Q&A: How Can Humanitarians Navigate the New Expanded Global Gag Rule? 04/02/2026 Irwin Loy Pro-abortion demonstrators in the US This story was originally published by The New Humanitarian. Chaos, confusion, and more ethical dilemmas: Humanitarians are still trying to understand the impacts of a sweeping expansion to the so-called “global gag rule” on US funding. The Trump administration expanded the on-again, off-again anti-abortion care directive known as the Mexico City policy to include nearly all foreign assistance, including humanitarian funding sent through UN agencies and international and local aid groups. The rules – announced on 23 January and published last week – also slap vague bans on programmes related to diversity and equity, and gender identity. The gag rule’s impacts are clear: more backstreet abortions, more unwanted pregnancies, and higher school dropout rates for girls, among them. Harsher rules will extend more harm to trans people and others in the LGBTQI+ community, and to racialised communities and others already on the margins in emergencies, aid groups warn. For humanitarians, the move injects more chaos into emergency responses: Will they over-comply and over-interpret the rules – cutting more than they need to and undermining others that provide reproductive care or protective services for marginalised groups? Will they choose between US funding and other donors – making them even more dependent on one volatile government? Several aid officials have said that their organisations were still weighing the implications – especially with $2 billion in recently announced US funding in the backdrop. But the risks are inevitable, say reproductive health advocates, who have hard-won lessons from previous gags. “There’s a lot of stigma, there’s a lot of chilling,” said Sarah Shaw, associate director of advocacy at MSI Reproductive Choices, an organisation providing abortion and contraception services globally. “Organisations that used to refer women to us for services will stop doing that. So those women will have nowhere to go.” MSI is among the non-profits who have refused to sign on to all versions of the global gag rule. Shaw and Beth Schlachter, MSI’s senior director of US external relations, explained what humanitarians can expect from the expanded global gag rule. They warned of “chaotic” disaster response scenarios, spoke of the “chilling” effect on over-complying with vague rules, and offered advice on what humanitarian groups who choose to sign should prioritise. Q: In previous iterations, humanitarians have stayed on the sidelines because they felt they didn’t need to get involved. How would you describe the reaction from humanitarian organisations in the past, compared to what everyone’s facing now? Beth Schlachter: I think everyone stays away from this if they don’t have to be involved. So, no shame on the humanitarians, but it’s one of those “you’re not going to stand up for it unless you have to”, because life is hard enough with the work that you do and you don’t have time or resources for it, and so then when it does hit you, you’re like, “Oh damn, look at that.” Sarah Shaw: I would agree with that. It’s no criticism on other sectors, but why would you engage in this toxic fight that you will never win unless you have to? Can you talk about the impacts you’ve seen? Shaw: As an abortion provider, we’ve been impacted by every iteration of this, and this is probably my fourth global gag rule I think in my life. So based on past experience, you know what the impacts of this are. It means that a lot of organisations have to choose. They have to choose between their abortion programming or their US funding. And to be honest, for most organisations, they will choose their US funding because it will probably be a much bigger part of the organisation’s ability to survive. For MSI, because we are an abortion provider, we will always choose our abortion provision. So we’ve always had to relinquish our US funding. This time round, we didn’t have as much because we learned our lesson under Trump One. We diversified our funding base, and so [for] Trump Two we were less reliant. But our Zimbabwe programme were incredibly reliant and, for them, it was probably nearly half of their funding for family planning work. They had 10 outreach teams – these are mobile teams that will go at regular intervals to visit communities to provide family planning services. And these are communities that won’t have access to any other provider… We didn’t have time to fundraise to fill the gap or to negotiate with other partners to pick up some of the work. So for those communities, it’s disastrous and it’s a breach of trust as well. For a lot of women, accessing contraception is a big leap of faith, because there will be community stigma, there will be opposition in the family. And then, for the people that convinced them to do it and told them that it was a good thing, to just not show up is really damaging. So as a result of that, we’re going to see more unintended pregnancies, more unsafe abortions, more girls dropping out of school. I mean, this is what’s so nonsensical about it. They claim it’s to reduce abortion, but all it does is reduce access to family planning, which increases the need for abortion. Can you talk about the risk of over-compliance: organisations that over-interpret the rules? Shaw: [The global gag rule is] incredibly complicated and badly communicated. And this time around, it’s just off-the-scale complicated, to be quite honest. Even the abortion part alone is way more complex than it’s ever been, and then you’re factoring in the other aspects as well. This causes a lot of confusion. So generally, the safe place to be is to over-interpret, over-implement. I totally understand why organisations do that, because it’s either that or risk collapse which is not an option. But the result of that is there’s a lot of stigma, there’s a lot of chilling. We will have organisations that used to refer women to us for services will stop doing that. So those women will have nowhere to go. Our teams have reported being excluded from critical policy conversations and technical working groups; have their access to data limited; commodities as well. I remember last time around in one country – and I’m not going to name them because it’s not fair – but we were a sub[-grantee] on another INGO’s project and our role in the project was to deliver family planning services. And that sub came up – the day after the global gag rule was announced – with a truck and started taking all the USA-branded contraceptives out of our pharmacy, saying “Oh you can’t use this because of the global gag rule,” which isn’t true, because we got them from the national government. It’s just this over-interpretation; this chilling. We know that in times of crisis that the rates of rape and sexual violence escalate against women, children, against men. So if you have organisations who don’t know what they can or cannot provide when it comes to abortion without potentially violating their agreement with the US then are they going to be able to meet the needs of people who are in an immediate crisis? Schlachter: So you imagine the complexity of that, and now, if you report on humanitarian situations, you know how challenging it is to operate. If the largest providers of assistance in any particular situation, the ones who are on the ground, have not signed the global gag rule, or this doesn’t apply to them, then they may not be able to work with those other entities there who do. And it causes fracture about who can provide services and which services then could be provided… We know that in times of crisis that the rates of rape and sexual violence escalate against women, children, against men. So if you have organisations who don’t know what they can or cannot provide when it comes to abortion without potentially violating their agreement with the US – and potentially losing tens of millions of dollars or hundreds of million dollars – then are they going to be able to meet the needs of people who are in an immediate crisis? It introduces more complexity, more chaos in the situation that’s already chaotic and just creates a situation where fewer people are going to have access to resources. The new version of the global gag rule includes all multilateral aid, including through UN agencies. Schlachter: We know that even though the US isn’t funding UNFPA [the UN’s sexual and reproductive health agency], the partners who work with UNFPA would be affected because [the rule covers] all multilateral assistance. And so that gets complex as well because UNFPA is the cluster lead for the minimum initial service package for reproductive health in crisis settings and for [sexual and gender-based violence] in crisis settings. So, again, it creates [a] fracture of who can work with whom and who’s providing what resources to others. We don’t yet know how humanitarians are going to deal with this because they’ve never had to deal with it before. If UNFPA is not under [the global gag rule], but other UN partners are, then can UNFPA work with other UN entities in the time of a crisis? We don’t yet know. So it’s just creating unnecessary chaos. They’re just trying to stigmatise abortion and deny services to women and girls. So we don’t yet know how humanitarians are going to deal with this because they’ve never had to deal with it before. Can you expand on other examples of the over-compliance risk? Shaw: Supply chains are a big risk. Over the years, our supply chains have become incredibly integrated. I think this time round, because it’s so complicated, folks are going to try a lot harder to try and firewall between abortion-related commodities, and contraception commodities, or reproductive health commodities. So definitely a big risk is that countries will just stop procuring abortion commodities or stop distributing them because they won’t want to distribute them in the same vehicles with the same driver that’s on a US government project payroll. I think that’s a big risk. Similarly, with who receives these commodities – particularly in countries where there’s scarcity and maybe where the government is less concerned about reproductive health and maybe the government has given indications that they are ideologically aligned with the Christian nationalist agenda of the current US administration – there’s a risk that they will start to deprioritise certain implementing partners because they will maybe be seen not to be aligned with their agenda. Schlachter: Sarah, as you’re talking, I was thinking of one way this could really cause a problem as well, particularly in natural disasters or when people are displaced and health workers are displaced along with everybody else. If the global gag is applied through government sites and services, the folks who are healthcare workers themselves in addition to the commodities. And then humanitarian entities come in and try to work with them – as you would in any humanitarian situation – then you have a challenge of who’s gagged by what and who can work with whom. Why would you even be talking about that? There’s an earthquake. There’s somebody who’s been raped. You need to help the people, not check their credentials on the global gag. Can I even be a partner with you or not? Shaw: Exactly. Schlachter: So, how is that going to play out? I hope people just help people, as they would, and figure it out later. Shaw: It’s just putting an incredibly complicated administrative layer in a situation that is not able to deal with administration. You just need to do services when you’re in a humanitarian crisis, and the risk is – and the chilling is – that providers will just refuse to do anything that is not deemed safe. By that, I mean providing services for certain communities – like the LGBTQI community or trans people – or providing reproductive health services. There’s a risk even [with] post-abortion care: Post-abortion care is permitted, but it’s still going to come with that stigma. So there’s a real risk that people will just get turned away because providers will refuse to provide because they’ll be frightened. They don’t want to lose their jobs; they don’t want to lose their license. For those organisations that choose to sign the global gag rule, what advice do you have? Shaw: Really take care to develop very clear communications and guidance – for their partners on the ground, but also their sub-grantees as well – on what this means and where the red lines are. Because often the communications around this are very poor. They’re not in local language, or it will take the US government a year, two years to get around to doing the French and Lusophone translations, let alone African local languages. And in all that time there’s just all this confusion and chilling growing. Also: Really focus on what they can do. By fixating on what we can’t do, we just frighten people, so just really emphasise what they can do and continue to do… For example, be very clear that, yes, you can’t refer for abortion, but if a woman comes and says that she’s had an unsafe abortion and she needs treatment, you can and must treat her. Because the risk is that there will just be a complete carte blanche: “No, we’re not doing anything like that.” So, you know, looking at the things they can do. [The rules] very clearly say abortion as a method of family planning is not permitted. So that means if a woman’s life is at risk or she’s had an unsafe abortion, then you can provide a service. So, really focus on that. Because a lot of the time people think it’s just a carte-blanche ban on abortion and it’s not. Similarly, you know, for rape survivors. If a woman comes and says she’s been raped, well they are permitted to provide her a service. And I think that nuance, that’s what gets lost. The further down you get, the more that nuance is lost. The New Humanitarian puts quality, independent journalism at the service of the millions of people affected by humanitarian crises around the world. Find out more at www.thenewhumanitarian.org. Image Credits: Center for Reproductive Rights, Gayatri Malhotra/ Unsplash. Almost 40% of Cancers Could be Prevented by Curbing Tobacco, Infections and Alcohol 03/02/2026 Kerry Cullinan In Sierra Leone, students receive the HPV vaccine to protect them against cervical cancer. Almost 40% of global cancer cases could be prevented, according to a new global study from the World Health Organization (WHO) and its International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), published in Nature Medicine on Tuesday. The study attributed some 7.1 million cancer cases in 2022 to 30 “modifiable risk factors”. Tobacco was the leading preventable cause of cancer, globally responsible for 15% of all new cases, followed by infections (10%) and alcohol consumption (3%). Three cancer types – lung, stomach and cervical cancer – accounted for nearly half of all preventable cancer cases in both men and women, globally. Lung cancer was primarily linked to smoking and air pollution, stomach cancer was largely attributable to Helicobacter pylori infection, and cervical cancer was overwhelmingly caused by human papillomavirus (HPV). Gender and regional differences Around 45% of new cancer cases in men could be prevented in comparison to 30% in women, according to the study, which draws on data from 185 countries and 36 cancer types. In men, smoking accounted for an estimated 23% of all new cancer cases, followed by infections at 9% and alcohol at 4%. Among women globally, infections accounted for 11% of all new cancer cases, followed by smoking at 6% and high body mass index at 3%. There were also geographical differences. Preventable cancers for women ranged from 24% in North Africa and West Asia to 38% in sub-Saharan Africa. Among men, 57% of cancers in East Asia were preventable, while only 26% were in Latin America and the Caribbean at 28% “This is the first global analysis to show how much cancer risk comes from causes we can prevent,” said Dr Andre Ilbawi, WHO Team Lead for Cancer Control, and author of the study. “By examining patterns across countries and population groups, we can provide governments and individuals with more specific information to help prevent many cancer cases before they start.” The WHO urged countries to develop “context-specific prevention strategies that include strong tobacco control measures, alcohol regulation, vaccination against cancer-causing infections such as human papillomavirus (HPV) and hepatitis B, improved air quality, safer workplaces, and healthier food and physical activity environments”. Europe recognises air pollution as cancer agent Meanwhile, air pollution will be added to the European Code Against Cancer for the first time. “Air pollution raises our overall cancer risk by 11% and risk of death from cancer by 12%. Poor air quality is the largest environmental threat to human health, killing more people than tobacco, so it’s significant progress that air pollution is now recognised in the latest European Code Against Cancer,” said Nina Renshaw, head of health at the Clean Air Fund. “This vital change means that institutions and governments across the EU and the World Health Organization’s wider European region now have an even clearer mandate to reduce dangerous air pollution, and in doing so, protect people’s health. “With 99% of people worldwide currently breathing harmful air – contributing to respiratory diseases, strokes, heart attacks, and dementia, as well as stillbirths and miscarriages – it’s essential to address the interconnections between air quality and urgent health challenges. “Clean air measures positively impact public health almost immediately, resulting in reduced hospitalisations – and ultimately in fewer people developing chronic health conditions such as lung cancer.” Image Credits: Gavi. WHO to Consider Extending Definition of NCDs to Include Liver and Blood Diseases 03/02/2026 Kerry Cullinan Dr Jeremy Farrar, WHO Assistant Director-General. Proposals to include steatotic liver disease and haemophilia, and other inherited bleeding disorders, into the definition of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) will be tabled at the World Health Assembly in May, the World Health Organization (WHO) Executive Board (EB) resolved on Tuesday. Egypt, which sponsored the resolution on steatotic liver disease (formerly known as fatty liver disease), told the EB that it affects more than 1.7 billion people worldwide, “driven by metabolic risk factors, unhealthy diets and physical inactivity”. The resolution calls for the formal recognition and systematic integration of the liver disease into the global NCD response, “including surveillance systems, prevention strategies, primary healthcare-based management and national NCD plans”. Introducing the resolution on haemophilia and other inherited bleeding disorders, Armenia said it aimed to address “the systematic under-diagnosis and historical lack of prioritisation” afforded to these disorders and “bridge the gap in access to essential treatment and care”. Dr Jeremy Farrar, WHO Assistant Director General, said that NCDs will be one of the “defining concerns” of the 21st century, after a mammoth session on NCDs that was addressed by almost every member state. NCDs already account for over 80% of deaths in the Western Pacific region, the EB heard from a representative from the Solomon Islands. Several countries appealed for support and guidance to address their growing burdens of key NCDs, including diabetes, heart disease and hypertension – driven mainly by unhealthy diets and lack of exercise. The majority of countries have been unable to reach NCD-related targets set out in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and Farrar warned that the world’s ageing population would make matters worse. Farrar also cautioned against an “over-reliance in many parts of the world on treatment, as opposed to prevention and promotion of health”. During the WHO’s reforms, it has combined into one division health promotion, disease prevention and care, and this would encourage a “holistic approach to treatment beyond just drugs”. UN Declaration on NCDs NCD Alliance representative Mina Pécot-Demiaux addresses the EB. Much of the discussion focused on how to implement the Political Declaration on NCDs and mental health, adopted by the United Nations last December after last year’s High-Level Meeting (HLM). The declaration was expected to be adopted by consensus at HLM last September, but the US refused at the last minute. It was then referred to the UN General Assembly for a vote, where only the US and Argentina opposed it. Farrar said that, during the current time where there are “questions on multilateralism”, it was reassuring that “the vast, overwhelming number of countries could come together and agree on a political declaration”. The declaration sets three global targets for 2030: 150 million fewer tobacco users; 150 million more people with hypertension under control; and 150 million more people with access to mental health care. It also commits to at least 80% of countries with policy, legislative, regulatory and fiscal measures in place to address NCDs and mental health; at least 80% of primary health care facilities stocking essential medicines and basic technologies; and at least 60% of countries with measures to cover or limit the cost of essential NCD and mental health services. However, the NCD Alliance told the EB it was concerned about “the significant influence of health-harming industries, which weakened the [Political Declaration], including less ambitious commitments on NCD prevention, the removal of the health tax targets [on tobacco, alcohol and sugary drinks] and the omission of any reference to fossil fuels as key drivers of NCDs”. Meanwhile, Farrar said that while “political declarations have a critical role to play, in the end, they’re not the way that things get implemented,” pledging WHO support to countries to make a difference to people’s lives. Countries are Significantly Off-Track to Meet Global Mental Health Targets 03/02/2026 Disha Shetty Resources allocated to mental health services have not increased since 2020, according to the WHO Director General’s latest report on mental health. Countries are significantly off track in meeting global targets set to transform mental health systems, according to the latest Director-General report tabled at the World Health Organization’s (WHO) Executive Board meeting. Around 1.1 billion people were estimated to be living with a mental health disorder, according to the latest WHO data available for 2021. Financial and human resources available for mental health services have not increased since 2020, with budgets remaining at a median of 2% of government health spending, the report found. On average, there is only one government mental health worker for every 10,000 people with stark variations between lower- and higher-income countries, the Director General’s (DG) report noted. Countries discussed a range of responses. “It is absolutely essential to advance towards true inclusion of mental health and all policies tackling related inequalities to do with housing, the socio-economic level, work and climate change, as well as discrimination and violence,” the representative from Spain said. “We want to make sure that we focus ourselves on non-pharmaceutical tools, the fewer prescriptions of psychotropic drugs and the prescription of social measures and community action,” the Spanish representative added. The WHO has a ‘Comprehensive Mental Health Action Plan 2013-2030’ in place, and the DG’s report was meant to highlight the ways in which this action plan can be implemented or enhanced. New pressures on mental health disorders WHO wants mental health to be managed in a community set-up and is pushing countries to do so. Mental health disorders are worsening with the added pressure of the recent COVID-19 pandemic and increasing climate change impacts. The pandemic has worsened all the factors that expose young people to mental health problems – indebtedness, economic insecurity and inequalities, migration and conflict, the report found. Death by suicide is now the third leading cause of death among 15 to 29-year-olds, with an estimated 727,000 deaths by suicide in 2021, according to WHO data. Digital pressures are exacerbating poor mental health, and the WHO has already recognized that the time spent online is associated with depression, anxiety, and psychological distress in adolescents. “We request WHO to urgently address the impact of social media and extensive use of technology among adolescents and young people by ensuring that the recently published guidance on mental health for children and young people is fully implemented by member states,” a representative of Zambia said during the discussion. Belgium echoed similar sentiments. One of the key components of WHO’s plan is to integrate mental health and social care services in community-based settings. Currently, most countries are at an early stage of this transition to community-based service delivery, despite it being a key priority area for the WHO, according to the DG report. Millions of alcohol and drug-use deaths WHO Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus addressing the 158th session of WHO’s Executive Board in Geneva. In 2019, an estimated 2.5 billion people consumed alcohol and 400 million people were living with alcohol use disorders. Alcohol consumption and psychoactive drug use was responsible for 2.6 million and 0.6 million deaths in 2019, according to the WHO. The world health body estimates that 316 million people used psychoactive drugs in 2023, and 64 million people were living with drug use disorders. Both alcohol use and drug use disorders are problems that in recent years have been categorized as a mental health issue that require help. “Little progress has been made in implementing the high-impact policy interventions proven to reduce alcohol-related harm,” the DG’s report read. “…and quality and ethical treatment for substance use disorders is still largely inaccessible for those most in need.” Members of the European Union raised concern over tobacco products being aggressively marketed to children online. “Children should be protected from aggressive online marketing of unhealthy food and drinks, alcohol, tobacco and similar products or prohibited substances. We call upon WHO to advance research and develop effective guidance to protect and promote mental health online and offline, while recognizing the responsibility of digital platforms and industries,” said Bulgaria on behalf of the European Union. Growing recognition of the impact of mental health WHO EB’s ongoing 158th session in Geneva While the action on the ground is still limited, it is clear that there is a growing recognition among countries of the kinds of mental health disorders affect health. Discussions on the non-communicable diseases (NCDs) too saw extensive mention of mental health disorders. Germany drew attention to the impact of climate change on all NCDs, including mental health. Several non-state actors raised concerns about the mental health impacts on healthcare providers themselves due to a combination of excessive working hours, job insecurity, violence and psychosocial workplace risk. “Studies show that health workers face mental health crises in several countries, reflected in a suicide risk that is 24% higher than in other sectors. We urge member states to ramp up efforts at strengthening mental health and psychosocial support for the populations of their countries and with dedicated programs for health workers,” said a representative of Public Services International, a global union that represents millions of workers. Image Credits: Unsplash, WHO/X, WHO/X. Days After US Leaves WHO, Israel Warns it Faces Pressure to Withdraw 02/02/2026 Kerry Cullinan Israel addressing the EB158 Israel has called for a “brave conceptual overhaul” of the World Health Organization (WHO) following the recent withdrawal of the United States, warning that it too is under pressure to leave the global body. Claiming that the WHO has become “too politicised”, Israel told the body’s Executive Board (EB) meeting on Monday that, “in Israel, there are also, unfortunately, strong public voices calling for us to leave the organisation as we enter the transitional period”. “Just days ago, we witnessed the United States withdrawal from the WHO. The departure of the United States should compel us all to engage in an honest, urgent dialogue about the future and the purpose of our organisation,” said Israel. “We must confront the fact that other nations may follow even without formal departure, lose interest, reduce contributions, and pursue alternative mechanisms for global health cooperation,” Israel concluded. Later in the opening session, Israel – a close ally of the Trump administration – announced that it would be putting forward a resolution related to Argentina’s planned exit from the WHO. Argentina announced its exit after the US did, but unlike the US, it has no agreement enabling it to leave and the WHO has no mechanism that allows for country withdrawal – other than a 1948 agreement with the US. The Israeli resolution recommends that the World Health Assembly accepts’s Argentina’s withdrawal. Russia also expressed unhappiness at some EB agenda items and urged the WHO to revert to “impartiality”. One of ‘most difficult years’ Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus addresses the Executive Board. Opening the EB, Director-General Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said that the past year has been “one of the most difficult” in the WHO’s history. The US contributed over $1 billion to the WHO in 2022/ 23, around 20% of the body’s budget, and the body has been forced to reduce its budget for 2026/27 from $5.3 billion to $4.2 billion. It is still short of 15% of its reduced budget, particularly for emergency preparedness, antimicrobial resistance, health financing, climate resilience and determinants of health. However, Tedros said that WHO has “reached a position of stability”, and it will be able to wean itself from an “over-reliance on a handful of donors” if member states retain their commitment to incrementally increasing their membership fees. This would enable WHO “non-dependence” on a handful of donors, inflexible, unpredictable funding and its biggest donors. When I say independence…. I mean an impartial, science-based organisation that’s free to say what the evidence says without fear or favour,” added Tedros. Disease prevention successes Tedros also reported numerous successes over the past year. Highlights in terms of disease prevention include access to more than 900 million influenza vaccine doses; the re-establishment of preventive cholera vaccination after a three-year gap, with 50 million doses going to Bangladesh, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Mozambique; and preventative vaccination for Ebola for approximately 100,000 frontline health workers in the DRC and the Central African Republic. “Despite funding cuts, we protected the global measles and rubella lab network, enabling our network of more than 740 labs to process more than 700,000 tests to detect and respond to measles globally,” said Tedros. Seven new countries were supported to introduce malaria vaccines, and 15 more countries to introduce HPV vaccination to prevent cervical cancer,” meaning that 65% of girls globally now live in a country with routine HPV vaccination”, he added. Health emergencies The WHO Academy in Lyon, set up with the French government, had 100,000 enrollments. The academy’s basic emergency care programme provides standard training on how to manage acutely ill patients. “A study of over 35,000 patients in 17 hospitals in Nepal, Uganda and Zambia, showed a reduction in mortality of between 34% and 50% following the implementation of the WHO Academy basic emergency care training,” Tedros noted. “Despite funding cuts, we protected the global measles and rubella lab network, enabling our network of more than 740 labs to process more than 700,000 tests to detect and respond to measles globally,” he added. Last week was the sixth anniversary of COVID-19 being declared a public health emergency of international concern, and last year the WHO pandemic agreement was agreed and the amended International Health Regulations came into force. Through the Pandemic Fund, the WHO and the World Bank, 70 countries to strengthen surveillance, laboratory networks, workforce capacity and multi-sectoral coordination. WHO has also updated its international pathogen surveillance network, using AI to “support more than 110 countries and 30 organisations who use the platform every day to quickly identify new threats”. Organisational reform The report from the Programme, Budget and Administration Committee (PBAC), which recommended governance reform, Global Health architecture changes, and amendments to the external auditor selection process, was adopted by the EB. PBAC requested that the WHO Secretariat ensure that country-level functions, such as emergency preparedness capacities, particularly in vulnerable settings, be protected during the cost-containment measures. The Committee also underscored the importance of sustainable, predictable and flexible financing. In its response, the WHO Secretariat reported that existing flexible funding was already being allocated to sustain underfunded priority areas, and reaffirmed its commitment to transparency, cost containment, strengthened prioritisation and ongoing engagement with member states on sustainable financing. PBAC also requested the WHO Secretariat to host a member-state-led process that brings together current discussions on reforming the global health architecture and the United Nations reform initiative, UN80. The aim would be to “facilitate convergence and consensus-building”, and include relevant global health actors, including development banks, philanthropies, civil society and academic institutions. Brain Health Is Not an Abstract Policy Issue, It Is a Lived Reality 31/01/2026 Health Policy Watch George Vredenburg and Rajinder Dhamija “You start with, as in my case, with the loss of three generations of my family to various forms of Alzheimer’s or dementia.” Those were the words of George Vradenburg. For him, brain health is not an abstract policy issue. It is a lived reality that mirrors a fast-growing global crisis. This issue was the focus of a recent episode of the Global Health Matters podcast, hosted by Dr. Garry Aslanyan. An estimated 57 million people worldwide are living with dementia, Vradenburg said, but that figure captures only those with symptoms. The scale is far larger. Disease processes often begin decades earlier, placing hundreds of millions more at risk. “The problem is by and large, now two thirds to three quarters of the people with dementia are in the global south, and that number and percentage is going to increase in the next 25 years,” Vradenburg said. The economic and social toll is enormous, already exceeding trillions of dollars globally. Families shoulder much of the burden, facing years of emotional strain and financial loss. Read related article: Unlocking ‘Brain Capital’ in the Brain Economy – Davos Initiative Aims to Make Brain Health a Development Indicator In India, neurologist Rajinder Dhamija sees brain health as a challenge that spans generations. “One of three of us will develop a brain disorder at one point of our life,” he said. Children face neurodevelopmental conditions and infections. Young adults confront rising rates of stroke and mental illness. Older adults are living longer, often with multiple chronic brain-related conditions. India’s numbers are stark. More than 330 million people are expected to be over the age of 60 within two decades. Dementia alone costs the country billions each year. Yet specialist care remains scarce. “We have less than one neurologist per million population in India, around 3,000 neurologists at present,” according to Dhamija. Both experts argued that brain health must be reframed beyond hospitals and clinics. Prevention, education, nutrition, and primary care deliver far greater returns than crisis response. “Prevention at the primary level yields much more results than the investing in terms of a large infrastructure,” Dhamija said. India has begun piloting district brain health clinics that combine screening, treatment, rehabilitation, and data collection to inform national policy. Globally, new tools may further expand access. Vaccines for Alzheimer’s are now in clinical trials. Low-cost screening using mobile phones and artificial intelligence could bring early detection to underserved communities. The stakes are high. As Dhamija put it, “brain health… is very essential, not only for the healthy societies and healthy countries, but also for a smooth economic development and the social development of any nation.” See more Global Health Matters episodes on Health Policy Watch. Image Credits: Global Health Matters Podcast. Why Africa Wants to Lead its own Health Research Agenda 31/01/2026 Health Policy Watch In the latest episode of Trailblazers with Garry, Garry Aslanyan visits Accra, Ghana, to speak with Professor John Owusu Gyapong, Secretary General of the African Research Universities Alliance. Gyapong took on the role in 2024, leading efforts to strengthen research collaboration across African universities. His work focusses on building capacity within the continent and supporting locally driven research agendas. Earlier in his career, when much of global health funding and attention centred on malaria, Gyapong chose to study neglected tropical diseases. These illnesses, he explains, had major social and economic consequences but received far less attention. Now, as a researcher and educator, Gyapong continues to emphasise the importance of African-led solutions and long-term investment in young scientists. The conversation touches on leadership, research priorities, and why universities play a critical role in shaping Africa’s health future. Watch the full episode: Trailblazers with Garry is part of Global Health Matters. Listen to more Global Health Matters shows on Health Policy Watch. Image Credits: Global Health Matters Podcast. Unlocking ‘Brain Capital’ in the Brain Economy – Davos Initiative Aims to Make Brain Health a Development Indicator 30/01/2026 Elaine Ruth Fletcher Rice University’s Harris Eyre in the Davos Alzheimer’s Collaborative ‘Brain House’ describing new brain capital and brain economy initiatives launched at the 2026 World Economic Forum. A new initiative that aims to measure and promote the inclusion of “brain capital” as an economic indicator was launched at the World Economic Forum in Davos last week. Advocates for the Global Brain Economy initiative, and a companion Global Brain Capital Index argue that using brain health as a development indicator can help spur more awareness and investments in brain health – including dementia related diseases that now rank as the seventh largest cause of death worldwide. The discussions, hosted by the Davos Alzheimer’s Collaborative (DAC), marked what several speakers described as a turning point: a shift from viewing brain health primarily as a cost to seeing it as an investable economic asset — one with implications for productivity, resilience, innovation, and long-term growth. With the launch of the Global Brain Capital Index and the Global Brain Economy Initiative, leaders from economics, neuroscience, policy, and finance argued that recognizing — and monetizing — “brain capital” may be essential to unlocking investment in brain health across the life course, from early development to healthy aging and dementia prevention. Projected growth curve for dementia risks and deaths 0 from 0.56 million in 1990 to nearly 5 million annually in 2030. From Idea to Global Movement The concept of the “brain economy” has evolved rapidly from academic theory to policy and investment agenda, said Harris Eyre. A professor at Rice University and the University of Texas Medical Branch, and a leading member of DAC, he framed the launch moment as the culmination of years of work. “We’ve really hit a crescendo point,” Eyre said. Referring to the newly released flagship report, The Human Advantage: Stronger Brains in the Age of AI, published by the World Economic Forum and McKinsey Health Institute, he noted its resonance across Davos. “We have a lot of different global challenges, a lot of big macro challenges. But here you can see… that brain challenges are very significant across the lifespan, from the earliest stage of life through to late life.” Those challenges include early-life malnutrition and stunted development, youth mental health, workforce disruption driven by artificial intelligence, and rising rates of dementia in ageing populations. “The cost of brain health conditions across the lifespan… is $3.5 trillion to the global economy, and the cost is rising at 3% a year,” Eyre said. Introducing brain capital Brain Capital concept At the heart of the Davos discussions was the concept of brain capital, defined as the combined value of brain health and brain skills. “Brain capital is the new paradigm here,” Eyre said. “It’s human capital 2.0 — human capital in the age of neuroscience.” He stressed that brain capital spans mental health, neurological health, cognitive skills, emotional resilience, creativity, and learning — and that these capacities are now more critical than ever. “Our brains are just so important now than ever before,” he said. “The accelerations of change are so high, we need brain health. We need brain skills.” Eyre argued that advances in neuroscience, reduced stigma around mental health and dementia, and growing awareness of neurodiversity have created a unique opportunity. “If you remember one thing today,” he told the audience, “is remember brain capital.” Dialogues at Davos with global health leaders around the new initiative included conversations with: Bill Gates, WHO Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, and Wellcome’s John-Arne Røttingen, among others, Eyre said. Brain Capital Index – a new development indicator Rym Ayadi, president of the Euro-Mediterranean Economists Association, describes the new ‘Brain Capital’ index launched at Davos. That call for recognition was matched with a new measurement tool unveiled in Davos; the full report was published just this week. Called the Global Brain Capital Index, it establishes a set of standardized indicators for measuring brain capital, in the form of brain health and brain skills, across countries and globally. The new index was developed by the economist Rym Ayadi, President of the Euro-Mediterranean Economists Association (EMEA). “Brain capital was a concept,” Ayadi said. “And nowadays I can say to you… it can be measured at national level.” Ayadi described the index as a response to what she called a blind spot in traditional economic frameworks. Brain health and brain skills are the two main pillars of the brain capital index – with “enablers” as a third important influence in overall outcomes. “GDP is very quantity-based. It’s not quality-based,” she said. “Brain health was a residual. It’s a cost. But brain health nowadays should be [seen as] infrastructure, an asset. It’s not a cost — it’s an investment.” The new index brings together over 28 indicators on brain health, brain skills, and enabling environments — the latter includes the quality of education, health systems, governance, and environmental risks, like air pollution, which has now been link clearly to dementia as well as to other forms of cognitive impairment. The 28 core indicators were derived from a larger collection of 106 indicators, available on an interactive Brain Capital Dashboard, and selected through a systematic process as the best composite measure of trends. “It is really a strategic tool, a compass for economic policy thinking going forward,” Ayadi said of the index. Decline in brain health seen worldwide A decline in brain health as a component of the brain capital index is seen across countries and regions. Drawing on data from 1990 onwards, the findings presented in Davos revealed troubling global trends. “We can see an increase overall in brain health since the 90s, but then there is an overall decline, and this decline is persistent in all countries of the world,” Ayadi said. “So something is wrong here.” The trend of brain health decline is seen across both OECD and non-OECD countries. And there is also a “huge inequality between OECD and non-OECD countries,” Ayadi said. “And if we don’t really act, it becomes even worse.” Non-communicable diseases and dementia in focus Abnormal accumulation of amyloid plaques and tau proteins in the brain, are the two hallmarks of Alzheimer’s – the latter forming tangles in neurons, seen here. Speakers linked the brain health declines to the growing burden of non-communicable diseases, particularly neurological and mental health conditions. “For the brain health indicators, for example, we have burden of disease, prevalence of depression, suicide rate… Alzheimer’s disease and other dementia, Parkinson’s disease, schizophrenia, stroke, bipolar,” Ayadi said. Population ageing, combined with underinvestment in brain health, are other contributing factors. “Brain health overall is under global strain,” she said. “Driven by population aging, raising mental health burdens and cumulative economic and health stressors.” Despite the scale of the challenge, Ayadi noted that brain health remains systematically underfunded. “Despite the economic importance, brain health remains systematically underfunded and under integrated into policy framework,” she said. Brain skills improvements offset brain health declines Consideration of brain skills as part of the index provides a more hopeful picture. This includes skills’ indicators, like level of education or the rate of innovation, Ayadi said. Skills indicators, as such, are still rising in many parts of the world, including in low income countries -even if the disparities are huge. Brain skill indicators such as educational level or the pace of innovation are still rising in many countries, countering negative trends in brain health. But even when those enablers are considered, the composite trends in many parts of the world, including high and lower-income regions, still reflects worrying signs of stagnation or decline, she underlined – reflecting the way the decline in brain health can ‘drag down’ progress overall. Evolution of composite brain capital index including enablers. More positive trends in brain skills and related enablers, like education and health infrastructure, offset declines in brain health. From measurement to investment The central argument emerging from Davos was that measurement enables monetisation of risks and benefits to brain health and brain capital. Consequently, monetizing brain capital could unlock large-scale investment in prevention, care, and skills development. “If, in fact, we are able to measure, and we are able to govern, we can… finance,” Ayadi said. “And then it becomes in the economic and financial system.” This idea resonated strongly with investors and business leaders attending the sessions. Steve Carnevale, moderator of the DAC session and himself a venture capitalist, reflected on the power of quantification: “When we can quantify something that previously wasn’t quantifiable, and when we can quantify it, we can turn it into a growth story,” Carnevale said. “That’s when people are really going to follow us.” Toward a ‘brain-positive’ economy The Davos discussions also signal a broader rethinking of development indicators. