceedings

But beyond the geopolitical and cultural rifts, the 8-day meeting was haunted, even more profoundly, by the budget crisis facing WHO, due to the imminent loss of US financial support – which in 2024-25 amounted to nearly $1 billion, including voluntary and assessed contributions. Although legally, the withdrawal only takes effect in January 2026, some of the assessed 2025 US contribution, however, also remains unpaid – raising questions over if and how WHO will be able to collect the fees.

With the exception of a resolution on Gaza emergency aid, EB approval of about three dozen other WHO initiatives on issues ranging from rare diseases to air pollution was made conditional on a “prioritization” of the most important and affordable activities, due to take place before the full WHA meets in May.

Along with the financial pain of the US withdrawal, China continued to oppose a planned 20% increase in assessed contributions by all WHO member states  – casting an even bigger pallor over the agency’s financial future.

Against this background, the EB approval of a 9.5% pay raise for WHO’s senior leadership team raised eyebrows and private concerns among some member states. But it was ultimately approved after WHO’s Tedros said it was a “no-gain, no loss” alignment of WHO with UN salaries – and came with a simultaneous reduction in a cost-of living allowance that Geneva-based officials receive.  And at the same time, member states said the specialized UN agency still needs to do more to in terms of financial transparency – with inadequate data provided to them on staff costs and their evolution. See related story:

China’s 2026 WHO Fee Could Match US Levels Today – But Beijing Resists Planned Increase

“We’ve had to face new realities with the announcement of the withdrawal of the US from the WHO,” the EB Chair, Jerome Walcott Minister of Health of Barbados, told the 34-member board, “Amidst all of this, you continue to demonstrate the true meaning of multilateralism, moving away from entrenched positions towards compromise for the greater good, or collective well being.” Looking forward to the May WHA, he said, “Our work over the next few months will not be easy, but we have learned that anything that is worthwhile comes with some sacrifice. “

Citing a “sluggish” global economy, China argued against raising WHO fee assessments to member states – but most don’t buy the argument.

China’s assessed contribution to the World Health Organization (WHO) would increase by more than $50 million – from $87.586 million in 2025 to $137.828 million in 2026 if WHO member states approve another 20% step-wise contribution from all countries at the May World Health Assembly (WHA). 

That would be even larger than the US contribution of $130 million for 2025. For 2026, the US assessment would increase at a much smaller rate than China’s, amounting to 155.572 million, were it to remain in the organization.  

The hike in China’s fees stems from an updated scale of assessment that distributes budget cost more fairly and proportionately amongst all 194 member states, in line with their GDP. 

The data was disclosed in documents published Monday morning ahead of the seventh day of WHO Executive Board discussions. 

Along with the proposed step-wise increase in all member state fees, China’s dues are being recalculated at a higher rate, in line with a new UN global assessment scale. The scale is largely based on GDP, while adjusting for debt burden, per capita income, and development status. The new UN formula translates into a proportionately larger share for Beijing of the WHO assessment.   

“China moves up as the scale of assessment is based on GDP,” one member state delegate told Health Policy Watch.

Effectively, the new scale would charge China for 20% of the entire amount to be paid by all 194 member states to WHO, as compared to 15% in 2025.  Meanwhile, the US share would remain steady at 22%. While there are minor adjustments up or down in assessment rates for some other member states none are as large China’s.  Some countries, like Brazil, would see a big decline. 

China’s asssessment to WHO in the old and new UN scale.

US President Donald Trump has long complained that China’s payments to WHO were out of sync with its economic prowess and population, citing that as one reason from withdrawing from the organisation just after his inauguration in January 2020.  Along with its assessed contributions to WHO, the US has traditionally paid hundreds of millions in donations

China still baulking at member state increase 

Ethiopia and other members of the 47-country African bloc expressed support for the assessed fee increase.

Altogether, WHO would receive some $537.4 million in 2026 from the planned 20% increase in assessed contributions by countries  – even without the United States participation. If the US were ever to remain in the organisation, WHO’s total budget from assessed contributions to be about  $692.9 million, according to the data published Monday. 

Proposed member state fee increase timeline published by WHO on Monday.

That is still only 22% – 28% of the $2.45 billion budget for 2026 that has been tabled this month’s EB meeting.  But increasing those assessments is regarded as an increasingly vital move to stave off a bigger WHO financial crisis.  And the total 2026-27 biennium budget of $2.9 billion has already been slashed by $400 million in anticipation of the US withdrawal. 

Speaking at Monday’s board meeting, China was one of only two states that once again expressed opposition to the 20% increase in assessed contributions for 2026, which had been agreed to in principle in 2022 as part of a step-wise plan to increased member state contributions to WHO to 50% of its budget by the end of the decade. 

