A piece from Laurie Garrett, one of my favorite GH journalists (her books are great reads on prior work in GH, and compellingly written) discussing the election results and their impact on global health. The brief summary – we don’t really know, as we don’t really know Trump’s positions on foreign aid, but there is reason to hope that many aspects of the US efforts will continue unabated, albeit without increased support. Family planning will be the most likely target of any cut.
She also tackles the WHO secretary-general election, and the lack of support for the WHO despite increasing strident pleads.
A longer read, but worthwhile.
This article notes that the cost of providing essential medications could be considerably lower (largely to do with the prices charged) – which then leads to the below article.
Finally, an article on the Access to Medicine Foundation campaign to laud those drug companies doing the most to provide access to their products in low resource settings (and to gently shame those failing to do so). Here are the latest results from that, with GSK coming in the lead. As ever, figuring out how to negotiate between the health of the public and the needs of private corporations is a fraught process; I do find this a useful guide as to what is afoot in that sphere.