German health minister praises 'historic' WHO draft pandemic treaty
A new global pandemic treaty drafted by the World Health Organization (WHO) will help prevent the spread of deadly viruses such as the coronavirus in future, German Health Minister Karl Lauterbach has said.
"It is no exaggeration to describe this agreement as historic," Lauterbach said.
Thanks to the agreement, forged early on Wednesday, he said information about viruses or other pathogens with pandemic potential will be shared more quickly in the future, enabling action to be taken sooner.
"It simply increases the likelihood that a local outbreak will never become a pandemic if you have an agreement like this," the health minister said.
Over 190 states agreed to the draft treaty, committing to strengthening global collaboration on prevention and responses to future pandemic threats.
The WHO treaty is also designed to prevent chaotic conditions in the procurement of protective materials and the unfair distribution of vaccines - both points of criticism of the handling of the coronavirus pandemic.
Lauterbach expressed regret that the United States no longer participates in WHO negotiations and plans to leave the body in January under President Donald Trump.
"Of course, all of this has been significantly weakened by the planned withdrawal of the United States," he said.
The draft treaty will now be submitted to the World Health Assembly, the decision-making body of the WHO, in May for consideration.
The treaty would be binding only in countries that choose to ratify it.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
UPI
8 hours ago
- UPI
'Unite for Vets' rally in Washington, D.C., protest overhaul of VA
1 of 8 | Veterans, military families and demonstrators gather on the National Mall in Washington, D.C.,, to participate in a Unite for Veterans Rally to protest the Trump Administration's cuts to staffing and programs at the Department of Veterans Affairs. Photo by Annabelle Gordon/UPI | License Photo June 6 (UPI) -- Several thousand veterans converged on the National Mall on Friday at a rally among 200 events nationwide against a proposed overhaul that includes staffing reduction and some services shifted. The Veterans Administration counters the new proposed budget is higher than last year, processing of claims have sped up and it's easier to get benefits. Veterans, military families and others participated in the Unite for Veterans, Unite for America Rally on the 81st anniversary of D-Day, which was the Allies' amphibious invasion of German-occupied France. The protests, which were organized by a union, took place at 16 state capitol buildings and more than 100 other places across 43 states. "We are coming together to defend the benefits, jobs and dignity that every generation of veterans has earned through sacrifice," Unite for Veterans said on its website. "Veteran jobs, healthcare, and essential VA services are under attack. We will not stand by." Speakers in Washington included Democrats with military backgrounds: Sen. Tammy Duckworth of Illinois, former Rep. Conor Lamb of Pennsylvania and California Rep. Derek Tran. There were signs against President Donald Trump, VA Secretary Doug Collins and Elon Musk, the multi-billionaire who ran the Department of Government Efficiency. They said those leaders are betraying the country's promises to troops. "Are you tired of being thanked for our service in the public and stabbed in our back in private?" Army veteran Everett Kelly, the national president of the American Federation of Government Employees, asked the crowd. "For years, politicians on both sides of the aisle have campaigned on their support of veterans, but once they get into office, they cut our benefits, our services. They take every opportunity to privatize our health care." The Trump administration plans to cut 83,000 VA staffers and shift more money from the federal health care system to private-sector clinics. The administration's proposed budget for the VA, released on Friday, slashes spending for "medical services" by $12bn - or nearly 20% - an amount offset by a corresponding 50% boost in funding for veterans seeking healthcare in the private sector. The Department of Veterans Affairs employs approximately 482,000 people, including 500,000 workers at 170 hospitals and 1,200 local clinics in the nation's largest health care system. In all, there are 15.8 million veterans, which represents 6.1% of the civilian population 18 years and older. VA officials said the event was misguided. "Imagine how much better off veterans would be if VA's critics cared as much about fixing the department as they do about protecting its broken bureaucracy," VA press secretary Peter Kasperowicz said in a statement to UPI. "The Biden Administration's VA failed to address nearly all of the department's most serious problems, such as rising health care wait times, growing backlogs of veterans waiting for disability compensation and major issues with survivor benefits." Kasperowicz told UPI disability claims backlog is already down 25% since Trump took office on Jan. 20 after it increased 24% during the Biden administration. He said VA has opened 10 new healthcare clinics around the country, and Trump has proposed a 10% budget increase to $441.3 billion in fiscal year 2026. The administration's proposed budget for the VA reduces spending for "medical services" by $12 billion - or nearly 20% - which is offset by a 50% boost in funding for veterans seeking healthcare in the private sector. Kasperowicz said the "VA is accelerating the deployment of its integrated electronic health record system, after the program was nearly dormant for almost two years under the Biden Administration." The event was modeled after the Bonus Army protests of the 1930s, when veterans who served in World War I gathered in the nation's capital to demand extra pay denied after leaving the service. Irma Westmoreland, a registered nurse working at a VA hospital and the secretary-treasurer of National Nurses United, told the crowd in Washington: "It's important for every person to keep their job, from the engineering staff to the housekeeper to the dietary staff. When cuts are made, the nursing and medical staff will have to pick up all their work that needs to be done."