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) continues to be the dominant indicator of socio-economic development. While this has been under challenge by academics for sometime, GDP’s binary nature is even more out of date in the age of AI, panelists argued. “Brain health has to become a priority within our national policies, and also brain skills. This index could be a new policy compass beyond GDP,” Ayadi argued, saying that development indicators need to shift “from quantity-based skills into neurocognitive assets… and from growth to resilience.” Along with that, the new brain economy initiative launched at Davos aims to spur policymakers from theory to action, Eyre said. The initiative focusses on safeguarding brain health, fostering brain skills, investing with a “brain lens,” and mobilizing public-private partnerships. “We need brain lens investing to sit above global financial architecture – and channel it towards brain positive investments.” Added Drew Holzapfel DAC COO, “Brain health has long been treated primarily as a health issue, which it is. But when it’s understood as an economic issue, it opens the door to more resources and a broader, more sustained commitment. What we have the opportunity to do is take the concept of brain capital and translate it into something that focuses the minds of finance ministers.” Brain capital all the more important in AI era DAC founder George Vradenburg opening the panel on brain capital and the brain economy at a WEF side event in Davos last week. Recognizing the importance of brain health and brain capital is all the more critical in the age of fast-evolving AI systems – so that humans can keep abreast of these changes – and benefit from them – rather than the reverse, said George Vradenburg, founder of the Davos Alzheimer’s Collaborative, and convenor of the Davos session. “We need to be referring to AI as Augmented Intelligence and not Artificial Intelligence,” Vradenburg said. At a “Davos wrap” webinar this week, hosted by EMEA, Lucy Pérez, global leader of the McKinsey Health Institute, underlined the critical moment faced. “There’s no more urgent time to invest in brain capital than right now,” Pérez said. “The demographic shifts that we’re experiencing, the geopolitical shocks, the economic shocks, the way technology is impacting not only the workplace, but also our daily lives.” But its the opportunity – as compared to the threat – that policymakers need to appreciate: “Scaling existing brain interventions already is going to unlock over $6 trillion in economic opportunity,” Pérez said. “And that’s with innovation we already have in hand.” Image Credits: DigitalRalph, Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer’s Disease, August 2024. , EMEA, 2026, National Institutes on Aging . US Freezes All Funds to Gavi Over Vaccine Preservative Thimerosal 29/01/2026 Kerry Cullinan A baby in Rwanda receives a combined measles and rubella vaccine. The US government has frozen funds to Gavi, the global vaccine alliance, until it commits to a plan to phase out the preservative thimerosal from all the vaccines it distributes. The US demand, first reported by Reuters, is linked to the unproven belief held by US Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr and allies that thimerosal, which contains mercury, is linked to autism. However, even the US Food and Drug Administration has pronounced that “thimerosal has been the subject of numerous studies and has a long record of safe and effective use preventing bacterial and fungal contamination of vaccines, with no ill effects established other than minor local reactions at the site of injection.” The FDA also notes that a vaccine with 0.01% thimerosal as a preservative contains “roughly the same amount of elemental mercury [as] contained in a three-ounce can of tuna fish”. Around 14% of Gavi’s vaccines contain thimerosal, which is used in some multi-dose vials to destroy any bacteria and fungi that may enter a vial each time a new dose is drawn. Multi-dose vaccines are used in many low- and middle-income countries as they are cheaper. Affected Gavi vaccines include the five-in-one pentavalent vaccine (Diphtheria, Pertussis , Tetanus, Hepatitis B and Haemophilus influenzae type b), the Diphtheria, Pertussis and Tetanus (DPT) vaccine, Tetanus-Reduced Diphtheria (Td), Hepatitis B, Meningococcal A Conjugate (MenA) and Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine (PCV). Most US vaccines do not contain thimerosal, while it is seldom found in Europe, which relies mainly on single-dose vaccines. Scientific consensus “We received a request from the US government to remove thimerosal from our portfolio. We remain in contact on this subject,” a Gavi spokesperson told Health Policy Watch. “While we very much hope to find a pathway to welcoming the US back as a donor, any decision related to Gavi’s portfolio would require a decision by Gavi’s Board and input from preceding governance committees, which will be guided by scientific consensus.” Hanging in the balance is some $300 million already allocated by the Biden administration but not yet paid, as well as any new funds. All Gavi-supported vaccines have to be recommended by the World Health Organisation’s (WHO) Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE), an independent body that examines all available scientific evidence and issues global guidance on the use of vaccines. In addition, each manufacturing site where Gavi-supported vaccines are produced must be approved or “pre-qualified” by WHO. Gavi-supported vaccines must also be recommended by the National Immunisation Technical Advisory Group (NITAG) in each country where they are being used. Most Gavi-supported countries also require vaccines to be approved by their own National Regulatory Authorities (NRAs), in addition to WHO approvals. In June last year, Kennedy told Gavi that the US would withhold funds until it “re-earned the public trust”, claiming that it had “ignored vaccine safety”. The US recently lost its seat on the Gavi board as it has failed to pledge any funds to it. Image Credits: Twitter: @WHOAFRO, WHO. Latest US Restrictions on Aid ‘Bully’ Recipients to Accept ‘Extremist Ideology’ 29/01/2026 Kerry Cullinan Kenyan women at a family planning clinic. Global health organisations have reacted with anger to the new US foreign aid policy, which prohibits all aid recipients, bar military, from performing or promoting abortion, “gender ideology”, or “diversity, equity and inclusion” (DEI). “Catastrophic”, “bullying”, “draconian” and “ideologically driven” – are some of their reactions to the Promoting Human Flourishing in Foreign Assistance (PHFFA) policy, announced by US Vice-President JD Vance at an anti-abortion event last Friday evening. The policy’s three parts were published in the Federal Register on Tuesday as Protecting Life in Foreign Assistance, Combating Gender Ideology in Foreign Assistance and Combating Discriminatory Equity Ideology in Foreign Assistance Rules. The new rules apply to all foreign and US NGOs and “international organisations”, including multilateral UN agencies still funded by the US and bodies such as the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, TB and Malaria. However, in countries that allow abortion, governments and parastatals (government agencies) will need to place any US funds in “a segregated account” to ensure they’re not used for abortions and related activities. Governments and parastatals “may” also be required to agree that they won’t use US funds to promote or engage in “gender ideology” or DEI. The US State Department defines “gender ideology” activities as those that provide or promote “sex rejecting procedures” (defined broadly to include puberty blockers, hormones, surgeries); promote or counsel social transition; use materials that discuss changing one’s sex or pronoun usage not aligned with biological sex; lobby foreign governments on gender identity issues; and support drag queen workshops, performances, or similar activities”. Aid recipients are also compelled to agree to US officials visiting their offices unannounced to inspect their documents and activities, and to speak to people receiving their services. This is potentially a violation of patient confidentiality. Imposing ‘extremist ideology’ Since 1984, successive Republican governments have imposed a “Global Gag Rule” (also known as the Mexico City Policy) on foreign NGOs receiving global health aid, barring them from using this money – or even money they have raised from other sources – for any abortion-related activities, including referrals. However, the second Trump administration is the first to extend this to all non-military foreign assistance, including humanitarian assistance, and to widen the scope to include US NGOs, international organisations and – potentially – governments. “Bullying countries into complying with anti-rights and extremist ideology is despicable and unacceptable. The imperialist goals of this administration are on full display in these conditions to foreign assistance,” Anu Kumar, CEO of the global reproductive justice organisation, Ipas, told a media briefing this week. In 2024, $39.8 billion in US foreign aid was dispensed over 160 countries, with the largest share (41%) going to multilateral agencies, according to KFF. “This is tens of billions more than the amount of global health assistance subject to the policy under the first Trump administration’s previously expanded policy ($7.3 billion in 2020),” notes KFF. This “catastrophic expansion” is going to be especially harmful to “women, young people, girls and LGBTQI+ people”, added Ipas senior researcher Jamie Vernaelde. “There is an agenda here from the US government to push these ideologies across to other countries, both through direct government-to-government funding, but also forcing multilateral organisations to be subject to the ideology of one specific country.” Impact on Kenya The bilateral Memorandums of Understanding (MOU) that the US has signed with 15 African countries as part of its “America First Global Health Strategy” all contain a clause compelling countries to comply with the Global Gag Rule. “What we’ve realised is this inclusion of the Global Gag Rule in the MOUs was basically a Trojan horse, in the sense that now the governments have signed, they are obligated to implement these expanded conditions, for example, on gender ideology,” said Ipas’s Kenya director, Dr Musoba Kitui. Kitui said that 40,000 health workers had already lost their jobs in his country since the closure of the US Agency for International Development (USAID), leading to the “weakening of the health system”. Many African governments “are very, very desperate” to inject resources into their health systems since the closure of USAID, and were willing to sign bilateral MOUs with the US, despite some of the unfavourable conditions, said Kitui. Kenya’s MOU would be complex to implement, and there is “no way the US can monitor compliance without seeing patient records,” added Kitui, highlighting a concern about patient privacy which has resulted in the MOU being challenged in court. However, “this MOU grants US personnel diplomatic immunity, insulating them from any local courts against judicial processes for any violations of data privacy, or even crippling the health system for that matter”, he added. “Sexual and reproductive health is not a diplomatic bargaining chip. It’s a fundamental human right. Essential health care services must be separate from political agendas. What is really important is to protect the progress that we have made over the years, including in countries like Kenya,” Kitui stressed. Impact on humanitarian aid South Sudanese women survivors of violence shared their stories with a visiting UN delegation. The narrow redefinition of US global aid will affect survivors of gender-based violence who need access to rape kits and emergency contraception. Dr Jean-Claude Mulunda, who heads Ipas work in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), said that his organisation assisted displaced people in camps with family planning services, abortion care and also supports survivors of gender-based violence (GBV). With the demise of USAID, “rape kits” for GBV survivors containing medicine to protect women and girls against sexually transmitted infections and pregnancy are no longer available. “Ipas is trying, with our limited funds, to buy unit-by-unit, the different medicines in these kits,” said Mulunda. “Many women who are victims of rape can’t access abortion care, even though the country has signed the Maputo Protocol which allows access to abortion in case of rape.” The more onerous aid conditions are going to make it even harder for displaced women to access sexual and reproductive services. “The risk of unsafe abortion is elevated in humanitarian settings where it’s even harder for people to access medical services,” warned Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) in its reaction to the new policy. “In 2023, MSF provided more than 31,000 consultations for post-abortion care, most of which were due to complications related to unsafe abortion. With the reinstatement of the Global Gag Rule, MSF expects these already troubling numbers to increase.” The new policy, PHFFA, “escalates a pattern established across both Trump administrations: the systematic subordination of scientific evidence and patient needs to ideological and political objectives,” added MSF. “Versions of the Global Gag Rule have been introduced by Republican administrations since 1984, and extensive research has repeatedly documented that the policy disrupts health services and causes cascading adverse health outcomes in low- and middle-income countries, with the chilling impact enduring even when the policy has been rescinded,” MSF noted. MSF added that the State Department’s definitions of “gender ideology” and “discriminatory equity ideology” are so broad “that it is likely to result in barring or limiting access to essential health services for LGBTQIA+ individuals, women and girls, racial and ethnic minorities, and other marginalized groups”. ‘Abdication of decency’ US Vice President JD Vance addressing the March for Life last Friday, where he announced the new policy. “President Trump and his anti-abortion administration would rather let people starve to death in the wake of famine and war than let anyone in the world get an abortion – or even receive information about it,” said Rachana Desai Martin, chief US program officer at the Center for Reproductive Rights. “People are already dying because of this administration’s slashing of foreign assistance. Now, they’re making it harder for doctors and aid workers to provide food, water, and lifesaving medical care. This isn’t about saving lives – it’s a stunning abdication of basic human decency,” Martin added. “Trump’s expansion [of the Global Gag Rule] continues on a path of instrumentalising those most marginalised. It marks increasing attempts to capture global health and human rights with a deeply regressive act of imperialism masquerading as foreign policy,” said Mina Barling, International Planned Parenthood Federation’s global director of external relations. “This is yet another attack on national sovereignty and colonial intervention through the curtailing of sexual and reproductive rights.” “The dismantling of USAID has already caused widespread harm: more than 45 million women and girls have lost access to contraceptive care and clinics around the world have been forced to close,” said Marieke van der Plas, executive director of the Dutch reproductive rights organisation, Rutgers. “Now, the Trump administration is further reshaping global health policy through new government agreements that embed ideological conditions and deepen political control.” The Senate Foreign Relations Democrats said in a statement: “By blocking US funding to any entity that does not conform to his extreme ideological agenda, the administration is exporting MAGA culture wars overseas and turning lifesaving aid into a political tool. “This order goes far beyond anything we’ve seen before. It will shrink global resources to fight disease, respond to humanitarian crises and protect women and girls from violence, while forcing many of our trusted partners to shut their doors or betray their missions. In doing so, it also leaves Americans more vulnerable to infectious diseases and health threats that do not respect borders.” Image Credits: saac Billy/ UN Photo, KFF. Posts navigation Older postsNewer posts This site uses cookies to help give you the best experience on our website. Cookies enable us to collect information that helps us personalise your experience and improve the functionality and performance of our site. By continuing to read our website, we assume you agree to this, otherwise you can adjust your browser settings. Please read our cookie and Privacy Policy. Our Cookies and Privacy Policy Loading Comments... You must be logged in to post a comment.
Pro-abortion demonstrators in the US This story was originally published by The New Humanitarian. Chaos, confusion, and more ethical dilemmas: Humanitarians are still trying to understand the impacts of a sweeping expansion to the so-called “global gag rule” on US funding. The Trump administration expanded the on-again, off-again anti-abortion care directive known as the Mexico City policy to include nearly all foreign assistance, including humanitarian funding sent through UN agencies and international and local aid groups. The rules – announced on 23 January and published last week – also slap vague bans on programmes related to diversity and equity, and gender identity. The gag rule’s impacts are clear: more backstreet abortions, more unwanted pregnancies, and higher school dropout rates for girls, among them. Harsher rules will extend more harm to trans people and others in the LGBTQI+ community, and to racialised communities and others already on the margins in emergencies, aid groups warn. For humanitarians, the move injects more chaos into emergency responses: Will they over-comply and over-interpret the rules – cutting more than they need to and undermining others that provide reproductive care or protective services for marginalised groups? Will they choose between US funding and other donors – making them even more dependent on one volatile government? Several aid officials have said that their organisations were still weighing the implications – especially with $2 billion in recently announced US funding in the backdrop. But the risks are inevitable, say reproductive health advocates, who have hard-won lessons from previous gags. “There’s a lot of stigma, there’s a lot of chilling,” said Sarah Shaw, associate director of advocacy at MSI Reproductive Choices, an organisation providing abortion and contraception services globally. “Organisations that used to refer women to us for services will stop doing that. So those women will have nowhere to go.” MSI is among the non-profits who have refused to sign on to all versions of the global gag rule. Shaw and Beth Schlachter, MSI’s senior director of US external relations, explained what humanitarians can expect from the expanded global gag rule. They warned of “chaotic” disaster response scenarios, spoke of the “chilling” effect on over-complying with vague rules, and offered advice on what humanitarian groups who choose to sign should prioritise. Q: In previous iterations, humanitarians have stayed on the sidelines because they felt they didn’t need to get involved. How would you describe the reaction from humanitarian organisations in the past, compared to what everyone’s facing now? Beth Schlachter: I think everyone stays away from this if they don’t have to be involved. So, no shame on the humanitarians, but it’s one of those “you’re not going to stand up for it unless you have to”, because life is hard enough with the work that you do and you don’t have time or resources for it, and so then when it does hit you, you’re like, “Oh damn, look at that.” Sarah Shaw: I would agree with that. It’s no criticism on other sectors, but why would you engage in this toxic fight that you will never win unless you have to? Can you talk about the impacts you’ve seen? Shaw: As an abortion provider, we’ve been impacted by every iteration of this, and this is probably my fourth global gag rule I think in my life. So based on past experience, you know what the impacts of this are. It means that a lot of organisations have to choose. They have to choose between their abortion programming or their US funding. And to be honest, for most organisations, they will choose their US funding because it will probably be a much bigger part of the organisation’s ability to survive. For MSI, because we are an abortion provider, we will always choose our abortion provision. So we’ve always had to relinquish our US funding. This time round, we didn’t have as much because we learned our lesson under Trump One. We diversified our funding base, and so [for] Trump Two we were less reliant. But our Zimbabwe programme were incredibly reliant and, for them, it was probably nearly half of their funding for family planning work. They had 10 outreach teams – these are mobile teams that will go at regular intervals to visit communities to provide family planning services. And these are communities that won’t have access to any other provider… We didn’t have time to fundraise to fill the gap or to negotiate with other partners to pick up some of the work. So for those communities, it’s disastrous and it’s a breach of trust as well. For a lot of women, accessing contraception is a big leap of faith, because there will be community stigma, there will be opposition in the family. And then, for the people that convinced them to do it and told them that it was a good thing, to just not show up is really damaging. So as a result of that, we’re going to see more unintended pregnancies, more unsafe abortions, more girls dropping out of school. I mean, this is what’s so nonsensical about it. They claim it’s to reduce abortion, but all it does is reduce access to family planning, which increases the need for abortion. Can you talk about the risk of over-compliance: organisations that over-interpret the rules? Shaw: [The global gag rule is] incredibly complicated and badly communicated. And this time around, it’s just off-the-scale complicated, to be quite honest. Even the abortion part alone is way more complex than it’s ever been, and then you’re factoring in the other aspects as well. This causes a lot of confusion. So generally, the safe place to be is to over-interpret, over-implement. I totally understand why organisations do that, because it’s either that or risk collapse which is not an option. But the result of that is there’s a lot of stigma, there’s a lot of chilling. We will have organisations that used to refer women to us for services will stop doing that. So those women will have nowhere to go. Our teams have reported being excluded from critical policy conversations and technical working groups; have their access to data limited; commodities as well. I remember last time around in one country – and I’m not going to name them because it’s not fair – but we were a sub[-grantee] on another INGO’s project and our role in the project was to deliver family planning services. And that sub came up – the day after the global gag rule was announced – with a truck and started taking all the USA-branded contraceptives out of our pharmacy, saying “Oh you can’t use this because of the global gag rule,” which isn’t true, because we got them from the national government. It’s just this over-interpretation; this chilling. We know that in times of crisis that the rates of rape and sexual violence escalate against women, children, against men. So if you have organisations who don’t know what they can or cannot provide when it comes to abortion without potentially violating their agreement with the US then are they going to be able to meet the needs of people who are in an immediate crisis? Schlachter: So you imagine the complexity of that, and now, if you report on humanitarian situations, you know how challenging it is to operate. If the largest providers of assistance in any particular situation, the ones who are on the ground, have not signed the global gag rule, or this doesn’t apply to them, then they may not be able to work with those other entities there who do. And it causes fracture about who can provide services and which services then could be provided… We know that in times of crisis that the rates of rape and sexual violence escalate against women, children, against men. So if you have organisations who don’t know what they can or cannot provide when it comes to abortion without potentially violating their agreement with the US – and potentially losing tens of millions of dollars or hundreds of million dollars – then are they going to be able to meet the needs of people who are in an immediate crisis? It introduces more complexity, more chaos in the situation that’s already chaotic and just creates a situation where fewer people are going to have access to resources. The new version of the global gag rule includes all multilateral aid, including through UN agencies. Schlachter: We know that even though the US isn’t funding UNFPA [the UN’s sexual and reproductive health agency], the partners who work with UNFPA would be affected because [the rule covers] all multilateral assistance. And so that gets complex as well because UNFPA is the cluster lead for the minimum initial service package for reproductive health in crisis settings and for [sexual and gender-based violence] in crisis settings. So, again, it creates [a] fracture of who can work with whom and who’s providing what resources to others. We don’t yet know how humanitarians are going to deal with this because they’ve never had to deal with it before. If UNFPA is not under [the global gag rule], but other UN partners are, then can UNFPA work with other UN entities in the time of a crisis? We don’t yet know. So it’s just creating unnecessary chaos. They’re just trying to stigmatise abortion and deny services to women and girls. So we don’t yet know how humanitarians are going to deal with this because they’ve never had to deal with it before. Can you expand on other examples of the over-compliance risk? Shaw: Supply chains are a big risk. Over the years, our supply chains have become incredibly integrated. I think this time round, because it’s so complicated, folks are going to try a lot harder to try and firewall between abortion-related commodities, and contraception commodities, or reproductive health commodities. So definitely a big risk is that countries will just stop procuring abortion commodities or stop distributing them because they won’t want to distribute them in the same vehicles with the same driver that’s on a US government project payroll. I think that’s a big risk. Similarly, with who receives these commodities – particularly in countries where there’s scarcity and maybe where the government is less concerned about reproductive health and maybe the government has given indications that they are ideologically aligned with the Christian nationalist agenda of the current US administration – there’s a risk that they will start to deprioritise certain implementing partners because they will maybe be seen not to be aligned with their agenda. Schlachter: Sarah, as you’re talking, I was thinking of one way this could really cause a problem as well, particularly in natural disasters or when people are displaced and health workers are displaced along with everybody else. If the global gag is applied through government sites and services, the folks who are healthcare workers themselves in addition to the commodities. And then humanitarian entities come in and try to work with them – as you would in any humanitarian situation – then you have a challenge of who’s gagged by what and who can work with whom. Why would you even be talking about that? There’s an earthquake. There’s somebody who’s been raped. You need to help the people, not check their credentials on the global gag. Can I even be a partner with you or not? Shaw: Exactly. Schlachter: So, how is that going to play out? I hope people just help people, as they would, and figure it out later. Shaw: It’s just putting an incredibly complicated administrative layer in a situation that is not able to deal with administration. You just need to do services when you’re in a humanitarian crisis, and the risk is – and the chilling is – that providers will just refuse to do anything that is not deemed safe. By that, I mean providing services for certain communities – like the LGBTQI community or trans people – or providing reproductive health services. There’s a risk even [with] post-abortion care: Post-abortion care is permitted, but it’s still going to come with that stigma. So there’s a real risk that people will just get turned away because providers will refuse to provide because they’ll be frightened. They don’t want to lose their jobs; they don’t want to lose their license. For those organisations that choose to sign the global gag rule, what advice do you have? Shaw: Really take care to develop very clear communications and guidance – for their partners on the ground, but also their sub-grantees as well – on what this means and where the red lines are. Because often the communications around this are very poor. They’re not in local language, or it will take the US government a year, two years to get around to doing the French and Lusophone translations, let alone African local languages. And in all that time there’s just all this confusion and chilling growing. Also: Really focus on what they can do. By fixating on what we can’t do, we just frighten people, so just really emphasise what they can do and continue to do… For example, be very clear that, yes, you can’t refer for abortion, but if a woman comes and says that she’s had an unsafe abortion and she needs treatment, you can and must treat her. Because the risk is that there will just be a complete carte blanche: “No, we’re not doing anything like that.” So, you know, looking at the things they can do. [The rules] very clearly say abortion as a method of family planning is not permitted. So that means if a woman’s life is at risk or she’s had an unsafe abortion, then you can provide a service. So, really focus on that. Because a lot of the time people think it’s just a carte-blanche ban on abortion and it’s not. Similarly, you know, for rape survivors. If a woman comes and says she’s been raped, well they are permitted to provide her a service. And I think that nuance, that’s what gets lost. The further down you get, the more that nuance is lost. The New Humanitarian puts quality, independent journalism at the service of the millions of people affected by humanitarian crises around the world. Find out more at www.thenewhumanitarian.org.
Almost 40% of Cancers Could be Prevented by Curbing Tobacco, Infections and Alcohol 03/02/2026 Kerry Cullinan In Sierra Leone, students receive the HPV vaccine to protect them against cervical cancer. Almost 40% of global cancer cases could be prevented, according to a new global study from the World Health Organization (WHO) and its International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), published in Nature Medicine on Tuesday. The study attributed some 7.1 million cancer cases in 2022 to 30 “modifiable risk factors”. Tobacco was the leading preventable cause of cancer, globally responsible for 15% of all new cases, followed by infections (10%) and alcohol consumption (3%). Three cancer types – lung, stomach and cervical cancer – accounted for nearly half of all preventable cancer cases in both men and women, globally. Lung cancer was primarily linked to smoking and air pollution, stomach cancer was largely attributable to Helicobacter pylori infection, and cervical cancer was overwhelmingly caused by human papillomavirus (HPV). Gender and regional differences Around 45% of new cancer cases in men could be prevented in comparison to 30% in women, according to the study, which draws on data from 185 countries and 36 cancer types. In men, smoking accounted for an estimated 23% of all new cancer cases, followed by infections at 9% and alcohol at 4%. Among women globally, infections accounted for 11% of all new cancer cases, followed by smoking at 6% and high body mass index at 3%. There were also geographical differences. Preventable cancers for women ranged from 24% in North Africa and West Asia to 38% in sub-Saharan Africa. Among men, 57% of cancers in East Asia were preventable, while only 26% were in Latin America and the Caribbean at 28% “This is the first global analysis to show how much cancer risk comes from causes we can prevent,” said Dr Andre Ilbawi, WHO Team Lead for Cancer Control, and author of the study. “By examining patterns across countries and population groups, we can provide governments and individuals with more specific information to help prevent many cancer cases before they start.” The WHO urged countries to develop “context-specific prevention strategies that include strong tobacco control measures, alcohol regulation, vaccination against cancer-causing infections such as human papillomavirus (HPV) and hepatitis B, improved air quality, safer workplaces, and healthier food and physical activity environments”. Europe recognises air pollution as cancer agent Meanwhile, air pollution will be added to the European Code Against Cancer for the first time. “Air pollution raises our overall cancer risk by 11% and risk of death from cancer by 12%. Poor air quality is the largest environmental threat to human health, killing more people than tobacco, so it’s significant progress that air pollution is now recognised in the latest European Code Against Cancer,” said Nina Renshaw, head of health at the Clean Air Fund. “This vital change means that institutions and governments across the EU and the World Health Organization’s wider European region now have an even clearer mandate to reduce dangerous air pollution, and in doing so, protect people’s health. “With 99% of people worldwide currently breathing harmful air – contributing to respiratory diseases, strokes, heart attacks, and dementia, as well as stillbirths and miscarriages – it’s essential to address the interconnections between air quality and urgent health challenges. “Clean air measures positively impact public health almost immediately, resulting in reduced hospitalisations – and ultimately in fewer people developing chronic health conditions such as lung cancer.” Image Credits: Gavi. WHO to Consider Extending Definition of NCDs to Include Liver and Blood Diseases 03/02/2026 Kerry Cullinan Dr Jeremy Farrar, WHO Assistant Director-General. Proposals to include steatotic liver disease and haemophilia, and other inherited bleeding disorders, into the definition of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) will be tabled at the World Health Assembly in May, the World Health Organization (WHO) Executive Board (EB) resolved on Tuesday. Egypt, which sponsored the resolution on steatotic liver disease (formerly known as fatty liver disease), told the EB that it affects more than 1.7 billion people worldwide, “driven by metabolic risk factors, unhealthy diets and physical inactivity”. The resolution calls for the formal recognition and systematic integration of the liver disease into the global NCD response, “including surveillance systems, prevention strategies, primary healthcare-based management and national NCD plans”. Introducing the resolution on haemophilia and other inherited bleeding disorders, Armenia said it aimed to address “the systematic under-diagnosis and historical lack of prioritisation” afforded to these disorders and “bridge the gap in access to essential treatment and care”. Dr Jeremy Farrar, WHO Assistant Director General, said that NCDs will be one of the “defining concerns” of the 21st century, after a mammoth session on NCDs that was addressed by almost every member state. NCDs already account for over 80% of deaths in the Western Pacific region, the EB heard from a representative from the Solomon Islands. Several countries appealed for support and guidance to address their growing burdens of key NCDs, including diabetes, heart disease and hypertension – driven mainly by unhealthy diets and lack of exercise. The majority of countries have been unable to reach NCD-related targets set out in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and Farrar warned that the world’s ageing population would make matters worse. Farrar also cautioned against an “over-reliance in many parts of the world on treatment, as opposed to prevention and promotion of health”. During the WHO’s reforms, it has combined into one division health promotion, disease prevention and care, and this would encourage a “holistic approach to treatment beyond just drugs”. UN Declaration on NCDs NCD Alliance representative Mina Pécot-Demiaux addresses the EB. Much of the discussion focused on how to implement the Political Declaration on NCDs and mental health, adopted by the United Nations last December after last year’s High-Level Meeting (HLM). The declaration was expected to be adopted by consensus at HLM last September, but the US refused at the last minute. It was then referred to the UN General Assembly for a vote, where only the US and Argentina opposed it. Farrar said that, during the current time where there are “questions on multilateralism”, it was reassuring that “the vast, overwhelming number of countries could come together and agree on a political declaration”. The declaration sets three global targets for 2030: 150 million fewer tobacco users; 150 million more people with hypertension under control; and 150 million more people with access to mental health care. It also commits to at least 80% of countries with policy, legislative, regulatory and fiscal measures in place to address NCDs and mental health; at least 80% of primary health care facilities stocking essential medicines and basic technologies; and at least 60% of countries with measures to cover or limit the cost of essential NCD and mental health services. However, the NCD Alliance told the EB it was concerned about “the significant influence of health-harming industries, which weakened the [Political Declaration], including less ambitious commitments on NCD prevention, the removal