logo
The business of better health: An opinion editorial by Chidi Okpala, Executive Director, Heirs Holdings

The business of better health: An opinion editorial by Chidi Okpala, Executive Director, Heirs Holdings

A healthy continent is a prosperous one. When people are well, they work more, earn more, and invest more in their communities. Conversely, when illness spreads unchecked or medical costs plunge families into debt, entire economies suffer. Despite this clear link, healthcare in Africa has long been underfunded, deprioritised, and underserved.
The cost of this oversight is that in sub-Saharan Africa alone, poor health and premature mortality result in productivity losses exceeding $2.6 trillion annually by World Bank estimates. Across the continent, maternal mortality remains high, child survival rates are low, and rural communities continue to face dire access challenges to essential health services.
More concerningly, healthcare funding momentum has regressed in recent years. The COVID-19 pandemic brought unprecedented spending, but as the world pivots toward economic recovery and inflation control, many governments are scaling back health investments. In Africa, this shift is particularly worrisome. Countries such as Nigeria consistently allocate less than 5% of their national budgets to health—far below the 15% target outlined in the Abuja Declaration. Mali, Botswana, and Cameroon reflect similar patterns, with Cameroon allocating only 3.7% in recent years—the lowest in over two decades.
External donor support, which was once a key pillar for many countries' health programme, has also declined. Global aid is now being redirected to other urgent crises, and donor fatigue is setting in. A recent example is the restructuring of USAID—an agency that typically spends $40 billion a year on humanitarian aid—
which has led to the shutdown of 83% of its programmes worldwide.
The result is a growing reliance on out-of-pocket payments, leaving vulnerable populations exposed and public systems under strain. These are grim realities. Africa's growing population and weak health systems paint the picture of clear moral responsibility, but they also reveal major business opportunities that can scale.
Beneath the sobering reality, there's a hopeful side. Africa is also the site of remarkable health innovation and resilience. There are quiet and interesting revolutions happening, through policy, technology, private investment, and local innovation.
Consider Nigeria, Africa's most populous country. With over 200 million citizens and a doctor-patient ratio of 1:5,000; far below the recommended 1:600; the need for scalable health interventions is urgent and new models are emerging in form: Drone Delivery of Medical Supplies, Telemedicine in Remote Areas, Digital Health Platforms & EHR Systems, AI & IoT for Diagnosis and Monitoring, and Local Manufacturing of Vaccines and Drugs. Companies like Helium Health are partnering with hospitals to digitise their operations and to facilitate financing for healthcare through various credit products, while others such as LifeBank are solving critical issues in blood and oxygen supply through innovative logistics.
Private sector engagement is proving vital. A WHO study found that every $1 invested in basic healthcare in low- and middle-income countries yields up to $9 in economic returns. For a continent with the youngest workforce in the world, over 60% under the age of 25, this return on investment should not be ignored.
While much of the direct investment in Africa remains concentrated in extracting natural resources, a growing recognition of the continent's broader
developmental needs is beginning to reshape investment priorities. One of Africa's leading investment companies, Heirs Holdings, has taken a forward looking stance by identifying healthcare as one of seven critical sectors essential to securing the continent's long-term socioeconomic advancement.
Through two of its subsidiaries, Avon Medical Practice and Avon HMO, Heirs Holdings has steadily built a healthcare model that prioritises both quality and access. Avon Medical Practice's impact is already measurable: over 164,000 patients treated, 13,000 dialysis procedures performed, more than 20,000 immunisations administered, and 2,000 childbirths all within the last decade. At an intersect, Avon HMO addresses a different core challenge—affordability and access, paying out over $30 million in health claims over the last twelve years.
Africa's healthcare evolution is however not occurring in a vacuum. Breakthrough innovations are emerging from across the continent, reshaping how healthcare is delivered. In Mali, a bold community-based approach to health services reduced child mortality by over 90% in the Yirimadio district, proving that the right models, when scaled, can transform outcomes at the grassroots.
Still, challenges remain. Africa accounts for 24% of the global disease burden but only 3% of the world's health workforce and less than 1% of its health expenditures. Brain-drain siphons off top medical talent. Out-of-pocket expenses still make up 37% of total health spending in sub-Saharan Africa, pushing families into poverty and deterring care. In Nigeria alone, nearly 77% of healthcare costs are paid directly by patients. Without radical reform and increased investment, particularly in primary healthcare infrastructure, progress may stall.
We must shift from reactive to preventive care, from bureaucracy to technology driven solutions, and from donor-dependence to inclusive, locally-owned
systems. Strengthening primary healthcare infrastructure, investing in health workers, and localising pharmaceutical production are essential next steps. Most importantly, healthcare must no longer be seen as a cost—but as a foundational investment.
The business of better health is everyone's business. For investors, it presents growth. For governments, it is policy transformation. For families, it means dignity and survival. And for Africa, it is the gateway to shared prosperity and lasting development.
--
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Long Covid's lingering financial side effects
Long Covid's lingering financial side effects

