With U.S. absent, WHO adopts pandemic treaty aimed at improving vaccine access
Backers of the the treaty argued it showed what global cooperation could still accomplish
GENEVA — World Health Organization members on Tuesday adopted a treaty aimed at preparing for and responding to future pandemics, in what countries say is both a tangible example of how they’re learning the lessons of Covid-19 and a marker for the continued importance of international collaboration.
Health officials hailed the treaty, a goal of which is to enable the more equitable distribution of vaccines and treatments, as a historic milestone. Countries reached agreement on its terms last month after more than three years of negotiations, kicking off in late 2021 as the Omicron variant of the coronavirus swept around the world and underscored the gulf in vaccine availability between wealthy and developing nations.
But the treaty’s successes are dimmed by the departure from the negotiations earlier this year of the United States, once the Trump administration moved to withdraw the country and its funding from the WHO. The issue was not broached Monday as dozens of countries discussed their views on the treaty here at the annual meeting of WHO’s member states, before they ultimately voted to endorse the treaty late Monday. Among the countries that voted, 124 supported the treaty, 11 abstained, and none opposed it.
“The agreement is a victory for public health, science, and multilateral action,” Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the director-general of the WHO, said Tuesday at the World Health Assembly, marking the formal adoption of the treaty. “It will ensure we, collectively, can better protect the world from future pandemic threats. It is also a recognition by the international community that our citizens, societies, and economies must not be left vulnerable to again suffer losses like those endured during Covid-19.”
Yet there is more work to be done. Countries are still negotiating the details for how a country is meant to share samples and sequences of pathogens it discovers within its borders, and access to the response tools — including vaccines, drugs, and diagnostic tests — that are developed with that information. The plan is to have manufacturers donate or sell at low prices 20% of what they make.
Delegates said they hoped to have the provision finalized by next year’s assembly.
Member states also still need to ratify the treaty, and there are outstanding questions about how closely countries and drugmakers will follow the strategies in the pact.
But it is only the second time that WHO’s member states have reached such a legal agreement, following a tobacco control effort more than 20 years ago. The wrangling over the pandemic treaty lasted a year past the original target date.
“In a time of growing geopolitical tensions and seismic changes, this agreement is proof that the world is still together,” Precious Matsoso, a South African regulatory expert who co-chaired the negotiating body, said Monday. “It is a strong signal that multilateralism is not being treated in ICU, because we see before us that countries have raised their voices and demonstrated that the international community of nations still matters.”
The treaty aims to strengthen global health security by outlining steps that countries should take to prevent potential pandemics — for example, by reducing the risk of pathogens spilling from animals to people — and to get ready for future health crises. It touches on improving support and access to personal protective equipment for health care workers, encourages drugmakers to share the recipes for making their products with manufacturers in the developing world, and promotes the rapid sharing of data about emerging diseases.
“Within its provisions lies a promise — access for all to vaccines, diagnostics, and therapeutics, and other pandemic health products; sustained investment in our health workforces; equitable sharing of knowledge; and innovation through research and development,” said Teodoro Herbosa, the health secretary of the Philippines. He added that it was “a product not of imposition, but of painstaking dialogue across differences, indeed a signal of hope in the divided world.”
Some experts have criticized the pact for not going far enough in guaranteeing that vaccine manufacturers will have to supply more doses to developing countries sooner, and for not including enforcement mechanisms or more resources for developing countries to bolster their health security.
But supporters of the treaty argued it had to strike a balance if it was going to win the backing of both wealthier countries, which were more likely to want to protect the interests of large companies, and poorer nations, which advocated for more equitable provisions. International treaties also have to be careful not to tread on national sovereignty.
Whatever limitations the treaty has, some advocates drew hope from the process: If countries — or at least most of them — could agree to the pandemic pact, then perhaps they will be more willing to collaborate during the next health crisis.
As countries neared the vote on the treaty Monday evening, the WHO’s Mike Ryan, who runs the agency’s health emergency program and who is departing in the wake of budget cuts, told the delegates that health workers will one day be back on the front lines of a crisis.
“The support they feel should start now, in terms of the equipment they have, the drugs they have at their disposal, the oxygen they have at their disposal, the vaccines they have at their disposal — you will give them the tools, the means, the systems, the systems of systems needed for us all to save more lives in the next pandemic,” he said. “Hopefully you will give the world a gift.”
Post
Nessun commento:
Posta un commento