of the health tax targets [on tobacco, alcohol and sugary drinks] and the omission of any reference to fossil fuels as key drivers of NCDs”. Meanwhile, Farrar said that while “political declarations have a critical role to play, in the end, they’re not the way that things get implemented,” pledging WHO support to countries to make a difference to people’s lives. Countries are Significantly Off-Track to Meet Global Mental Health Targets 03/02/2026 Disha Shetty Resources allocated to mental health services have not increased since 2020, according to the WHO Director General’s latest report on mental health. Countries are significantly off track in meeting global targets set to transform mental health systems, according to the latest Director-General report tabled at the World Health Organization’s (WHO) Executive Board meeting. Around 1.1 billion people were estimated to be living with a mental health disorder, according to the latest WHO data available for 2021. Financial and human resources available for mental health services have not increased since 2020, with budgets remaining at a median of 2% of government health spending, the report found. On average, there is only one government mental health worker for every 10,000 people with stark variations between lower- and higher-income countries, the Director General’s (DG) report noted. Countries discussed a range of responses. “It is absolutely essential to advance towards true inclusion of mental health and all policies tackling related inequalities to do with housing, the socio-economic level, work and climate change, as well as discrimination and violence,” the representative from Spain said. “We want to make sure that we focus ourselves on non-pharmaceutical tools, the fewer prescriptions of psychotropic drugs and the prescription of social measures and community action,” the Spanish representative added. The WHO has a ‘Comprehensive Mental Health Action Plan 2013-2030’ in place, and the DG’s report was meant to highlight the ways in which this action plan can be implemented or enhanced. New pressures on mental health disorders WHO wants mental health to be managed in a community set-up and is pushing countries to do so. Mental health disorders are worsening with the added pressure of the recent COVID-19 pandemic and increasing climate change impacts. The pandemic has worsened all the factors that expose young people to mental health problems – indebtedness, economic insecurity and inequalities, migration and conflict, the report found. Death by suicide is now the third leading cause of death among 15 to 29-year-olds, with an estimated 727,000 deaths by suicide in 2021, according to WHO data. Digital pressures are exacerbating poor mental health, and the WHO has already recognized that the time spent online is associated with depression, anxiety, and psychological distress in adolescents. “We request WHO to urgently address the impact of social media and extensive use of technology among adolescents and young people by ensuring that the recently published guidance on mental health for children and young people is fully implemented by member states,” a representative of Zambia said during the discussion. Belgium echoed similar sentiments. One of the key components of WHO’s plan is to integrate mental health and social care services in community-based settings. Currently, most countries are at an early stage of this transition to community-based service delivery, despite it being a key priority area for the WHO, according to the DG report. Millions of alcohol and drug-use deaths WHO Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus addressing the 158th session of WHO’s Executive Board in Geneva. In 2019, an estimated 2.5 billion people consumed alcohol and 400 million people were living with alcohol use disorders. Alcohol consumption and psychoactive drug use was responsible for 2.6 million and 0.6 million deaths in 2019, according to the WHO. The world health body estimates that 316 million people used psychoactive drugs in 2023, and 64 million people were living with drug use disorders. Both alcohol use and drug use disorders are problems that in recent years have been categorized as a mental health issue that require help. “Little progress has been made in implementing the high-impact policy interventions proven to reduce alcohol-related harm,” the DG’s report read. “…and quality and ethical treatment for substance use disorders is still largely inaccessible for those most in need.” Members of the European Union raised concern over tobacco products being aggressively marketed to children online. “Children should be protected from aggressive online marketing of unhealthy food and drinks, alcohol, tobacco and similar products or prohibited substances. We call upon WHO to advance research and develop effective guidance to protect and promote mental health online and offline, while recognizing the responsibility of digital platforms and industries,” said Bulgaria on behalf of the European Union. Growing recognition of the impact of mental health WHO EB’s ongoing 158th session in Geneva While the action on the ground is still limited, it is clear that there is a growing recognition among countries of the kinds of mental health disorders affect health. Discussions on the non-communicable diseases (NCDs) too saw extensive mention of mental health disorders. Germany drew attention to the impact of climate change on all NCDs, including mental health. Several non-state actors raised concerns about the mental health impacts on healthcare providers themselves due to a combination of excessive working hours, job insecurity, violence and psychosocial workplace risk. “Studies show that health workers face mental health crises in several countries, reflected in a suicide risk that is 24% higher than in other sectors. We urge member states to ramp up efforts at strengthening mental health and psychosocial support for the populations of their countries and with dedicated programs for health workers,” said a representative of Public Services International, a global union that represents millions of workers. Image Credits: Unsplash, WHO/X, WHO/X. Days After US Leaves WHO, Israel Warns it Faces Pressure to Withdraw 02/02/2026 Kerry Cullinan Israel addressing the EB158 Israel has called for a “brave conceptual overhaul” of the World Health Organization (WHO) following the recent withdrawal of the United States, warning that it too is under pressure to leave the global body. Claiming that the WHO has become “too politicised”, Israel told the body’s Executive Board (EB) meeting on Monday that, “in Israel, there are also, unfortunately, strong public voices calling for us to leave the organisation as we enter the transitional period”. “Just days ago, we witnessed the United States withdrawal from the WHO. The departure of the United States should compel us all to engage in an honest, urgent dialogue about the future and the purpose of our organisation,” said Israel. “We must confront the fact that other nations may follow even without formal departure, lose interest, reduce contributions, and pursue alternative mechanisms for global health cooperation,” Israel concluded. Later in the opening session, Israel – a close ally of the Trump administration – announced that it would be putting forward a resolution related to Argentina’s planned exit from the WHO. Argentina announced its exit after the US did, but unlike the US, it has no agreement enabling it to leave and the WHO has no mechanism that allows for country withdrawal – other than a 1948 agreement with the US. The Israeli resolution recommends that the World Health Assembly accepts’s Argentina’s withdrawal. Russia also expressed unhappiness at some EB agenda items and urged the WHO to revert to “impartiality”. One of ‘most difficult years’ Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus addresses the Executive Board. Opening the EB, Director-General Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said that the past year has been “one of the most difficult” in the WHO’s history. The US contributed over $1 billion to the WHO in 2022/ 23, around 20% of the body’s budget, and the body has been forced to reduce its budget for 2026/27 from $5.3 billion to $4.2 billion. It is still short of 15% of its reduced budget, particularly for emergency preparedness, antimicrobial resistance, health financing, climate resilience and determinants of health. However, Tedros said that WHO has “reached a position of stability”, and it will be able to wean itself from an “over-reliance on a handful of donors” if member states retain their commitment to incrementally increasing their membership fees. This would enable WHO “non-dependence” on a handful of donors, inflexible, unpredictable funding and its biggest donors. When I say independence…. I mean an impartial, science-based organisation that’s free to say what the evidence says without fear or favour,” added Tedros. Disease prevention successes Tedros also reported numerous successes over the past year. Highlights in terms of disease prevention include access to more than 900 million influenza vaccine doses; the re-establishment of preventive cholera vaccination after a three-year gap, with 50 million doses going to Bangladesh, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Mozambique; and preventative vaccination for Ebola for approximately 100,000 frontline health workers in the DRC and the Central African Republic. “Despite funding cuts, we protected the global measles and rubella lab network, enabling our network of more than 740 labs to process more than 700,000 tests to detect and respond to measles globally,” said Tedros. Seven new countries were supported to introduce malaria vaccines, and 15 more countries to introduce HPV vaccination to prevent cervical cancer,” meaning that 65% of girls globally now live in a country with routine HPV vaccination”, he added. Health emergencies The WHO Academy in Lyon, set up with the French government, had 100,000 enrollments. The academy’s basic emergency care programme provides standard training on how to manage acutely ill patients. “A study of over 35,000 patients in 17 hospitals in Nepal, Uganda and Zambia, showed a reduction in mortality of between 34% and 50% following the implementation of the WHO Academy basic emergency care training,” Tedros noted. “Despite funding cuts, we protected the global measles and rubella lab network, enabling our network of more than 740 labs to process more than 700,000 tests to detect and respond to measles globally,” he added. Last week was the sixth anniversary of COVID-19 being declared a public health emergency of international concern, and last year the WHO pandemic agreement was agreed and the amended International Health Regulations came into force. Through the Pandemic Fund, the WHO and the World Bank, 70 countries to strengthen surveillance, laboratory networks, workforce capacity and multi-sectoral coordination. WHO has also updated its international pathogen surveillance network, using AI to “support more than 110 countries and 30 organisations who use the platform every day to quickly identify new threats”. Organisational reform The report from the Programme, Budget and Administration Committee (PBAC), which recommended governance reform, Global Health architecture changes, and amendments to the external auditor selection process, was adopted by the EB. PBAC requested that the WHO Secretariat ensure that country-level functions, such as emergency preparedness capacities, particularly in vulnerable settings, be protected during the cost-containment measures. The Committee also underscored the importance of sustainable, predictable and flexible financing. In its response, the WHO Secretariat reported that existing flexible funding was already being allocated to sustain underfunded priority areas, and reaffirmed its commitment to transparency, cost containment, strengthened prioritisation and ongoing engagement with member states on sustainable financing. PBAC also requested the WHO Secretariat to host a member-state-led process that brings together current discussions on reforming the global health architecture and the United Nations reform initiative, UN80. The aim would be to “facilitate convergence and consensus-building”, and include relevant global health actors, including development banks, philanthropies, civil society and academic institutions. Brain Health Is Not an Abstract Policy Issue, It Is a Lived Reality 31/01/2026 Health Policy Watch George Vredenburg and Rajinder Dhamija “You start with, as in my case, with the loss of three generations of my family to various forms of Alzheimer’s or dementia.” Those were the words of George Vradenburg. For him, brain health is not an abstract policy issue. It is a lived reality that mirrors a fast-growing global crisis. This issue was the focus of a recent episode of the Global Health Matters podcast, hosted by Dr. Garry Aslanyan. An estimated 57 million people worldwide are living with dementia, Vradenburg said, but that figure captures only those with symptoms. The scale is far larger. Disease processes often begin decades earlier, placing hundreds of millions more at risk. “The problem is by and large, now two thirds to three quarters of the people with dementia are in the global south, and that number and percentage is going to increase in the next 25 years,” Vradenburg said. The economic and social toll is enormous, already exceeding trillions of dollars globally. Families shoulder much of the burden, facing years of emotional strain and financial loss. Read related article: Unlocking ‘Brain Capital’ in the Brain Economy – Davos Initiative Aims to Make Brain Health a Development Indicator In India, neurologist Rajinder Dhamija sees brain health as a challenge that spans generations. “One of three of us will develop a brain disorder at one point of our life,” he said. Children face neurodevelopmental conditions and infections. Young adults confront rising rates of stroke and mental illness. Older adults are living longer, often with multiple chronic brain-related conditions. India’s numbers are stark. More than 330 million people are expected to be over the age of 60 within two decades. Dementia alone costs the country billions each year. Yet specialist care remains scarce. “We have less than one neurologist per million population in India, around 3,000 neurologists at present,” according to Dhamija. Both experts argued that brain health must be reframed beyond hospitals and clinics. Prevention, education, nutrition, and primary care deliver far greater returns than crisis response. “Prevention at the primary level yields much more results than the investing in terms of a large infrastructure,” Dhamija said. India has begun piloting district brain health clinics that combine screening, treatment, rehabilitation, and data collection to inform national policy. Globally, new tools may further expand access. Vaccines for Alzheimer’s are now in clinical trials. Low-cost screening using mobile phones and artificial intelligence could bring early detection to underserved communities. The stakes are high. As Dhamija put it, “brain health… is very essential, not only for the healthy societies and healthy countries, but also for a smooth economic development and the social development of any nation.” See more Global Health Matters episodes on Health Policy Watch. Image Credits: Global Health Matters Podcast. Why Africa Wants to Lead its own Health Research Agenda 31/01/2026 Health Policy Watch In the latest episode of Trailblazers with Garry, Garry Aslanyan visits Accra, Ghana, to speak with Professor John Owusu Gyapong, Secretary General of the African Research Universities Alliance. Gyapong took on the role in 2024, leading efforts to strengthen research collaboration across African universities. His work focusses on building capacity within the continent and supporting locally driven research agendas. Earlier in his career, when much of global health funding and attention centred on malaria, Gyapong chose to study neglected tropical diseases. These illnesses, he explains, had major social and economic consequences but received far less attention. Now, as a researcher and educator, Gyapong continues to emphasise the importance of African-led solutions and long-term investment in young scientists. The conversation touches on leadership, research priorities, and why universities play a critical role in shaping Africa’s health future. Watch the full episode: Trailblazers with Garry is part of Global Health Matters. Listen to more Global Health Matters shows on Health Policy Watch. Image Credits: Global Health Matters Podcast. Unlocking ‘Brain Capital’ in the Brain Economy – Davos Initiative Aims to Make Brain Health a Development Indicator 30/01/2026 Elaine Ruth Fletcher Rice University’s Harris Eyre in the Davos Alzheimer’s Collaborative ‘Brain House’ describing new brain capital and brain economy initiatives launched at the 2026 World Economic Forum. A new initiative that aims to measure and promote the inclusion of “brain capital” as an economic indicator was launched at the World Economic Forum in Davos last week. Advocates for the Global Brain Economy initiative, and a companion Global Brain Capital Index argue that using brain health as a development indicator can help spur more awareness and investments in brain health – including dementia related diseases that now rank as the seventh largest cause of death worldwide. The discussions, hosted by the Davos Alzheimer’s Collaborative (DAC), marked what several speakers described as a turning point: a shift from viewing brain health primarily as a cost to seeing it as an investable economic asset — one with implications for productivity, resilience, innovation, and long-term growth. With the launch of the Global Brain Capital Index and the Global Brain Economy Initiative, leaders from economics, neuroscience, policy, and finance argued that recognizing — and monetizing — “brain capital” may be essential to unlocking investment in brain health across the life course, from early development to healthy aging and dementia prevention. Projected growth curve for dementia risks and deaths 0 from 0.56 million in 1990 to nearly 5 million annually in 2030. From Idea to Global Movement The concept of the “brain economy” has evolved rapidly from academic theory to policy and investment agenda, said Harris Eyre. A professor at Rice University and the University of Texas Medical Branch, and a leading member of DAC, he framed the launch moment as the culmination of years of work. “We’ve really hit a crescendo point,” Eyre said. Referring to the newly released flagship report, The Human Advantage: Stronger Brains in the Age of AI, published by the World Economic Forum and McKinsey Health Institute, he noted its resonance across Davos. “We have a lot of different global challenges, a lot of big macro challenges. But here you can see… that brain challenges are very significant across the lifespan, from the earliest stage of life through to late life.” Those challenges include early-life malnutrition and stunted development, youth mental health, workforce disruption driven by artificial intelligence, and rising rates of dementia in ageing populations. “The cost of brain health conditions across the lifespan… is $3.5 trillion to the global economy, and the cost is rising at 3% a year,” Eyre said. Introducing brain capital Brain Capital concept At the heart of the Davos discussions was the concept of brain capital, defined as the combined value of brain health and brain skills. “Brain capital is the new paradigm here,” Eyre said. “It’s human capital 2.0 — human capital in the age of neuroscience.” He stressed that brain capital spans mental health, neurological health, cognitive skills, emotional resilience, creativity, and learning — and that these capacities are now more critical than ever. “Our brains are just so important now than ever before,” he said. “The accelerations of change are so high, we need brain health. We need brain skills.” Eyre argued that advances in neuroscience, reduced stigma around mental health and dementia, and growing awareness of neurodiversity have created a unique opportunity. “If you remember one thing today,” he told the audience, “is remember brain capital.” Dialogues at Davos with global health leaders around the new initiative included conversations with: Bill Gates, WHO Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, and Wellcome’s John-Arne Røttingen, among others, Eyre said. Brain Capital Index – a new development indicator Rym Ayadi, president of the Euro-Mediterranean Economists Association, describes the new ‘Brain Capital’ index launched at Davos. That call for recognition was matched with a new measurement tool unveiled in Davos; the full report was published just this week. Called the Global Brain Capital Index, it establishes a set of standardized indicators for measuring brain capital, in the form of brain health and brain skills, across countries and globally. The new index was developed by the economist Rym Ayadi, President of the Euro-Mediterranean Economists Association (EMEA). “Brain capital was a concept,” Ayadi said. “And nowadays I can say to you… it can be measured at national level.” Ayadi described the index as a response to what she called a blind spot in traditional economic frameworks. Brain health and brain skills are the two main pillars of the brain capital index – with “enablers” as a third important influence in overall outcomes. “GDP is very quantity-based. It’s not quality-based,” she said. “Brain health was a residual. It’s a cost. But brain health nowadays should be [seen as] infrastructure, an asset. It’s not a cost — it’s an investment.” The new index brings together over 28 indicators on brain health, brain skills, and enabling environments — the latter includes the quality of education, health systems, governance, and environmental risks, like air pollution, which has now been link clearly to dementia as well as to other forms of cognitive impairment. The 28 core indicators were derived from a larger collection of 106 indicators, available on an interactive Brain Capital Dashboard, and selected through a systematic process as the best composite measure of trends. “It is really a strategic tool, a compass for economic policy thinking going forward,” Ayadi said of the index. Decline in brain health seen worldwide A decline in brain health as a component of the brain capital index is seen across countries and regions. Drawing on data from 1990 onwards, the findings presented in Davos revealed troubling global trends. “We can see an increase overall in brain health since the 90s, but then there is an overall decline, and this decline is persistent in all countries of the world,” Ayadi said. “So something is wrong here.” The trend of brain health decline is seen across both OECD and non-OECD countries. And there is also a “huge inequality between OECD and non-OECD countries,” Ayadi said. “And if we don’t really act, it becomes even worse.” Non-communicable diseases and dementia in focus Abnormal accumulation of amyloid plaques and tau proteins in the brain, are the two hallmarks of Alzheimer’s – the latter forming tangles in neurons, seen here. Speakers linked the brain health declines to the growing burden of non-communicable diseases, particularly neurological and mental health conditions. “For the brain health indicators, for example, we have burden of disease, prevalence of depression, suicide rate… Alzheimer’s disease and other dementia, Parkinson’s disease, schizophrenia, stroke, bipolar,” Ayadi said. Population ageing, combined with underinvestment in brain health, are other contributing factors. “Brain health overall is under global strain,” she said. “Driven by population aging, raising mental health burdens and cumulative economic and health stressors.” Despite the scale of the challenge, Ayadi noted that brain health remains systematically underfunded. “Despite the economic importance, brain health remains systematically underfunded and under integrated into policy framework,” she said. Brain skills improvements offset brain health declines Consideration of brain skills as part of the index provides a more hopeful picture. This includes skills’ indicators, like level of education or the rate of innovation, Ayadi said. Skills indicators, as such, are still rising in many parts of the world, including in low income countries -even if the disparities are huge. Brain skill indicators such as educational level or the pace of innovation are still rising in many countries, countering negative trends in brain health. But even when those enablers are considered, the composite trends in many parts of the world, including high and lower-income regions, still reflects worrying signs of stagnation or decline, she underlined – reflecting the way the decline in brain health can ‘drag down’ progress overall. Evolution of composite brain capital index including enablers. More positive trends in brain skills and related enablers, like education and health infrastructure, offset declines in brain health. From measurement to investment The central argument emerging from Davos was that measurement enables monetisation of risks and benefits to brain health and brain capital. Consequently, monetizing brain capital could unlock large-scale investment in prevention, care, and skills development. “If, in fact, we are able to measure, and we are able to govern, we can… finance,” Ayadi said. “And then it becomes in the economic and financial system.” This idea resonated strongly with investors and business leaders attending the sessions. Steve Carnevale, moderator of the DAC session and himself a venture capitalist, reflected on the power of quantification: “When we can quantify something that previously wasn’t quantifiable, and when we can quantify it, we can turn it into a growth story,” Carnevale said. “That’s when people are really going to follow us.” Toward a ‘brain-positive’ economy The Davos discussions also signal a broader rethinking of development indicators. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) continues to be the dominant indicator of socio-economic development. While this has been under challenge by academics for sometime, GDP’s binary nature is even more out of date in the age of AI, panelists argued. “Brain health has to become a priority within our national policies, and also brain skills. This index could be a new policy compass beyond GDP,” Ayadi argued, saying that development indicators need to shift “from quantity-based skills into neurocognitive assets… and from growth to resilience.” Along with that, the new brain economy initiative launched at Davos aims to spur policymakers from theory to action, Eyre said. The initiative focusses on safeguarding brain health, fostering brain skills, investing with a “brain lens,” and mobilizing public-private partnerships. “We need brain lens investing to sit above global financial architecture – and channel it towards brain positive investments.” Added Drew Holzapfel DAC COO, “Brain health has long been treated primarily as a health issue, which it is. But when it’s understood as an economic issue, it opens the door to more resources and a broader, more sustained commitment. What we have the opportunity to do is take the concept of brain capital and translate it into something that focuses the minds of finance ministers.” Brain capital all the more important in AI era DAC founder George Vradenburg opening the panel on brain capital and the brain economy at a WEF side event in Davos last week. Recognizing the importance of brain health and brain capital is all the more critical in the age of fast-evolving AI systems – so that humans can keep abreast of these changes – and benefit from them – rather than the reverse, said George Vradenburg, founder of the Davos Alzheimer’s Collaborative, and convenor of the Davos session. “We need to be referring to AI as Augmented Intelligence and not Artificial Intelligence,” Vradenburg said. At a “Davos wrap” webinar this week, hosted by EMEA, Lucy Pérez, global leader of the McKinsey Health Institute, underlined the critical moment faced. “There’s no more urgent time to invest in brain capital than right now,” Pérez said. “The demographic shifts that we’re experiencing, the geopolitical shocks, the economic shocks, the way technology is impacting not only the workplace, but also our daily lives.” But its the opportunity – as compared to the threat – that policymakers need to appreciate: “Scaling existing brain interventions already is going to unlock over $6 trillion in economic opportunity,” Pérez said. “And that’s with innovation we already have in hand.” Image Credits: DigitalRalph, Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer’s Disease, August 2024. , EMEA, 2026, National Institutes on Aging . US Freezes All Funds to Gavi Over Vaccine Preservative Thimerosal 29/01/2026 Kerry Cullinan A baby in Rwanda receives a combined measles and rubella vaccine. The US government has frozen funds to Gavi, the global vaccine alliance, until it commits to a plan to phase out the preservative thimerosal from all the vaccines it distributes. The US demand, first reported by Reuters, is linked to the unproven belief held by US Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr and allies that thimerosal, which contains mercury, is linked to autism. However, even the US Food and Drug Administration has pronounced that “thimerosal has been the subject of numerous studies and has a long record of safe and effective use preventing bacterial and fungal contamination of vaccines, with no ill effects established other than minor local reactions at the site of injection.” The FDA also notes that a vaccine with 0.01% thimerosal as a preservative contains “roughly the same amount of elemental mercury [as] contained in a three-ounce can of tuna fish”. Around 14% of Gavi’s vaccines contain thimerosal, which is used in some multi-dose vials to destroy any bacteria and fungi that may enter a vial each time a new dose is drawn. Multi-dose vaccines are used in many low- and middle-income countries as they are cheaper. Affected Gavi vaccines include the five-in-one pentavalent vaccine (Diphtheria, Pertussis , Tetanus, Hepatitis B and Haemophilus influenzae type b), the Diphtheria, Pertussis and Tetanus (DPT) vaccine, Tetanus-Reduced Diphtheria (Td), Hepatitis B, Meningococcal A Conjugate (MenA) and Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine (PCV). Most US vaccines do not contain thimerosal, while it is seldom found in Europe, which relies mainly on single-dose vaccines. Scientific consensus “We received a request from the US government to remove thimerosal from our portfolio. We remain in contact on this subject,” a Gavi spokesperson told Health Policy Watch. “While we very much hope to find a pathway to welcoming the US back as a donor, any decision related to Gavi’s portfolio would require a decision by Gavi’s Board and input from preceding governance committees, which will be guided by scientific consensus.” Hanging in the balance is some $300 million already allocated by the Biden administration but not yet paid, as well as any new funds. All Gavi-supported vaccines have to be recommended by the World Health Organisation’s (WHO) Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE), an independent body that examines all available scientific evidence and issues global guidance on the use of vaccines. In addition, each manufacturing site where Gavi-supported vaccines are produced must be approved or “pre-qualified” by WHO. Gavi-supported vaccines must also be recommended by the National Immunisation Technical Advisory Group (NITAG) in each country where they are being used. Most Gavi-supported countries also require vaccines to be approved by their own National Regulatory Authorities (NRAs), in addition to WHO approvals. In June last year, Kennedy told Gavi that the US would withhold funds until it “re-earned the public trust”, claiming that it had “ignored vaccine safety”. The US recently lost its seat on the Gavi board as it has failed to pledge any funds to it. Image Credits: Twitter: @WHOAFRO, WHO. Latest US Restrictions on Aid ‘Bully’ Recipients to Accept ‘Extremist Ideology’ 29/01/2026 Kerry Cullinan Kenyan women at a family planning clinic. Global health organisations have reacted with anger to the new US foreign aid policy, which prohibits all aid recipients, bar military, from performing or promoting abortion, “gender ideology”, or “diversity, equity and inclusion” (DEI). “Catastrophic”, “bullying”, “draconian” and “ideologically driven” – are some of their reactions to the Promoting Human Flourishing in Foreign Assistance (PHFFA) policy, announced by US Vice-President JD Vance at an anti-abortion event last Friday evening. The policy’s three parts were published in the Federal Register on Tuesday as Protecting Life in Foreign Assistance, Combating Gender Ideology in Foreign Assistance and Combating Discriminatory Equity Ideology in Foreign Assistance Rules. The new rules apply to all foreign and US NGOs and “international organisations”, including multilateral UN agencies still funded by the US and bodies such as the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, TB and Malaria. However, in countries that allow abortion, governments and parastatals (government agencies) will need to place any US funds in “a segregated account” to ensure they’re not used for abortions and related activities. Governments and parastatals “may” also be required to agree that they won’t use US funds to promote or engage in “gender ideology” or DEI. The US State Department defines “gender ideology” activities as those that provide or promote “sex rejecting procedures” (defined broadly to include puberty blockers, hormones, surgeries); promote or counsel social transition; use materials that discuss changing one’s sex or pronoun usage not aligned with biological sex; lobby foreign governments on gender identity issues; and support drag queen workshops, performances, or similar activities”. Aid recipients are also compelled to agree to US officials visiting their offices unannounced to inspect their documents and activities, and to speak to people receiving their services. This is potentially a violation of patient confidentiality. Imposing ‘extremist ideology’ Since 1984, successive Republican governments have imposed a “Global Gag Rule” (also known as the Mexico City Policy) on foreign NGOs receiving global health aid, barring them from using this money – or even money they have raised from other sources – for any abortion-related activities, including referrals. However, the second Trump administration is the first to extend this to all non-military foreign assistance, including humanitarian assistance, and to widen the scope to include US NGOs, international organisations and – potentially – governments. “Bullying countries into complying with anti-rights and extremist ideology is despicable and unacceptable. The imperialist goals of this administration are on full display in these conditions to foreign assistance,” Anu Kumar, CEO of the global reproductive justice organisation, Ipas, told a media briefing this week. In 2024, $39.8 billion in US foreign aid was dispensed over 160 countries, with the largest share (41%) going to multilateral agencies, according to KFF. “This is tens of billions more than the amount of global health assistance subject to the policy under the first Trump administration’s previously expanded policy ($7.3 billion in 2020),” notes KFF. This “catastrophic expansion” is going to be especially harmful to “women, young people, girls and LGBTQI+ people”, added Ipas senior researcher Jamie Vernaelde. “There is an agenda here from the US government to push these ideologies across to other countries, both through direct government-to-government funding, but also forcing multilateral organisations to be subject to the ideology of one specific country.” Impact on Kenya The bilateral Memorandums of Understanding (MOU) that the US has signed with 15 African countries as part of its “America First Global Health Strategy” all contain a clause compelling countries to comply with the Global Gag Rule. “What we’ve realised is this inclusion of the Global Gag Rule in the MOUs was basically a Trojan horse, in the sense that now the governments have signed, they are obligated to implement these expanded conditions, for example, on gender ideology,” said Ipas’s Kenya director, Dr Musoba Kitui. Kitui said that 40,000 health workers had already lost their jobs in his country since the closure of the US Agency for International Development (USAID), leading to the “weakening of the health system”. Many African governments “are very, very desperate” to inject resources into their health systems since the closure of USAID, and were willing to sign bilateral MOUs with the US, despite some of the unfavourable conditions, said Kitui. Kenya’s MOU would be complex to implement, and there is “no way the US can monitor compliance without seeing patient records,” added Kitui, highlighting a concern about patient privacy which has resulted in the MOU being challenged in court. However, “this MOU grants US personnel diplomatic immunity, insulating them from any local courts against judicial processes for any violations of data privacy, or even crippling the health system for that matter”, he added. “Sexual and reproductive health is not a diplomatic bargaining chip. It’s a fundamental human right. Essential health care services must be separate from political agendas. What is really important is to protect the progress that we have made over the years, including in countries like Kenya,” Kitui stressed. Impact on humanitarian aid South Sudanese women survivors of violence shared their stories with a visiting UN delegation. The narrow redefinition of US global aid will affect survivors of gender-based violence who need access to rape kits and emergency contraception. Dr Jean-Claude Mulunda, who heads Ipas work in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), said that his organisation assisted displaced people in camps with family planning services, abortion care and also supports survivors of gender-based violence (GBV). With the demise of USAID, “rape kits” for GBV survivors containing medicine to protect women and girls against sexually transmitted infections and pregnancy are no longer available. “Ipas is trying, with our limited funds, to buy unit-by-unit, the different medicines in these kits,” said Mulunda. “Many women who are victims of rape can’t access abortion care, even though the country has signed the Maputo Protocol which allows access to abortion in case of rape.” The more onerous aid conditions are going to make it even harder for displaced women to access sexual and reproductive services. “The risk of unsafe abortion is elevated in humanitarian settings where it’s even harder for people to access medical services,” warned Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) in its reaction to the new policy. “In 2023, MSF provided more than 31,000 consultations for post-abortion care, most of which were due to complications related to unsafe abortion. With the reinstatement of the Global Gag Rule, MSF expects these already troubling numbers to increase.” The new policy, PHFFA, “escalates a pattern established across both Trump administrations: the systematic subordination of scientific evidence and patient needs to ideological and political objectives,” added MSF. “Versions of the Global Gag Rule have been introduced by Republican administrations since 1984, and extensive research has repeatedly documented that the policy disrupts health services and causes cascading adverse health outcomes in low- and middle-income countries, with the chilling impact enduring even when the policy has been rescinded,” MSF noted. MSF added that the State Department’s definitions of “gender ideology” and “discriminatory equity ideology” are so broad “that it is likely to result in barring or limiting access to essential health services for LGBTQIA+ individuals, women and girls, racial and ethnic minorities, and other marginalized groups”. ‘Abdication of decency’ US Vice President JD Vance addressing the March for Life last Friday, where he announced the new policy. “President Trump and his anti-abortion administration would rather let people starve to death in the wake of famine and war than let anyone in the world get an abortion – or even receive information about it,” said Rachana Desai Martin, chief US program officer at the Center for Reproductive Rights. “People are already dying because of this administration’s slashing of foreign assistance. Now, they’re making it harder for doctors and aid workers to provide food, water, and lifesaving medical care. This isn’t about saving lives – it’s a stunning abdication of basic human decency,” Martin added. “Trump’s expansion [of the Global Gag Rule] continues on a path of instrumentalising those most marginalised. It marks increasing attempts to capture global health and human rights with a deeply regressive act of imperialism masquerading as foreign policy,” said Mina Barling, International Planned Parenthood Federation’s global director of external relations. “This is yet another attack on national sovereignty and colonial intervention through the curtailing of sexual and reproductive rights.” “The dismantling of USAID has already caused widespread harm: more than 45 million women and girls have lost access to contraceptive care and clinics around the world have been forced to close,” said Marieke van der Plas, executive director of the Dutch reproductive rights organisation, Rutgers. “Now, the Trump administration is further reshaping global health policy through new government agreements that embed ideological conditions and deepen political control.” The Senate Foreign Relations Democrats said in a statement: “By blocking US funding to any entity that does not conform to his extreme ideological agenda, the administration is exporting MAGA culture wars overseas and turning lifesaving aid into a political tool. “This order goes far beyond anything we’ve seen before. It will shrink global resources to fight disease, respond to humanitarian crises and protect women and girls from violence, while forcing many of our trusted partners to shut their doors or betray their missions. In doing so, it also leaves Americans more vulnerable to infectious diseases and health threats that do not respect borders.” Image Credits: saac Billy/ UN Photo, KFF. Posts navigation Older postsNewer posts This site uses cookies to help give you the best experience on our website. Cookies enable us to collect information that helps us personalise your experience and improve the functionality and performance of our site. By continuing to read our website, we assume you agree to this, otherwise you can adjust your browser settings. Please read our cookie and Privacy Policy. Our Cookies and Privacy Policy Loading Comments... You must be logged in to post a comment.
