{"id":5863,"date":"2025-02-19T09:07:00","date_gmt":"2025-02-18T23:37:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/hepatitissa.asn.au\/communitynews\/?p=5863"},"modified":"2025-05-15T13:57:03","modified_gmt":"2025-05-15T04:27:03","slug":"pathogens-dont-defer-to-presidents-or-politicians","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/hepatitissa.asn.au\/communitynews\/2025\/02\/pathogens-dont-defer-to-presidents-or-politicians\/","title":{"rendered":"Pathogens Don\u2019t Defer to Presidents or Politicians"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

The sudden freezing of USAID funds is jeopardising the goal of eliminating viral hepatitis by 2030. In an editorial published 14 February<\/a>, the Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology said efforts to scale up testing for hepatitis B and hepatitis C are at most immediate risk.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The editorial pointed out that USAID distributes half of US foreign aid, and its shuttering has had abrupt effects around the globe. Communities are still coming to grips with the repercussions of actions that include withdrawing from WHO, instructing agencies to pause external communications and collaborations, freezes to foreign aid, cuts to funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and a backslide on efforts to improve inclusivity, the editorial said, posing the question:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cWhat are their implications for viral hepatitis elimination, for which progress has already stalled<\/a>?”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/a><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Funding for viral hepatitis is already scarce. Rollback of international support might see governments pivot limited resources to focus on diseases that are deemed a higher priority<\/p><\/blockquote><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

It said although The Global Fund has recently broadened support for viral hepatitis<\/a>, reductions to its funding may see it “revert to solely focusing on closing gaps in treatment and prevention for its core diseases.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It noted that USAID was a major donor to the Vaccine Alliance, Gavi<\/a>, which only launched its hepatitis B birth-dose vaccination program in June 2024, and adding that speculation that the UK may<\/a> also be planning to cut support to Gavi was deeply alarming.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cFunding for viral hepatitis is already scarce. Rollback of international support might see governments pivot limited resources to focus on diseases that are deemed a higher priority.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
The recently launched hepatitis B birth-dose vaccination program by Gavi, could be cut as a result of the shut down of USAID.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

On a broader level, it said, reduced contributions to WHO and less international collaboration put other crucial activities, such as disease surveillance, drawing up elimination plans and tracking progress towards elimination.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The editorial follows a letter to the Lancet <\/a>from a group of prominent health researchers and advocates, published on 6 February, warning of a new threat to global health. The authors called for \u201cimmediate practical action to protect individuals and communities, preserve data, and defend public health systems, by supporting, restoring, and resourcing crucial activities that protect and preserve health for all”.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cMany people have little awareness of the complex national and international systems that provide them with safe water, food, diagnostics, medications, blood products, and vaccines,\u201d the letter said. \u201cThey are protected by global programs and collaborations that have pre-empted or ended epidemics, preventing mass morbidity and mortality. There are extensive data and reporting systems that contribute to identifying and confronting public health threats, from viral hepatitis to cancer<\/strong>.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/a><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Dr Su Wang<\/a>, one of the letter\u2019s authors, said in an interview with Contagion Live<\/a> that on top of the shuttering of USAID, the US withdrawing from the World Health Organisation (WHO) was very concerning for the health community because there was a lot of collaborative work being done between the CDC and the WHO, and not only did the US withdraw from the WHO, but CDC staff were not allowed to communicate with the WHO.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There are no boundaries. You may have a boundary on a map, but it doesn\u2019t happen in real life.<\/p><\/blockquote><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

\u201cWe need people to realise that our global health ecosystem really relies … on these collaborations, collaborations that require input from people from different countries, and that collaboration is really core to our safety across the world,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Such collaboration, she added, helps to identify outbreaks, and have an immediate response so that these outbreaks don\u2019t go out of control.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cWe feel like it\u2019s not happening in our country, it won\u2019t affect us but we saw what\u2019s happening with Ebola. People travel to these places and bring them back.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThere are no boundaries. You may have a boundary on a map, but it doesn\u2019t happen in real life. So this is very concerning to us, this break in the global health ecosystem.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
Without access to the latest information, the scientific medical community would be operating in the dark.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Dr Wang raised the issue of the sudden withholding of regular CDC reports such as the Flu Surveillance Report and the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe MMWR which had been around since the 1800\u2019s and put out weekly since the 1950\u2019s, for the first time did not have a publication,\u201d she said. \u201cIt is concerning because that publication is used to convey what is happening in a timely way, such as what is happening with Avian Influenza\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As a scientific medical community we have to keep on top of these things because … we still need access to \u2026 reliable information.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

“Without these reports, we are operating in the dark.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cBesides that, there are other databases suddenly not available. Fortunately we heard that some scientists had archived some of these pages, so we have still access to them for reference.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cAs a scientific medical community we have to keep on top of these things because during the middle of this transition, we still need access to \u2026 reliable information.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Dr Wang also spoke of the need for the medical community to rise to the occasion to fill in the sudden gap in services for vulnerable, at-risk communities. This reflects the joint letter which said, \u201cThe sudden sabotage of disease control efforts has profound and immediate effects, especially among marginalised and under-served groups who already experience health and social inequities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
The shutting down of disease control efforts will especially affect the most marginalised and vulnerable groups.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

\u201cWe know that\u2014along with infectious diseases\u2014reproductive health, migrant health, global health, and activities focused on advancing equity are among the most vulnerable targets. But in fact, no one is safe<\/strong>; in our interconnected world, status does not insulate individuals or countries from public health threats.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cIf there is a shift in prioritisation and funding,\u201d they said, \u201cthere are ways of transitioning with transparent dialogue, rather than this abrupt and wholesale closure of lifesaving programs that leads to the abandonment of many stakeholders and recipients.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe current catastrophic threat to global health infrastructure must be stopped.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

The following are the authors of the letter<\/em>:<\/p>\n\n\n\n