Politico

timean hour ago

  • Politico

Long Covid's lingering financial side effects

LONG COVID'S TOLL — More than five years after the Covid-19 pandemic first ravaged the nation, many Americans are still dealing with the social and economic fallout of having contracted the disease. People with long Covid — those who have new or persistent symptoms lasting three months past infection — have experienced worse financial and employment outcomes, lasting up to three years after their initial infection, compared with people who haven't had the disease, according to a study published Tuesday in JAMA Network Open from researchers at Rush University Medical Center, Yale School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine and other research institutions. Long Covid patients reported worse work impairment, missed work and financial distress compared with those who never had Long Covid, the study found. Vaccination against Covid was associated with improved work and economic outcomes. Not just physical: 'While much of the focus in Long COVID research has been on the medical impact, we must also consider the sustained financial burden faced by those whose symptoms persist,' lead author Michael Gottlieb, an emergency medicine doctor and vice chair of research at Rush, said in a statement. Addressing the financial burden of long Covid might 'require policy interventions, such as expanded disability benefits or workplace accommodations to help combat the work and financial impact of this condition,' the authors wrote. The researchers analyzed self-reported data from more than 3,600 participants in the Innovative Support for Patients with SARS-CoV-2 Infections Registry, a CDC-funded initiative aimed at better understanding Covid's long-term effects. Why it matters: About 6 percent of U.S. adults suffer from some form of long Covid, according to CDC estimates. The National Institutes of Health believes that as many as 23 million people have the illness, which can range in severity from mild to debilitating. The symptoms, which can include fatigue, headaches and brain fog, can be life-disrupting for many patients. Some treatments, like Paxlovid, have shown promise in reducing symptoms, but being diagnosed and finding suitable treatment can be difficult because of the disease's wide range of symptoms that often overlap with other conditions. HHS recently shut down its long Covid office, a casualty of the Trump administration's sweeping reorganization of the agency. At the time the closure was announced, an HHS employee who worked on long Covid and who was granted anonymity to share details of the move told POLITICO that abandoning work that could have cured the disease means the country's health care system will have to provide years, if not decades, of costly care for tens of millions of chronically ill people. In March, the Trump administration also canceled dozens of grants for long Covid projects, but some funding was restored after advocates fought back. WELCOME TO WEDNESDAY PULSE. I'm still reeling from Taylor Swift announcing her new album. Send your Swiftie theories, scoops and feedback to khooper@ and sgardner@ and follow along @kelhoops and @sophie_gardnerj. At the Agencies LOOMER'S LATEST PREY — After successfully ousting several members of Trump's administration for alleged insufficient loyalty, far-right activist and MAGA influencer Laura Loomer tells our colleagues at Playbook that she has her next target: Stefanie Spear, the principal deputy chief of staff and senior counselor to HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. The reason why, in part: 'I think that there's a clear intention by Stefanie Spear to utilize her position to try to lay the groundwork for a 2028 RFK presidential run,' Loomer alleges. Asked for comment by Playbook, a senior HHS official did not deny that Kennedy is weighing a presidential bid. Read the full story in this morning's Playbook. CDC LATEST — CDC officials held a tense all-hands meeting Tuesday in the aftermath of last week's shooting at the agency's Atlanta headquarters, Sophie reports with POLITICO's Amanda Friedman and Lauren Gardner. The meeting came as law enforcement officials revealed early Tuesday additional information about the nature of the shooting: The man who opened fire at the agency on Friday died of a self-inflicted gunshot wound and was motivated by his distrust of Covid-19 vaccines. Agency update: At the CDC's all-hands meeting, Director Susan Monarez thanked employees for their work and acknowledged that 'misinformation can be dangerous,' according to a live transcript obtained by POLITICO. 