WHO to Consider Extending Definition of NCDs to Include Liver and Blood Diseases 03/02/2026 Kerry Cullinan Dr Jeremy Farrar, WHO Assistant Director-General. Proposals to include steatotic liver disease and haemophilia, and other inherited bleeding disorders, into the definition of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) will be tabled at the World Health Assembly in May, the World Health Organization (WHO) Executive Board (EB) resolved on Tuesday. Egypt, which sponsored the resolution on steatotic liver disease (formerly known as fatty liver disease), told the EB that it affects more than 1.7 billion people worldwide, “driven by metabolic risk factors, unhealthy diets and physical inactivity”. The resolution calls for the formal recognition and systematic integration of the liver disease into the global NCD response, “including surveillance systems, prevention strategies, primary healthcare-based management and national NCD plans”. Introducing the resolution on haemophilia and other inherited bleeding disorders, Armenia said it aimed to address “the systematic under-diagnosis and historical lack of prioritisation” afforded to these disorders and “bridge the gap in access to essential treatment and care”. Dr Jeremy Farrar, WHO Assistant Director General, said that NCDs will be one of the “defining concerns” of the 21st century, after a mammoth session on NCDs that was addressed by almost every member state. NCDs already account for over 80% of deaths in the Western Pacific region, the EB heard from a representative from the Solomon Islands. Several countries appealed for support and guidance to address their growing burdens of key NCDs, including diabetes, heart disease and hypertension – driven mainly by unhealthy diets and lack of exercise. The majority of countries have been unable to reach NCD-related targets set out in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and Farrar warned that the world’s ageing population would make matters worse. Farrar also cautioned against an “over-reliance in many parts of the world on treatment, as opposed to prevention and promotion of health”. During the WHO’s reforms, it has combined into one division health promotion, disease prevention and care, and this would encourage a “holistic approach to treatment beyond just drugs”. UN Declaration on NCDs NCD Alliance representative Mina Pécot-Demiaux addresses the EB. Much of the discussion focused on how to implement the Political Declaration on NCDs and mental health, adopted by the United Nations last December after last year’s High-Level Meeting (HLM). The declaration was expected to be adopted by consensus at HLM last September, but the US refused at the last minute. It was then referred to the UN General Assembly for a vote, where only the US and Argentina opposed it. Farrar said that, during the current time where there are “questions on multilateralism”, it was reassuring that “the vast, overwhelming number of countries could come together and agree on a political declaration”. The declaration sets three global targets for 2030: 150 million fewer tobacco users; 150 million more people with hypertension under control; and 150 million more people with access to mental health care. It also commits to at least 80% of countries with policy, legislative, regulatory and fiscal measures in place to address NCDs and mental health; at least 80% of primary health care facilities stocking essential medicines and basic technologies; and at least 60% of countries with measures to cover or limit the cost of essential NCD and mental health services. However, the NCD Alliance told the EB it was concerned about “the significant influence of health-harming industries, which weakened the [Political Declaration], including less ambitious commitments on NCD prevention, the removal of the health tax targets [on tobacco, alcohol and sugary drinks] and the omission of any reference to fossil fuels as key drivers of NCDs”. Meanwhile, Farrar said that while “political declarations have a critical role to play, in the end, they’re not the way that things get implemented,” pledging WHO support to countries to make a difference to people’s lives. Countries are Significantly Off-Track to Meet Global Mental Health Targets 03/02/2026 Disha Shetty Resources allocated to mental health services have not increased since 2020, according to the WHO Director General’s latest report on mental health. Countries are significantly off track in meeting global targets set to transform mental health systems, according to the latest Director-General report tabled at the World Health Organization’s (WHO) Executive Board meeting. Around 1.1 billion people were estimated to be living with a mental health disorder, according to the latest WHO data available for 2021. Financial and human resources available for mental health services have not increased since 2020, with budgets remaining at a median of 2% of government health spending, the report found. On average, there is only one government mental health worker for every 10,000 people with stark variations between lower- and higher-income countries, the Director General’s (DG) report noted. Countries discussed a range of responses. “It is absolutely essential to advance towards true inclusion of mental health and all policies tackling related inequalities to do with housing, the socio-economic level, work and climate change, as well as discrimination and violence,” the representative from Spain said. “We want to make sure that we focus ourselves on non-pharmaceutical tools, the fewer prescriptions of psychotropic drugs and the prescription of social measures and community action,” the Spanish representative added. The WHO has a ‘Comprehensive Mental Health Action Plan 2013-2030’ in place, and the DG’s report was meant to highlight the ways in which this action plan can be implemented or enhanced. New pressures on mental health disorders WHO wants mental health to be managed in a community set-up and is pushing countries to do so. Mental health disorders are worsening with the added pressure of the recent COVID-19 pandemic and increasing climate change impacts. The pandemic has worsened all the factors that expose young people to mental health problems – indebtedness, economic insecurity and inequalities, migration and conflict, the report found. Death by suicide is now the third leading cause of death among 15 to 29-year-olds, with an estimated 727,000 deaths by suicide in 2021, according to WHO data. Digital pressures are exacerbating poor mental health, and the WHO has already recognized that the time spent online is associated with depression, anxiety, and psychological distress in adolescents. “We request WHO to urgently address the impact of social media and extensive use of technology among adolescents and young people by ensuring that the recently published guidance on mental health for children and young people is fully implemented by member states,” a representative of Zambia said during the discussion. Belgium echoed similar sentiments. One of the key components of WHO’s plan is to integrate mental health and social care services in community-based settings. Currently, most countries are at an early stage of this transition to community-based service delivery, despite it being a key priority area for the WHO, according to the DG report. Millions of alcohol and drug-use deaths WHO Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus addressing the 158th session of WHO’s Executive Board in Geneva. In 2019, an estimated 2.5 billion people consumed alcohol and 400 million people were living with alcohol use disorders. Alcohol consumption and psychoactive drug use was responsible for 2.6 million and 0.6 million deaths in 2019, according to the WHO. The world health body estimates that 316 million people used psychoactive drugs in 2023, and 64 million people were living with drug use disorders. Both alcohol use and drug use disorders are problems that in recent years have been categorized as a mental health issue that require help. “Little progress has been made in implementing the high-impact policy interventions proven to reduce alcohol-related harm,” the DG’s report read. “…and quality and ethical treatment for substance use disorders is still largely inaccessible for those most in need.” Members of the European Union raised concern over tobacco products being aggressively marketed to children online. “Children should be protected from aggressive online marketing of unhealthy food and drinks, alcohol, tobacco and similar products or prohibited substances. We call upon WHO to advance research and develop effective guidance to protect and promote mental health online and offline, while recognizing the responsibility of digital platforms and industries,” said Bulgaria on behalf of the European Union. Growing recognition of the impact of mental health WHO EB’s ongoing 158th session in Geneva While the action on the ground is still limited, it is clear that there is a growing recognition among countries of the kinds of mental health disorders affect health. Discussions on the non-communicable diseases (NCDs) too saw extensive mention of mental health disorders. Germany drew attention to the impact of climate change on all NCDs, including mental health. Several non-state actors raised concerns about the mental health impacts on healthcare providers themselves due to a combination of excessive working hours, job insecurity, violence and psychosocial workplace risk. “Studies show that health workers face mental health crises in several countries, reflected in a suicide risk that is 24% higher than in other sectors. We urge member states to ramp up efforts at strengthening mental health and psychosocial support for the populations of their countries and with dedicated programs for health workers,” said a representative of Public Services International, a global union that represents millions of workers. Image Credits: Unsplash, WHO/X, WHO/X. Days After US Leaves WHO, Israel Warns it Faces Pressure to Withdraw 02/02/2026 Kerry Cullinan Israel addressing the EB158 Israel has called for a “brave conceptual overhaul” of the World Health Organization (WHO) following the recent withdrawal of the United States, warning that it too is under pressure to leave the global body. Claiming that the WHO has become “too politicised”, Israel told the body’s Executive Board (EB) meeting on Monday that, “in Israel, there are also, unfortunately, strong public voices calling for us to leave the organisation as we enter the transitional period”. “Just days ago, we witnessed the United States withdrawal from the WHO. The departure of the United States should compel us all to engage in an honest, urgent dialogue about the future and the purpose of our organisation,” said Israel. “We must confront the fact that other nations may follow even without formal departure, lose interest, reduce contributions, and pursue alternative mechanisms for global health cooperation,” Israel concluded. Later in the opening session, Israel – a close ally of the Trump administration – announced that it would be putting forward a resolution related to Argentina’s planned exit from the WHO. Argentina announced its exit after the US did, but unlike the US, it has no agreement enabling it to leave and the WHO has no mechanism that allows for country withdrawal – other than a 1948 agreement with the US. The Israeli resolution recommends that the World Health Assembly accepts’s Argentina’s withdrawal. Russia also expressed unhappiness at some EB agenda items and urged the WHO to revert to “impartiality”. One of ‘most difficult years’ Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus addresses the Executive Board. Opening the EB, Director-General Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said that the past year has been “one of the most difficult” in the WHO’s history. The US contributed over $1 billion to the WHO in 2022/ 23, around 20% of the body’s budget, and the body has been forced to reduce its budget for 2026/27 from $5.3 billion to $4.2 billion. It is still short of 15% of its reduced budget, particularly for emergency preparedness, antimicrobial resistance, health financing, climate resilience and determinants of health. However, Tedros said that WHO has “reached a position of stability”, and it will be able to wean itself from an “over-reliance on a handful of donors” if member states retain their commitment to incrementally increasing their membership fees. This would enable WHO “non-dependence” on a handful of donors, inflexible, unpredictable funding and its biggest donors. When I say independence…. I mean an impartial, science-based organisation that’s free to say what the evidence says without fear or favour,” added Tedros. Disease prevention successes Tedros also reported numerous successes over the past year. Highlights in terms of disease prevention include access to more than 900 million influenza vaccine doses; the re-establishment of preventive cholera vaccination after a three-year gap, with 50 million doses going to Bangladesh, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Mozambique; and preventative vaccination for Ebola for approximately 100,000 frontline health workers in the DRC and the Central African Republic. “Despite funding cuts, we protected the global measles and rubella lab network, enabling our network of more than 740 labs to process more than 700,000 tests to detect and respond to measles globally,” said Tedros. Seven new countries were supported to introduce malaria vaccines, and 15 more countries to introduce HPV vaccination to prevent cervical cancer,” meaning that 65% of girls globally now live in a country with routine HPV vaccination”, he added. Health emergencies The WHO Academy in Lyon, set up with the French government, had 100,000 enrollments. The academy’s basic emergency care programme provides standard training on how to manage acutely ill patients. “A study of over 35,000 patients in 17 hospitals in Nepal, Uganda and Zambia, showed a reduction in mortality of between 34% and 50% following the implementation of the WHO Academy basic emergency care training,” Tedros noted. “Despite funding cuts, we protected the global measles and rubella lab network, enabling our network of more than 740 labs to process more than 700,000 tests to detect and respond to measles globally,” he added. Last week was the sixth anniversary of COVID-19 being declared a public health emergency of international concern, and last year the WHO pandemic agreement was agreed and the amended International Health Regulations came into force. Through the Pandemic Fund, the WHO and the World Bank, 70 countries to strengthen surveillance, laboratory networks, workforce capacity and multi-sectoral coordination. WHO has also updated its international pathogen surveillance network, using AI to “support more than 110 countries and 30 organisations who use the platform every day to quickly identify new threats”. Organisational reform The report from the Programme, Budget and Administration Committee (PBAC), which recommended governance reform, Global Health architecture changes, and amendments to the external auditor selection process, was adopted by the EB. PBAC requested that the WHO Secretariat ensure that country-level functions, such as emergency preparedness capacities, particularly in vulnerable settings, be protected during the cost-containment measures. The Committee also underscored the importance of sustainable, predictable and flexible financing. In its response, the WHO Secretariat reported that existing flexible funding was already being allocated to sustain underfunded priority areas, and reaffirmed its commitment to transparency, cost containment, strengthened prioritisation and ongoing engagement with member states on sustainable financing. PBAC also requested the WHO Secretariat to host a member-state-led process that brings together current discussions on reforming the global health architecture and the United Nations reform initiative, UN80. The aim would be to “facilitate convergence and consensus-building”, and include relevant global health actors, including development banks, philanthropies, civil society and academic institutions. Brain Health Is Not an Abstract Policy Issue, It Is a Lived Reality 31/01/2026 Health Policy Watch George Vredenburg and Rajinder Dhamija “You start with, as in my case, with the loss of three generations of my family to various forms of Alzheimer’s or dementia.” Those were the words of George Vradenburg. For him, brain health is not an abstract policy issue. It is a lived reality that mirrors a fast-growing global crisis. This issue was the focus of a recent episode of the Global Health Matters podcast, hosted by Dr. Garry Aslanyan. An estimated 57 million people worldwide are living with dementia, Vradenburg said, but that figure captures only those with symptoms. The scale is far larger. Disease processes often begin decades earlier, placing hundreds of millions more at risk. “The problem is by and large, now two thirds to three quarters of the people with dementia are in the global south, and that number and percentage is going to increase in the next 25 years,” Vradenburg said. The economic and social toll is enormous, already exceeding trillions of dollars globally. Families shoulder much of the burden, facing years of emotional strain and financial loss. Read related article: Unlocking ‘Brain Capital’ in the Brain Economy – Davos Initiative Aims to Make Brain Health a Development Indicator In India, neurologist Rajinder Dhamija sees brain health as a challenge that spans generations. “One of three of us will develop a brain disorder at one point of our life,” he said. Children face neurodevelopmental conditions and infections. Young adults confront rising rates of stroke and mental illness. Older adults are living longer, often with multiple chronic brain-related conditions. India’s numbers are stark. More than 330 million people are expected to be over the age of 60 within two decades. Dementia alone costs the country billions each year. Yet specialist care remains scarce. “We have less than one neurologist per million population in India, around 3,000 neurologists at present,” according to Dhamija. Both experts argued that brain health must be reframed beyond hospitals and clinics. Prevention, education, nutrition, and primary care deliver far greater returns than crisis response. “Prevention at the primary level yields much more results than the investing in terms of a large infrastructure,” Dhamija said. India has begun piloting district brain health clinics that combine screening, treatment, rehabilitation, and data collection to inform national policy. Globally, new tools may further expand access. Vaccines for Alzheimer’s are now in clinical trials. Low-cost screening using mobile phones and artificial intelligence could bring early detection to underserved communities. The stakes are high. As Dhamija put it, “brain health… is very essential, not only for the healthy societies and healthy countries, but also for a smooth economic development and the social development of any nation.” See more Global Health Matters episodes on Health Policy Watch. Image Credits: Global Health Matters Podcast. Why Africa Wants to Lead its own Health Research Agenda 31/01/2026 Health Policy Watch In the latest episode of Trailblazers with Garry, Garry Aslanyan visits Accra, Ghana, to speak with Professor John Owusu Gyapong, Secretary General of the African Research Universities Alliance. Gyapong took on the role in 2024, leading efforts to strengthen research collaboration across African universities. His work focusses on building capacity within the continent and supporting locally driven research agendas. Earlier in his career, when much of global health funding and attention centred on malaria, Gyapong chose to study neglected tropical diseases. These illnesses, he explains, had major social and economic consequences but received far less attention. Now, as a researcher and educator, Gyapong continues to emphasise the importance of African-led solutions and long-term investment in young scientists. The conversation touches on leadership, research priorities, and why universities play a critical role in shaping Africa’s health future. Watch the full episode: Trailblazers with Garry is part of Global Health Matters. Listen to more Global Health Matters shows on Health Policy Watch. Image Credits: Global Health Matters Podcast. Unlocking ‘Brain Capital’ in the Brain Economy – Davos Initiative Aims to Make Brain Health a Development Indicator 30/01/2026 Elaine Ruth Fletcher Rice University’s Harris Eyre in the Davos Alzheimer’s Collaborative ‘Brain House’ describing new brain capital and brain economy initiatives launched at the 2026 World Economic Forum. A new initiative that aims to measure and promote the inclusion of “brain capital” as an economic indicator was launched at the World Economic Forum in Davos last week. Advocates for the Global Brain Economy initiative, and a companion Global Brain Capital Index argue that using brain health as a development indicator can help spur more awareness and investments in brain health – including dementia related diseases that now rank as the seventh largest cause of death worldwide. The discussions, hosted by the Davos Alzheimer’s Collaborative (DAC), marked what several speakers described as a turning point: a shift from viewing brain health primarily as a cost to seeing it as an investable economic asset — one with implications for productivity, resilience, innovation, and long-term growth. With the launch of the Global Brain Capital Index and the Global Brain Economy Initiative, leaders from economics, neuroscience, policy, and finance argued that recognizing — and monetizing — “brain capital” may be essential to unlocking investment in brain health across the life course, from early development to healthy aging and dementia prevention. Projected growth curve for dementia risks and deaths 0 from 0.56 million in 1990 to nearly 5 million annually in 2030. From Idea to Global Movement The concept of the “brain economy” has evolved rapidly from academic theory to policy and investment agenda, said Harris Eyre. A professor at Rice University and the University of Texas Medical Branch, and a leading member of DAC, he framed the launch moment as the culmination of years of work. “We’ve really hit a crescendo point,” Eyre said. Referring to the newly released flagship report, The Human Advantage: Stronger Brains in the Age of AI, published by the World Economic Forum and McKinsey Health Institute, he noted its resonance across Davos. “We have a lot of different global challenges, a lot of big macro challenges. But here you can see… that brain challenges are very significant across the lifespan, from the earliest stage of life through to late life.” Those challenges include early-life malnutrition and stunted development, youth mental health, workforce disruption driven by artificial intelligence, and rising rates of dementia in ageing populations. “The cost of brain health conditions across the lifespan… is $3.5 trillion to the global economy, and the cost is rising at 3% a year,” Eyre said. Introducing brain capital Brain Capital concept At the heart of the Davos discussions was the concept of brain capital, defined as the combined value of brain health and brain skills. “Brain capital is the new paradigm here,” Eyre said. “It’s human capital 2.0 — human capital in the age of neuroscience.” He stressed that brain capital spans mental health, neurological health, cognitive skills, emotional resilience, creativity, and learning — and that these capacities are now more critical than ever. “Our brains are just so important now than ever before,” he said. “The accelerations of change are so high, we need brain health. We need brain skills.” Eyre argued that advances in neuroscience, reduced stigma around mental health and dementia, and growing awareness of neurodiversity have created a unique opportunity. “If you remember one thing today,” he told the audience, “is remember brain capital.” Dialogues at Davos with global health leaders around the new initiative included conversations with: Bill Gates, WHO Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, and Wellcome’s John-Arne Røttingen, among others, Eyre said. Brain Capital Index – a new development indicator Rym Ayadi, president of the Euro-Mediterranean Economists Association, describes the new ‘Brain Capital’ index launched at Davos. That call for recognition was matched with a new measurement tool unveiled in Davos; the full report was published just this week. Called the Global Brain Capital Index, it establishes a set of standardized indicators for measuring brain capital, in the form of brain health and brain skills, across countries and globally. The new index was developed by the economist Rym Ayadi, President of the Euro-Mediterranean Economists Association (EMEA). “Brain capital was a concept,” Ayadi said. “And nowadays I can say to you… it can be measured at national level.” Ayadi described the index as a response to what she called a blind spot in traditional economic frameworks. Brain health and brain skills are the two main pillars of the brain capital index – with “enablers” as a third important influence in overall outcomes. “GDP is very quantity-based. It’s not quality-based,” she said. “Brain health was a residual. It’s a cost. But brain health nowadays should be [seen as] infrastructure, an asset. It’s not a cost — it’s an investment.” The new index brings together over 28 indicators on brain health, brain skills, and enabling environments — the latter includes the quality of education, health systems, governance, and environmental risks, like air pollution, which has now been link clearly to dementia as well as to other forms of cognitive impairment. The 28 core indicators were derived from a larger collection of 106 indicators, available on an interactive Brain Capital Dashboard, and selected through a systematic process as the best composite measure of trends. “It is really a strategic tool, a compass for economic policy thinking going forward,” Ayadi said of the index. Decline in brain health seen worldwide A decline in brain health as a component of the brain capital index is seen across countries and regions. Drawing on data from 1990 onwards, the findings presented in Davos revealed troubling global trends. “We can see an increase overall in brain health since the 90s, but then there is an overall decline, and this decline is persistent in all countries of the world,” Ayadi said. “So something is wrong here.” The trend of brain health decline is seen across both OECD and non-OECD countries. And there is also a “huge inequality between OECD and non-OECD countries,” Ayadi said. “And if we don’t really act, it becomes even worse.” Non-communicable diseases and dementia in focus Abnormal accumulation of amyloid plaques and tau proteins in the brain, are the two hallmarks of Alzheimer’s – the latter forming tangles in neurons, seen here. Speakers linked the brain health declines to the growing burden of non-communicable diseases, particularly neurological and mental health conditions. “For the brain health indicators, for example, we have burden of disease, prevalence of depression, suicide rate… Alzheimer’s disease and other dementia, Parkinson’s disease, schizophrenia, stroke, bipolar,” Ayadi said. Population ageing, combined with underinvestment in brain health, are other contributing factors. “Brain health overall is under global strain,” she said. “Driven by population aging, raising mental health burdens and cumulative economic and health stressors.” Despite the scale of the challenge, Ayadi noted that brain health remains systematically underfunded. “Despite the economic importance, brain health remains systematically underfunded and under integrated into policy framework,” she said. Brain skills improvements offset brain health declines Consideration of brain skills as part of the index provides a more hopeful picture. This includes skills’ indicators, like level of education or the rate of innovation, Ayadi said. Skills indicators, as such, are still rising in many parts of the world, including in low income countries -even if the disparities are huge. Brain skill indicators such as educational level or the pace of innovation are still rising in many countries, countering negative trends in brain health. But even when those enablers are considered, the composite trends in many parts of the world, including high and lower-income regions, still reflects worrying signs of stagnation or decline, she underlined – reflecting the way the decline in brain health can ‘drag down’ progress overall. Evolution of composite brain capital index including enablers. More positive trends in brain skills and related enablers, like education and health infrastructure, offset declines in brain health. From measurement to investment The central argument emerging from Davos was that measurement enables monetisation of risks and benefits to brain health and brain capital. Consequently, monetizing brain capital could unlock large-scale investment in prevention, care, and skills development. “If, in fact, we are able to measure, and we are able to govern, we can… finance,” Ayadi said. “And then it becomes in the economic and financial system.” This idea resonated strongly with investors and business leaders attending the sessions. Steve Carnevale, moderator of the DAC session and himself a venture capitalist, reflected on the power of quantification: “When we can quantify something that previously wasn’t quantifiable, and when we can quantify it, we can turn it into a growth story,” Carnevale said. “That’s when people are really going to follow us.” Toward a ‘brain-positive’ economy The Davos discussions also signal a broader rethinking of development indicators. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) continues to be the dominant indicator of socio-economic development. While this has been under challenge by academics for sometime, GDP’s binary nature is even more out of date in the age of AI, panelists argued. “Brain health has to become a priority within our national policies, and also brain skills. This index could be a new policy compass beyond GDP,” Ayadi argued, saying that development indicators need to shift “from quantity-based skills into neurocognitive assets… and from growth to resilience.” Along with that, the new brain economy initiative launched at Davos aims to spur policymakers from theory to action, Eyre said. The initiative focusses on safeguarding brain health, fostering brain skills, investing with a “brain lens,” and mobilizing public-private partnerships. “We need brain lens investing to sit above global financial architecture – and channel it towards brain positive investments.” Added Drew Holzapfel DAC COO, “Brain health has long been treated primarily as a health issue, which it is. But when it’s understood as an economic issue, it opens the door to more resources and a broader, more sustained commitment. What we have the opportunity to do is take the concept of brain capital and translate it into something that focuses the minds of finance ministers.” Brain capital all the more important in AI era DAC founder George Vradenburg opening the panel on brain capital and the brain economy at a WEF side event in Davos last week. Recognizing the importance of brain health and brain capital is all the more critical in the age of fast-evolving AI systems – so that humans can keep abreast of these changes – and benefit from them – rather than the reverse, said George Vradenburg, founder of the Davos Alzheimer’s Collaborative, and convenor of the Davos session. “We need to be referring to AI as Augmented Intelligence and not Artificial Intelligence,” Vradenburg said. At a “Davos wrap” webinar this week, hosted by EMEA, Lucy Pérez, global leader of the McKinsey Health Institute, underlined the critical moment faced. “There’s no more urgent time to invest in brain capital than right now,” Pérez said. “The demographic shifts that we’re experiencing, the geopolitical shocks, the economic shocks, the way technology is impacting not only the workplace, but also our daily lives.” But its the opportunity – as compared to the threat – that policymakers need to appreciate: “Scaling existing brain interventions already is going to unlock over $6 trillion in economic opportunity,” Pérez said. “And that’s with innovation we already have in hand.” Image Credits: DigitalRalph, Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer’s Disease, August 2024. , EMEA, 2026, National Institutes on Aging . US Freezes All Funds to Gavi Over Vaccine Preservative Thimerosal 29/01/2026 Kerry Cullinan A baby in Rwanda receives a combined measles and rubella vaccine. The US government has frozen funds to Gavi, the global vaccine alliance, until it commits to a plan to phase out the preservative thimerosal from all the vaccines it distributes. The US demand, first reported by Reuters, is linked to the unproven belief held by US Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr and allies that thimerosal, which contains mercury, is linked to autism. However, even the US Food and Drug Administration has pronounced that “thimerosal has been the subject of numerous studies and has a long record of safe and effective use preventing bacterial and fungal contamination of vaccines, with no ill effects established other than minor local reactions at the site of injection.” The FDA also notes that a vaccine with 0.01% thimerosal as a preservative contains “roughly the same amount of elemental mercury [as] contained in a three-ounce can of tuna fish”. Around 14% of Gavi’s vaccines contain thimerosal, which is used in some multi-dose vials to destroy any bacteria and fungi that may enter a vial each time a new dose is drawn. Multi-dose vaccines are used in many low- and middle-income countries as they are cheaper. Affected Gavi vaccines include the five-in-one pentavalent vaccine (Diphtheria, Pertussis , Tetanus, Hepatitis B and Haemophilus influenzae type b), the Diphtheria, Pertussis and Tetanus (DPT) vaccine, Tetanus-Reduced Diphtheria (Td), Hepatitis B, Meningococcal A Conjugate (MenA) and Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine (PCV). Most US vaccines do not contain thimerosal, while it is seldom found in Europe, which relies mainly on single-dose vaccines. Scientific consensus “We received a request from the US government to remove thimerosal from our portfolio. We remain in contact on this subject,” a Gavi spokesperson told Health Policy Watch. “While we very much hope to find a pathway to welcoming the US back as a donor, any decision related to Gavi’s portfolio would require a decision by Gavi’s Board and input from preceding governance committees, which will be guided by scientific consensus.” Hanging in the balance is some $300 million already allocated by the Biden administration but not yet paid, as well as any new funds. All Gavi-supported vaccines have to be recommended by the World Health Organisation’s (WHO) Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE), an independent body that examines all available scientific evidence and issues global guidance on the use of vaccines. In addition, each manufacturing site where Gavi-supported vaccines are produced must be approved or “pre-qualified” by WHO. Gavi-supported vaccines must also be recommended by the National Immunisation Technical Advisory Group (NITAG) in each country where they are being used. Most Gavi-supported countries also require vaccines to be approved by their own National Regulatory Authorities (NRAs), in addition to WHO approvals. In June last year, Kennedy told Gavi that the US would withhold funds until it “re-earned the public trust”, claiming that it had “ignored vaccine safety”. The US recently lost its seat on the Gavi board as it has failed to pledge any funds to it. Image Credits: Twitter: @WHOAFRO, WHO. Latest US Restrictions on Aid ‘Bully’ Recipients to Accept ‘Extremist Ideology’ 29/01/2026 Kerry Cullinan Kenyan women at a family planning clinic. Global health organisations have reacted with anger to the new US foreign aid policy, which prohibits all aid recipients, bar military, from performing or promoting abortion, “gender ideology”, or “diversity, equity and inclusion” (DEI). “Catastrophic”, “bullying”, “draconian” and “ideologically driven” – are some of their reactions to the Promoting Human Flourishing in Foreign Assistance (PHFFA) policy, announced by US Vice-President JD Vance at an anti-abortion event last Friday evening. The policy’s three parts were published in the Federal Register on Tuesday as Protecting Life in Foreign Assistance, Combating Gender Ideology in Foreign Assistance and Combating Discriminatory Equity Ideology in Foreign Assistance Rules. The new rules apply to all foreign and US NGOs and “international organisations”, including multilateral UN agencies still funded by the US and bodies such as the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, TB and Malaria. However, in countries that allow abortion, governments and parastatals (government agencies) will need to place any US funds in “a segregated account” to ensure they’re not used for abortions and related activities. Governments and parastatals “may” also be required to agree that they won’t use US funds to promote or engage in “gender ideology” or DEI. The US State Department defines “gender ideology” activities as those that provide or promote “sex rejecting procedures” (defined broadly to include puberty blockers, hormones, surgeries); promote or counsel social transition; use materials that discuss changing one’s sex or pronoun usage not aligned with biological sex; lobby foreign governments on gender identity issues; and support drag queen workshops, performances, or similar activities”. Aid recipients are also compelled to agree to US officials visiting their offices unannounced to inspect their documents and activities, and to speak to people receiving their services. This is potentially a violation of patient confidentiality. Imposing ‘extremist ideology’ Since 1984, successive Republican governments have imposed a “Global Gag Rule” (also known as the Mexico City Policy) on foreign NGOs receiving global health aid, barring them from using this money – or even money they have raised from other sources – for any abortion-related activities, including referrals. However, the second Trump administration is the first to extend this to all non-military foreign assistance, including humanitarian assistance, and to widen the scope to include US NGOs, international organisations and – potentially – governments. “Bullying countries into complying with anti-rights and extremist ideology is despicable and unacceptable. The imperialist goals of this administration are on full display in these conditions to foreign assistance,” Anu Kumar, CEO of the global reproductive justice organisation, Ipas, told a media briefing this week. In 2024, $39.8 billion in US foreign aid was dispensed over 160 countries, with the largest share (41%) going to multilateral agencies, according to KFF. “This is tens of billions more than the amount of global health assistance subject to the policy under the first Trump administration’s previously expanded policy ($7.3 billion in 2020),” notes KFF. This “catastrophic expansion” is going to be especially harmful to “women, young people, girls and LGBTQI+ people”, added Ipas senior researcher Jamie Vernaelde. “There is an agenda here from the US government to push these ideologies across to other countries, both through direct government-to-government funding, but also forcing multilateral organisations to be subject to the ideology of one specific country.” Impact on Kenya The bilateral Memorandums of Understanding (MOU) that the US has signed with 15 African countries as part of its “America First Global Health Strategy” all contain a clause compelling countries to comply with the Global Gag Rule. “What we’ve realised is this inclusion of the Global Gag Rule in the MOUs was basically a Trojan horse, in the sense that now the governments have signed, they are obligated to implement these expanded conditions, for example, on gender ideology,” said Ipas’s Kenya director, Dr Musoba Kitui. Kitui said that 40,000 health workers had already lost their jobs in his country since the closure of the US Agency for International Development (USAID), leading to the “weakening of the health system”. Many African governments “are very, very desperate” to inject resources into their health systems since the closure of USAID, and were willing to sign bilateral MOUs with the US, despite some of the unfavourable conditions, said Kitui. Kenya’s MOU would be complex to implement, and there is “no way the US can monitor compliance without seeing patient records,” added Kitui, highlighting a concern about patient privacy which has resulted in the MOU being challenged in court. However, “this MOU grants US personnel diplomatic immunity, insulating them from any local courts against judicial processes for any violations of data privacy, or even crippling the health system for that matter”, he added. “Sexual and reproductive health is not a diplomatic bargaining chip. It’s a fundamental human right. Essential health care services must be separate from political agendas. What is really important is to protect the progress that we have made over the years, including in countries like Kenya,” Kitui stressed. Impact on humanitarian aid South Sudanese women survivors of violence shared their stories with a visiting UN delegation. The narrow redefinition of US global aid will affect survivors of gender-based violence who need access to rape kits and emergency contraception. Dr Jean-Claude Mulunda, who heads Ipas work in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), said that his organisation assisted displaced people in camps with family planning services, abortion care and also supports survivors of gender-based violence (GBV). With the demise of USAID, “rape kits” for GBV survivors containing medicine to protect women and girls against sexually transmitted infections and pregnancy are no longer available. “Ipas is trying, with our limited funds, to buy unit-by-unit, the different medicines in these kits,” said Mulunda. “Many women who are victims of rape can’t access abortion care, even though the country has signed the Maputo Protocol which allows access to abortion in case of rape.” The more onerous aid conditions are going to make it even harder for displaced women to access sexual and reproductive services. “The risk of unsafe abortion is elevated in humanitarian settings where it’s even harder for people to access medical services,” warned Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) in its reaction to the new policy. “In 2023, MSF provided more than 31,000 consultations for post-abortion care, most of which were due to complications related to unsafe abortion. With the reinstatement of the Global Gag Rule, MSF expects these already troubling numbers to increase.” The new policy, PHFFA, “escalates a pattern established across both Trump administrations: the systematic subordination of scientific evidence and patient needs to ideological and political objectives,” added MSF. “Versions of the Global Gag Rule have been introduced by Republican administrations since 1984, and extensive research has repeatedly documented that the policy disrupts health services and causes cascading adverse health outcomes in low- and middle-income countries, with the chilling impact enduring even when the policy has been rescinded,” MSF noted. MSF added that the State Department’s definitions of “gender ideology” and “discriminatory equity ideology” are so broad “that it is likely to result in barring or limiting access to essential health services for LGBTQIA+ individuals, women and girls, racial and ethnic minorities, and other marginalized groups”. ‘Abdication of decency’ US Vice President JD Vance addressing the March for Life last Friday, where he announced the new policy. “President Trump and his anti-abortion administration would rather let people starve to death in the wake of famine and war than let anyone in the world get an abortion – or even receive information about it,” said Rachana Desai Martin, chief US program officer at the Center for Reproductive Rights. “People are already dying because of this administration’s slashing of foreign assistance. Now, they’re making it harder for doctors and aid workers to provide food, water, and lifesaving medical care. This isn’t about saving lives – it’s a stunning abdication of basic human decency,” Martin added. “Trump’s expansion [of the Global Gag Rule] continues on a path of instrumentalising those most marginalised. It marks increasing attempts to capture global health and human rights with a deeply regressive act of imperialism masquerading as foreign policy,” said Mina Barling, International Planned Parenthood Federation’s global director of external relations. “This is yet another attack on national sovereignty and colonial intervention through the curtailing of sexual and reproductive rights.” “The dismantling of USAID has already caused widespread harm: more than 45 million women and girls have lost access to contraceptive care and clinics around the world have been forced to close,” said Marieke van der Plas, executive director of the Dutch reproductive rights organisation, Rutgers. “Now, the Trump administration is further reshaping global health policy through new government agreements that embed ideological conditions and deepen political control.” The Senate Foreign Relations Democrats said in a statement: “By blocking US funding to any entity that does not conform to his extreme ideological agenda, the administration is exporting MAGA culture wars overseas and turning lifesaving aid into a political tool. “This order goes far beyond anything we’ve seen before. It will shrink global resources to fight disease, respond to humanitarian crises and protect women and girls from violence, while forcing many of our trusted partners to shut their doors or betray their missions. In doing so, it also leaves Americans more vulnerable to infectious diseases and health threats that do not respect borders.” Image Credits: saac Billy/ UN Photo, KFF. Posts navigation Older postsNewer posts This site uses cookies to help give you the best experience on our website. Cookies enable us to collect information that helps us personalise your experience and improve the functionality and performance of our site. By continuing to read our website, we assume you agree to this, otherwise you can adjust your browser settings. Please read our cookie and Privacy Policy. Our Cookies and Privacy Policy Loading Comments... You must be logged in to post a comment.
