“The world is on the verge of a great success story: the eradication of polio,” John Hewko, CEO and general secretary of Rotary International, and Jeffrey Sachs, director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University and special adviser to U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon, write in the Huffington Post’s “Global Motherhood” blog. But “[t]here is still ground to cover,” they continue. “Even though the current cases of polio transmission number less than 200 so far this year, the case for finishing the job — getting to zero — is more crucial than ever,” they write, adding, “If polio is fully eradicated, it can’t ever return. On the other hand, if even a few cases persist, and the world lets its guard down, those few cases could become the start of a new epidemic.”
Programs, Funding & Financing
Researchers from Imperial College London, the Harvard Global Equity Initiative, and Harvard School of Public Health “have identified three global organizations that new funding initiatives should emulate in order to meet health priorities in poorer countries, in research published [Thursday] in the journal the Lancet,” Imperial College London reports in an article on its webpage. The study, “a comprehensive review of new funding methods that raised money for health in developing countries between 1990 and 2010 … found that the GAVI Alliance, … the Global Fund [to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria], and UNITAID, … were the sole organizations whose innovative financing methods had raised and distributed funds on a global scale,” the article notes, adding, “The authors concluded that innovative financing is essential to reduce dependence on contributions from donor governments. These innovative instruments provide a different way of raising money from new sources and making it available to address global health problems” (10/25).
Negative Effects Of Global Health Initiatives On Developing Countries' Health Systems Exaggerated, Review Shows
“An evaluation of the scientific evidence on the effects of global health initiatives on the health systems of developing countries concludes that the harmful effects have been exaggerated,” according to a press release from the Royal Society of Medicine. The systematic review, published on Wednesday in JRSM Short Reports, “found that much of the research literature did not fulfill the requirements of rigorous scientific evidence,” according to the press release. “The systematic review identified 24 studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals between 2002 and 2009 that have commented on adverse effects on health systems arising from investments by the Global Fund,” the press release states, adding, “All the studies evaluated contained only seemingly anecdotal evidence or authors’ perceptions or interpretations of circumstances” (10/24).
“Though the U.S. President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) has been touted as one of our nation’s most successful initiatives in global health (and certainly one of President George W. Bush’s most positive legacies) it continues to miss the mark” when it comes to family planning, global gender specialist and freelance writer Jessica Mack writes in KPLU 88.5’s “Humanosphere” blog. “The essential role of contraception, especially barrier methods, in preventing the spread of HIV/AIDS is intuitive, obvious, and also well documented,” she writes. “While earlier PEPFAR rules did not specifically dictate whether or not funding could be used for contraceptive supplies, the language over the last few years has become increasingly restrictive on this point,” she continues, noting that PEPFAR’s recently released 2013 country operational plan (COP) forbids the use of PEPFAR funds to purchase family planning commodities. Mack concludes, “PEPFAR is simply flying directly in the face of the Global Health Initiative’s vision and the stated objectives of the Obama Administration” (10/25).
Contradictions Among Member State, Donor Priorities Must Be Resolved For Current WHO Reform To Be Successful
In a BMJ analysis examining the future of the WHO, David Legge, scholar emeritus at Australia’s La Trobe University, notes “[a] substantial shortfall in the funds available for basic administrative functions led WHO’s director general, Margaret Chan, to initiate another reform of the WHO in 2010,” and “outlines the problems and what the reforms are trying to achieve.” He writes, “Success of the current reform program depends on resolving the contradiction between member state priorities and donor control and requires the freeze on assessed contributions to be lifted,” adding, “To achieve this, member states must be persuaded to prioritize global health over parochial interests.”
Differing Opinions About AMFm 'Unlikely To Be Resolved' After Global Fund Decision On Program's Future
In her “Global Health Blog,” Guardian health editor Sarah Boseley examines the Affordable Medicines Facility-malaria (AMFm), “which aims to enable countries to increase the provision of affordable artemisinin combination therapies (ACTs) through not only the public sector but also the private sector and [non-governmental organizations (NGOs)].” Following pilot projects in seven African countries and an independent evaluation by the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, which hosts AMFm, is set to decide the future of the scheme at a board meeting in November. She notes Oxfam recently released a report criticizing the mechanism, saying the evaluation was flawed because it looked at the number of ACTs sold and not lives saved.
The Associated Press examines access to antiretroviral treatment in Myanmar, which “ranks among the world’s hardest places to get HIV care, and health experts warn it will take years to prop up a broken health system hobbled by decades of neglect.” The country, also known as Burma, has been hindered by decades of rule by a military junta and economic sanctions imposed by developed countries, including the U.S., the AP notes, and writes, “Of the estimated 240,000 people living with HIV [in the country], half are going without treatment.” However, “as Myanmar wows the world with its reforms, the U.S. and other nations are easing sanctions,” the news agency writes, adding, “The Global Fund [to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria] recently urged Myanmar to apply for more assistance that would make up the shortfall and open the door for HIV drugs to reach more than 75 percent of those in need by the end of 2015,” as well as medications to fight tuberculosis (TB). The AP details one man’s efforts to obtain antiretrovirals, which are reserved for patients with CD4 cell counts below 150 cells, versus the WHO recommended 350 (Mason, 10/22).
Central African Republic Town Struggling To Provide Health Care Since Withdrawal Of Foreign Companies, VOA Reports
VOA News examines how the 2009 withdrawal of foreign diamond-mining companies from the small town of Carnot in the Central African Republic (CAR) affected the local economy and access to health care for residents. Initially, Medecins Sans Frontieres (MSF) “ran emergency nutrition programs for the first year, but then discovered deeper health problems in the region, including a child mortality rate that is three times above what is considered an emergency level, as well as elevated rates of HIV and tuberculosis,” the news service writes.
The U.N. World Food Programme (WFP) on Tuesday posted an infographic that answers such questions as “how many people does WFP feed each year?” and “[h]ow much does that cost and where does it get the money?” According to the infographic, WFP provided 3.6 million tons of food aid in 2011, which is equivalent to the weight of 36 cruise ships, and 71 percent of the food bought came from developing countries (10/23).
In the last of a series of posts on the U.K. Department for International Development’s (DfID) blog examining the department’s work in Malawi, Neil Squires, DfID head of profession for health, looks at the sustainability of the country’s HIV/AIDS program. “Malawi’s success in increasing access to antiretroviral drugs for HIV is highly dependent on donor funding for medicines,” he writes, adding, “Malawi has to actively consider its resource allocation in order to maximize the benefits and the health gained from the limited resources available.” He notes a report commissioned by UNAIDS on Malawi concluded that “unless Malawi can reduce the incidence of new infections, the scale up in access to antiretroviral drugs will not be sustainable in the medium to long term.” He concludes, “This is an important issue for the Government of Malawi, but also for the key donors who have supported the massive scale up in access to drugs, particularly the Global Fund. Malawi will need to maintain high levels of funding from the Global Fund if it is to maintain its supply of antiretroviral drugs” (10/23).