'In moments like this, we must meet the challenges with rational, evidence-based discourse spoken with compassion and understanding,' she said. 'That is how we will lead.' CDC employees were closely watching Monarez at the meeting to see how she would respond to the shooting and the news that the suspected shooter had expressed distrust of the Covid vaccine. Two CDC employees, granted anonymity to speak candidly, told POLITICO that Monarez's speech was not what they'd hoped. '[Twenty minutes] of reading off a teleprompter,' one of the employees said in a text, adding that Monarez's remarks prompted an 'overwhelmingly negative response from folks in my immediate orbit.' Another agency employee said the meeting was in stark contrast to a separate meeting held for the CDC's National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases staff on Saturday, where employees could ask Monarez questions. What's next: HHS spokesperson Andrew Nixon said that staff would have 'continued opportunities' to voice their perspectives to CDC leadership in the days ahead. 'Friday's shooting was a traumatic event for the agency, and leadership is working to provide continued updates along with resources for healing and recovery,' Nixon said in a statement. DOGE SAVINGS — The Trump administration has drastically exaggerated how much money it has saved through DOGE-related cuts to federal contracts, including at health agencies, according to an analysis of public data and federal spending records from POLITICO's Jessie Blaeser. Through July, DOGE said it had saved taxpayers $52.8 billion by canceling contracts, but of the $32.7 billion in actual claimed contract savings that POLITICO could verify, DOGE's savings over that period were closer to $1.4 billion. Despite the administration's claims, none of that $1.4 billion will lower the federal deficit unless Congress steps in. Instead, the money has been returned to agencies mandated by law to spend it. The health claims: Under the VA, DOGE's wall of receipts reported savings of $932 million from contracts canceled through June, including awards for a cancer registry, suicide-prevention services and other health care support. Federal records show the VA recovered just $132 million from the awards, or less than 15 percent of what DOGE claimed, and that the VA reinstated the contract for suicide-prevention support. One of DOGE's largest savings claims is from a canceled contract for a shelter in Pecos, Texas, to house unaccompanied migrant children. In a post on social media platform X in February, DOGE said HHS 'paid ~$18M/month' to keep the now-empty center open. Canceling the agreement, it said, would translate to more than $215 million in annual savings for taxpayers. By the time the contract was added to the DOGE termination list, that savings claim skyrocketed to $2.9 billion. But HHS and its Office of Refugee Resettlement were not on track to spend anywhere close to the contract's $3.3 billion ceiling. WHAT WE'RE READING POLITICO's Tyler Katzenberger reports on a federal judge blocking the Trump administration from using Medicaid beneficiaries' personal data for immigration enforcement purposes. Bloomberg Law's Celine Castronuovo reports on Texas' attorney general accusing Eli Lilly of unlawfully pushing providers to prescribe its blockbuster obesity drugs and other treatments to receive Medicaid payments.

Why many Americans are rethinking alcohol, according to a new Gallup poll
Why many Americans are rethinking alcohol, according to a new Gallup poll

