Interesting reading the interim report from @TheIndPanel

My hot takes đź§µ

1. I feel like im reading a lot of what academics in global health have been saying for decades: it’s all political.. but while States play politics @who avoids politics to detriment of health security
2. “procedures and protocols attached to IHR, including those leading up to the declaration of a PHEIC, seem to come from an earlier analog era and need to be brought into the digital age”

I disagree - Article 9 accounts for this and role of @healthmap @ProMED_mail quite well!
3. Metrics for measuring preparedness “have not had sufficient regard for leadership and political factors which have a bearing on how countries respond.”

Global health politics has been saying for years, invisibilised by the focus on countable/quant metrics @MMKavanagh
4. #WHO underfunded and under supported politically to do its job. Again for those at the back. This has been a problem long since.

How to move to action to change this is the real question. How to inspire normative leadership amongst states - can we answer this?
5. 12 commissions and panels making similar recommendations for strengthening health security.

So why do we keep having new panels, rather than investing that people time in implementing recommendations from the last?
6. China could have done more in Dec/January - @TheIndPanel happy to make that call,

but I wonder if this incessant focus on the origins misses the bigger point that the problem was in what governments globally did to respond (answer:not much)
7. Why didn’t #IHR EC declare a #PHEIC on 1st meeting - speaks to a bigger issue with transparency in EC meetings. But my hunch chinese representatives in room may have had effect, as when PHEIC declared it was actively not about China. Disease diplomacy in action @MarkRTurner
8. Where are regional and national #WHO during this? Not mentioned much. Would also like to have @TheIndPanel consider role of #unsc
@WorldBank (and failure of #PEF) NGOs, UN bodies etc
9. “It is overwhelmingly evident to the Panel that choices made at both national and subnational levels of what policies and measures to implement, by whom, and when, have shaped the severity of the epidemic in each country.”

YEP! Politics drives epidemics
9. Prioritising health or prioritising the economy has proved to be a false dichotomy

Yep: this is abundantly clear as well elaborated on (now just to get govs to listen, any strategies learned for this?)
10. Vaccine inequity in distribution- so glad this is in here as this is the time we can take steps to change this to look to #covax in effort to redress inequitable distribution. Time to act is now to avoid global failure
11. Financing too slow and uncoordinated for preparedness and response. The #PEF was created post Ebola precisely to fill this gap. Took til May to meet criteria to deploy, utterly failed... and now @WorldBank v silent on it. @olga_02138
12. Overwhelming subtext to @TheIndPanel report: the global health security system cannot respond to a health emergency.

I still think too much is focused on improving preparedness, but that’s not where I see the major problem. The barriers are in response mechanisms
Thanks for all the work on this @HelenClarkNZ @MaEllenSirleaf @NordstrmAnders @sudhvir @legidoquigley @DreJoanneLiu @DMiliband et al. so much to unpack and explore, and I am keen to see final recommendations for meaningful change 🤞
You can follow @clarewenham.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled:

By continuing to use the site, you are consenting to the use of cookies as explained in our Cookie Policy to improve your experience.