American isolationism & the WHO
Last night, CDC official John Nkengasong ordered senior leaders to cut off all collaborations with the World Health Organization and “await further guidance.”
Scientists, researchers, and public health officials across the nation immediately expressed concern, especially since Trump signed a first-day executive order to leave the WHO.
The stakes are especially high given the impact cutting off America from global public health could have.
Experts said the sudden stoppage was a surprise and would set back work on investigating and trying to stop outbreaks of Marburg virus and mpox in Africa, as well as brewing threats from around the world. It also comes as health authorities around the world are monitoring bird flu outbreaks among U.S. livestock.
Given the gravity of this situation, it’s especially disconcerting that RFK Jr sent out a newsletter this morning praising the decision to stop all HHS-related agencies from sending out comms while fundraising.
There’s speculation that this unprecedented cessation of communications is in hopes of confirming RFK Jr as Secretary of HHS with as little friction as possible. The above email certainly fits with that narrative.
I chatted with a few experts about Trump’s decision to leave the WHO. Their responses are below. First, a few thoughts on what leaving the WHO actually means for America, and the world.
Ramifications of the US leaving the WHO
The US is the largest single contributor to the WHO, providing 19% of the agency’s total budget. Withdrawal creates a substantial financial gap, hampering the WHO’s ability to carry out global health initiatives, adversely affecting public health programs in developing nations, and diminishing global readiness for health emergencies.
This move disrupts ongoing negotiations for the WHO Pandemic Agreement and hinders global efforts against future pandemics, which are increasingly likely due to climate change and other factors.
The US exit from WHO would significantly reduce its influence in shaping global health policies. This vacuum could potentially be filled by other nations, such as China, which might alter the direction of international health strategies.
The US loses access to the WHO’s global database of health information, such as surveillance for new and existing infectious diseases—including the annual updates on influenza strains.
The US would lose a significant platform for “public health diplomacy,” potentially weakening valuable relationships with countries that have been fostered through collaborative health initiatives.
Finally, this isolation could deprive The CDC and FDA of crucial global health intelligence, making it impossible for them to do their jobs.
Expert thoughts
Public health in the 21st-century is all about collaboration. It’s about sharing data, and coordinating, and tracking the spread of diseases. By withdrawing from the WHO, Trump is reminding us that he is inadvertently on the side of the diseases. He is gouging the eyes out of his country to play pretend that everything is fine. The consequences are likely to be a reduced worldwide pandemic readiness, a rise in communicable diseases, and an increase in healthcare costs. The world will be worse off.
Jonathan Jarry, science communicator at McGill University’s Office for Science and Society
The US leaving the WHO is going to severely impact many aspects of global health, such as disease surveillance, emergency responses and critical public health campaigns. The current administration’s decision is based on the incorrect assumption that the US does not receive any benefits from membership - this is categorically false. We saw even with the COVID-19 pandemic that pathogens don’t respect borders. Ultimately, we won’t thrive unless everyone thrives, and this cannot occur without global coordination and partnership. Whether it is another global pandemic or infectious disease outbreaks, being left out preparedness plans and policy decisions will leave the US in a highly vulnerable position.
Sabina Vohra-Miller, Doctor of Public Health candidate, Vice-Chair of the board at Lymphoma Canada
One of the big lessons that the US could learn (but apparently has not) from the COVID pandemic is the importance of timely, coordinated responses to the outbreak of a new virus. The WHO is a channel to advise and share information on a global scale. As the biggest donor to the WHO, pulling out means weakening this channel and increasing our vulnerability to emerging infectious diseases.
Dan Wilson, Ph.D. in molecular biology, Debunk the Funk on social media