Chicago Tribune

timean hour ago

  • Chicago Tribune

Why many Americans are rethinking alcohol, according to a new Gallup poll

WASHINGTON — Fewer Americans are reporting that they drink alcohol amid a growing belief that even moderate alcohol consumption is a health risk, according to a Gallup poll released Wednesday. A record high percentage of U.S. adults, 53%, now say moderate drinking is bad for their health, up from 28% in 2015. The uptick in doubt about alcohol's benefits is largely driven by young adults — the age group that is most likely to believe drinking 'one or two drinks a day' can cause health hazards — but older adults are also now increasingly likely to think moderate drinking carries risks. As concerns about health impacts rise, fewer Americans are reporting that they drink. The survey finds that 54% of U.S. adults say they drink alcoholic beverages such as liquor, wine or beer. That's lower than at any other point in the past three decades. The findings of the poll, which was conducted in July, indicate that after years of many believing that moderate drinking was harmless — or even beneficial — worries about alcohol consumption are taking hold. According to Gallup's data, even those who consume alcohol are drinking less. The federal government is updating new dietary guidelines, including those around alcohol. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, government data showed U.S. alcohol consumption was trending up. But other government surveys have shown a decline in certain types of drinking, particularly among teenagers and young adults. This comes alongside a new drumbeat of information about alcohol's risks. While moderate drinking was once thought to have benefits for heart health, health professionals in recent years have pointed to overwhelming evidence that alcohol consumption leads to negative health outcomes and is a leading cause of cancer. Younger adults have been quicker than older Americans to accept that drinking is harmful, but older adults are coming around to the same view. About two-thirds of 18- to 34-year-olds believe moderate drinking is unhealthy, according to the poll, up from about 4 in 10 in 2015. Older adults are less likely to see alcohol as harmful — about half of Americans age 55 or older believe this — but that's a substantial increase, too. In 2015, only about 2 in 10 adults age 55 or older thought alcohol was bad for their health. In the past, moderate drinking was thought to have some benefits. That idea came from imperfect studies that largely didn't include younger people and couldn't prove cause and effect. Now the scientific consensus has shifted, and several countries recently lowered their alcohol consumption recommendations. Earlier this year, the outgoing U.S. surgeon general, Vivek Murthy, recommended a label on bottles of beer, wine and liquor that would clearly outline the link between alcohol consumption and cancer. The federal government's current dietary guidelines recommend Americans not drink or, if they do consume alcohol, men should limit themselves to two drinks a day or fewer while women should stick to one or fewer. Gallup's director of U.S. social research, Lydia Saad, said shifting health advice throughout older Americans' lives may be a reason they have been more gradual than young adults to recognize alcohol as harmful. 'Older folks may be a little more hardened in terms of the whiplash that they get with recommendations,' Saad said. 'It may take them a little longer to absorb or accept the information. Whereas, for young folks, this is the environment that they've grown up in … in many cases, it would be the first thing young adults would have heard as they were coming into adulthood.' The government is expected to release new guidelines later this year, under the directive of health secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who has promised big changes. Kennedy has not hinted at how the alcohol recommendations may shift. Slightly more than half of Americans, 54%, report that they drink alcohol — a low in Gallup's data that is especially pronounced among women and young adults. Young Americans' alcohol consumption has been trending downward for years, accelerating the overall decline in alcohol consumption. In sharp contrast with Gallup's findings two decades ago, when young adults were likeliest to report drinking, young adults' drinking rate is now slightly below middle-aged and older adults. Americans' reported drinking is among the lowest since the question was first asked in 1939. For most of the last few decades, at least 6 in 10 Americans have reported drinking alcoholic beverages, only dipping below that point a few times in the question's history. Even if concerns about health risks aren't causing some adults to give up alcohol entirely, these worries could be influencing how often they drink. The survey found that adults who think moderate drinking is bad for one's health are just as likely as people who don't share those concerns to report that they drink, but fewer of the people with health worries had consumed alcohol recently. About half of those who worry moderate drinking is unhealthy said they had a drink in the previous week, compared with about 7 in 10 who did not think drinking was bad for their health. Overall, only about one-quarter of Americans who drink said they had consumed alcohol in the prior 24 hours, a record low in the survey. Roughly 4 in 10 said that it had been more than a week since they had poured a drink.