“At present, the global economic recovery remains sluggish, and both Member States and international organisations are excessing caution in increasing their budgets. Against this backdrop, various parties, including China, agreed to a 20% increase in AC for 2024 to 2025 demonstrating great support for the organisation. Regarding the secretary’s proposal for further 20% increase in the EAC for 2026 and 2027 China has previously stated its position,” stated the delegate from Beijing.

China’s assessment in 2026 would almost as high as that of the US – if the latter  did not withdraw from the WHO.

However, in the day’s debate, Beijing was largely alone. 

A long list of African, as well as European, member states expressed support for the next of stepwise increase in assessed contributions in 2026. 

“We … wish to join others in supporting the 20% increase in the assessed contributions, which we think is even more important now that it drives our intention in our work towards sustainably financed who providing more support and better support for countries,” said Ethiopia, echoing a statement made by Senegal on behalf of the 47 member states of WHO’s African region.

Member states question pay raise for senior management 

Tedros says the pay raise for senior staff is on a no-gain, no loss basis.

Member states also questioned a proposal by the WHO administration to raise the pay rates of professional and senior staff by 9.5%, particularly in a period of austerity.

That means that the gross salary of the organisation’s 10 assistant director generals as well as directors in five WHO regions would be $216,655 per year in 2025, according to the new scale, as compared to about $198,000 previously.  

WHO’s Deputy Director-General, Mike Ryan, who also heads WHO’s emergency operations,  would receive a gross salary of US$ 235,064 per annum in 2025. And the gross salary of the director-general, Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, would be US$ 293,003 a year. 

Responding to EB member concerns, Tedros told the board that the increase had been proposed by the International Civil Service Commission of the United Nations to bring Geneva salaries in line with those of other UN agencies.  

However, the increase in base pay would be offset by a reduction in the “post adjustment” rate that WHO staff receive, leading to a net “no -gain, no loss” outcome in terms of their net pay, he stressed.  

Right now, post adjustment rates for Geneva’s professional staff, for instance, amount to a whopping 80% over WHO’s basic pay rate – due to the high cost of living in Switzerland.  Even so, it remained unclear if the “no-gain no/loss principle” would really apply to senior staff in WHO regions, where the cost of living, and thus post adjustment rates are much lower to begin with. 

WHO did not respond to enquiries from Health Policy Watch regarding the issue. 

Member states call for more transparency by WHO administration

Member states at the WHO Executive Board on Monday.

In Monday’s debate, however, several member states stressed that the WHO administration still needs to be more transparent regarding disclosures regarding staff costs, in terms of the organisational budget overall.  

Notably, in the hundreds of pages of WHO  documents before the Executive Board, there is no breakdown of average and aggregate costs to the organisation of staff, with respect to professional and administrative staff at different salary grades. 

And in the proposal to raise the pay of the DG and ADGs, it was unclear if the “net pay rates” cited, which were about 26% lower than the gross pay scales, really reflect all of the perks that senior staff enjoy.

Those would include post adjustments, [even at a reduced rate], as well as educational grants, dependency allowances, and other housing benefits. WHO professional staff also enjoy tax free status in Geneva and their home countries – with the exception of the United States where the organisation pays taxes on behalf of WHO professional staff. 

WHO did not reply to repeated Health Policy Watch requests for further budget details.    

Most WHA decisions and resolutions approved conditionally  

In other business, the executive board conditionally approved over a dozen new or expanded WHO initiatives on universal health coverage, environmental health, communicable and non-communicable diseases, for consideration at the May World Health Assembly. The green-lighted initiatives also included a new global strategy on women, children’s and adolescent health, as well as a strategy on the health care workforce.

But they added stipulation that resolutions requiring WHO to undertake new or expanded programme of activities at significant cost would be reviewed and prioritised prior to the WHA to see which should indeed be approved in May, or alternatively, amended or delayed.    

The conditions, initially proposed by Norway, would have implementation “subject to the operationalisation of the Programme budget 2026–2027 once approved””- with a consultation process leading up to the WHA to prioritise the most important activities. 

Amongst the measures considered, however, several were also delayed. The Board deferred to the full Assembly any decision on an initiative by Pacific Island states to update WHO’s guidance on nuclear weapons – due to Russian opposition. (See related story).

The Board also agreed to continue negotiations between now and the WHA over a draft strategy on Traditional Medicine as well as a new global strategy for climate change and health – which was presented to member states at the EB as an “initial draft” for feedback and negotiation over the course of the coming three months. 

Russia Opposes Updated WHO Assessment of Health Effects of Nuclear Weapons

 

South African programmes like this one, to encourage people living with HIV to adhere to treatment, face an uncertain future following US President Donald Trump’s latest Executive order cutting off aid to the country.

