Connect with us

Health

Countries Eye WHO Exit Despite Legal Uncertainty

Published

on

Several world leaders, including Argentina’s President Javier Milei and Hungary’s Viktor Orbán, have expressed their intentions to withdraw from the World Health Organization (WHO), following the United States’ decision to leave the global health body last month. However, the legal complexities of such a move present an unclear path forward.

No Clear Exit Mechanism in WHO Constitution

Unlike other international organizations, the WHO’s constitution—an international treaty signed by nearly every country—does not include a formal withdrawal clause. The organization was founded in 1946 with the intention of fostering universal cooperation in global health, making the idea of member states leaving a legal gray area.

“The idea in the field of public health was for the WHO to be as universal as possible,” said Stéphanie Dagron, an international law professor at the University of Geneva.

While the U.S. reserved the right to exit when it joined in 1948, no such provision exists for other nations. This means countries like Argentina and Hungary face legal uncertainty in their attempts to leave.

How Countries Could Withdraw

Despite the lack of a formal exit clause, international law provides some guidance. The 1969 Vienna Convention states that if a treaty does not specify withdrawal terms, member states must provide one year’s notice before leaving.

This suggests that Argentina and other nations would have to navigate a year-long process before officially cutting ties with the WHO, potentially slowing down their exit plans.

Pedro Villarreal, a researcher in global health law at the German Institute for International and Security Affairs, noted that while no clear precedent exists, withdrawal is still legally possible. “The fact that an international treaty does not envisage withdrawal does not mean that countries cannot withdraw,” he explained.

Inactive Status: A Middle Ground?

While an outright departure remains uncertain, historical precedent suggests that nations could instead take on an “inactive” status. When the Soviet Union stopped participating in the WHO in 1949, it was not seen as a formal withdrawal but rather as a period of inactivity. The USSR later rejoined in 1956 without needing to ratify the constitution again.

Whether countries like Argentina or Hungary could follow a similar path remains an open question. Steven Solomon, the WHO’s principal legal officer, acknowledged the ambiguity, saying, “The question of whether withdrawal is possible, and if so, how it would be given effect, and under what conditions, is a matter of interpretation.”

Potential Consequences of Withdrawal

If countries were to go inactive or withdraw, they would face significant consequences. Member states are required to pay annual fees, and those that stop contributing could lose their voting rights at the World Health Assembly. More importantly, they may also forfeit access to WHO-backed health programs and initiatives.

For nations with struggling healthcare systems, this could mean reduced support in areas such as disease prevention, vaccine distribution, and emergency health response.

What Happens Next?

For now, no formal withdrawal requests have been submitted, and the topic is not currently on the agenda for the WHO’s next World Health Assembly in May.

“At the moment, it’s a political announcement,” Dagron said, emphasizing that any final decisions on withdrawal will likely involve further legal and diplomatic negotiations.

As more countries weigh their options, the global health community is left watching to see how this unprecedented situation unfolds.

Health

Europe Faces Growing Challenges in Meeting Medical Care Needs, EU Report Shows

Published

on

A new report has highlighted stark disparities in healthcare access across Europe, revealing that a growing number of citizens face unmet medical needs due to systemic issues such as high costs and long waiting times.

According to the latest data from Eurostat and the Health at a Glance: Europe 2024 report, 3.8 per cent of EU residents aged 16 and over reported unmet medical needs in the past year. However, the percentage climbs significantly when focusing solely on individuals who actively required healthcare services — with some countries reporting unmet needs among over 20 per cent of this group.

The causes are twofold: healthcare system barriers, including long waiting lists and treatment costs, account for 2.4 per cent of all cases, while 1.4 per cent stem from personal reasons such as fear of doctors, lack of time, or lack of knowledge about available care.

Unmet healthcare needs vary widely across the continent. Estonia tops the list within the EU, with 15.5 per cent of people reporting unmet needs, followed closely by Greece and Albania, each over 13 per cent. Even wealthier Nordic countries show surprising figures — Denmark (12.2 per cent), Finland, and Norway (over 7.5 per cent) — despite high healthcare spending. Conversely, countries such as Germany (0.5 per cent), Austria (1.3 per cent), and the Netherlands (1.4 per cent) report the lowest levels, pointing to more efficient and accessible healthcare systems.

Cost is a dominant barrier in nations like Greece and Albania, where over 9 per cent of citizens cited unaffordable care. In contrast, long waiting times are the primary issue in countries like Estonia (12 per cent) and Finland (7.5 per cent).

Income inequality also plays a major role. On average, 3.8 per cent of low-income individuals across the EU report unmet needs due to healthcare system issues — more than triple the 1.2 per cent reported by higher-income groups. In Greece, that gap is particularly wide, with 23 per cent of low-income respondents affected.

Healthcare experts say these disparities reflect more than just economic factors. Dr. Tit Albreht, President of the European Public Health Association (EUPHA), noted, “Unmet health needs arise from different reasons, including how well healthcare governance integrates services to meet population needs.”