Why many Americans are rethinking alcohol, according to a new Gallup poll
Why many Americans are rethinking alcohol, according to a new Gallup poll

Associated Press

timean hour ago

  • Associated Press

Why many Americans are rethinking alcohol, according to a new Gallup poll

WASHINGTON (AP) — Fewer Americans are reporting that they drink alcohol amid a growing belief that even moderate alcohol consumption is a health risk, according to a Gallup poll released Wednesday. A record high percentage of U.S. adults, 53%, now say moderate drinking is bad for their health, up from 28% in 2015. The uptick in doubt about alcohol's benefits is largely driven by young adults — the age group that is most likely to believe drinking 'one or two drinks a day' can cause health hazards — but older adults are also now increasingly likely to think moderate drinking carries risks. As concerns about health impacts rise, fewer Americans are reporting that they drink. The survey finds that 54% of U.S. adults say they drink alcoholic beverages such as liquor, wine or beer. That's lower than at any other point in the past three decades. The findings of the poll, which was conducted in July, indicate that after years of many believing that moderate drinking was harmless — or even beneficial — worries about alcohol consumption are taking hold. According to Gallup's data, even those who consume alcohol are drinking less. The federal government is updating new dietary guidelines, including those around alcohol. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, government data showed U.S. alcohol consumption was trending up. But other government surveys have shown a decline in certain types of drinking, particularly among teenagers and young adults. This comes alongside a new drumbeat of information about alcohol's risks. While moderate drinking was once thought to have benefits for heart health, health professionals in recent years have pointed to overwhelming evidence that alcohol consumption leads to negative health outcomes and is a leading cause of cancer. Growing skepticism about alcohol's benefits Younger adults have been quicker than older Americans to accept that drinking is harmful, but older adults are coming around to the same view. About two-thirds of 18- to 34-year-olds believe moderate drinking is unhealthy, according to the poll, up from about 4 in 10 in 2015. Older adults are less likely to see alcohol as harmful — about half of Americans age 55 or older believe this — but that's a substantial increase, too. In 2015, only about 2 in 10 adults age 55 or older thought alcohol was bad for their health. In the past, moderate drinking was thought to have some benefits. That idea came from imperfect studies that largely didn't include younger people and couldn't prove cause and effect. Now the scientific consensus has shifted, and several countries recently lowered their alcohol consumption recommendations. Earlier this year, the outgoing U.S. surgeon general, Vivek Murthy, recommended a label on bottles of beer, wine and liquor that would clearly outline the link between alcohol consumption and cancer. The federal government's current dietary guidelines recommend Americans not drink or, if they do consume alcohol, men should limit themselves to two drinks a day or fewer while women should stick to one or fewer. Gallup's director of U.S. social research, Lydia Saad, said shifting health advice throughout older Americans' lives may be a reason they have been more gradual than young adults to recognize alcohol as harmful. 'Older folks may be a little more hardened in terms of the whiplash that they get with recommendations,' Saad said. 'It may take them a little longer to absorb or accept the information. Whereas, for young folks, this is the environment that they've grown up in ... in many cases, it would be the first thing young adults would have heard as they were coming into adulthood.' The government is expected to release new guidelines later this year, under the directive of health secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who has promised big changes. Kennedy has not hinted at how the alcohol recommendations may shift. Drinking rates fall to decade low Slightly more than half of Americans, 54%, report that they drink alcohol — a low in Gallup's data that is especially pronounced among women and young adults. Young Americans' alcohol consumption has been trending downward for years, accelerating the overall decline in alcohol consumption. In sharp contrast with Gallup's findings two decades ago, when young adults were likeliest to report drinking, young adults' drinking rate is now slightly below middle-aged and older adults. Americans' reported drinking is among the lowest since the question was first asked in 1939. For most of the last few decades, at least 6 in 10 Americans have reported drinking alcoholic beverages, only dipping below that point a few times in the question's history. Americans who drink alcohol are consuming less Even if concerns about health risks aren't causing some adults to give up alcohol entirely, these worries could be influencing how often they drink. The survey found that adults who think moderate drinking is bad for one's health are just as likely as people who don't share those concerns to report that they drink, but fewer of the people with health worries had consumed alcohol recently. About half of those who worry moderate drinking is unhealthy said they had a drink in the previous week, compared with about 7 in 10 who did not think drinking was bad for their health. Overall, only about one-quarter of Americans who drink said they had consumed alcohol in the prior 24 hours, a record low in the survey. Roughly 4 in 10 said that it had been more than a week since they had poured a drink. ___

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store