CAPE TOWN – A coalition of South African civil society groups have urged South Africa’s President Cyril Ramaphosa to “step up” and lead a coordinated national and regional response to prevent “mass healthcare disruptions, preventable deaths, and surges in new HIV infections and drug resistance,” in the wake of the US President Donald Trump’s cut off of aid to the country. 

Trump last week issued an Executive Order halting all aid to South Africa, citing “unjust racial discrimination” against the country’s Afrikaner farmers as well as the country’s case against Israel at the International Criminal Court, alleging genocide in Gaza. The Trump order was referring to a new South African government law that makes it easier to expropriate unused land from white landowners without compensation – when it’s deemed to be in the “public interest“. The new law is being challenged in court.

“Action is critical, particularly in his role as the African Union (AU) Champion on Pandemic Prevention, Preparedness and Response (PPPR) and as South Africa takes on the G20 Presidency,” said the coalition, Community Health and HIV Advocate Navigating Global Emergencies (CHANGE), in a statement on Saturday.

A few organisations have received waivers, but many haven’t

South African schoolgirls campaign on World AIDS Day.

While a few South African organisations delivering HIV and tuberculosis services through the US President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) confirmed to Health Policy Watch that they had received PEPFAR waiver letters on Saturday exempting them from the 90-day freeze on PEPFAR activities, originally announced in late January, many others have seen activities cut or curtailed.

However, in light of the most recent Trump order, there is uncertainty about the fate of all PEPFAR-supported South African programmes beyond the 90 days exemption period. Meanwhile, the US Agency for International Development (USAID), which disburses a significant portion of the PEPFAR funding, is being dismantled and PEPFAR’s long-term future is in doubt as its budget comes up for consideration before the US Congress in late March.

Adding to the confusion, several other organisations have not received waivers, while forcing them to cut certain activities. 

For example, at least 9,000 people have lost access to needle exchange and opioid substitution therapy (OST), according to the South African National AIDS Council’s (SANAC) civil society forum.

Funding for HIV clinics catering for those most vulnerable to HIV – “key populations” including sex workers, men who have sex with men and trans people – is likely to be cut permanently.

Funding for a game-changing intervention for groups vulnerable to HIV – twice-yearly injections of lenacapivir that are 100% effective in preventing HIV infection or pre-exposure prophylaxis (PREP) has also been cancelled, according to various reports.

Witkoppen Clinic’s HIV services in Gauteng are among many South African clinics receiving PEPFAR funds via USAID.

Calling on Ramaphosa to “personally intervene” 

CHANGE has urged President Ramaphosa to “personally intervene before the situation worsens and to ensure a whole-of-government and civil society response.”

Sibongile Tshabalala, TAC chairperson.

“The reckless freezing of US foreign aid is nothing short of a death sentence for thousands of people in South Africa,” warned Sibongile Tshabalala, chairperson of the Treatment Action Campaign (TAC) which advocates for people living with HIV.

“Critical healthcare infrastructure is being dismantled, clinics forced to close, frontline workers without support, all while lives hang in the balance. We are watching decades of progress on HIV being decimated.” 

Historically, South Africa has had one of the highest rates of HIV infection in Africa and in the World.  However, rates of new infections have declined sharply thanks to aggressive campaigns to get those infected on anti-retroviral drugs.  Overall HIV prevalence is about 14% in South Africa, and nearly 20% amongst people aged 15-49 years.

No idea what is happening – people are going to start dying soon

“Health workers and people have no idea what is happening across the region. People are going to start dying soon. Can you imagine being dependent on treatment to save your life, and having it snatched away from you like this, with no alternative?” warned HIV clinician Dr Francois Venter, who directs the Ezintsha research centre in Johannesburg.

New HIV infections have declined sharply as ARV uptake increased.

Fatima Hassan, head of Health Justice Initiative (HJI), confirmed that while some projects had been given waivers “the issue is still the concern about key populations and what the waiver seeks to cruelly limit”.

“The loss of US government funding has left sex workers without life-saving healthcare, HIV prevention, and critical support. Without these services, they face higher risks of violence, stigma, and disease—pushing them further into isolation and vulnerability,” said Kholi Buthelezi of Sisonke, the National Sex Worker Movement of South Africa.

Grassroots organisations that fund outreach workers, peer educators, and service providers have been “left destitute”. “While the communities they serve face even greater barriers to safety and healthcare. Without urgent funding, these lifelines will disappear, leaving sex workers more isolated and at risk than ever,” said Buthelezi.

In light of the additional orders directed at South Africa, communities are also calling on Ramaphosa to use “all available domestic, as well as compulsory measures,” to ensure that life-saving tools and medicines reach all who need them.

Image Credits: UNAIDS, AIDS Healthcare Foundation, Witkoppen Clinic, TAC, UNAIDS.