Countries are Significantly Off-Track to Meet Global Mental Health Targets 03/02/2026 Disha Shetty Resources allocated to mental health services have not increased since 2020, according to the WHO Director General’s latest report on mental health. Countries are significantly off track in meeting global targets set to transform mental health systems, according to the latest Director-General report tabled at the World Health Organization’s (WHO) Executive Board meeting. Around 1.1 billion people were estimated to be living with a mental health disorder, according to the latest WHO data available for 2021. Financial and human resources available for mental health services have not increased since 2020, with budgets remaining at a median of 2% of government health spending, the report found. On average, there is only one government mental health worker for every 10,000 people with stark variations between lower- and higher-income countries, the Director General’s (DG) report noted. Countries discussed a range of responses. “It is absolutely essential to advance towards true inclusion of mental health and all policies tackling related inequalities to do with housing, the socio-economic level, work and climate change, as well as discrimination and violence,” the representative from Spain said. “We want to make sure that we focus ourselves on non-pharmaceutical tools, the fewer prescriptions of psychotropic drugs and the prescription of social measures and community action,” the Spanish representative added. The WHO has a ‘Comprehensive Mental Health Action Plan 2013-2030’ in place, and the DG’s report was meant to highlight the ways in which this action plan can be implemented or enhanced. New pressures on mental health disorders WHO wants mental health to be managed in a community set-up and is pushing countries to do so. Mental health disorders are worsening with the added pressure of the recent COVID-19 pandemic and increasing climate change impacts. The pandemic has worsened all the factors that expose young people to mental health problems – indebtedness, economic insecurity and inequalities, migration and conflict, the report found. Death by suicide is now the third leading cause of death among 15 to 29-year-olds, with an estimated 727,000 deaths by suicide in 2021, according to WHO data. Digital pressures are exacerbating poor mental health, and the WHO has already recognized that the time spent online is associated with depression, anxiety, and psychological distress in adolescents. “We request WHO to urgently address the impact of social media and extensive use of technology among adolescents and young people by ensuring that the recently published guidance on mental health for children and young people is fully implemented by member states,” a representative of Zambia said during the discussion. Belgium echoed similar sentiments. One of the key components of WHO’s plan is to integrate mental health and social care services in community-based settings. Currently, most countries are at an early stage of this transition to community-based service delivery, despite it being a key priority area for the WHO, according to the DG report. Millions of alcohol and drug-use deaths WHO Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus addressing the 158th session of WHO’s Executive Board in Geneva. In 2019, an estimated 2.5 billion people consumed alcohol and 400 million people were living with alcohol use disorders. Alcohol consumption and psychoactive drug use was responsible for 2.6 million and 0.6 million deaths in 2019, according to the WHO. The world health body estimates that 316 million people used psychoactive drugs in 2023, and 64 million people were living with drug use disorders. Both alcohol use and drug use disorders are problems that in recent years have been categorized as a mental health issue that require help. “Little progress has been made in implementing the high-impact policy interventions proven to reduce alcohol-related harm,” the DG’s report read. “…and quality and ethical treatment for substance use disorders is still largely inaccessible for those most in need.” Members of the European Union raised concern over tobacco products being aggressively marketed to children online. “Children should be protected from aggressive online marketing of unhealthy food and drinks, alcohol, tobacco and similar products or prohibited substances. We call upon WHO to advance research and develop effective guidance to protect and promote mental health online and offline, while recognizing the responsibility of digital platforms and industries,” said Bulgaria on behalf of the European Union. Growing recognition of the impact of mental health WHO EB’s ongoing 158th session in Geneva While the action on the ground is still limited, it is clear that there is a growing recognition among countries of the kinds of mental health disorders affect health. Discussions on the non-communicable diseases (NCDs) too saw extensive mention of mental health disorders. Germany drew attention to the impact of climate change on all NCDs, including mental health. Several non-state actors raised concerns about the mental health impacts on healthcare providers themselves due to a combination of excessive working hours, job insecurity, violence and psychosocial workplace risk. “Studies show that health workers face mental health crises in several countries, reflected in a suicide risk that is 24% higher than in other sectors. We urge member states to ramp up efforts at strengthening mental health and psychosocial support for the populations of their countries and with dedicated programs for health workers,” said a representative of Public Services International, a global union that represents millions of workers. Image Credits: Unsplash, WHO/X, WHO/X. Days After US Leaves WHO, Israel Warns it Faces Pressure to Withdraw 02/02/2026 Kerry Cullinan Israel addressing the EB158 Israel has called for a “brave conceptual overhaul” of the World Health Organization (WHO) following the recent withdrawal of the United States, warning that it too is under pressure to leave the global body. Claiming that the WHO has become “too politicised”, Israel told the body’s Executive Board (EB) meeting on Monday that, “in Israel, there are also, unfortunately, strong public voices calling for us to leave the organisation as we enter the transitional period”. “Just days ago, we witnessed the United States withdrawal from the WHO. The departure of the United States should compel us all to engage in an honest, urgent dialogue about the future and the purpose of our organisation,” said Israel. “We must confront the fact that other nations may follow even without formal departure, lose interest, reduce contributions, and pursue alternative mechanisms for global health cooperation,” Israel concluded. Later in the opening session, Israel – a close ally of the Trump administration – announced that it would be putting forward a resolution related to Argentina’s planned exit from the WHO. Argentina announced its exit after the US did, but unlike the US, it has no agreement enabling it to leave and the WHO has no mechanism that allows for country withdrawal – other than a 1948 agreement with the US. The Israeli resolution recommends that the World Health Assembly accepts’s Argentina’s withdrawal. Russia also expressed unhappiness at some EB agenda items and urged the WHO to revert to “impartiality”. One of ‘most difficult years’ Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus addresses the Executive Board. Opening the EB, Director-General Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said that the past year has been “one of the most difficult” in the WHO’s history. The US contributed over $1 billion to the WHO in 2022/ 23, around 20% of the body’s budget, and the body has been forced to reduce its budget for 2026/27 from $5.3 billion to $4.2 billion. It is still short of 15% of its reduced budget, particularly for emergency preparedness, antimicrobial resistance, health financing, climate resilience and determinants of health. However, Tedros said that WHO has “reached a position of stability”, and it will be able to wean itself from an “over-reliance on a handful of donors” if member states retain their commitment to incrementally increasing their membership fees. This would enable WHO “non-dependence” on a handful of donors, inflexible, unpredictable funding and its biggest donors. When I say independence…. I mean an impartial, science-based organisation that’s free to say what the evidence says without fear or favour,” added Tedros. Disease prevention successes Tedros also reported numerous successes over the past year. Highlights in terms of disease prevention include access to more than 900 million influenza vaccine doses; the re-establishment of preventive cholera vaccination after a three-year gap, with 50 million doses going to Bangladesh, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Mozambique; and preventative vaccination for Ebola for approximately 100,000 frontline health workers in the DRC and the Central African Republic. “Despite funding cuts, we protected the global measles and rubella lab network, enabling our network of more than 740 labs to process more than 700,000 tests to detect and respond to measles globally,” said Tedros. Seven new countries were supported to introduce malaria vaccines, and 15 more countries to introduce HPV vaccination to prevent cervical cancer,” meaning that 65% of girls globally now live in a country with routine HPV vaccination”, he added. Health emergencies The WHO Academy in Lyon, set up with the French government, had 100,000 enrollments. The academy’s basic emergency care programme provides standard training on how to manage acutely ill patients. “A study of over 35,000 patients in 17 hospitals in Nepal, Uganda and Zambia, showed a reduction in mortality of between 34% and 50% following the implementation of the WHO Academy basic emergency care training,” Tedros noted. “Despite funding cuts, we protected the global measles and rubella lab network, enabling our network of more than 740 labs to process more than 700,000 tests to detect and respond to measles globally,” he added. Last week was the sixth anniversary of COVID-19 being declared a public health emergency of international concern, and last year the WHO pandemic agreement was agreed and the amended International Health Regulations came into force. Through the Pandemic Fund, the WHO and the World Bank, 70 countries to strengthen surveillance, laboratory networks, workforce capacity and multi-sectoral coordination. WHO has also updated its international pathogen surveillance network, using AI to “support more than 110 countries and 30 organisations who use the platform every day to quickly identify new threats”. Organisational reform The report from the Programme, Budget and Administration Committee (PBAC), which recommended governance reform, Global Health architecture changes, and amendments to the external auditor selection process, was adopted by the EB. PBAC requested that the WHO Secretariat ensure that country-level functions, such as emergency preparedness capacities, particularly in vulnerable settings, be protected during the cost-containment measures. The Committee also underscored the importance of sustainable, predictable and flexible financing. In its response, the WHO Secretariat reported that existing flexible funding was already being allocated to sustain underfunded priority areas, and reaffirmed its commitment to transparency, cost containment, strengthened prioritisation and ongoing engagement with member states on sustainable financing. PBAC also requested the WHO Secretariat to host a member-state-led process that brings together current discussions on reforming the global health architecture and the United Nations reform initiative, UN80. The aim would be to “facilitate convergence and consensus-building”, and include relevant global health actors, including development banks, philanthropies, civil society and academic institutions. Brain Health Is Not an Abstract Policy Issue, It Is a Lived Reality 31/01/2026 Health Policy Watch George Vredenburg and Rajinder Dhamija “You start with, as in my case, with the loss of three generations of my family to various forms of Alzheimer’s or dementia.” Those were the words of George Vradenburg. For him, brain health is not an abstract policy issue. It is a lived reality that mirrors a fast-growing global crisis. This issue was the focus of a recent episode of the Global Health Matters podcast, hosted by Dr. Garry Aslanyan. An estimated 57 million people worldwide are living with dementia, Vradenburg said, but that figure captures only those with symptoms. The scale is far larger. Disease processes often begin decades earlier, placing hundreds of millions more at risk. “The problem is by and large, now two thirds to three quarters of the people with dementia are in the global south, and that number and percentage is going to increase in the next 25 years,” Vradenburg said. The economic and social toll is enormous, already exceeding trillions of dollars globally. Families shoulder much of the burden, facing years of emotional strain and financial loss. Read related article: Unlocking ‘Brain Capital’ in the Brain Economy – Davos Initiative Aims to Make Brain Health a Development Indicator In India, neurologist Rajinder Dhamija sees brain health as a challenge that spans generations. “One of three of us will develop a brain disorder at one point of our life,” he said. Children face neurodevelopmental conditions and infections. Young adults confront rising rates of stroke and mental illness. Older adults are living longer, often with multiple chronic brain-related conditions. India’s numbers are stark. More than 330 million people are expected to be over the age of 60 within two decades. Dementia alone costs the country billions each year. Yet specialist care remains scarce. “We have less than one neurologist per million population in India, around 3,000 neurologists at present,” according to Dhamija. Both experts argued that brain health must be reframed beyond hospitals and clinics. Prevention, education, nutrition, and primary care deliver far greater returns than crisis response. “Prevention at the primary level yields much more results than the investing in terms of a large infrastructure,” Dhamija said. India has begun piloting district brain health clinics that combine screening, treatment, rehabilitation, and data collection to inform national policy. Globally, new tools may further expand access. Vaccines for Alzheimer’s are now in clinical trials. Low-cost screening using mobile phones and artificial intelligence could bring early detection to underserved communities. The stakes are high. As Dhamija put it, “brain health… is very essential, not only for the healthy societies and healthy countries, but also for a smooth economic development and the social development of any nation.” See more Global Health Matters episodes on Health Policy Watch. Image Credits: Global Health Matters Podcast. Why Africa Wants to Lead its own Health Research Agenda 31/01/2026 Health Policy Watch In the latest episode of Trailblazers with Garry, Garry Aslanyan visits Accra, Ghana, to speak with Professor John Owusu Gyapong, Secretary General of the African Research Universities Alliance. Gyapong took on the role in 2024, leading efforts to strengthen research collaboration across African universities. His work focusses on building capacity within the continent and supporting locally driven research agendas. Earlier in his career, when much of global health funding and attention centred on malaria, Gyapong chose to study neglected tropical diseases. These illnesses, he explains, had major social and economic consequences but received far less attention. Now, as a researcher and educator, Gyapong continues to emphasise the importance of African-led solutions and long-term investment in young scientists. The conversation touches on leadership, research priorities, and why universities play a critical role in shaping Africa’s health future. Watch the full episode: Trailblazers with Garry is part of Global Health Matters. Listen to more Global Health Matters shows on Health Policy Watch. Image Credits: Global Health Matters Podcast. Unlocking ‘Brain Capital’ in the Brain Economy – Davos Initiative Aims to Make Brain Health a Development Indicator 30/01/2026 Elaine Ruth Fletcher Rice University’s Harris Eyre in the Davos Alzheimer’s Collaborative ‘Brain House’ describing new brain capital and brain economy initiatives launched at the 2026 World Economic Forum. A new initiative that aims to measure and promote the inclusion of “brain capital” as an economic indicator was launched at the World Economic Forum in Davos last week. Advocates for the Global Brain Economy initiative, and a companion Global Brain Capital Index argue that using brain health as a development indicator can help spur more awareness and investments in brain health – including dementia related diseases that now rank as the seventh largest cause of death worldwide. The discussions, hosted by the Davos Alzheimer’s Collaborative (DAC), marked what several speakers described as a turning point: a shift from viewing brain health primarily as a cost to seeing it as an investable economic asset — one with implications for productivity, resilience, innovation, and long-term growth. With the launch of the Global Brain Capital Index and the Global Brain Economy Initiative, leaders from economics, neuroscience, policy, and finance argued that recognizing — and monetizing — “brain capital” may be essential to unlocking investment in brain health across the life course, from early development to healthy aging and dementia prevention. Projected growth curve for dementia risks and deaths 0 from 0.56 million in 1990 to nearly 5 million annually in 2030. From Idea to Global Movement The concept of the “brain economy” has evolved rapidly from academic theory to policy and investment agenda, said Harris Eyre. A professor at Rice University and the University of Texas Medical Branch, and a leading member of DAC, he framed the launch moment as the culmination of years of work. “We’ve really hit a crescendo point,” Eyre said. Referring to the newly released flagship report, The Human Advantage: Stronger Brains in the Age of AI, published by the World Economic Forum and McKinsey Health Institute, he noted its resonance across Davos. “We have a lot of different global challenges, a lot of big macro challenges. But here you can see… that brain challenges are very significant across the lifespan, from the earliest stage of life through to late life.” Those challenges include early-life malnutrition and stunted development, youth mental health, workforce disruption driven by artificial intelligence, and rising rates of dementia in ageing populations. “The cost of brain health conditions across the lifespan… is $3.5 trillion to the global economy, and the cost is rising at 3% a year,” Eyre said. Introducing brain capital Brain Capital concept At the heart of the Davos discussions was the concept of brain capital, defined as the combined value of brain health and brain skills. “Brain capital is the new paradigm here,” Eyre said. “It’s human capital 2.0 — human capital in the age of neuroscience.” He stressed that brain capital spans mental health, neurological health, cognitive skills, emotional resilience, creativity, and learning — and that these capacities are now more critical than ever. “Our brains are just so important now than ever before,” he said. “The accelerations of change are so high, we need brain health. We need brain skills.” Eyre argued that advances in neuroscience, reduced stigma around mental health and dementia, and growing awareness of neurodiversity have created a unique opportunity. “If you remember one thing today,” he told the audience, “is remember brain capital.” Dialogues at Davos with global health leaders around the new initiative included conversations with: Bill Gates, WHO Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, and Wellcome’s John-Arne Røttingen, among others, Eyre said. Brain Capital Index – a new development indicator Rym Ayadi, president of the Euro-Mediterranean Economists Association, describes the new ‘Brain Capital’ index launched at Davos. That call for recognition was matched with a new measurement tool unveiled in Davos; the full report was published just this week. Called the Global Brain Capital Index, it establishes a set of standardized indicators for measuring brain capital, in the form of brain health and brain skills, across countries and globally. The new index was developed by the economist Rym Ayadi, President of the Euro-Mediterranean Economists Association (EMEA). “Brain capital was a concept,” Ayadi said. “And nowadays I can say to you… it can be measured at national level.” Ayadi described the index as a response to what she called a blind spot in traditional economic frameworks. Brain health and brain skills are the two main pillars of the brain capital index – with “enablers” as a third important influence in overall outcomes. “GDP is very quantity-based. It’s not quality-based,” she said. “Brain health was a residual. It’s a cost. But brain health nowadays should be [seen as] infrastructure, an asset. It’s not a cost — it’s an investment.” The new index brings together over 28 indicators on brain health, brain skills, and enabling environments — the latter includes the quality of education, health systems, governance, and environmental risks, like air pollution, which has now been link clearly to dementia as well as to other forms of cognitive impairment. The 28 core indicators were derived from a larger collection of 106 indicators, available on an interactive Brain Capital Dashboard, and selected through a systematic process as the best composite measure of trends. “It is really a strategic tool, a compass for economic policy thinking going forward,” Ayadi said of the index. Decline in brain health seen worldwide A decline in brain health as a component of the brain capital index is seen across countries and regions. Drawing on data from 1990 onwards, the findings presented in Davos revealed troubling global trends. “We can see an increase overall in brain health since the 90s, but then there is an overall decline, and this decline is persistent in all countries of the world,” Ayadi said. “So something is wrong here.” The trend of brain health decline is seen across both OECD and non-OECD countries. And there is also a “huge inequality between OECD and non-OECD countries,” Ayadi said. “And if we don’t really act, it becomes even worse.” Non-communicable diseases and dementia in focus Abnormal accumulation of amyloid plaques and tau proteins in the brain, are the two hallmarks of Alzheimer’s – the latter forming tangles in neurons, seen here. Speakers linked the brain health declines to the growing burden of non-communicable diseases, particularly neurological and mental health conditions. “For the brain health indicators, for example, we have burden of disease, prevalence of depression, suicide rate… Alzheimer’s disease and other dementia, Parkinson’s disease, schizophrenia, stroke, bipolar,” Ayadi said. Population ageing, combined with underinvestment in brain health, are other contributing factors. “Brain health overall is under global strain,” she said. “Driven by population aging, raising mental health burdens and cumulative economic and health stressors.” Despite the scale of the challenge, Ayadi noted that brain health remains systematically underfunded. “Despite the economic importance, brain health remains systematically underfunded and under integrated into policy framework,” she said. Brain skills improvements offset brain health declines Consideration of brain skills as part of the index provides a more hopeful picture. This includes skills’ indicators, like level of education or the rate of innovation, Ayadi said. Skills indicators, as such, are still rising in many parts of the world, including in low income countries -even if the disparities are huge. Brain skill indicators such as educational level or the pace of innovation are still rising in many countries, countering negative trends in brain health. But even when those enablers are considered, the composite trends in many parts of the world, including high and lower-income regions, still reflects worrying signs of stagnation or decline, she underlined – reflecting the way the decline in brain health can ‘drag down’ progress overall. Evolution of composite brain capital index including enablers. More positive trends in brain skills and related enablers, like education and health infrastructure, offset declines in brain health. From measurement to investment The central argument emerging from Davos was that measurement enables monetisation of risks and benefits to brain health and brain capital. Consequently, monetizing brain capital could unlock large-scale investment in prevention, care, and skills development. “If, in fact, we are able to measure, and we are able to govern, we can… finance,” Ayadi said. “And then it becomes in the economic and financial system.” This idea resonated strongly with investors and business leaders attending the sessions. Steve Carnevale, moderator of the DAC session and himself a venture capitalist, reflected on the power of quantification: “When we can quantify something that previously wasn’t quantifiable, and when we can quantify it, we can turn it into a growth story,” Carnevale said. “That’s when people are really going to follow us.” Toward a ‘brain-positive’ economy The Davos discussions also signal a broader rethinking of development indicators. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) continues to be the dominant indicator of socio-economic development. While this has been under challenge by academics for sometime, GDP’s binary nature is even more out of date in the age of AI, panelists argued. “Brain health has to become a priority within our national policies, and also brain skills. This index could be a new policy compass beyond GDP,” Ayadi argued, saying that development indicators need to shift “from quantity-based skills into neurocognitive assets… and from growth to resilience.” Along with that, the new brain economy initiative launched at Davos aims to spur policymakers from theory to action, Eyre said. The initiative focusses on safeguarding brain health, fostering brain skills, investing with a “brain lens,” and mobilizing public-private partnerships. “We need brain lens investing to sit above global financial architecture – and channel it towards brain positive investments.” Added Drew Holzapfel DAC COO, “Brain health has long been treated primarily as a health issue, which it is. But when it’s understood as an economic issue, it opens the door to more resources and a broader, more sustained commitment. What we have the opportunity to do is take the concept of brain capital and translate it into something that focuses the minds of finance ministers.” Brain capital all the more important in AI era DAC founder George Vradenburg opening the panel on brain capital and the brain economy at a WEF side event in Davos last week. Recognizing the importance of brain health and brain capital is all the more critical in the age of fast-evolving AI systems – so that humans can keep abreast of these changes – and benefit from them – rather than the reverse, said George Vradenburg, founder of the Davos Alzheimer’s Collaborative, and convenor of the Davos session. “We need to be referring to AI as Augmented Intelligence and not Artificial Intelligence,” Vradenburg said. At a “Davos wrap” webinar this week, hosted by EMEA, Lucy Pérez, global leader of the McKinsey Health Institute, underlined the critical moment faced. “There’s no more urgent time to invest in brain capital than right now,” Pérez said. “The demographic shifts that we’re experiencing, the geopolitical shocks, the economic shocks, the way technology is impacting not only the workplace, but also our daily lives.” But its the opportunity – as compared to the threat – that policymakers need to appreciate: “Scaling existing brain interventions already is going to unlock over $6 trillion in economic opportunity,” Pérez said. “And that’s with innovation we already have in hand.” Image Credits: DigitalRalph, Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer’s Disease, August 2024. , EMEA, 2026, National Institutes on Aging . US Freezes All Funds to Gavi Over Vaccine Preservative Thimerosal 29/01/2026 Kerry Cullinan A baby in Rwanda receives a combined measles and rubella vaccine. The US government has frozen funds to Gavi, the global vaccine alliance, until it commits to a plan to phase out the preservative thimerosal from all the vaccines it distributes. The US demand, first reported by Reuters, is linked to the unproven belief held by US Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr and allies that thimerosal, which contains mercury, is linked to autism. However, even the US Food and Drug Administration has pronounced that “thimerosal has been the subject of numerous studies and has a long record of safe and effective use preventing bacterial and fungal contamination of vaccines, with no ill effects established other than minor local reactions at the site of injection.” The FDA also notes that a vaccine with 0.01% thimerosal as a preservative contains “roughly the same amount of elemental mercury [as] contained in a three-ounce can of tuna fish”. Around 14% of Gavi’s vaccines contain thimerosal, which is used in some multi-dose vials to destroy any bacteria and fungi that may enter a vial each time a new dose is drawn. Multi-dose vaccines are used in many low- and middle-income countries as they are cheaper. Affected Gavi vaccines include the five-in-one pentavalent vaccine (Diphtheria, Pertussis , Tetanus, Hepatitis B and Haemophilus influenzae type b), the Diphtheria, Pertussis and Tetanus (DPT) vaccine, Tetanus-Reduced Diphtheria (Td), Hepatitis B, Meningococcal A Conjugate (MenA) and Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine (PCV). Most US vaccines do not contain thimerosal, while it is seldom found in Europe, which relies mainly on single-dose vaccines. Scientific consensus “We received a request from the US government to remove thimerosal from our portfolio. We remain in contact on this subject,” a Gavi spokesperson told Health Policy Watch. “While we very much hope to find a pathway to welcoming the US back as a donor, any decision related to Gavi’s portfolio would require a decision by Gavi’s Board and input from preceding governance committees, which will be guided by scientific consensus.” Hanging in the balance is some $300 million already allocated by the Biden administration but not yet paid, as well as any new funds. All Gavi-supported vaccines have to be recommended by the World Health Organisation’s (WHO) Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE), an independent body that examines all available scientific evidence and issues global guidance on the use of vaccines. In addition, each manufacturing site where Gavi-supported vaccines are produced must be approved or “pre-qualified” by WHO. Gavi-supported vaccines must also be recommended by the National Immunisation Technical Advisory Group (NITAG) in each country where they are being used. Most Gavi-supported countries also require vaccines to be approved by their own National Regulatory Authorities (NRAs), in addition to WHO approvals. In June last year, Kennedy told Gavi that the US would withhold funds until it “re-earned the public trust”, claiming that it had “ignored vaccine safety”. The US recently lost its seat on the Gavi board as it has failed to pledge any funds to it. Image Credits: Twitter: @WHOAFRO, WHO. Latest US Restrictions on Aid ‘Bully’ Recipients to Accept ‘Extremist Ideology’ 29/01/2026 Kerry Cullinan Kenyan women at a family planning clinic. Global health organisations have reacted with anger to the new US foreign aid policy, which prohibits all aid recipients, bar military, from performing or promoting abortion, “gender ideology”, or “diversity, equity and inclusion” (DEI). “Catastrophic”, “bullying”, “draconian” and “ideologically driven” – are some of their reactions to the Promoting Human Flourishing in Foreign Assistance (PHFFA) policy, announced by US Vice-President JD Vance at an anti-abortion event last Friday evening. The policy’s three parts were published in the Federal Register on Tuesday as Protecting Life in Foreign Assistance, Combating Gender Ideology in Foreign Assistance and Combating Discriminatory Equity Ideology in Foreign Assistance Rules. The new rules apply to all foreign and US NGOs and “international organisations”, including multilateral UN agencies still funded by the US and bodies such as the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, TB and Malaria. However, in countries that allow abortion, governments and parastatals (government agencies) will need to place any US funds in “a segregated account” to ensure they’re not used for abortions and related activities. Governments and parastatals “may” also be required to agree that they won’t use US funds to promote or engage in “gender ideology” or DEI. The US State Department defines “gender ideology” activities as those that provide or promote “sex rejecting procedures” (defined broadly to include puberty blockers, hormones, surgeries); promote or counsel social transition; use materials that discuss changing one’s sex or pronoun usage not aligned with biological sex; lobby foreign governments on gender identity issues; and support drag queen workshops, performances, or similar activities”. Aid recipients are also compelled to agree to US officials visiting their offices unannounced to inspect their documents and activities, and to speak to people receiving their services. This is potentially a violation of patient confidentiality. Imposing ‘extremist ideology’ Since 1984, successive Republican governments have imposed a “Global Gag Rule” (also known as the Mexico City Policy) on foreign NGOs receiving global health aid, barring them from using this money – or even money they have raised from other sources – for any abortion-related activities, including referrals. However, the second Trump administration is the first to extend this to all non-military foreign assistance, including humanitarian assistance, and to widen the scope to include US NGOs, international organisations and – potentially – governments. “Bullying countries into complying with anti-rights and extremist ideology is despicable and unacceptable. The imperialist goals of this administration are on full display in these conditions to foreign assistance,” Anu Kumar, CEO of the global reproductive justice organisation, Ipas, told a media briefing this week. In 2024, $39.8 billion in US foreign aid was dispensed over 160 countries, with the largest share (41%) going to multilateral agencies, according to KFF. “This is tens of billions more than the amount of global health assistance subject to the policy under the first Trump administration’s previously expanded policy ($7.3 billion in 2020),” notes KFF. This “catastrophic expansion” is going to be especially harmful to “women, young people, girls and LGBTQI+ people”, added Ipas senior researcher Jamie Vernaelde. “There is an agenda here from the US government to push these ideologies across to other countries, both through direct government-to-government funding, but also forcing multilateral organisations to be subject to the ideology of one specific country.” Impact on Kenya The bilateral Memorandums of Understanding (MOU) that the US has signed with 15 African countries as part of its “America First Global Health Strategy” all contain a clause compelling countries to comply with the Global Gag Rule. “What we’ve realised is this inclusion of the Global Gag Rule in the MOUs was basically a Trojan horse, in the sense that now the governments have signed, they are obligated to implement these expanded conditions, for example, on gender ideology,” said Ipas’s Kenya director, Dr Musoba Kitui. Kitui said that 40,000 health workers had already lost their jobs in his country since the closure of the US Agency for International Development (USAID), leading to the “weakening of the health system”. Many African governments “are very, very desperate” to inject resources into their health systems since the closure of USAID, and were willing to sign bilateral MOUs with the US, despite some of the unfavourable conditions, said Kitui. Kenya’s MOU would be complex to implement, and there is “no way the US can monitor compliance without seeing patient records,” added Kitui, highlighting a concern about patient privacy which has resulted in the MOU being challenged in court. However, “this MOU grants US personnel diplomatic immunity, insulating them from any local courts against judicial processes for any violations of data privacy, or even crippling the health system for that matter”, he added. “Sexual and reproductive health is not a diplomatic bargaining chip. It’s a fundamental human right. Essential health care services must be separate from political agendas. What is really important is to protect the progress that we have made over the years, including in countries like Kenya,” Kitui stressed. Impact on humanitarian aid South Sudanese women survivors of violence shared their stories with a visiting UN delegation. The narrow redefinition of US global aid will affect survivors of gender-based violence who need access to rape kits and emergency contraception. Dr Jean-Claude Mulunda, who heads Ipas work in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), said that his organisation assisted displaced people in camps with family planning services, abortion care and also supports survivors of gender-based violence (GBV). With the demise of USAID, “rape kits” for GBV survivors containing medicine to protect women and girls against sexually transmitted infections and pregnancy are no longer available. “Ipas is trying, with our limited funds, to buy unit-by-unit, the different medicines in these kits,” said Mulunda. “Many women who are victims of rape can’t access abortion care, even though the country has signed the Maputo Protocol which allows access to abortion in case of rape.” The more onerous aid conditions are going to make it even harder for displaced women to access sexual and reproductive services. “The risk of unsafe abortion is elevated in humanitarian settings where it’s even harder for people to access medical services,” warned Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) in its reaction to the new policy. “In 2023, MSF provided more than 31,000 consultations for post-abortion care, most of which were due to complications related to unsafe abortion. With the reinstatement of the Global Gag Rule, MSF expects these already troubling numbers to increase.” The new policy, PHFFA, “escalates a pattern established across both Trump administrations: the systematic subordination of scientific evidence and patient needs to ideological and political objectives,” added MSF. “Versions of the Global Gag Rule have been introduced by Republican administrations since 1984, and extensive research has repeatedly documented that the policy disrupts health services and causes cascading adverse health outcomes in low- and middle-income countries, with the chilling impact enduring even when the policy has been rescinded,” MSF noted. MSF added that the State Department’s definitions of “gender ideology” and “discriminatory equity ideology” are so broad “that it is likely to result in barring or limiting access to essential health services for LGBTQIA+ individuals, women and girls, racial and ethnic minorities, and other marginalized groups”. ‘Abdication of decency’ US Vice President JD Vance addressing the March for Life last Friday, where he announced the new policy. “President Trump and his anti-abortion administration would rather let people starve to death in the wake of famine and war than let anyone in the world get an abortion – or even receive information about it,” said Rachana Desai Martin, chief US program officer at the Center for Reproductive Rights. “People are already dying because of this administration’s slashing of foreign assistance. Now, they’re making it harder for doctors and aid workers to provide food, water, and lifesaving medical care. This isn’t about saving lives – it’s a stunning abdication of basic human decency,” Martin added. “Trump’s expansion [of the Global Gag Rule] continues on a path of instrumentalising those most marginalised. It marks increasing attempts to capture global health and human rights with a deeply regressive act of imperialism masquerading as foreign policy,” said Mina Barling, International Planned Parenthood Federation’s global director of external relations. “This is yet another attack on national sovereignty and colonial intervention through the curtailing of sexual and reproductive rights.” “The dismantling of USAID has already caused widespread harm: more than 45 million women and girls have lost access to contraceptive care and clinics around the world have been forced to close,” said Marieke van der Plas, executive director of the Dutch reproductive rights organisation, Rutgers. “Now, the Trump administration is further reshaping global health policy through new government agreements that embed ideological conditions and deepen political control.” The Senate Foreign Relations Democrats said in a statement: “By blocking US funding to any entity that does not conform to his extreme ideological agenda, the administration is exporting MAGA culture wars overseas and turning lifesaving aid into a political tool. “This order goes far beyond anything we’ve seen before. It will shrink global resources to fight disease, respond to humanitarian crises and protect women and girls from violence, while forcing many of our trusted partners to shut their doors or betray their missions. In doing so, it also leaves Americans more vulnerable to infectious diseases and health threats that do not respect borders.” Image Credits: saac Billy/ UN Photo, KFF. Posts navigation Older postsNewer posts This site uses cookies to help give you the best experience on our website. Cookies enable us to collect information that helps us personalise your experience and improve the functionality and performance of our site. By continuing to read our website, we assume you agree to this, otherwise you can adjust your browser settings. Please read our cookie and Privacy Policy. Our Cookies and Privacy Policy Loading Comments... You must be logged in to post a comment.