Industry leaders, such as Tina Taube of the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA), stressed the importance of timely access to diagnosis and treatment. “Unmet needs are context-specific,” she said. “It’s not just about product availability, but also healthcare system readiness.”

Andy Powrie-Smith of EFPIA added that patients in some European countries wait up to seven times longer than others for the same treatments due to regulatory delays and varying national infrastructures.

The findings underscore the need for a more coordinated, equitable healthcare strategy across the continent, especially as Europe faces the challenges of an ageing population and increasingly complex medical technologies.

Continue Reading

Health

Chinese Nationals Charged in U.S. with Smuggling Toxic Fungus Labeled a Potential Agroterrorism Threat

Published

on

U.S. federal authorities have charged two Chinese nationals in connection with smuggling a dangerous agricultural fungus into the country, a move investigators describe as posing significant national security risks.

Yunqing Jian, 33, and Zunyong Liu, 34, are accused of conspiracy, smuggling, making false statements, and visa fraud after allegedly attempting to bring Fusarium graminearum — a toxic fungus capable of devastating crops and harming humans and livestock — into the United States. The case was detailed in a court filing by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in Detroit.

The fungus, which targets essential food staples like wheat, maize, barley, and rice, is described in a scientific journal cited by the FBI as a “potential agroterrorism weapon.” Experts warn that its spread could inflict serious damage on global food security and agricultural economies.

U.S. Attorney Jerome Gorgon Jr. emphasized the seriousness of the case, stating: “The alleged actions of these Chinese nationals, including a loyal member of the Chinese Communist Party, are of the gravest national security concerns.”

Jian made her first appearance in a Detroit federal court on Tuesday and remains in custody awaiting a bond hearing scheduled for Thursday. A court-appointed attorney for her initial appearance declined to comment.

According to the FBI’s complaint, the investigation began in July 2024 when Liu was stopped at Detroit Metropolitan Airport. During a routine screening, customs officials discovered suspicious red plant material in his backpack. Liu initially claimed not to know what it was but later admitted he planned to use it for research purposes at the University of Michigan, where Jian is currently employed and where Liu previously worked.

Authorities say Liu’s mobile phone contained an article titled “Plant-Pathogen Warfare under Changing Climate Conditions,” raising further concerns about the intended use of the samples. The FBI believes the two individuals were coordinating to introduce the pathogen into a U.S. research setting without proper clearance or oversight.

Liu was denied entry to the U.S. and deported in July. Charges against both individuals were filed this week, as prosecutors continue to investigate the scope of the alleged conspiracy.

The case underscores growing concerns in the U.S. over biosecurity and potential misuse of scientific research amid rising geopolitical tensions.

Continue Reading

Health

US Expands Measles Vaccination Guidance Amid Global Surge in Cases

Published

on

U.S. health officials have expanded their vaccination guidance for international travellers as measles cases rise sharply around the world, including in Europe and the United States.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) now recommends that all international travellers be vaccinated against measles, regardless of their destination. Previously, the CDC’s focus was on countries experiencing known outbreaks, but this latest update reflects growing concern over transmission during travel itself.

“This change is significant,” said Ashley Darcy-Mahoney, a health researcher at George Washington University’s School of Nursing. “We’re seeing a shift from localised outbreaks to transmission in transit. Measles is now being spread not only in outbreak zones but also on airplanes and during international travel.”

The updated guidance urges U.S. travellers aged 1 year and older to receive two doses of the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine before departing the country. Infants between 6 and 11 months old should receive an early dose, aligning with recommendations from the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC), which has also advised travellers to ensure they are fully vaccinated.

Measles is a highly contagious viral disease that spreads through coughing, sneezing, and close contact. Even brief exposure in confined spaces—such as airports or airplanes—can result in infection, particularly among unvaccinated individuals.

The CDC’s change comes amid a troubling global resurgence of measles. So far in 2025, more than 1,000 measles cases have been reported across the U.S., while the European Union has logged over 5,500 cases. Health officials have attributed many of the new infections to gaps in immunisation, often exacerbated by misinformation and pandemic-related disruptions to routine childhood vaccinations.

In the U.S., a recent outbreak in Colorado was traced back to an international flight that landed in Denver, underscoring the risks of in-flight transmission and the importance of proactive immunisation.

Measles was declared eliminated in the U.S. in 2000, but periodic outbreaks have occurred in recent years, often linked to unvaccinated travellers bringing the virus back from abroad.

Public health experts stress that maintaining high vaccination coverage is key to preventing further spread. The MMR vaccine is safe and highly effective, providing lifelong protection in most individuals after two doses.

“Given the rise in global travel and measles cases, the updated CDC guidance is a timely reminder that vaccination remains one of our strongest tools to protect public health,” Darcy-Mahoney said.

Continue Reading

Trending