A group of international experts slams the World Health Organization due to its delayed response in managing Ebola outbreak. The panel suggests that the international organization should be taken away from its position of declaring whether or not disease outbreaks are considered international emergencies.
The Ebola epidemic that struck Western Africa since 2013 has uncovered various serious liabilities of national and international groups in charge of safeguarding the public from the multiple negative impacts of infectious disease outbreaks.
The surge of diseases has caused experts to search for answers to the most critical questions surrounding the global issue, including what changes are required to fix the flimsy system being implemented to prevent and respond to outbreaks, restore public confidence and halt future disasters.
To answer this question, the Harvard Global Health Institute and the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine came together and founded the Independent Panel on the Global Response to Ebola. All in all, the panel is composed of 20 doctors, international health professionals, lawyers and humanitarians.
The report entitled "Will Ebola Change the Game?" made particular emphasis on WHO for its lack of efforts in alerting the world regarding the severity of the outbreak in a timely manner. The authors made recommendations as to how the agency can improve. Among the proposed changes include modifying the organization's disease declaration strategies and health emergency response, as well as limiting the scope of actions bestowed upon WHO, which subsequently reduces its budget.
Despite the significant castigation towards WHO, the authors said it is not the only culprit. They are now calling for enhanced international research and development on active diseases between and during outbreaks, as well as early negotiations between concerned parties regarding the safe and effective methods of sharing and implementing ethical clinical trials.
The highlight of the report is the 10 recommendations made by the authors to prevent future outbreaks. The proposals centered on four major categories: prevention, response, research and global governance system.
The Univeristy of Sydney's health-security specialist Adam Kamradt-Scott said that while the recommendations signify noble concepts, he does not think it will be put to action, thus, suggesting more realistic proposals.
"It is genuinely disappointing that there are so few practical suggestions that take account of the very real political constraints that the WHO currently confronts," he commented. "I honestly doubt that many of these recommendations will be acted upon."
For Ashish Jha, co-chairperson of the panel, the extent and severity of the disease will hopefully act as a wake-up call.
"We have to engage in a sustained effort for as long as it takes to make sure the world is better prepared for the next pandemic," he said.
The report was published in The Lancet on Sunday, Nov. 22.
Photo: Ted Eytan | Flickr