Days After US Leaves WHO, Israel Warns it Faces Pressure to Withdraw 02/02/2026 Kerry Cullinan Israel addressing the EB158 Israel has called for a “brave conceptual overhaul” of the World Health Organization (WHO) following the recent withdrawal of the United States, warning that it too is under pressure to leave the global body. Claiming that the WHO has become “too politicised”, Israel told the body’s Executive Board (EB) meeting on Monday that, “in Israel, there are also, unfortunately, strong public voices calling for us to leave the organisation as we enter the transitional period”. “Just days ago, we witnessed the United States withdrawal from the WHO. The departure of the United States should compel us all to engage in an honest, urgent dialogue about the future and the purpose of our organisation,” said Israel. “We must confront the fact that other nations may follow even without formal departure, lose interest, reduce contributions, and pursue alternative mechanisms for global health cooperation,” Israel concluded. Later in the opening session, Israel – a close ally of the Trump administration – announced that it would be putting forward a resolution related to Argentina’s planned exit from the WHO. Argentina announced its exit after the US did, but unlike the US, it has no agreement enabling it to leave and the WHO has no mechanism that allows for country withdrawal – other than a 1948 agreement with the US. The Israeli resolution recommends that the World Health Assembly accepts’s Argentina’s withdrawal. Russia also expressed unhappiness at some EB agenda items and urged the WHO to revert to “impartiality”. One of ‘most difficult years’ Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus addresses the Executive Board. Opening the EB, Director-General Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said that the past year has been “one of the most difficult” in the WHO’s history. The US contributed over $1 billion to the WHO in 2022/ 23, around 20% of the body’s budget, and the body has been forced to reduce its budget for 2026/27 from $5.3 billion to $4.2 billion. It is still short of 15% of its reduced budget, particularly for emergency preparedness, antimicrobial resistance, health financing, climate resilience and determinants of health. However, Tedros said that WHO has “reached a position of stability”, and it will be able to wean itself from an “over-reliance on a handful of donors” if member states retain their commitment to incrementally increasing their membership fees. This would enable WHO “non-dependence” on a handful of donors, inflexible, unpredictable funding and its biggest donors. When I say independence…. I mean an impartial, science-based organisation that’s free to say what the evidence says without fear or favour,” added Tedros. Disease prevention successes Tedros also reported numerous successes over the past year. Highlights in terms of disease prevention include access to more than 900 million influenza vaccine doses; the re-establishment of preventive cholera vaccination after a three-year gap, with 50 million doses going to Bangladesh, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Mozambique; and preventative vaccination for Ebola for approximately 100,000 frontline health workers in the DRC and the Central African Republic. “Despite funding cuts, we protected the global measles and rubella lab network, enabling our network of more than 740 labs to process more than 700,000 tests to detect and respond to measles globally,” said Tedros. Seven new countries were supported to introduce malaria vaccines, and 15 more countries to introduce HPV vaccination to prevent cervical cancer,” meaning that 65% of girls globally now live in a country with routine HPV vaccination”, he added. Health emergencies The WHO Academy in Lyon, set up with the French government, had 100,000 enrollments. The academy’s basic emergency care programme provides standard training on how to manage acutely ill patients. “A study of over 35,000 patients in 17 hospitals in Nepal, Uganda and Zambia, showed a reduction in mortality of between 34% and 50% following the implementation of the WHO Academy basic emergency care training,” Tedros noted. “Despite funding cuts, we protected the global measles and rubella lab network, enabling our network of more than 740 labs to process more than 700,000 tests to detect and respond to measles globally,” he added. Last week was the sixth anniversary of COVID-19 being declared a public health emergency of international concern, and last year the WHO pandemic agreement was agreed and the amended International Health Regulations came into force. Through the Pandemic Fund, the WHO and the World Bank, 70 countries to strengthen surveillance, laboratory networks, workforce capacity and multi-sectoral coordination. WHO has also updated its international pathogen surveillance network, using AI to “support more than 110 countries and 30 organisations who use the platform every day to quickly identify new threats”. Organisational reform The report from the Programme, Budget and Administration Committee (PBAC), which recommended governance reform, Global Health architecture changes, and amendments to the external auditor selection process, was adopted by the EB. PBAC requested that the WHO Secretariat ensure that country-level functions, such as emergency preparedness capacities, particularly in vulnerable settings, be protected during the cost-containment measures. The Committee also underscored the importance of sustainable, predictable and flexible financing. In its response, the WHO Secretariat reported that existing flexible funding was already being allocated to sustain underfunded priority areas, and reaffirmed its commitment to transparency, cost containment, strengthened prioritisation and ongoing engagement with member states on sustainable financing. PBAC also requested the WHO Secretariat to host a member-state-led process that brings together current discussions on reforming the global health architecture and the United Nations reform initiative, UN80. The aim would be to “facilitate convergence and consensus-building”, and include relevant global health actors, including development banks, philanthropies, civil society and academic institutions. Brain Health Is Not an Abstract Policy Issue, It Is a Lived Reality 31/01/2026 Health Policy Watch George Vredenburg and Rajinder Dhamija “You start with, as in my case, with the loss of three generations of my family to various forms of Alzheimer’s or dementia.” Those were the words of George Vradenburg. For him, brain health is not an abstract policy issue. It is a lived reality that mirrors a fast-growing global crisis. This issue was the focus of a recent episode of the Global Health Matters podcast, hosted by Dr. Garry Aslanyan. An estimated 57 million people worldwide are living with dementia, Vradenburg said, but that figure captures only those with symptoms. The scale is far larger. Disease processes often begin decades earlier, placing hundreds of millions more at risk. “The problem is by and large, now two thirds to three quarters of the people with dementia are in the global south, and that number and percentage is going to increase in the next 25 years,” Vradenburg said. The economic and social toll is enormous, already exceeding trillions of dollars globally. Families shoulder much of the burden, facing years of emotional strain and financial loss. Read related article: Unlocking ‘Brain Capital’ in the Brain Economy – Davos Initiative Aims to Make Brain Health a Development Indicator In India, neurologist Rajinder Dhamija sees brain health as a challenge that spans generations. “One of three of us will develop a brain disorder at one point of our life,” he said. Children face neurodevelopmental conditions and infections. Young adults confront rising rates of stroke and mental illness. Older adults are living longer, often with multiple chronic brain-related conditions. India’s numbers are stark. More than 330 million people are expected to be over the age of 60 within two decades. Dementia alone costs the country billions each year. Yet specialist care remains scarce. “We have less than one neurologist per million population in India, around 3,000 neurologists at present,” according to Dhamija. Both experts argued that brain health must be reframed beyond hospitals and clinics. Prevention, education, nutrition, and primary care deliver far greater returns than crisis response. “Prevention at the primary level yields much more results than the investing in terms of a large infrastructure,” Dhamija said. India has begun piloting district brain health clinics that combine screening, treatment, rehabilitation, and data collection to inform national policy. Globally, new tools may further expand access. Vaccines for Alzheimer’s are now in clinical trials. Low-cost screening using mobile phones and artificial intelligence could bring early detection to underserved communities. The stakes are high. As Dhamija put it, “brain health… is very essential, not only for the healthy societies and healthy countries, but also for a smooth economic development and the social development of any nation.” See more Global Health Matters episodes on Health Policy Watch. Image Credits: Global Health Matters Podcast. Why Africa Wants to Lead its own Health Research Agenda 31/01/2026 Health Policy Watch In the latest episode of Trailblazers with Garry, Garry Aslanyan visits Accra, Ghana, to speak with Professor John Owusu Gyapong, Secretary General of the African Research Universities Alliance. Gyapong took on the role in 2024, leading efforts to strengthen research collaboration across African universities. His work focusses on building capacity within the continent and supporting locally driven research agendas. Earlier in his career, when much of global health funding and attention centred on malaria, Gyapong chose to study neglected tropical diseases. These illnesses, he explains, had major social and economic consequences but received far less attention. Now, as a researcher and educator, Gyapong continues to emphasise the importance of African-led solutions and long-term investment in young scientists. The conversation touches on leadership, research priorities, and why universities play a critical role in shaping Africa’s health future. Watch the full episode: Trailblazers with Garry is part of Global Health Matters. Listen to more Global Health Matters shows on Health Policy Watch. Image Credits: Global Health Matters Podcast. Unlocking ‘Brain Capital’ in the Brain Economy – Davos Initiative Aims to Make Brain Health a Development Indicator 30/01/2026 Elaine Ruth Fletcher Rice University’s Harris Eyre in the Davos Alzheimer’s Collaborative ‘Brain House’ describing new brain capital and brain economy initiatives launched at the 2026 World Economic Forum. A new initiative that aims to measure and promote the inclusion of “brain capital” as an economic indicator was launched at the World Economic Forum in Davos last week. Advocates for the Global Brain Economy initiative, and a companion Global Brain Capital Index argue that using brain health as a development indicator can help spur more awareness and investments in brain health – including dementia related diseases that now rank as the seventh largest cause of death worldwide. The discussions, hosted by the Davos Alzheimer’s Collaborative (DAC), marked what several speakers described as a turning point: a shift from viewing brain health primarily as a cost to seeing it as an investable economic asset — one with implications for productivity, resilience, innovation, and long-term growth. With the launch of the Global Brain Capital Index and the Global Brain Economy Initiative, leaders from economics, neuroscience, policy, and finance argued that recognizing — and monetizing — “brain capital” may be essential to unlocking investment in brain health across the life course, from early development to healthy aging and dementia prevention. Projected growth curve for dementia risks and deaths 0 from 0.56 million in 1990 to nearly 5 million annually in 2030. From Idea to Global Movement The concept of the “brain economy” has evolved rapidly from academic theory to policy and investment agenda, said Harris Eyre. A professor at Rice University and the University of Texas Medical Branch, and a leading member of DAC, he framed the launch moment as the culmination of years of work. “We’ve really hit a crescendo point,” Eyre said. Referring to the newly released flagship report, The Human Advantage: Stronger Brains in the Age of AI, published by the World Economic Forum and McKinsey Health Institute, he noted its resonance across Davos. “We have a lot of different global challenges, a lot of big macro challenges. But here you can see… that brain challenges are very significant across the lifespan, from the earliest stage of life through to late life.” Those challenges include early-life malnutrition and stunted development, youth mental health, workforce disruption driven by artificial intelligence, and rising rates of dementia in ageing populations. “The cost of brain health conditions across the lifespan… is $3.5 trillion to the global economy, and the cost is rising at 3% a year,” Eyre said. Introducing brain capital Brain Capital concept At the heart of the Davos discussions was the concept of brain capital, defined as the combined value of brain health and brain skills. “Brain capital is the new paradigm here,” Eyre said. “It’s human capital 2.0 — human capital in the age of neuroscience.” He stressed that brain capital spans mental health, neurological health, cognitive skills, emotional resilience, creativity, and learning — and that these capacities are now more critical than ever. “Our brains are just so important now than ever before,” he said. “The accelerations of change are so high, we need brain health. We need brain skills.” Eyre argued that advances in neuroscience, reduced stigma around mental health and dementia, and growing awareness of neurodiversity have created a unique opportunity. “If you remember one thing today,” he told the audience, “is remember brain capital.” Dialogues at Davos with global health leaders around the new initiative included conversations with: Bill Gates, WHO Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, and Wellcome’s John-Arne Røttingen, among others, Eyre said. Brain Capital Index – a new development indicator Rym Ayadi, president of the Euro-Mediterranean Economists Association, describes the new ‘Brain Capital’ index launched at Davos. That call for recognition was matched with a new measurement tool unveiled in Davos; the full report was published just this week. Called the Global Brain Capital Index, it establishes a set of standardized indicators for measuring brain capital, in the form of brain health and brain skills, across countries and globally. The new index was developed by the economist Rym Ayadi, President of the Euro-Mediterranean Economists Association (EMEA). “Brain capital was a concept,” Ayadi said. “And nowadays I can say to you… it can be measured at national level.” Ayadi described the index as a response to what she called a blind spot in traditional economic frameworks. Brain health and brain skills are the two main pillars of the brain capital index – with “enablers” as a third important influence in overall outcomes. “GDP is very quantity-based. It’s not quality-based,” she said. “Brain health was a residual. It’s a cost. But brain health nowadays should be [seen as] infrastructure, an asset. It’s not a cost — it’s an investment.” The new index brings together over 28 indicators on brain health, brain skills, and enabling environments — the latter includes the quality of education, health systems, governance, and environmental risks, like air pollution, which has now been link clearly to dementia as well as to other forms of cognitive impairment. The 28 core indicators were derived from a larger collection of 106 indicators, available on an interactive Brain Capital Dashboard, and selected through a systematic process as the best composite measure of trends. “It is really a strategic tool, a compass for economic policy thinking going forward,” Ayadi said of the index. Decline in brain health seen worldwide A decline in brain health as a component of the brain capital index is seen across countries and regions. Drawing on data from 1990 onwards, the findings presented in Davos revealed troubling global trends. “We can see an increase overall in brain health since the 90s, but then there is an overall decline, and this decline is persistent in all countries of the world,” Ayadi said. “So something is wrong here.” The trend of brain health decline is seen across both OECD and non-OECD countries. And there is also a “huge inequality between OECD and non-OECD countries,” Ayadi said. “And if we don’t really act, it becomes even worse.” Non-communicable diseases and dementia in focus Abnormal accumulation of amyloid plaques and tau proteins in the brain, are the two hallmarks of Alzheimer’s – the latter forming tangles in neurons, seen here. Speakers linked the brain health declines to the growing burden of non-communicable diseases, particularly neurological and mental health conditions. “For the brain health indicators, for example, we have burden of disease, prevalence of depression, suicide rate… Alzheimer’s disease and other dementia, Parkinson’s disease, schizophrenia, stroke, bipolar,” Ayadi said. Population ageing, combined with underinvestment in brain health, are other contributing factors. “Brain health overall is under global strain,” she said. “Driven by population aging, raising mental health burdens and cumulative economic and health stressors.” Despite the scale of the challenge, Ayadi noted that brain health remains systematically underfunded. “Despite the economic importance, brain health remains systematically underfunded and under integrated into policy framework,” she said. Brain skills improvements offset brain health declines Consideration of brain skills as part of the index provides a more hopeful picture. This includes skills’ indicators, like level of education or the rate of innovation, Ayadi said. Skills indicators, as such, are still rising in many parts of the world, including in low income countries -even if the disparities are huge. Brain skill indicators such as educational level or the pace of innovation are still rising in many countries, countering negative trends in brain health. But even when those enablers are considered, the composite trends in many parts of the world, including high and lower-income regions, still reflects worrying signs of stagnation or decline, she underlined – reflecting the way the decline in brain health can ‘drag down’ progress overall. Evolution of composite brain capital index including enablers. More positive trends in brain skills and related enablers, like education and health infrastructure, offset declines in brain health. From measurement to investment The central argument emerging from Davos was that measurement enables monetisation of risks and benefits to brain health and brain capital. Consequently, monetizing brain capital could unlock large-scale investment in prevention, care, and skills development. “If, in fact, we are able to measure, and we are able to govern, we can… finance,” Ayadi said. “And then it becomes in the economic and financial system.” This idea resonated strongly with investors and business leaders attending the sessions. Steve Carnevale, moderator of the DAC session and himself a venture capitalist, reflected on the power of quantification: “When we can quantify something that previously wasn’t quantifiable, and when we can quantify it, we can turn it into a growth story,” Carnevale said. “That’s when people are really going to follow us.” Toward a ‘brain-positive’ economy The Davos discussions also signal a broader rethinking of development indicators. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) continues to be the dominant indicator of socio-economic development. While this has been under challenge by academics for sometime, GDP’s binary nature is even more out of date in the age of AI, panelists argued. “Brain health has to become a priority within our national policies, and also brain skills. This index could be a new policy compass beyond GDP,” Ayadi argued, saying that development indicators need to shift “from quantity-based skills into neurocognitive assets… and from growth to resilience.” Along with that, the new brain economy initiative launched at Davos aims to spur policymakers from theory to action, Eyre said. The initiative focusses on safeguarding brain health, fostering brain skills, investing with a “brain lens,” and mobilizing public-private partnerships. “We need brain lens investing to sit above global financial architecture – and channel it towards brain positive investments.” Added Drew Holzapfel DAC COO, “Brain health has long been treated primarily as a health issue, which it is. But when it’s understood as an economic issue, it opens the door to more resources and a broader, more sustained commitment. What we have the opportunity to do is take the concept of brain capital and translate it into something that focuses the minds of finance ministers.” Brain capital all the more important in AI era DAC founder George Vradenburg opening the panel on brain capital and the brain economy at a WEF side event in Davos last week. Recognizing the importance of brain health and brain capital is all the more critical in the age of fast-evolving AI systems – so that humans can keep abreast of these changes – and benefit from them – rather than the reverse, said George Vradenburg, founder of the Davos Alzheimer’s Collaborative, and convenor of the Davos session. “We need to be referring to AI as Augmented Intelligence and not Artificial Intelligence,” Vradenburg said. At a “Davos wrap” webinar this week, hosted by EMEA, Lucy Pérez, global leader of the McKinsey Health Institute, underlined the critical moment faced. “There’s no more urgent time to invest in brain capital than right now,” Pérez said. “The demographic shifts that we’re experiencing, the geopolitical shocks, the economic shocks, the way technology is impacting not only the workplace, but also our daily lives.” But its the opportunity – as compared to the threat – that policymakers need to appreciate: “Scaling existing brain interventions already is going to unlock over $6 trillion in economic opportunity,” Pérez said. “And that’s with innovation we already have in hand.” Image Credits: DigitalRalph, Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer’s Disease, August 2024. , EMEA, 2026, National Institutes on Aging . US Freezes All Funds to Gavi Over Vaccine Preservative Thimerosal 29/01/2026 Kerry Cullinan A baby in Rwanda receives a combined measles and rubella vaccine. The US government has frozen funds to Gavi, the global vaccine alliance, until it commits to a plan to phase out the preservative thimerosal from all the vaccines it distributes. The US demand, first reported by Reuters, is linked to the unproven belief held by US Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr and allies that thimerosal, which contains mercury, is linked to autism. However, even the US Food and Drug Administration has pronounced that “thimerosal has been the subject of numerous studies and has a long record of safe and effective use preventing bacterial and fungal contamination of vaccines, with no ill effects established other than minor local reactions at the site of injection.” The FDA also notes that a vaccine with 0.01% thimerosal as a preservative contains “roughly the same amount of elemental mercury [as] contained in a three-ounce can of tuna fish”. Around 14% of Gavi’s vaccines contain thimerosal, which is used in some multi-dose vials to destroy any bacteria and fungi that may enter a vial each time a new dose is drawn. Multi-dose vaccines are used in many low- and middle-income countries as they are cheaper. Affected Gavi vaccines include the five-in-one pentavalent vaccine (Diphtheria, Pertussis , Tetanus, Hepatitis B and Haemophilus influenzae type b), the Diphtheria, Pertussis and Tetanus (DPT) vaccine, Tetanus-Reduced Diphtheria (Td), Hepatitis B, Meningococcal A Conjugate (MenA) and Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine (PCV). Most US vaccines do not contain thimerosal, while it is seldom found in Europe, which relies mainly on single-dose vaccines. Scientific consensus “We received a request from the US government to remove thimerosal from our portfolio. We remain in contact on this subject,” a Gavi spokesperson told Health Policy Watch. “While we very much hope to find a pathway to welcoming the US back as a donor, any decision related to Gavi’s portfolio would require a decision by Gavi’s Board and input from preceding governance committees, which will be guided by scientific consensus.” Hanging in the balance is some $300 million already allocated by the Biden administration but not yet paid, as well as any new funds. All Gavi-supported vaccines have to be recommended by the World Health Organisation’s (WHO) Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE), an independent body that examines all available scientific evidence and issues global guidance on the use of vaccines. In addition, each manufacturing site where Gavi-supported vaccines are produced must be approved or “pre-qualified” by WHO. Gavi-supported vaccines must also be recommended by the National Immunisation Technical Advisory Group (NITAG) in each country where they are being used. Most Gavi-supported countries also require vaccines to be approved by their own National Regulatory Authorities (NRAs), in addition to WHO approvals. In June last year, Kennedy told Gavi that the US would withhold funds until it “re-earned the public trust”, claiming that it had “ignored vaccine safety”. The US recently lost its seat on the Gavi board as it has failed to pledge any funds to it. Image Credits: Twitter: @WHOAFRO, WHO. Latest US Restrictions on Aid ‘Bully’ Recipients to Accept ‘Extremist Ideology’ 29/01/2026 Kerry Cullinan Kenyan women at a family planning clinic. Global health organisations have reacted with anger to the new US foreign aid policy, which prohibits all aid recipients, bar military, from performing or promoting abortion, “gender ideology”, or “diversity, equity and inclusion” (DEI). “Catastrophic”, “bullying”, “draconian” and “ideologically driven” – are some of their reactions to the Promoting Human Flourishing in Foreign Assistance (PHFFA) policy, announced by US Vice-President JD Vance at an anti-abortion event last Friday evening. The policy’s three parts were published in the Federal Register on Tuesday as Protecting Life in Foreign Assistance, Combating Gender Ideology in Foreign Assistance and Combating Discriminatory Equity Ideology in Foreign Assistance Rules. The new rules apply to all foreign and US NGOs and “international organisations”, including multilateral UN agencies still funded by the US and bodies such as the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, TB and Malaria. However, in countries that allow abortion, governments and parastatals (government agencies) will need to place any US funds in “a segregated account” to ensure they’re not used for abortions and related activities. Governments and parastatals “may” also be required to agree that they won’t use US funds to promote or engage in “gender ideology” or DEI. The US State Department defines “gender ideology” activities as those that provide or promote “sex rejecting procedures” (defined broadly to include puberty blockers, hormones, surgeries); promote or counsel social transition; use materials that discuss changing one’s sex or pronoun usage not aligned with biological sex; lobby foreign governments on gender identity issues; and support drag queen workshops, performances, or similar activities”. Aid recipients are also compelled to agree to US officials visiting their offices unannounced to inspect their documents and activities, and to speak to people receiving their services. This is potentially a violation of patient confidentiality. Imposing ‘extremist ideology’ Since 1984, successive Republican governments have imposed a “Global Gag Rule” (also known as the Mexico City Policy) on foreign NGOs receiving global health aid, barring them from using this money – or even money they have raised from other sources – for any abortion-related activities, including referrals. However, the second Trump administration is the first to extend this to all non-military foreign assistance, including humanitarian assistance, and to widen the scope to include US NGOs, international organisations and – potentially – governments. “Bullying countries into complying with anti-rights and extremist ideology is despicable and unacceptable. The imperialist goals of this administration are on full display in these conditions to foreign assistance,” Anu Kumar, CEO of the global reproductive justice organisation, Ipas, told a media briefing this week. In 2024, $39.8 billion in US foreign aid was dispensed over 160 countries, with the largest share (41%) going to multilateral agencies, according to KFF. “This is tens of billions more than the amount of global health assistance subject to the policy under the first Trump administration’s previously expanded policy ($7.3 billion in 2020),” notes KFF. This “catastrophic expansion” is going to be especially harmful to “women, young people, girls and LGBTQI+ people”, added Ipas senior researcher Jamie Vernaelde. “There is an agenda here from the US government to push these ideologies across to other countries, both through direct government-to-government funding, but also forcing multilateral organisations to be subject to the ideology of one specific country.” Impact on Kenya The bilateral Memorandums of Understanding (MOU) that the US has signed with 15 African countries as part of its “America First Global Health Strategy” all contain a clause compelling countries to comply with the Global Gag Rule. “What we’ve realised is this inclusion of the Global Gag Rule in the MOUs was basically a Trojan horse, in the sense that now the governments have signed, they are obligated to implement these expanded conditions, for example, on gender ideology,” said Ipas’s Kenya director, Dr Musoba Kitui. Kitui said that 40,000 health workers had already lost their jobs in his country since the closure of the US Agency for International Development (USAID), leading to the “weakening of the health system”. Many African governments “are very, very desperate” to inject resources into their health systems since the closure of USAID, and were willing to sign bilateral MOUs with the US, despite some of the unfavourable conditions, said Kitui. Kenya’s MOU would be complex to implement, and there is “no way the US can monitor compliance without seeing patient records,” added Kitui, highlighting a concern about patient privacy which has resulted in the MOU being challenged in court. However, “this MOU grants US personnel diplomatic immunity, insulating them from any local courts against judicial processes for any violations of data privacy, or even crippling the health system for that matter”, he added. “Sexual and reproductive health is not a diplomatic bargaining chip. It’s a fundamental human right. Essential health care services must be separate from political agendas. What is really important is to protect the progress that we have made over the years, including in countries like Kenya,” Kitui stressed. Impact on humanitarian aid South Sudanese women survivors of violence shared their stories with a visiting UN delegation. The narrow redefinition of US global aid will affect survivors of gender-based violence who need access to rape kits and emergency contraception. Dr Jean-Claude Mulunda, who heads Ipas work in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), said that his organisation assisted displaced people in camps with family planning services, abortion care and also supports survivors of gender-based violence (GBV). With the demise of USAID, “rape kits” for GBV survivors containing medicine to protect women and girls against sexually transmitted infections and pregnancy are no longer available. “Ipas is trying, with our limited funds, to buy unit-by-unit, the different medicines in these kits,” said Mulunda. “Many women who are victims of rape can’t access abortion care, even though the country has signed the Maputo Protocol which allows access to abortion in case of rape.” The more onerous aid conditions are going to make it even harder for displaced women to access sexual and reproductive services. “The risk of unsafe abortion is elevated in humanitarian settings where it’s even harder for people to access medical services,” warned Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) in its reaction to the new policy. “In 2023, MSF provided more than 31,000 consultations for post-abortion care, most of which were due to complications related to unsafe abortion. With the reinstatement of the Global Gag Rule, MSF expects these already troubling numbers to increase.” The new policy, PHFFA, “escalates a pattern established across both Trump administrations: the systematic subordination of scientific evidence and patient needs to ideological and political objectives,” added MSF. “Versions of the Global Gag Rule have been introduced by Republican administrations since 1984, and extensive research has repeatedly documented that the policy disrupts health services and causes cascading adverse health outcomes in low- and middle-income countries, with the chilling impact enduring even when the policy has been rescinded,” MSF noted. MSF added that the State Department’s definitions of “gender ideology” and “discriminatory equity ideology” are so broad “that it is likely to result in barring or limiting access to essential health services for LGBTQIA+ individuals, women and girls, racial and ethnic minorities, and other marginalized groups”. ‘Abdication of decency’ US Vice President JD Vance addressing the March for Life last Friday, where he announced the new policy. “President Trump and his anti-abortion administration would rather let people starve to death in the wake of famine and war than let anyone in the world get an abortion – or even receive information about it,” said Rachana Desai Martin, chief US program officer at the Center for Reproductive Rights. “People are already dying because of this administration’s slashing of foreign assistance. Now, they’re making it harder for doctors and aid workers to provide food, water, and lifesaving medical care. This isn’t about saving lives – it’s a stunning abdication of basic human decency,” Martin added. “Trump’s expansion [of the Global Gag Rule] continues on a path of instrumentalising those most marginalised. It marks increasing attempts to capture global health and human rights with a deeply regressive act of imperialism masquerading as foreign policy,” said Mina Barling, International Planned Parenthood Federation’s global director of external relations. “This is yet another attack on national sovereignty and colonial intervention through the curtailing of sexual and reproductive rights.” “The dismantling of USAID has already caused widespread harm: more than 45 million women and girls have lost access to contraceptive care and clinics around the world have been forced to close,” said Marieke van der Plas, executive director of the Dutch reproductive rights organisation, Rutgers. “Now, the Trump administration is further reshaping global health policy through new government agreements that embed ideological conditions and deepen political control.” The Senate Foreign Relations Democrats said in a statement: “By blocking US funding to any entity that does not conform to his extreme ideological agenda, the administration is exporting MAGA culture wars overseas and turning lifesaving aid into a political tool. “This order goes far beyond anything we’ve seen before. It will shrink global resources to fight disease, respond to humanitarian crises and protect women and girls from violence, while forcing many of our trusted partners to shut their doors or betray their missions. In doing so, it also leaves Americans more vulnerable to infectious diseases and health threats that do not respect borders.” Image Credits: saac Billy/ UN Photo, KFF. Posts navigation Older postsNewer posts This site uses cookies to help give you the best experience on our website. Cookies enable us to collect information that helps us personalise your experience and improve the functionality and performance of our site. By continuing to read our website, we assume you agree to this, otherwise you can adjust your browser settings. Please read our cookie and Privacy Policy. Our Cookies and Privacy Policy Loading Comments... You must be logged in to post a comment.
Brain Health Is Not an Abstract Policy Issue, It Is a Lived Reality 31/01/2026 Health Policy Watch George Vredenburg and Rajinder Dhamija “You start with, as in my case, with the loss of three generations of my family to various forms of Alzheimer’s or dementia.” Those were the words of George Vradenburg. For him, brain health is not an abstract policy issue. It is a lived reality that mirrors a fast-growing global crisis. This issue was the focus of a recent episode of the Global Health Matters podcast, hosted by Dr. Garry Aslanyan. An estimated 57 million people worldwide are living with dementia, Vradenburg said, but that figure captures only those with symptoms. The scale is far larger. Disease processes often begin decades earlier, placing hundreds of millions more at risk. “The problem is by and large, now two thirds to three quarters of the people with dementia are in the global south, and that number and percentage is going to increase in the next 25 years,” Vradenburg said. The economic and social toll is enormous, already exceeding trillions of dollars globally. Families shoulder much of the burden, facing years of emotional strain and financial loss. Read related article: Unlocking ‘Brain Capital’ in the Brain Economy – Davos Initiative Aims to Make Brain Health a Development Indicator In India, neurologist Rajinder Dhamija sees brain health as a challenge that spans generations. “One of three of us will develop a brain disorder at one point of our life,” he said. Children face neurodevelopmental conditions and infections. Young adults confront rising rates of stroke and mental illness. Older adults are living longer, often with multiple chronic brain-related conditions. India’s numbers are stark. More than 330 million people are expected to be over the age of 60 within two decades. Dementia alone costs the country billions each year. Yet specialist care remains scarce. “We have less than one neurologist per million population in India, around 3,000 neurologists at present,” according to Dhamija. Both experts argued that brain health must be reframed beyond hospitals and clinics. Prevention, education, nutrition, and primary care deliver far greater returns than crisis response. “Prevention at the primary level yields much more results than the investing in terms of a large infrastructure,” Dhamija said. India has begun piloting district brain health clinics that combine screening, treatment, rehabilitation, and data collection to inform national policy. Globally, new tools may further expand access. Vaccines for Alzheimer’s are now in clinical trials. Low-cost screening using mobile phones and artificial intelligence could bring early detection to underserved communities. The stakes are high. As Dhamija put it, “brain health… is very essential, not only for the healthy societies and healthy countries, but also for a smooth economic development and the social development of any nation.” See more Global Health Matters episodes on Health Policy Watch. Image Credits: Global Health Matters Podcast. Why Africa Wants to Lead its own Health Research Agenda 31/01/2026 Health Policy Watch In the latest episode of Trailblazers with Garry, Garry Aslanyan visits Accra, Ghana, to speak with Professor John Owusu Gyapong, Secretary General of the African Research Universities Alliance. Gyapong took on the role in 2024, leading efforts to strengthen research collaboration across African universities. His work focusses on building capacity within the continent and supporting locally driven research agendas. Earlier in his career, when much of global health funding and attention centred on malaria, Gyapong chose to study neglected tropical diseases. These illnesses, he explains, had major social and economic consequences but received far less attention. Now, as a researcher and educator, Gyapong continues to emphasise the importance of African-led solutions and long-term investment in young scientists. The conversation touches on leadership, research priorities, and why universities play a critical role in shaping Africa’s health future. Watch the full episode: Trailblazers with Garry is part of Global Health Matters. Listen to more Global Health Matters shows on Health Policy Watch. Image Credits: Global Health Matters Podcast. Unlocking ‘Brain Capital’ in the Brain Economy – Davos Initiative Aims to Make Brain Health a Development Indicator 30/01/2026 Elaine Ruth Fletcher Rice University’s Harris Eyre in the Davos Alzheimer’s Collaborative ‘Brain House’ describing new brain capital and brain economy initiatives launched at the 2026 World Economic Forum. A new initiative that aims to measure and promote the inclusion of “brain capital” as an economic indicator was launched at the World Economic Forum in Davos last week. Advocates for the Global Brain Economy initiative, and a companion Global Brain Capital Index argue that using brain health as a development indicator can help spur more awareness and investments in brain health – including dementia related diseases that now rank as the seventh largest cause of death worldwide. The discussions, hosted by the Davos Alzheimer’s Collaborative (DAC), marked what several speakers described as a turning point: a shift from viewing brain health primarily as a cost to seeing it as an investable economic asset — one with implications for productivity, resilience, innovation, and long-term growth. With the launch of the Global Brain Capital Index and the Global Brain Economy Initiative, leaders from economics, neuroscience, policy, and finance argued that recognizing — and monetizing — “brain capital” may be essential to unlocking investment in brain health across the life course, from early development to healthy aging and dementia prevention. Projected growth curve for dementia risks and deaths 0 from 0.56 million in 1990 to nearly 5 million annually in 2030. From Idea to Global Movement The concept of the “brain economy” has evolved rapidly from academic theory to policy and investment agenda, said Harris Eyre. A professor at Rice University and the University of Texas Medical Branch, and a leading member of DAC, he framed the launch moment as the culmination of years of work. “We’ve really hit a crescendo point,” Eyre said. Referring to the newly released flagship report, The Human Advantage: Stronger Brains in the Age of AI, published by the World Economic Forum and McKinsey Health Institute, he noted its resonance across Davos. “We have a lot of different global challenges, a lot of big macro challenges. But here you can see… that brain challenges are very significant across the lifespan, from the earliest stage of life through to late life.” Those challenges include early-life malnutrition and stunted development, youth mental health, workforce disruption driven by artificial intelligence, and rising rates of dementia in ageing populations. “The cost of brain health conditions across the lifespan… is $3.5 trillion to the global economy, and the cost is rising at 3% a year,” Eyre said. Introducing brain capital Brain Capital concept At the heart of the Davos discussions was the concept of brain capital, defined as the combined value of brain health and brain skills. “Brain capital is the new paradigm here,” Eyre said. “It’s human capital 2.0 — human capital in the age of neuroscience.” He stressed that brain capital spans mental health, neurological health, cognitive skills, emotional resilience, creativity, and learning — and that these capacities are now more critical than ever. “Our brains are just so important now than ever before,” he said. “The accelerations of change are so high, we need brain health. We need brain skills.” Eyre argued that advances in neuroscience, reduced stigma around mental health and dementia, and growing awareness of neurodiversity have created a unique opportunity. “If you remember one thing today,” he told the audience, “is remember brain capital.” Dialogues at Davos with global health leaders around the new initiative included conversations with: Bill Gates, WHO Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, and Wellcome’s John-Arne Røttingen, among others, Eyre said. Brain Capital Index – a new development indicator Rym Ayadi, president of the Euro-Mediterranean Economists Association, describes the new ‘Brain Capital’ index launched at Davos. That call for recognition was matched with a new measurement tool unveiled in Davos; the full report was published just this week. Called the Global Brain Capital Index, it establishes a set of standardized indicators for measuring brain capital, in the form of brain health and brain skills, across countries and globally. The new index was developed by the economist Rym Ayadi, President of the Euro-Mediterranean Economists Association (EMEA). “Brain capital was a concept,” Ayadi said. “And nowadays I can say to you… it can be measured at national level.” Ayadi described the index as a response to what she called a blind spot in traditional economic frameworks. Brain health and brain skills are the two main pillars of the brain capital index – with “enablers” as a third important influence in overall outcomes. “GDP is very quantity-based. It’s not quality-based,” she said. “Brain health was a residual. It’s a cost. But brain health nowadays should be [seen as] infrastructure, an asset. It’s not a cost — it’s an investment.” The new index brings together over 28 indicators on brain health, brain skills, and enabling environments — the latter includes the quality of education, health systems, governance, and environmental risks, like air pollution, which has now been link clearly to dementia as well as to other forms of cognitive impairment. The 28 core indicators were derived from a larger collection of 106 indicators, available on an interactive Brain Capital Dashboard, and selected through a systematic process as the best composite measure of trends. “It is really a strategic tool, a compass for economic policy thinking going forward,” Ayadi said of the index. Decline in brain health seen worldwide A decline in brain health as a component of the brain capital index is seen across countries and regions. Drawing on data from 1990 onwards, the findings presented in Davos revealed troubling global trends. “We can see an increase overall in brain health since the 90s, but then there is an overall decline, and this decline is persistent in all countries of the world,” Ayadi said. “So something is wrong here.” The trend of brain health decline is seen across both OECD and non-OECD countries. And there is also a “huge inequality between OECD and non-OECD countries,” Ayadi said. “And if we don’t really act, it becomes even worse.” Non-communicable diseases and dementia in focus Abnormal accumulation of amyloid plaques and tau proteins in the brain, are the two hallmarks of Alzheimer’s – the latter forming tangles in neurons, seen here. Speakers linked the brain health declines to the growing burden of non-communicable diseases, particularly neurological and mental health conditions. “For the brain health indicators, for example, we have burden of disease, prevalence of depression, suicide rate… Alzheimer’s disease and other dementia, Parkinson’s disease, schizophrenia, stroke, bipolar,” Ayadi said. Population ageing, combined with underinvestment in brain health, are other contributing factors. “Brain health overall is under global strain,” she said. “Driven by population aging, raising mental health burdens and cumulative economic and health stressors.” Despite the scale of the challenge, Ayadi noted that brain health remains systematically underfunded. “Despite the economic importance, brain health remains systematically underfunded and under integrated into policy framework,” she said. Brain skills improvements offset brain health declines Consideration of brain skills as part of the index provides a more hopeful picture. This includes skills’ indicators, like level of education or the rate of innovation, Ayadi said. Skills indicators, as such, are still rising in many parts of the world, including in low income countries -even if the disparities are huge. Brain skill indicators such as educational level or the pace of innovation are still rising in many countries, countering negative trends in brain health. But even when those enablers are considered, the composite trends in many parts of the world, including high and lower-income regions, still reflects worrying signs of stagnation or decline, she underlined – reflecting the way the decline in brain health can ‘drag down’ progress overall. Evolution of composite brain capital index including enablers. More positive trends in brain skills and related enablers, like education and health infrastructure, offset declines in brain health. From measurement to investment The central argument emerging from Davos was that measurement enables monetisation of risks and benefits to brain health and brain capital. Consequently, monetizing brain capital could unlock large-scale investment in prevention, care, and skills development. “If, in fact, we are able to measure, and we are able to govern, we can… finance,” Ayadi said. “And then it becomes in the economic and financial system.” This idea resonated strongly with investors and business leaders attending the sessions. Steve Carnevale, moderator of the DAC session and himself a venture capitalist, reflected on the power of quantification: “When we can quantify something that previously wasn’t quantifiable, and when we can quantify it, we can turn it into a growth story,” Carnevale said. “That’s when people are really going to follow us.” Toward a ‘brain-positive’ economy The Davos discussions also signal a broader rethinking of development indicators. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) continues to be the dominant indicator of socio-economic development. While this has been under challenge by academics for sometime, GDP’s binary nature is even more out of date in the age of AI, panelists argued. “Brain health has to become a priority within our national policies, and also brain skills. This index could be a new policy compass beyond GDP,” Ayadi argued, saying that development indicators need to shift “from quantity-based skills into neurocognitive assets… and from growth to resilience.” Along with that, the new brain economy initiative launched at Davos aims to spur policymakers from theory to action, Eyre said. The initiative focusses on safeguarding brain health, fostering brain skills, investing with a “brain lens,” and mobilizing public-private partnerships. “We need brain lens investing to sit above global financial architecture – and channel it towards brain positive investments.” Added Drew Holzapfel DAC COO, “Brain health has long been treated primarily as a health issue, which it is. But when it’s understood as an economic issue, it opens the door to more resources and a broader, more sustained commitment. What we have the opportunity to do is take the concept of brain capital and translate it into something that focuses the minds of finance ministers.” Brain capital all the more important in AI era DAC founder George Vradenburg opening the panel on brain capital and the brain economy at a WEF side event in Davos last week. Recognizing the importance of brain health and brain capital is all the more critical in the age of fast-evolving AI systems – so that humans can keep abreast of these changes – and benefit from them – rather than the reverse, said George Vradenburg, founder of the Davos Alzheimer’s Collaborative, and convenor of the Davos session. “We need to be referring to AI as Augmented Intelligence and not Artificial Intelligence,” Vradenburg said. At a “Davos wrap” webinar this week, hosted by EMEA, Lucy Pérez, global leader of the McKinsey Health Institute, underlined the critical moment faced. “There’s no more urgent time to invest in brain capital than right now,” Pérez said. “The demographic shifts that we’re experiencing, the geopolitical shocks, the economic shocks, the way technology is impacting not only the workplace, but also our daily lives.” But its the opportunity – as compared to the threat – that policymakers need to appreciate: “Scaling existing brain interventions already is going to unlock over $6 trillion in economic opportunity,” Pérez said. “And that’s with innovation we already have in hand.” Image Credits: DigitalRalph, Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer’s Disease, August 2024. , EMEA, 2026, National Institutes on Aging . US Freezes All Funds to Gavi Over Vaccine Preservative Thimerosal 29/01/2026 Kerry Cullinan A baby in Rwanda receives a combined measles and rubella vaccine. The US government has frozen funds to Gavi, the global vaccine alliance, until it commits to a plan to phase out the preservative thimerosal from all the vaccines it distributes. The US demand, first reported by Reuters, is linked to the unproven belief held by US Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr and allies that thimerosal, which contains mercury, is linked to autism. However, even the US Food and Drug Administration has pronounced that “thimerosal has been the subject of numerous studies and has a long record of safe and effective use preventing bacterial and fungal contamination of vaccines, with no ill effects established other than minor local reactions at the site of injection.” The FDA also notes that a vaccine with 0.01% thimerosal as a preservative contains “roughly the same amount of elemental mercury [as] contained in a three-ounce can of tuna fish”. Around 14% of Gavi’s vaccines contain thimerosal, which is used in some multi-dose vials to destroy any bacteria and fungi that may enter a vial each time a new dose is drawn. Multi-dose vaccines are used in many low- and middle-income countries as they are cheaper. Affected Gavi vaccines include the five-in-one pentavalent vaccine (Diphtheria, Pertussis , Tetanus, Hepatitis B and Haemophilus influenzae type b), the Diphtheria, Pertussis and Tetanus (DPT) vaccine, Tetanus-Reduced Diphtheria (Td), Hepatitis B, Meningococcal A Conjugate (MenA) and Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine (PCV). Most US vaccines do not contain thimerosal, while it is seldom found in Europe, which relies mainly on single-dose vaccines. Scientific consensus “We received a request from the US government to remove thimerosal from our portfolio. We remain in contact on this subject,” a Gavi spokesperson told Health Policy Watch. “While we very much hope to find a pathway to welcoming the US back as a donor, any decision related to Gavi’s portfolio would require a decision by Gavi’s Board and input from preceding governance committees, which will be guided by scientific consensus.” Hanging in the balance is some $300 million already allocated by the Biden administration but not yet paid, as well as any new funds. All Gavi-supported vaccines have to be recommended by the World Health Organisation’s (WHO) Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE), an independent body that examines all available scientific evidence and issues global guidance on the use of vaccines. In addition, each manufacturing site where Gavi-supported vaccines are produced must be approved or “pre-qualified” by WHO. Gavi-supported vaccines must also be recommended by the National Immunisation Technical Advisory Group (NITAG) in each country where they are being used. Most Gavi-supported countries also require vaccines to be approved by their own National Regulatory Authorities (NRAs), in addition to WHO approvals. In June last year, Kennedy told Gavi that the US would withhold funds until it “re-earned the public trust”, claiming that it had “ignored vaccine safety”. The US recently lost its seat on the Gavi board as it has failed to pledge any funds to it. Image Credits: Twitter: @WHOAFRO, WHO. Latest US Restrictions on Aid ‘Bully’ Recipients to Accept ‘Extremist Ideology’ 29/01/2026 Kerry Cullinan Kenyan women at a family planning clinic. Global health organisations have reacted with anger to the new US foreign aid policy, which prohibits all aid recipients, bar military, from performing or promoting abortion, “gender ideology”, or “diversity, equity and inclusion” (DEI). “Catastrophic”, “bullying”, “draconian” and “ideologically driven” – are some of their reactions to the Promoting Human Flourishing in Foreign Assistance (PHFFA) policy, announced by US Vice-President JD Vance at an anti-abortion event last Friday evening. The policy’s three parts were published in the Federal Register on Tuesday as Protecting Life in Foreign Assistance, Combating Gender Ideology in Foreign Assistance and Combating Discriminatory Equity Ideology in Foreign Assistance Rules. The new rules apply to all foreign and US NGOs and “international organisations”, including multilateral UN agencies still funded by the US and bodies such as the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, TB and Malaria. However, in countries that allow abortion, governments and parastatals (government agencies) will need to place any US funds in “a segregated account” to ensure they’re not used for abortions and related activities. Governments and parastatals “may” also be required to agree that they won’t use US funds to promote or engage in “gender ideology” or DEI. The US State Department defines “gender ideology” activities as those that provide or promote “sex rejecting procedures” (defined broadly to include puberty blockers, hormones, surgeries); promote or counsel social transition; use materials that discuss changing one’s sex or pronoun usage not aligned with biological sex; lobby foreign governments on gender identity issues; and support drag queen workshops, performances, or similar activities”. Aid recipients are also compelled to agree to US officials visiting their offices unannounced to inspect their documents and activities, and to speak to people receiving their services. This is potentially a violation of patient confidentiality. Imposing ‘extremist ideology’ Since 1984, successive Republican governments have imposed a “Global Gag Rule” (also known as the Mexico City Policy) on foreign NGOs receiving global health aid, barring them from using this money – or even money they have raised from other sources – for any abortion-related activities, including referrals. However, the second Trump administration is the first to extend this to all non-military foreign assistance, including humanitarian assistance, and to widen the scope to include US NGOs, international organisations and – potentially – governments. “Bullying countries into complying with anti-rights and extremist ideology is despicable and unacceptable. The imperialist goals of this administration are on full display in these conditions to foreign assistance,” Anu Kumar, CEO of the global reproductive justice organisation, Ipas, told a media briefing this week. In 2024, $39.8 billion in US foreign aid was dispensed over 160 countries, with the largest share (41%) going to multilateral agencies, according to KFF. “This is tens of billions more than the amount of global health assistance subject to the policy under the first Trump administration’s previously expanded policy ($7.3 billion in 2020),” notes KFF. This “catastrophic expansion” is going to be especially harmful to “women, young people, girls and LGBTQI+ people”, added Ipas senior researcher Jamie Vernaelde. “There is an agenda here from the US government to push these ideologies across to other countries, both through direct government-to-government funding, but also forcing multilateral organisations to be subject to the ideology of one specific country.” Impact on Kenya The bilateral Memorandums of Understanding (MOU) that the US has signed with 15 African countries as part of its “America First Global Health Strategy” all contain a clause compelling countries to comply with the Global Gag Rule. “What we’ve realised is this inclusion of the Global Gag Rule in the MOUs was basically a Trojan horse, in the sense that now the governments have signed, they are obligated to implement these expanded conditions, for example, on gender ideology,” said Ipas’s Kenya director, Dr Musoba Kitui. Kitui said that 40,000 health workers had already lost their jobs in his country since the closure of the US Agency for International Development (USAID), leading to the “weakening of the health system”. Many African governments “are very, very desperate” to inject resources into their health systems since the closure of USAID, and were willing to sign bilateral MOUs with the US, despite some of the unfavourable conditions, said Kitui. Kenya’s MOU would be complex to implement, and there is “no way the US can monitor compliance without seeing patient records,” added Kitui, highlighting a concern about patient privacy which has resulted in the MOU being challenged in court. However, “this MOU grants US personnel diplomatic immunity, insulating them from any local courts against judicial processes for any violations of data privacy, or even crippling the health system for that matter”, he added. “Sexual and reproductive health is not a diplomatic bargaining chip. It’s a fundamental human right. Essential health care services must be separate from political agendas. What is really important is to protect the progress that we have made over the years, including in countries like Kenya,” Kitui stressed. Impact on humanitarian aid South Sudanese women survivors of violence shared their stories with a visiting UN delegation. The narrow redefinition of US global aid will affect survivors of gender-based violence who need access to rape kits and emergency contraception. Dr Jean-Claude Mulunda, who heads Ipas work in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), said that his organisation assisted displaced people in camps with family planning services, abortion care and also supports survivors of gender-based violence (GBV). With the demise of USAID, “rape kits” for GBV survivors containing medicine to protect women and girls against sexually transmitted infections and pregnancy are no longer available. “Ipas is trying, with our limited funds, to buy unit-by-unit, the different medicines in these kits,” said Mulunda. “Many women who are victims of rape can’t access abortion care, even though the country has signed the Maputo Protocol which allows access to abortion in case of rape.” The more onerous aid conditions are going to make it even harder for displaced women to access sexual and reproductive services. “The risk of unsafe abortion is elevated in humanitarian settings where it’s even harder for people to access medical services,” warned Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) in its reaction to the new policy. “In 2023, MSF provided more than 31,000 consultations for post-abortion care, most of which were due to complications related to unsafe abortion. With the reinstatement of the Global Gag Rule, MSF expects these already troubling numbers to increase.” The new policy, PHFFA, “escalates a pattern established across both Trump administrations: the systematic subordination of scientific evidence and patient needs to ideological and political objectives,” added MSF. “Versions of the Global Gag Rule have been introduced by Republican administrations since 1984, and extensive research has repeatedly documented that the policy disrupts health services and causes cascading adverse health outcomes in low- and middle-income countries, with the chilling impact enduring even when the policy has been rescinded,” MSF noted. MSF added that the State Department’s definitions of “gender ideology” and “discriminatory equity ideology” are so broad “that it is likely to result in barring or limiting access to essential health services for LGBTQIA+ individuals, women and girls, racial and ethnic minorities, and other marginalized groups”. ‘Abdication of decency’ US Vice President JD Vance addressing the March for Life last Friday, where he announced the new policy. “President Trump and his anti-abortion administration would rather let people starve to death in the wake of famine and war than let anyone in the world get an abortion – or even receive information about it,” said Rachana Desai Martin, chief US program officer at the Center for Reproductive Rights. “People are already dying because of this administration’s slashing of foreign assistance. Now, they’re making it harder for doctors and aid workers to provide food, water, and lifesaving medical care. This isn’t about saving lives – it’s a stunning abdication of basic human decency,” Martin added. “Trump’s expansion [of the Global Gag Rule] continues on a path of instrumentalising those most marginalised. It marks increasing attempts to capture global health and human rights with a deeply regressive act of imperialism masquerading as foreign policy,” said Mina Barling, International Planned Parenthood Federation’s global director of external relations. “This is yet another attack on national sovereignty and colonial intervention through the curtailing of sexual and reproductive rights.” “The dismantling of USAID has already caused widespread harm: more than 45 million women and girls have lost access to contraceptive care and clinics around the world have been forced to close,” said Marieke van der Plas, executive director of the Dutch reproductive rights organisation, Rutgers. “Now, the Trump administration is further reshaping global health policy through new government agreements that embed ideological conditions and deepen political control.” The Senate Foreign Relations Democrats said in a statement: “By blocking US funding to any entity that does not conform to his extreme ideological agenda, the administration is exporting MAGA culture wars overseas and turning lifesaving aid into a political tool. “This order goes far beyond anything we’ve seen before. It will shrink global resources to fight disease, respond to humanitarian crises and protect women and girls from violence, while forcing many of our trusted partners to shut their doors or betray their missions. In doing so, it also leaves Americans more vulnerable to infectious diseases and health threats that do not respect borders.” Image Credits: saac Billy/ UN Photo, KFF. Posts navigation Older postsNewer posts This site uses cookies to help give you the best experience on our website. Cookies enable us to collect information that helps us personalise your experience and improve the functionality and performance of our site. By continuing to read our website, we assume you agree to this, otherwise you can adjust your browser settings. Please read our cookie and Privacy Policy. Our Cookies and Privacy Policy Loading Comments... You must be logged in to post a comment.
Why Africa Wants to Lead its own Health Research Agenda 31/01/2026 Health Policy Watch In the latest episode of Trailblazers with Garry, Garry Aslanyan visits Accra, Ghana, to speak with Professor John Owusu Gyapong, Secretary General of the African Research Universities Alliance. Gyapong took on the role in 2024, leading efforts to strengthen research collaboration across African universities. His work focusses on building capacity within the continent and supporting locally driven research agendas. Earlier in his career, when much of global health funding and attention centred on malaria, Gyapong chose to study neglected tropical diseases. These illnesses, he explains, had major social and economic consequences but received far less attention. Now, as a researcher and educator, Gyapong continues to emphasise the importance of African-led solutions and long-term investment in young scientists. The conversation touches on leadership, research priorities, and why universities play a critical role in shaping Africa’s health future. Watch the full episode: Trailblazers with Garry is part of Global Health Matters. Listen to more Global Health Matters shows on Health Policy Watch. Image Credits: Global Health Matters Podcast. Unlocking ‘Brain Capital’ in the Brain Economy – Davos Initiative Aims to Make Brain Health a Development Indicator 30/01/2026 Elaine Ruth Fletcher Rice University’s Harris Eyre in the Davos Alzheimer’s Collaborative ‘Brain House’ describing new brain capital and brain economy initiatives launched at the 2026 World Economic Forum. A new initiative that aims to measure and promote the inclusion of “brain capital” as an economic indicator was launched at the World Economic Forum in Davos last week. Advocates for the Global Brain Economy initiative, and a companion Global Brain Capital Index argue that using brain health as a development indicator can help spur more awareness and investments in brain health – including dementia related diseases that now rank as the seventh largest cause of death worldwide. The discussions, hosted by the Davos Alzheimer’s Collaborative (DAC), marked what several speakers described as a turning point: a shift from viewing brain health primarily as a cost to seeing it as an investable economic asset — one with implications for productivity, resilience, innovation, and long-term growth. With the launch of the Global Brain Capital Index and the Global Brain Economy Initiative, leaders from economics, neuroscience, policy, and finance argued that recognizing — and monetizing — “brain capital” may be essential to unlocking investment in brain health across the life course, from early development to healthy aging and dementia prevention. Projected growth curve for dementia risks and deaths 0 from 0.56 million in 1990 to nearly 5 million annually in 2030. From Idea to Global Movement The concept of the “brain economy” has evolved rapidly from academic theory to policy and investment agenda, said Harris Eyre. A professor at Rice University and the University of Texas Medical Branch, and a leading member of DAC, he framed the launch moment as the culmination of years of work. “We’ve really hit a crescendo point,” Eyre said. Referring to the newly released flagship report, The Human Advantage: Stronger Brains in the Age of AI, published by the World Economic Forum and McKinsey Health Institute, he noted its resonance across Davos. “We have a lot of different global challenges, a lot of big macro challenges. But here you can see… that brain challenges are very significant across the lifespan, from the earliest stage of life through to late life.” Those challenges include early-life malnutrition and stunted development, youth mental health, workforce disruption driven by artificial intelligence, and rising rates of dementia in ageing populations. “The cost of brain health conditions across the lifespan… is $3.5 trillion to the global economy, and the cost is rising at 3% a year,” Eyre said. Introducing brain capital Brain Capital concept At the heart of the Davos discussions was the concept of brain capital, defined as the combined value of brain health and brain skills. “Brain capital is the new paradigm here,” Eyre said. “It’s human capital 2.0 — human capital in the age of neuroscience.” He stressed that brain capital spans mental health, neurological health, cognitive skills, emotional resilience, creativity, and learning — and that these capacities are now more critical than ever. “Our brains are just so important now than ever before,” he said. “The accelerations of change are so high, we need brain health. We need brain skills.” Eyre argued that advances in neuroscience, reduced stigma around mental health and dementia, and growing awareness of neurodiversity have created a unique opportunity. “If you remember one thing today,” he told the audience, “is remember brain capital.” Dialogues at Davos with global health leaders around the new initiative included conversations with: Bill Gates, WHO Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, and Wellcome’s John-Arne Røttingen, among others, Eyre said. Brain Capital Index – a new development indicator Rym Ayadi, president of the Euro-Mediterranean Economists Association, describes the new ‘Brain Capital’ index launched at Davos. That call for recognition was matched with a new measurement tool unveiled in Davos; the full report was published just this week. Called the Global Brain Capital Index, it establishes a set of standardized indicators for measuring brain capital, in the form of brain health and brain skills, across countries and globally. The new index was developed by the economist Rym Ayadi, President of the Euro-Mediterranean Economists Association (EMEA). “Brain capital was a concept,” Ayadi said. “And nowadays I can say to you… it can be measured at national level.” Ayadi described the index as a response to what she called a blind spot in traditional economic frameworks. Brain health and brain skills are the two main pillars of the brain capital index – with “enablers” as a third important influence in overall outcomes. “GDP is very quantity-based. It’s not quality-based,” she said. “Brain health was a residual. It’s a cost. But brain health nowadays should be [seen as] infrastructure, an asset. It’s not a cost — it’s an investment.” The new index brings together over 28 indicators on brain health, brain skills, and enabling environments — the latter includes the quality of education, health systems, governance, and environmental risks, like air pollution, which has now been link clearly to dementia as well as to other forms of cognitive impairment. The 28 core indicators were derived from a larger collection of 106 indicators, available on an interactive Brain Capital Dashboard, and selected through a systematic process as the best composite measure of trends. “It is really a strategic tool, a compass for economic policy thinking going forward,” Ayadi said of the index. Decline in brain health seen worldwide A decline in brain health as a component of the brain capital index is seen across countries and regions. Drawing on data from 1990 onwards, the findings presented in Davos revealed troubling global trends. “We can see an increase overall in brain health since the 90s, but then there is an overall decline, and this decline is persistent in all countries of the world,” Ayadi said. “So something is wrong here.” The trend of brain health decline is seen across both OECD and non-OECD countries. And there is also a “huge inequality between OECD and non-OECD countries,” Ayadi said. “And if we don’t really act, it becomes even worse.” Non-communicable diseases and dementia in focus Abnormal accumulation of amyloid plaques and tau proteins in the brain, are the two hallmarks of Alzheimer’s – the latter forming tangles in neurons, seen here. Speakers linked the brain health declines to the growing burden of non-communicable diseases, particularly neurological and mental health conditions. “For the brain health indicators, for example, we have burden of disease, prevalence of depression, suicide rate… Alzheimer’s disease and other dementia, Parkinson’s disease, schizophrenia, stroke, bipolar,” Ayadi said. Population ageing, combined with underinvestment in brain health, are other contributing factors. “Brain health overall is under global strain,” she said. “Driven by population aging, raising mental health burdens and cumulative economic and health stressors.” Despite the scale of the challenge, Ayadi noted that brain health remains systematically underfunded. “Despite the economic importance, brain health remains systematically underfunded and under integrated into policy framework,” she said. Brain skills improvements offset brain health declines Consideration of brain skills as part of the index provides a more hopeful picture. This includes skills’ indicators, like level of education or the rate of innovation, Ayadi said. Skills indicators, as such, are still rising in many parts of the world, including in low income countries -even if the disparities are huge. Brain skill indicators such as educational level or the pace of innovation are still rising in many countries, countering negative trends in brain health. But even when those enablers are considered, the composite trends in many parts of the world, including high and lower-income regions, still reflects worrying signs of stagnation or decline, she underlined – reflecting the way the decline in brain health can ‘drag down’ progress overall. Evolution of composite brain capital index including enablers. More positive trends in brain skills and related enablers, like education and health infrastructure, offset declines in brain health. From measurement to investment The central argument emerging from Davos was that measurement enables monetisation of risks and benefits to brain health and brain capital. Consequently, monetizing brain capital could unlock large-scale investment in prevention, care, and skills development. “If, in fact, we are able to measure, and we are able to govern, we can… finance,” Ayadi said. “And then it becomes in the economic and financial system.” This idea resonated strongly with investors and business leaders attending the sessions. Steve Carnevale, moderator of the DAC session and himself a venture capitalist, reflected on the power of quantification: “When we can quantify something that previously wasn’t quantifiable, and when we can quantify it, we can turn it into a growth story,” Carnevale said. “That’s when people are really going to follow us.” Toward a ‘brain-positive’ economy The Davos discussions also signal a broader rethinking of development indicators. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) continues to be the dominant indicator of socio-economic development. While this has been under challenge by academics for sometime, GDP’s binary nature is even more out of date in the age of AI, panelists argued. “Brain health has to become a priority within our national policies, and also brain skills. This index could be a new policy compass beyond GDP,” Ayadi argued, saying that development indicators need to shift “from quantity-based skills into neurocognitive assets… and from growth to resilience.” Along with that, the new brain economy initiative launched at Davos aims to spur policymakers from theory to action, Eyre said. The initiative focusses on safeguarding brain health, fostering brain skills, investing with a “brain lens,” and mobilizing public-private partnerships. “We need brain lens investing to sit above global financial architecture – and channel it towards brain positive investments.” Added Drew Holzapfel DAC COO, “Brain health has long been treated primarily as a health issue, which it is. But when it’s understood as an economic issue, it opens the door to more resources and a broader, more sustained commitment. What we have the opportunity to do is take the concept of brain capital and translate it into something that focuses the minds of finance ministers.” Brain capital all the more important in AI era DAC founder George Vradenburg opening the panel on brain capital and the brain economy at a WEF side event in Davos last week. Recognizing the importance of brain health and brain capital is all the more critical in the age of fast-evolving AI systems – so that humans can keep abreast of these changes – and benefit from them – rather than the reverse, said George Vradenburg, founder of the Davos Alzheimer’s Collaborative, and convenor of the Davos session. “We need to be referring to AI as Augmented Intelligence and not Artificial Intelligence,” Vradenburg said. At a “Davos wrap” webinar this week, hosted by EMEA, Lucy Pérez, global leader of the McKinsey Health Institute, underlined the critical moment faced. “There’s no more urgent time to invest in brain capital than right now,” Pérez said. “The demographic shifts that we’re experiencing, the geopolitical shocks, the economic shocks, the way technology is impacting not only the workplace, but also our daily lives.” But its the opportunity – as compared to the threat – that policymakers need to appreciate: “Scaling existing brain interventions already is going to unlock over $6 trillion in economic opportunity,” Pérez said. “And that’s with innovation we already have in hand.” Image Credits: DigitalRalph, Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer’s Disease, August 2024. , EMEA, 2026, National Institutes on Aging . US Freezes All Funds to Gavi Over Vaccine Preservative Thimerosal 29/01/2026 Kerry Cullinan A baby in Rwanda receives a combined measles and rubella vaccine. The US government has frozen funds to Gavi, the global vaccine alliance, until it commits to a plan to phase out the preservative thimerosal from all the vaccines it distributes. The US demand, first reported by Reuters, is linked to the unproven belief held by US Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr and allies that thimerosal, which contains mercury, is linked to autism. However, even the US Food and Drug Administration has pronounced that “thimerosal has been the subject of numerous studies and has a long record of safe and effective use preventing bacterial and fungal contamination of vaccines, with no ill effects established other than minor local reactions at the site of injection.” The FDA also notes that a vaccine with 0.01% thimerosal as a preservative contains “roughly the same amount of elemental mercury [as] contained in a three-ounce can of tuna fish”. Around 14% of Gavi’s vaccines contain thimerosal, which is used in some multi-dose vials to destroy any bacteria and fungi that may enter a vial each time a new dose is drawn. Multi-dose vaccines are used in many low- and middle-income countries as they are cheaper. Affected Gavi vaccines include the five-in-one pentavalent vaccine (Diphtheria, Pertussis , Tetanus, Hepatitis B and Haemophilus influenzae type b), the Diphtheria, Pertussis and Tetanus (DPT) vaccine, Tetanus-Reduced Diphtheria (Td), Hepatitis B, Meningococcal A Conjugate (MenA) and Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine (PCV). Most US vaccines do not contain thimerosal, while it is seldom found in Europe, which relies mainly on single-dose vaccines. Scientific consensus “We received a request from the US government to remove thimerosal from our portfolio. We remain in contact on this subject,” a Gavi spokesperson told Health Policy Watch. “While we very much hope to find a pathway to welcoming the US back as a donor, any decision related to Gavi’s portfolio would require a decision by Gavi’s Board and input from preceding governance committees, which will be guided by scientific consensus.” Hanging in the balance is some $300 million already allocated by the Biden administration but not yet paid, as well as any new funds. All Gavi-supported vaccines have to be recommended by the World Health Organisation’s (WHO) Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE), an independent body that examines all available scientific evidence and issues global guidance on the use of vaccines. In addition, each manufacturing site where Gavi-supported vaccines are produced must be approved or “pre-qualified” by WHO. Gavi-supported vaccines must also be recommended by the National Immunisation Technical Advisory Group (NITAG) in each country where they are being used. Most Gavi-supported countries also require vaccines to be approved by their own National Regulatory Authorities (NRAs), in addition to WHO approvals. In June last year, Kennedy told Gavi that the US would withhold funds until it “re-earned the public trust”, claiming that it had “ignored vaccine safety”. The US recently lost its seat on the Gavi board as it has failed to pledge any funds to it. Image Credits: Twitter: @WHOAFRO, WHO. Latest US Restrictions on Aid ‘Bully’ Recipients to Accept ‘Extremist Ideology’ 29/01/2026 Kerry Cullinan Kenyan women at a family planning clinic. Global health organisations have reacted with anger to the new US foreign aid policy, which prohibits all aid recipients, bar military, from performing or promoting abortion, “gender ideology”, or “diversity, equity and inclusion” (DEI). “Catastrophic”, “bullying”, “draconian” and “ideologically driven” – are some of their reactions to the Promoting Human Flourishing in Foreign Assistance (PHFFA) policy, announced by US Vice-President JD Vance at an anti-abortion event last Friday evening. The policy’s three parts were published in the Federal Register on Tuesday as Protecting Life in Foreign Assistance, Combating Gender Ideology in Foreign Assistance and Combating Discriminatory Equity Ideology in Foreign Assistance Rules. The new rules apply to all foreign and US NGOs and “international organisations”, including multilateral UN agencies still funded by the US and bodies such as the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, TB and Malaria. However, in countries that allow abortion, governments and parastatals (government agencies) will need to place any US funds in “a segregated account” to ensure they’re not used for abortions and related activities. Governments and parastatals “may” also be required to agree that they won’t use US funds to promote or engage in “gender ideology” or DEI. The US State Department defines “gender ideology” activities as those that provide or promote “sex rejecting procedures” (defined broadly to include puberty blockers, hormones, surgeries); promote or counsel social transition; use materials that discuss changing one’s sex or pronoun usage not aligned with biological sex; lobby foreign governments on gender identity issues; and support drag queen workshops, performances, or similar activities”. Aid recipients are also compelled to agree to US officials visiting their offices unannounced to inspect their documents and activities, and to speak to people receiving their services. This is potentially a violation of patient confidentiality. Imposing ‘extremist ideology’ Since 1984, successive Republican governments have imposed a “Global Gag Rule” (also known as the Mexico City Policy) on foreign NGOs receiving global health aid, barring them from using this money – or even money they have raised from other sources – for any abortion-related activities, including referrals. However, the second Trump administration is the first to extend this to all non-military foreign assistance, including humanitarian assistance, and to widen the scope to include US NGOs, international organisations and – potentially – governments. “Bullying countries into complying with anti-rights and extremist ideology is despicable and unacceptable. The imperialist goals of this administration are on full display in these conditions to foreign assistance,” Anu Kumar, CEO of the global reproductive justice organisation, Ipas, told a media briefing this week. In 2024, $39.8 billion in US foreign aid was dispensed over 160 countries, with the largest share (41%) going to multilateral agencies, according to KFF. “This is tens of billions more than the amount of global health assistance subject to the policy under the first Trump administration’s previously expanded policy ($7.3 billion in 2020),” notes KFF. This “catastrophic expansion” is going to be especially harmful to “women, young people, girls and LGBTQI+ people”, added Ipas senior researcher Jamie Vernaelde. “There is an agenda here from the US government to push these ideologies across to other countries, both through direct government-to-government funding, but also forcing multilateral organisations to be subject to the ideology of one specific country.” Impact on Kenya The bilateral Memorandums of Understanding (MOU) that the US has signed with 15 African countries as part of its “America First Global Health Strategy” all contain a clause compelling countries to comply with the Global Gag Rule. “What we’ve realised is this inclusion of the Global Gag Rule in the MOUs was basically a Trojan horse, in the sense that now the governments have signed, they are obligated to implement these expanded conditions, for example, on gender ideology,” said Ipas’s Kenya director, Dr Musoba Kitui. Kitui said that 40,000 health workers had already lost their jobs in his country since the closure of the US Agency for International Development (USAID), leading to the “weakening of the health system”. Many African governments “are very, very desperate” to inject resources into their health systems since the closure of USAID, and were willing to sign bilateral MOUs with the US, despite some of the unfavourable conditions, said Kitui. Kenya’s MOU would be complex to implement, and there is “no way the US can monitor compliance without seeing patient records,” added Kitui, highlighting a concern about patient privacy which has resulted in the MOU being challenged in court. However, “this MOU grants US personnel diplomatic immunity, insulating them from any local courts against judicial processes for any violations of data privacy, or even crippling the health system for that matter”, he added. “Sexual and reproductive health is not a diplomatic bargaining chip. It’s a fundamental human right. Essential health care services must be separate from political agendas. What is really important is to protect the progress that we have made over the years, including in countries like Kenya,” Kitui stressed. Impact on humanitarian aid South Sudanese women survivors of violence shared their stories with a visiting UN delegation. The narrow redefinition of US global aid will affect survivors of gender-based violence who need access to rape kits and emergency contraception. Dr Jean-Claude Mulunda, who heads Ipas work in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), said that his organisation assisted displaced people in camps with family planning services, abortion care and also supports survivors of gender-based violence (GBV). With the demise of USAID, “rape kits” for GBV survivors containing medicine to protect women and girls against sexually transmitted infections and pregnancy are no longer available. “Ipas is trying, with our limited funds, to buy unit-by-unit, the different medicines in these kits,” said Mulunda. “Many women who are victims of rape can’t access abortion care, even though the country has signed the Maputo Protocol which allows access to abortion in case of rape.” The more onerous aid conditions are going to make it even harder for displaced women to access sexual and reproductive services. “The risk of unsafe abortion is elevated in humanitarian settings where it’s even harder for people to access medical services,” warned Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) in its reaction to the new policy. “In 2023, MSF provided more than 31,000 consultations for post-abortion care, most of which were due to complications related to unsafe abortion. With the reinstatement of the Global Gag Rule, MSF expects these already troubling numbers to increase.” The new policy, PHFFA, “escalates a pattern established across both Trump administrations: the systematic subordination of scientific evidence and patient needs to ideological and political objectives,” added MSF. “Versions of the Global Gag Rule have been introduced by Republican administrations since 1984, and extensive research has repeatedly documented that the policy disrupts health services and causes cascading adverse health outcomes in low- and middle-income countries, with the chilling impact enduring even when the policy has been rescinded,” MSF noted. MSF added that the State Department’s definitions of “gender ideology” and “discriminatory equity ideology” are so broad “that it is likely to result in barring or limiting access to essential health services for LGBTQIA+ individuals, women and girls, racial and ethnic minorities, and other marginalized groups”. ‘Abdication of decency’ US Vice President JD Vance addressing the March for Life last Friday, where he announced the new policy. “President Trump and his anti-abortion administration would rather let people starve to death in the wake of famine and war than let anyone in the world get an abortion – or even receive information about it,” said Rachana Desai Martin, chief US program officer at the Center for Reproductive Rights. “People are already dying because of this administration’s slashing of foreign assistance. Now, they’re making it harder for doctors and aid workers to provide food, water, and lifesaving medical care. This isn’t about saving lives – it’s a stunning abdication of basic human decency,” Martin added. “Trump’s expansion [of the Global Gag Rule] continues on a path of instrumentalising those most marginalised. It marks increasing attempts to capture global health and human rights with a deeply regressive act of imperialism masquerading as foreign policy,” said Mina Barling, International Planned Parenthood Federation’s global director of external relations. “This is yet another attack on national sovereignty and colonial intervention through the curtailing of sexual and reproductive rights.” “The dismantling of USAID has already caused widespread harm: more than 45 million women and girls have lost access to contraceptive care and clinics around the world have been forced to close,” said Marieke van der Plas, executive director of the Dutch reproductive rights organisation, Rutgers. “Now, the Trump administration is further reshaping global health policy through new government agreements that embed ideological conditions and deepen political control.” The Senate Foreign Relations Democrats said in a statement: “By blocking US funding to any entity that does not conform to his extreme ideological agenda, the administration is exporting MAGA culture wars overseas and turning lifesaving aid into a political tool. “This order goes far beyond anything we’ve seen before. It will shrink global resources to fight disease, respond to humanitarian crises and protect women and girls from violence, while forcing many of our trusted partners to shut their doors or betray their missions. In doing so, it also leaves Americans more vulnerable to infectious diseases and health threats that do not respect borders.” Image Credits: saac Billy/ UN Photo, KFF. Posts navigation Older postsNewer posts This site uses cookies to help give you the best experience on our website. Cookies enable us to collect information that helps us personalise your experience and improve the functionality and performance of our site. By continuing to read our website, we assume you agree to this, otherwise you can adjust your browser settings. Please read our cookie and Privacy Policy. Our Cookies and Privacy Policy Loading Comments... You must be logged in to post a comment.
Unlocking ‘Brain Capital’ in the Brain Economy – Davos Initiative Aims to Make Brain Health a Development Indicator 30/01/2026 Elaine Ruth Fletcher Rice University’s Harris Eyre in the Davos Alzheimer’s Collaborative ‘Brain House’ describing new brain capital and brain economy initiatives launched at the 2026 World Economic Forum. A new initiative that aims to measure and promote the inclusion of “brain capital” as an economic indicator was launched at the World Economic Forum in Davos last week. Advocates for the Global Brain Economy initiative, and a companion Global Brain Capital Index argue that using brain health as a development indicator can help spur more awareness and investments in brain health – including dementia related diseases that now rank as the seventh largest cause of death worldwide. The discussions, hosted by the Davos Alzheimer’s Collaborative (DAC), marked what several speakers described as a turning point: a shift from viewing brain health primarily as a cost to seeing it as an investable economic asset — one with implications for productivity, resilience, innovation, and long-term growth. With the launch of the Global Brain Capital Index and the Global Brain Economy Initiative, leaders from economics, neuroscience, policy, and finance argued that recognizing — and monetizing — “brain capital” may be essential to unlocking investment in brain health across the life course, from early development to healthy aging and dementia prevention. Projected growth curve for dementia risks and deaths 0 from 0.56 million in 1990 to nearly 5 million annually in 2030. From Idea to Global Movement The concept of the “brain economy” has evolved rapidly from academic theory to policy and investment agenda, said Harris Eyre. A professor at Rice University and the University of Texas Medical Branch, and a leading member of DAC, he framed the launch moment as the culmination of years of work. “We’ve really hit a crescendo point,” Eyre said. Referring to the newly released flagship report, The Human Advantage: Stronger Brains in the Age of AI, published by the World Economic Forum and McKinsey Health Institute, he noted its resonance across Davos. “We have a lot of different global challenges, a lot of big macro challenges. But here you can see… that brain challenges are very significant across the lifespan, from the earliest stage of life through to late life.” Those challenges include early-life malnutrition and stunted development, youth mental health, workforce disruption driven by artificial intelligence, and rising rates of dementia in ageing populations. “The cost of brain health conditions across the lifespan… is $3.5 trillion to the global economy, and the cost is rising at 3% a year,” Eyre said. Introducing brain capital Brain Capital concept At the heart of the Davos discussions was the concept of brain capital, defined as the combined value of brain health and brain skills. “Brain capital is the new paradigm here,” Eyre said. “It’s human capital 2.0 — human capital in the age of neuroscience.” He stressed that brain capital spans mental health, neurological health, cognitive skills, emotional resilience, creativity, and learning — and that these capacities are now more critical than ever. “Our brains are just so important now than ever before,” he said. “The accelerations of change are so high, we need brain health. We need brain skills.” Eyre argued that advances in neuroscience, reduced stigma around mental health and dementia, and growing awareness of neurodiversity have created a unique opportunity. “If you remember one thing today,” he told the audience, “is remember brain capital.” Dialogues at Davos with global health leaders around the new initiative included conversations with: Bill Gates, WHO Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, and Wellcome’s John-Arne Røttingen, among others, Eyre said. Brain Capital Index – a new development indicator Rym Ayadi, president of the Euro-Mediterranean Economists Association, describes the new ‘Brain Capital’ index launched at Davos. That call for recognition was matched with a new measurement tool unveiled in Davos; the full report was published just this week. Called the Global Brain Capital Index, it establishes a set of standardized indicators for measuring brain capital, in the form of brain health and brain skills, across countries and globally. The new index was developed by the economist Rym Ayadi, President of the Euro-Mediterranean Economists Association (EMEA). “Brain capital was a concept,” Ayadi said. “And nowadays I can say to you… it can be measured at national level.” Ayadi described the index as a response to what she called a blind spot in traditional economic frameworks. Brain health and brain skills are the two main pillars of the brain capital index – with “enablers” as a third important influence in overall outcomes. “GDP is very quantity-based. It’s not quality-based,” she said. “Brain health was a residual. It’s a cost. But brain health nowadays should be [seen as] infrastructure, an asset. It’s not a cost — it’s an investment.” The new index brings together over 28 indicators on brain health, brain skills, and enabling environments — the latter includes the quality of education, health systems, governance, and environmental risks, like air pollution, which has now been link clearly to dementia as well as to other forms of cognitive impairment. The 28 core indicators were derived from a larger collection of 106 indicators, available on an interactive Brain Capital Dashboard, and selected through a systematic process as the best composite measure of trends. “It is really a strategic tool, a compass for economic policy thinking going forward,” Ayadi said of the index. Decline in brain health seen worldwide A decline in brain health as a component of the brain capital index is seen across countries and regions. Drawing on data from 1990 onwards, the findings presented in Davos revealed troubling global trends. “We can see an increase overall in brain health since the 90s, but then there is an overall decline, and this decline is persistent in all countries of the world,” Ayadi said. “So something is wrong here.” The trend of brain health decline is seen across both OECD and non-OECD countries. And there is also a “huge inequality between OECD and non-OECD countries,” Ayadi said. “And if we don’t really act, it becomes even worse.” Non-communicable diseases and dementia in focus Abnormal accumulation of amyloid plaques and tau proteins in the brain, are the two hallmarks of Alzheimer’s – the latter forming tangles in neurons, seen here. Speakers linked the brain health declines to the growing burden of non-communicable diseases, particularly neurological and mental health conditions. “For the brain health indicators, for example, we have burden of disease, prevalence of depression, suicide rate… Alzheimer’s disease and other dementia, Parkinson’s disease, schizophrenia, stroke, bipolar,” Ayadi said. Population ageing, combined with underinvestment in brain health, are other contributing factors. “Brain health overall is under global strain,” she said. “Driven by population aging, raising mental health burdens and cumulative economic and health stressors.” Despite the scale of the challenge, Ayadi noted that brain health remains systematically underfunded. “Despite the economic importance, brain health remains systematically underfunded and under integrated into policy framework,” she said. Brain skills improvements offset brain health declines Consideration of brain skills as part of the index provides a more hopeful picture. This includes skills’ indicators, like level of education or the rate of innovation, Ayadi said. Skills indicators, as such, are still rising in many parts of the world, including in low income countries -even if the disparities are huge. Brain skill indicators such as educational level or the pace of innovation are still rising in many countries, countering negative trends in brain health. But even when those enablers are considered, the composite trends in many parts of the world, including high and lower-income regions, still reflects worrying signs of stagnation or decline, she underlined – reflecting the way the decline in brain health can ‘drag down’ progress overall. Evolution of composite brain capital index including enablers. More positive trends in brain skills and related enablers, like education and health infrastructure, offset declines in brain health. From measurement to investment The central argument emerging from Davos was that measurement enables monetisation of risks and benefits to brain health and brain capital. Consequently, monetizing brain capital could unlock large-scale investment in prevention, care, and skills development. “If, in fact, we are able to measure, and we are able to govern, we can… finance,” Ayadi said. “And then it becomes in the economic and financial system.” This idea resonated strongly with investors and business leaders attending the sessions. Steve Carnevale, moderator of the DAC session and himself a venture capitalist, reflected on the power of quantification: “When we can quantify something that previously wasn’t quantifiable, and when we can quantify it, we can turn it into a growth story,” Carnevale said. “That’s when people are really going to follow us.” Toward a ‘brain-positive’ economy The Davos discussions also signal a broader rethinking of development indicators. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) continues to be the dominant indicator of socio-economic development. While this has been under challenge by academics for sometime, GDP’s binary nature is even more out of date in the age of AI, panelists argued. “Brain health has to become a priority within our national policies, and also brain skills. This index could be a new policy compass beyond GDP,” Ayadi argued, saying that development indicators need to shift “from quantity-based skills into neurocognitive assets… and from growth to resilience.” Along with that, the new brain economy initiative launched at Davos aims to spur policymakers from theory to action, Eyre said. The initiative focusses on safeguarding brain health, fostering brain skills, investing with a “brain lens,” and mobilizing public-private partnerships. “We need brain lens investing to sit above global financial architecture – and channel it towards brain positive investments.” Added Drew Holzapfel DAC COO, “Brain health has long been treated primarily as a health issue, which it is. But when it’s understood as an economic issue, it opens the door to more resources and a broader, more sustained commitment. What we have the opportunity to do is take the concept of brain capital and translate it into something that focuses the minds of finance ministers.” Brain capital all the more important in AI era DAC founder George Vradenburg opening the panel on brain capital and the brain economy at a WEF side event in Davos last week. Recognizing the importance of brain health and brain capital is all the more critical in the age of fast-evolving AI systems – so that humans can keep abreast of these changes – and benefit from them – rather than the reverse, said George Vradenburg, founder of the Davos Alzheimer’s Collaborative, and convenor of the Davos session. “We need to be referring to AI as Augmented Intelligence and not Artificial Intelligence,” Vradenburg said. At a “Davos wrap” webinar this week, hosted by EMEA, Lucy Pérez, global leader of the McKinsey Health Institute, underlined the critical moment faced. “There’s no more urgent time to invest in brain capital than right now,” Pérez said. “The demographic shifts that we’re experiencing, the geopolitical shocks, the economic shocks, the way technology is impacting not only the workplace, but also our daily lives.” But its the opportunity – as compared to the threat – that policymakers need to appreciate: “Scaling existing brain interventions already is going to unlock over $6 trillion in economic opportunity,” Pérez said. “And that’s with innovation we already have in hand.” Image Credits: DigitalRalph, Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer’s Disease, August 2024. , EMEA, 2026, National Institutes on Aging . US Freezes All Funds to Gavi Over Vaccine Preservative Thimerosal 29/01/2026 Kerry Cullinan A baby in Rwanda receives a combined measles and rubella vaccine. The US government has frozen funds to Gavi, the global vaccine alliance, until it commits to a plan to phase out the preservative thimerosal from all the vaccines it distributes. The US demand, first reported by Reuters, is linked to the unproven belief held by US Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr and allies that thimerosal, which contains mercury, is linked to autism. However, even the US Food and Drug Administration has pronounced that “thimerosal has been the subject of numerous studies and has a long record of safe and effective use preventing bacterial and fungal contamination of vaccines, with no ill effects established other than minor local reactions at the site of injection.” The FDA also notes that a vaccine with 0.01% thimerosal as a preservative contains “roughly the same amount of elemental mercury [as] contained in a three-ounce can of tuna fish”. Around 14% of Gavi’s vaccines contain thimerosal, which is used in some multi-dose vials to destroy any bacteria and fungi that may enter a vial each time a new dose is drawn. Multi-dose vaccines are used in many low- and middle-income countries as they are cheaper. Affected Gavi vaccines include the five-in-one pentavalent vaccine (Diphtheria, Pertussis , Tetanus, Hepatitis B and Haemophilus influenzae type b), the Diphtheria, Pertussis and Tetanus (DPT) vaccine, Tetanus-Reduced Diphtheria (Td), Hepatitis B, Meningococcal A Conjugate (MenA) and Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine (PCV). Most US vaccines do not contain thimerosal, while it is seldom found in Europe, which relies mainly on single-dose vaccines. Scientific consensus “We received a request from the US government to remove thimerosal from our portfolio. We remain in contact on this subject,” a Gavi spokesperson told Health Policy Watch. “While we very much hope to find a pathway to welcoming the US back as a donor, any decision related to Gavi’s portfolio would require a decision by Gavi’s Board and input from preceding governance committees, which will be guided by scientific consensus.” Hanging in the balance is some $300 million already allocated by the Biden administration but not yet paid, as well as any new funds. All Gavi-supported vaccines have to be recommended by the World Health Organisation’s (WHO) Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE), an independent body that examines all available scientific evidence and issues global guidance on the use of vaccines. In addition, each manufacturing site where Gavi-supported vaccines are produced must be approved or “pre-qualified” by WHO. Gavi-supported vaccines must also be recommended by the National Immunisation Technical Advisory Group (NITAG) in each country where they are being used. Most Gavi-supported countries also require vaccines to be approved by their own National Regulatory Authorities (NRAs), in addition to WHO approvals. In June last year, Kennedy told Gavi that the US would withhold funds until it “re-earned the public trust”, claiming that it had “ignored vaccine safety”. The US recently lost its seat on the Gavi board as it has failed to pledge any funds to it. Image Credits: Twitter: @WHOAFRO, WHO. Latest US Restrictions on Aid ‘Bully’ Recipients to Accept ‘Extremist Ideology’ 29/01/2026 Kerry Cullinan Kenyan women at a family planning clinic. Global health organisations have reacted with anger to the new US foreign aid policy, which prohibits all aid recipients, bar military, from performing or promoting abortion, “gender ideology”, or “diversity, equity and inclusion” (DEI). “Catastrophic”, “bullying”, “draconian” and “ideologically driven” – are some of their reactions to the Promoting Human Flourishing in Foreign Assistance (PHFFA) policy, announced by US Vice-President JD Vance at an anti-abortion event last Friday evening. The policy’s three parts were published in the Federal Register on Tuesday as Protecting Life in Foreign Assistance, Combating Gender Ideology in Foreign Assistance and Combating Discriminatory Equity Ideology in Foreign Assistance Rules. The new rules apply to all foreign and US NGOs and “international organisations”, including multilateral UN agencies still funded by the US and bodies such as the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, TB and Malaria. However, in countries that allow abortion, governments and parastatals (government agencies) will need to place any US funds in “a segregated account” to ensure they’re not used for abortions and related activities. Governments and parastatals “may” also be required to agree that they won’t use US funds to promote or engage in “gender ideology” or DEI. The US State Department defines “gender ideology” activities as those that provide or promote “sex rejecting procedures” (defined broadly to include puberty blockers, hormones, surgeries); promote or counsel social transition; use materials that discuss changing one’s sex or pronoun usage not aligned with biological sex; lobby foreign governments on gender identity issues; and support drag queen workshops, performances, or similar activities”. Aid recipients are also compelled to agree to US officials visiting their offices unannounced to inspect their documents and activities, and to speak to people receiving their services. This is potentially a violation of patient confidentiality. Imposing ‘extremist ideology’ Since 1984, successive Republican governments have imposed a “Global Gag Rule” (also known as the Mexico City Policy) on foreign NGOs receiving global health aid, barring them from using this money – or even money they have raised from other sources – for any abortion-related activities, including referrals. However, the second Trump administration is the first to extend this to all non-military foreign assistance, including humanitarian assistance, and to widen the scope to include US NGOs, international organisations and – potentially – governments. “Bullying countries into complying with anti-rights and extremist ideology is despicable and unacceptable. The imperialist goals of this administration are on full display in these conditions to foreign assistance,” Anu Kumar, CEO of the global reproductive justice organisation, Ipas, told a media briefing this week. In 2024, $39.8 billion in US foreign aid was dispensed over 160 countries, with the largest share (41%) going to multilateral agencies, according to KFF. “This is tens of billions more than the amount of global health assistance subject to the policy under the first Trump administration’s previously expanded policy ($7.3 billion in 2020),” notes KFF. This “catastrophic expansion” is going to be especially harmful to “women, young people, girls and LGBTQI+ people”, added Ipas senior researcher Jamie Vernaelde. “There is an agenda here from the US government to push these ideologies across to other countries, both through direct government-to-government funding, but also forcing multilateral organisations to be subject to the ideology of one specific country.” Impact on Kenya The bilateral Memorandums of Understanding (MOU) that the US has signed with 15 African countries as part of its “America First Global Health Strategy” all contain a clause compelling countries to comply with the Global Gag Rule. “What we’ve realised is this inclusion of the Global Gag Rule in the MOUs was basically a Trojan horse, in the sense that now the governments have signed, they are obligated to implement these expanded conditions, for example, on gender ideology,” said Ipas’s Kenya director, Dr Musoba Kitui. Kitui said that 40,000 health workers had already lost their jobs in his country since the closure of the US Agency for International Development (USAID), leading to the “weakening of the health system”. Many African governments “are very, very desperate” to inject resources into their health systems since the closure of USAID, and were willing to sign bilateral MOUs with the US, despite some of the unfavourable conditions, said Kitui. Kenya’s MOU would be complex to implement, and there is “no way the US can monitor compliance without seeing patient records,” added Kitui, highlighting a concern about patient privacy which has resulted in the MOU being challenged in court. However, “this MOU grants US personnel diplomatic immunity, insulating them from any local courts against judicial processes for any violations of data privacy, or even crippling the health system for that matter”, he added. “Sexual and reproductive health is not a diplomatic bargaining chip. It’s a fundamental human right. Essential health care services must be separate from political agendas. What is really important is to protect the progress that we have made over the years, including in countries like Kenya,” Kitui stressed. Impact on humanitarian aid South Sudanese women survivors of violence shared their stories with a visiting UN delegation. The narrow redefinition of US global aid will affect survivors of gender-based violence who need access to rape kits and emergency contraception. Dr Jean-Claude Mulunda, who heads Ipas work in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), said that his organisation assisted displaced people in camps with family planning services, abortion care and also supports survivors of gender-based violence (GBV). With the demise of USAID, “rape kits” for GBV survivors containing medicine to protect women and girls against sexually transmitted infections and pregnancy are no longer available. “Ipas is trying, with our limited funds, to buy unit-by-unit, the different medicines in these kits,” said Mulunda. “Many women who are victims of rape can’t access abortion care, even though the country has signed the Maputo Protocol which allows access to abortion in case of rape.” The more onerous aid conditions are going to make it even harder for displaced women to access sexual and reproductive services. “The risk of unsafe abortion is elevated in humanitarian settings where it’s even harder for people to access medical services,” warned Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) in its reaction to the new policy. “In 2023, MSF provided more than 31,000 consultations for post-abortion care, most of which were due to complications related to unsafe abortion. With the reinstatement of the Global Gag Rule, MSF expects these already troubling numbers to increase.” The new policy, PHFFA, “escalates a pattern established across both Trump administrations: the systematic subordination of scientific evidence and patient needs to ideological and political objectives,” added MSF. “Versions of the Global Gag Rule have been introduced by Republican administrations since 1984, and extensive research has repeatedly documented that the policy disrupts health services and causes cascading adverse health outcomes in low- and middle-income countries, with the chilling impact enduring even when the policy has been rescinded,” MSF noted. MSF added that the State Department’s definitions of “gender ideology” and “discriminatory equity ideology” are so broad “that it is likely to result in barring or limiting access to essential health services for LGBTQIA+ individuals, women and girls, racial and ethnic minorities, and other marginalized groups”. ‘Abdication of decency’ US Vice President JD Vance addressing the March for Life last Friday, where he announced the new policy. “President Trump and his anti-abortion administration would rather let people starve to death in the wake of famine and war than let anyone in the world get an abortion – or even receive information about it,” said Rachana Desai Martin, chief US program officer at the Center for Reproductive Rights. “People are already dying because of this administration’s slashing of foreign assistance. Now, they’re making it harder for doctors and aid workers to provide food, water, and lifesaving medical care. This isn’t about saving lives – it’s a stunning abdication of basic human decency,” Martin added. “Trump’s expansion [of the Global Gag Rule] continues on a path of instrumentalising those most marginalised. It marks increasing attempts to capture global health and human rights with a deeply regressive act of imperialism masquerading as foreign policy,” said Mina Barling, International Planned Parenthood Federation’s global director of external relations. “This is yet another attack on national sovereignty and colonial intervention through the curtailing of sexual and reproductive rights.” “The dismantling of USAID has already caused widespread harm: more than 45 million women and girls have lost access to contraceptive care and clinics around the world have been forced to close,” said Marieke van der Plas, executive director of the Dutch reproductive rights organisation, Rutgers. “Now, the Trump administration is further reshaping global health policy through new government agreements that embed ideological conditions and deepen political control.” The Senate Foreign Relations Democrats said in a statement: “By blocking US funding to any entity that does not conform to his extreme ideological agenda, the administration is exporting MAGA culture wars overseas and turning lifesaving aid into a political tool. “This order goes far beyond anything we’ve seen before. It will shrink global resources to fight disease, respond to humanitarian crises and protect women and girls from violence, while forcing many of our trusted partners to shut their doors or betray their missions. In doing so, it also leaves Americans more vulnerable to infectious diseases and health threats that do not respect borders.” Image Credits: saac Billy/ UN Photo, KFF. Posts navigation Older postsNewer posts This site uses cookies to help give you the best experience on our website. Cookies enable us to collect information that helps us personalise your experience and improve the functionality and performance of our site. By continuing to read our website, we assume you agree to this, otherwise you can adjust your browser settings. Please read our cookie and Privacy Policy. Our Cookies and Privacy Policy Loading Comments... You must be logged in to post a comment.
US Freezes All Funds to Gavi Over Vaccine Preservative Thimerosal 29/01/2026 Kerry Cullinan A baby in Rwanda receives a combined measles and rubella vaccine. The US government has frozen funds to Gavi, the global vaccine alliance, until it commits to a plan to phase out the preservative thimerosal from all the vaccines it distributes. The US demand, first reported by Reuters, is linked to the unproven belief held by US Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr and allies that thimerosal, which contains mercury, is linked to autism. However, even the US Food and Drug Administration has pronounced that “thimerosal has been the subject of numerous studies and has a long record of safe and effective use preventing bacterial and fungal contamination of vaccines, with no ill effects established other than minor local reactions at the site of injection.” The FDA also notes that a vaccine with 0.01% thimerosal as a preservative contains “roughly the same amount of elemental mercury [as] contained in a three-ounce can of tuna fish”. Around 14% of Gavi’s vaccines contain thimerosal, which is used in some multi-dose vials to destroy any bacteria and fungi that may enter a vial each time a new dose is drawn. Multi-dose vaccines are used in many low- and middle-income countries as they are cheaper. Affected Gavi vaccines include the five-in-one pentavalent vaccine (Diphtheria, Pertussis , Tetanus, Hepatitis B and Haemophilus influenzae type b), the Diphtheria, Pertussis and Tetanus (DPT) vaccine, Tetanus-Reduced Diphtheria (Td), Hepatitis B, Meningococcal A Conjugate (MenA) and Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine (PCV). Most US vaccines do not contain thimerosal, while it is seldom found in Europe, which relies mainly on single-dose vaccines. Scientific consensus “We received a request from the US government to remove thimerosal from our portfolio. We remain in contact on this subject,” a Gavi spokesperson told Health Policy Watch. “While we very much hope to find a pathway to welcoming the US back as a donor, any decision related to Gavi’s portfolio would require a decision by Gavi’s Board and input from preceding governance committees, which will be guided by scientific consensus.” Hanging in the balance is some $300 million already allocated by the Biden administration but not yet paid, as well as any new funds. All Gavi-supported vaccines have to be recommended by the World Health Organisation’s (WHO) Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE), an independent body that examines all available scientific evidence and issues global guidance on the use of vaccines. In addition, each manufacturing site where Gavi-supported vaccines are produced must be approved or “pre-qualified” by WHO. Gavi-supported vaccines must also be recommended by the National Immunisation Technical Advisory Group (NITAG) in each country where they are being used. Most Gavi-supported countries also require vaccines to be approved by their own National Regulatory Authorities (NRAs), in addition to WHO approvals. In June last year, Kennedy told Gavi that the US would withhold funds until it “re-earned the public trust”, claiming that it had “ignored vaccine safety”. The US recently lost its seat on the Gavi board as it has failed to pledge any funds to it. Image Credits: Twitter: @WHOAFRO, WHO. Latest US Restrictions on Aid ‘Bully’ Recipients to Accept ‘Extremist Ideology’ 29/01/2026 Kerry Cullinan Kenyan women at a family planning clinic. Global health organisations have reacted with anger to the new US foreign aid policy, which prohibits all aid recipients, bar military, from performing or promoting abortion, “gender ideology”, or “diversity, equity and inclusion” (DEI). “Catastrophic”, “bullying”, “draconian” and “ideologically driven” – are some of their reactions to the Promoting Human Flourishing in Foreign Assistance (PHFFA) policy, announced by US Vice-President JD Vance at an anti-abortion event last Friday evening. The policy’s three parts were published in the Federal Register on Tuesday as Protecting Life in Foreign Assistance, Combating Gender Ideology in Foreign Assistance and Combating Discriminatory Equity Ideology in Foreign Assistance Rules. The new rules apply to all foreign and US NGOs and “international organisations”, including multilateral UN agencies still funded by the US and bodies such as the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, TB and Malaria. However, in countries that allow abortion, governments and parastatals (government agencies) will need to place any US funds in “a segregated account” to ensure they’re not used for abortions and related activities. Governments and parastatals “may” also be required to agree that they won’t use US funds to promote or engage in “gender ideology” or DEI. The US State Department defines “gender ideology” activities as those that provide or promote “sex rejecting procedures” (defined broadly to include puberty blockers, hormones, surgeries); promote or counsel social transition; use materials that discuss changing one’s sex or pronoun usage not aligned with biological sex; lobby foreign governments on gender identity issues; and support drag queen workshops, performances, or similar activities”. Aid recipients are also compelled to agree to US officials visiting their offices unannounced to inspect their documents and activities, and to speak to people receiving their services. This is potentially a violation of patient confidentiality. Imposing ‘extremist ideology’ Since 1984, successive Republican governments have imposed a “Global Gag Rule” (also known as the Mexico City Policy) on foreign NGOs receiving global health aid, barring them from using this money – or even money they have raised from other sources – for any abortion-related activities, including referrals. However, the second Trump administration is the first to extend this to all non-military foreign assistance, including humanitarian assistance, and to widen the scope to include US NGOs, international organisations and – potentially – governments. “Bullying countries into complying with anti-rights and extremist ideology is despicable and unacceptable. The imperialist goals of this administration are on full display in these conditions to foreign assistance,” Anu Kumar, CEO of the global reproductive justice organisation, Ipas, told a media briefing this week. In 2024, $39.8 billion in US foreign aid was dispensed over 160 countries, with the largest share (41%) going to multilateral agencies, according to KFF. “This is tens of billions more than the amount of global health assistance subject to the policy under the first Trump administration’s previously expanded policy ($7.3 billion in 2020),” notes KFF. This “catastrophic expansion” is going to be especially harmful to “women, young people, girls and LGBTQI+ people”, added Ipas senior researcher Jamie Vernaelde. “There is an agenda here from the US government to push these ideologies across to other countries, both through direct government-to-government funding, but also forcing multilateral organisations to be subject to the ideology of one specific country.” Impact on Kenya The bilateral Memorandums of Understanding (MOU) that the US has signed with 15 African countries as part of its “America First Global Health Strategy” all contain a clause compelling countries to comply with the Global Gag Rule. “What we’ve realised is this inclusion of the Global Gag Rule in the MOUs was basically a Trojan horse, in the sense that now the governments have signed, they are obligated to implement these expanded conditions, for example, on gender ideology,” said Ipas’s Kenya director, Dr Musoba Kitui. Kitui said that 40,000 health workers had already lost their jobs in his country since the closure of the US Agency for International Development (USAID), leading to the “weakening of the health system”. Many African governments “are very, very desperate” to inject resources into their health systems since the closure of USAID, and were willing to sign bilateral MOUs with the US, despite some of the unfavourable conditions, said Kitui. Kenya’s MOU would be complex to implement, and there is “no way the US can monitor compliance without seeing patient records,” added Kitui, highlighting a concern about patient privacy which has resulted in the MOU being challenged in court. However, “this MOU grants US personnel diplomatic immunity, insulating them from any local courts against judicial processes for any violations of data privacy, or even crippling the health system for that matter”, he added. “Sexual and reproductive health is not a diplomatic bargaining chip. It’s a fundamental human right. Essential health care services must be separate from political agendas. What is really important is to protect the progress that we have made over the years, including in countries like Kenya,” Kitui stressed. Impact on humanitarian aid South Sudanese women survivors of violence shared their stories with a visiting UN delegation. The narrow redefinition of US global aid will affect survivors of gender-based violence who need access to rape kits and emergency contraception. Dr Jean-Claude Mulunda, who heads Ipas work in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), said that his organisation assisted displaced people in camps with family planning services, abortion care and also supports survivors of gender-based violence (GBV). With the demise of USAID, “rape kits” for GBV survivors containing medicine to protect women and girls against sexually transmitted infections and pregnancy are no longer available. “Ipas is trying, with our limited funds, to buy unit-by-unit, the different medicines in these kits,” said Mulunda. “Many women who are victims of rape can’t access abortion care, even though the country has signed the Maputo Protocol which allows access to abortion in case of rape.” The more onerous aid conditions are going to make it even harder for displaced women to access sexual and reproductive services. “The risk of unsafe abortion is elevated in humanitarian settings where it’s even harder for people to access medical services,” warned Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) in its reaction to the new policy. “In 2023, MSF provided more than 31,000 consultations for post-abortion care, most of which were due to complications related to unsafe abortion. With the reinstatement of the Global Gag Rule, MSF expects these already troubling numbers to increase.” The new policy, PHFFA, “escalates a pattern established across both Trump administrations: the systematic subordination of scientific evidence and patient needs to ideological and political objectives,” added MSF. “Versions of the Global Gag Rule have been introduced by Republican administrations since 1984, and extensive research has repeatedly documented that the policy disrupts health services and causes cascading adverse health outcomes in low- and middle-income countries, with the chilling impact enduring even when the policy has been rescinded,” MSF noted. MSF added that the State Department’s definitions of “gender ideology” and “discriminatory equity ideology” are so broad “that it is likely to result in barring or limiting access to essential health services for LGBTQIA+ individuals, women and girls, racial and ethnic minorities, and other marginalized groups”. ‘Abdication of decency’ US Vice President JD Vance addressing the March for Life last Friday, where he announced the new policy. “President Trump and his anti-abortion administration would rather let people starve to death in the wake of famine and war than let anyone in the world get an abortion – or even receive information about it,” said Rachana Desai Martin, chief US program officer at the Center for Reproductive Rights. “People are already dying because of this administration’s slashing of foreign assistance. Now, they’re making it harder for doctors and aid workers to provide food, water, and lifesaving medical care. This isn’t about saving lives – it’s a stunning abdication of basic human decency,” Martin added. “Trump’s expansion [of the Global Gag Rule] continues on a path of instrumentalising those most marginalised. It marks increasing attempts to capture global health and human rights with a deeply regressive act of imperialism masquerading as foreign policy,” said Mina Barling, International Planned Parenthood Federation’s global director of external relations. “This is yet another attack on national sovereignty and colonial intervention through the curtailing of sexual and reproductive rights.” “The dismantling of USAID has already caused widespread harm: more than 45 million women and girls have lost access to contraceptive care and clinics around the world have been forced to close,” said Marieke van der Plas, executive director of the Dutch reproductive rights organisation, Rutgers. “Now, the Trump administration is further reshaping global health policy through new government agreements that embed ideological conditions and deepen political control.” The Senate Foreign Relations Democrats said in a statement: “By blocking US funding to any entity that does not conform to his extreme ideological agenda, the administration is exporting MAGA culture wars overseas and turning lifesaving aid into a political tool. “This order goes far beyond anything we’ve seen before. It will shrink global resources to fight disease, respond to humanitarian crises and protect women and girls from violence, while forcing many of our trusted partners to shut their doors or betray their missions. In doing so, it also leaves Americans more vulnerable to infectious diseases and health threats that do not respect borders.” Image Credits: saac Billy/ UN Photo, KFF. Posts navigation Older postsNewer posts This site uses cookies to help give you the best experience on our website. Cookies enable us to collect information that helps us personalise your experience and improve the functionality and performance of our site. By continuing to read our website, we assume you agree to this, otherwise you can adjust your browser settings. Please read our cookie and Privacy Policy. Our Cookies and Privacy Policy
Latest US Restrictions on Aid ‘Bully’ Recipients to Accept ‘Extremist Ideology’ 29/01/2026 Kerry Cullinan Kenyan women at a family planning clinic. Global health organisations have reacted with anger to the new US foreign aid policy, which prohibits all aid recipients, bar military, from performing or promoting abortion, “gender ideology”, or “diversity, equity and inclusion” (DEI). “Catastrophic”, “bullying”, “draconian” and “ideologically driven” – are some of their reactions to the Promoting Human Flourishing in Foreign Assistance (PHFFA) policy, announced by US Vice-President JD Vance at an anti-abortion event last Friday evening. The policy’s three parts were published in the Federal Register on Tuesday as Protecting Life in Foreign Assistance, Combating Gender Ideology in Foreign Assistance and Combating Discriminatory Equity Ideology in Foreign Assistance Rules. The new rules apply to all foreign and US NGOs and “international organisations”, including multilateral UN agencies still funded by the US and bodies such as the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, TB and Malaria. However, in countries that allow abortion, governments and parastatals (government agencies) will need to place any US funds in “a segregated account” to ensure they’re not used for abortions and related activities. Governments and parastatals “may” also be required to agree that they won’t use US funds to promote or engage in “gender ideology” or DEI. The US State Department defines “gender ideology” activities as those that provide or promote “sex rejecting procedures” (defined broadly to include puberty blockers, hormones, surgeries); promote or counsel social transition; use materials that discuss changing one’s sex or pronoun usage not aligned with biological sex; lobby foreign governments on gender identity issues; and support drag queen workshops, performances, or similar activities”. Aid recipients are also compelled to agree to US officials visiting their offices unannounced to inspect their documents and activities, and to speak to people receiving their services. This is potentially a violation of patient confidentiality. Imposing ‘extremist ideology’ Since 1984, successive Republican governments have imposed a “Global Gag Rule” (also known as the Mexico City Policy) on foreign NGOs receiving global health aid, barring them from using this money – or even money they have raised from other sources – for any abortion-related activities, including referrals. However, the second Trump administration is the first to extend this to all non-military foreign assistance, including humanitarian assistance, and to widen the scope to include US NGOs, international organisations and – potentially – governments. “Bullying countries into complying with anti-rights and extremist ideology is despicable and unacceptable. The imperialist goals of this administration are on full display in these conditions to foreign assistance,” Anu Kumar, CEO of the global reproductive justice organisation, Ipas, told a media briefing this week. In 2024, $39.8 billion in US foreign aid was dispensed over 160 countries, with the largest share (41%) going to multilateral agencies, according to KFF. “This is tens of billions more than the amount of global health assistance subject to the policy under the first Trump administration’s previously expanded policy ($7.3 billion in 2020),” notes KFF. This “catastrophic expansion” is going to be especially harmful to “women, young people, girls and LGBTQI+ people”, added Ipas senior researcher Jamie Vernaelde. “There is an agenda here from the US government to push these ideologies across to other countries, both through direct government-to-government funding, but also forcing multilateral organisations to be subject to the ideology of one specific country.” Impact on Kenya The bilateral Memorandums of Understanding (MOU) that the US has signed with 15 African countries as part of its “America First Global Health Strategy” all contain a clause compelling countries to comply with the Global Gag Rule. “What we’ve realised is this inclusion of the Global Gag Rule in the MOUs was basically a Trojan horse, in the sense that now the governments have signed, they are obligated to implement these expanded conditions, for example, on gender ideology,” said Ipas’s Kenya director, Dr Musoba Kitui. Kitui said that 40,000 health workers had already lost their jobs in his country since the closure of the US Agency for International Development (USAID), leading to the “weakening of the health system”. Many African governments “are very, very desperate” to inject resources into their health systems since the closure of USAID, and were willing to sign bilateral MOUs with the US, despite some of the unfavourable conditions, said Kitui. Kenya’s MOU would be complex to implement, and there is “no way the US can monitor compliance without seeing patient records,” added Kitui, highlighting a concern about patient privacy which has resulted in the MOU being challenged in court. However, “this MOU grants US personnel diplomatic immunity, insulating them from any local courts against judicial processes for any violations of data privacy, or even crippling the health system for that matter”, he added. “Sexual and reproductive health is not a diplomatic bargaining chip. It’s a fundamental human right. Essential health care services must be separate from political agendas. What is really important is to protect the progress that we have made over the years, including in countries like Kenya,” Kitui stressed. Impact on humanitarian aid South Sudanese women survivors of violence shared their stories with a visiting UN delegation. The narrow redefinition of US global aid will affect survivors of gender-based violence who need access to rape kits and emergency contraception. Dr Jean-Claude Mulunda, who heads Ipas work in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), said that his organisation assisted displaced people in camps with family planning services, abortion care and also supports survivors of gender-based violence (GBV). With the demise of USAID, “rape kits” for GBV survivors containing medicine to protect women and girls against sexually transmitted infections and pregnancy are no longer available. “Ipas is trying, with our limited funds, to buy unit-by-unit, the different medicines in these kits,” said Mulunda. “Many women who are victims of rape can’t access abortion care, even though the country has signed the Maputo Protocol which allows access to abortion in case of rape.” The more onerous aid conditions are going to make it even harder for displaced women to access sexual and reproductive services. “The risk of unsafe abortion is elevated in humanitarian settings where it’s even harder for people to access medical services,” warned Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) in its reaction to the new policy. “In 2023, MSF provided more than 31,000 consultations for post-abortion care, most of which were due to complications related to unsafe abortion. With the reinstatement of the Global Gag Rule, MSF expects these already troubling numbers to increase.” The new policy, PHFFA, “escalates a pattern established across both Trump administrations: the systematic subordination of scientific evidence and patient needs to ideological and political objectives,” added MSF. “Versions of the Global Gag Rule have been introduced by Republican administrations since 1984, and extensive research has repeatedly documented that the policy disrupts health services and causes cascading adverse health outcomes in low- and middle-income countries, with the chilling impact enduring even when the policy has been rescinded,” MSF noted. MSF added that the State Department’s definitions of “gender ideology” and “discriminatory equity ideology” are so broad “that it is likely to result in barring or limiting access to essential health services for LGBTQIA+ individuals, women and girls, racial and ethnic minorities, and other marginalized groups”. ‘Abdication of decency’ US Vice President JD Vance addressing the March for Life last Friday, where he announced the new policy. “President Trump and his anti-abortion administration would rather let people starve to death in the wake of famine and war than let anyone in the world get an abortion – or even receive information about it,” said Rachana Desai Martin, chief US program officer at the Center for Reproductive Rights. “People are already dying because of this administration’s slashing of foreign assistance. Now, they’re making it harder for doctors and aid workers to provide food, water, and lifesaving medical care. This isn’t about saving lives – it’s a stunning abdication of basic human decency,” Martin added. “Trump’s expansion [of the Global Gag Rule] continues on a path of instrumentalising those most marginalised. It marks increasing attempts to capture global health and human rights with a deeply regressive act of imperialism masquerading as foreign policy,” said Mina Barling, International Planned Parenthood Federation’s global director of external relations. “This is yet another attack on national sovereignty and colonial intervention through the curtailing of sexual and reproductive rights.” “The dismantling of USAID has already caused widespread harm: more than 45 million women and girls have lost access to contraceptive care and clinics around the world have been forced to close,” said Marieke van der Plas, executive director of the Dutch reproductive rights organisation, Rutgers. “Now, the Trump administration is further reshaping global health policy through new government agreements that embed ideological conditions and deepen political control.” The Senate Foreign Relations Democrats said in a statement: “By blocking US funding to any entity that does not conform to his extreme ideological agenda, the administration is exporting MAGA culture wars overseas and turning lifesaving aid into a political tool. “This order goes far beyond anything we’ve seen before. It will shrink global resources to fight disease, respond to humanitarian crises and protect women and girls from violence, while forcing many of our trusted partners to shut their doors or betray their missions. In doing so, it also leaves Americans more vulnerable to infectious diseases and health threats that do not respect borders.” Image Credits: saac Billy/ UN Photo, KFF. Posts navigation Older postsNewer posts