Yahoo
9 hours ago
- Yahoo
Scientists make disturbing discovery in riverbed that could endanger millions: 'An emerging public health concern'
A new study has discovered evidence that the presence of microplastics in river water could influence microbial communities, leading to more pathogens and antimicrobial resistance genes. The research team collected water samples from the Oder River, which flows over 522 miles through Czechia, Germany, and Poland, putting them in sanitized containers and adding pre-drained sediment and microplastic particles. Compared to a control group, which did not contain microplastics, the test samples showed a higher abundance of pathogenic bacteria such as Aeromonas salmonicida, Vibrio spp., Escherichia coli, and Salmonella. The microplastic-contaminated samples also showed higher levels of antibiotic resistance genes, per the study published in Scientific Reports. "The presence of microplastics in [a] water environment and their bioavailability may contribute to, or alter the pattern of, the spreading of pathogens and antimicrobial resistance genes," the researchers stated, adding that this could be due to microbial competition and their use of microplastics to create biofilms, which makes these particles an environmentally favorable niche for some bacteria species. "This represents an emerging public health concern, particularly in the context of the One Health framework, which emphasizes the interconnectedness of human, animal, and environmental health," researchers said. Antimicrobial resistance genes are problematic because they help bacteria resist the drugs meant to treat them. Antimicrobial resistance is one of the top global health threats, according to the World Health Organization, which says it makes infections harder to treat and other medical procedures and treatments, such as surgery and chemotherapy, much riskier. Meanwhile, this is not the first time scientists have sounded the alarm about microplastics, which are small plastic particles that break off of larger plastics as they degrade. These plastics are everywhere, including in water, soil, air, clothing, seafood, and salt. For instance, one study found microplastics in nearly every protein source tested, including chicken, tofu, and beef. While researchers and experts still don't understand the health impacts of microplastics, they've been linked to health problems such as cancer, dementia, and impaired blood flow in the brain. These tiny plastic particles could also be harming some of the world's most important archaeological sites. Researchers in England called attention to this issue following the discovery of microplastics in the soil at two historic sites. While it's difficult to remove microplastics from the environment, it's not impossible. For instance, one group of scientists has discovered a way to rid water of microplastics by using egg whites. How often do you worry about the quality of your drinking water? Never Sometimes Often Always Click your choice to see results and speak your mind. Plus, some cities and countries are tackling plastic pollution, which is the source of microplastics. For one, England and France banned plastic cutlery for most fast food and takeout meals, while Los Angeles has banned Styrofoam takeout containers. You can cut down on your own plastic use at home by investing in reusable items like metal razors and non-plastic sandwich bags. Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.
Vox
10 hours ago
- Vox
We're secretly winning the war on cancer
is a senior editorial director at Vox overseeing the climate teams and the Unexplainable and The Gray Area podcasts. He is also the editor of Vox's Future Perfect section and writes the Good News newsletter. He worked at Time magazine for 15 years as a foreign correspondent in Asia, a climate writer, and an international editor, and he wrote a book on existential risk. Thousands of people gather on the National Mall in Washington, DC, on September 26, 1998, to demand that the cause, the care, and the cure of cancer be made top research and healthcare priorities in the US. Paul J. Richards/AFP via Getty Images On November 4, 2003, a doctor gave Jon Gluck some of the worst news imaginable: He had cancer — one that later tests would reveal as multiple myeloma, a severe blood and bone marrow cancer. Jon was told he might have as little as 18 months to live. He was 38, a thriving magazine editor in New York with a 7-month-old daughter whose third birthday, he suddenly realized, he might never see. 'The moment after I was told I had cancer, I just said 'no, no, no,'' Jon told me in an interview just last week. 'This cannot be true.' Living in remission The fact that Jon is still here, talking to me in 2025, tells you that things didn't go the way the medical data would have predicted on that November morning. He has lived with his cancer, through waves of remission and recurrence, for more than 20 years, an experience he chronicles with grace and wit in his new book An Exercise in Uncertainty. That 7-month-old daughter is now in college. You could say Jon has beaten the odds, and he's well aware that chance played some role in his survival. ('Did you know that 'Glück' is German for 'luck'?' he writes in the book, noting his good fortune that a random spill on the ice is what sent him to the doctor in the first place, enabling them to catch his cancer early.) Cancer is still a terrible health threat, one that is responsible for 1 in 6 deaths around the world, killing nearly 10 million people a year globally and over 600,000 people a year in the US. But Jon's story and his survival demonstrate something that is too often missed: We've turned the tide in the war against cancer. The age-adjusted death rate in the US for cancer has declined by about a third since 1991, meaning people of a given age have about a third lower risk of dying from cancer than people of the same age more than three decades ago. That adds up to over 4 million fewer cancer deaths over that time period. Thanks to breakthroughs in treatments like autologous stem-cell harvesting and CAR-T therapy — breakthroughs Jon himself benefited from, often just in time — cancer isn't the death sentence it once was. Our World in Data Getting better all the time There's no doubt that just as the rise of smoking in the 20th century led to a major increase in cancer deaths, the equally sharp decline of tobacco use eventually led to a delayed decrease. Smoking is one of the most potent carcinogens in the world, and at the peak in the early 1960s, around 12 cigarettes were being sold per adult per day in the US. Take away the cigarettes and — after a delay of a couple of decades — lung cancer deaths drop in turn along with other non-cancer smoking-related deaths. But as Saloni Dattani wrote in a great piece earlier this year, even before the decline of smoking, death rates from non-lung cancers in the stomach and colon had begun to fall. Just as notably, death rates for childhood cancers — which for obvious reasons are not connected to smoking and tend to be caused by genetic mutations — have fallen significantly as well, declining sixfold since 1950. In the 1960s, for example, only around 10 percent of children diagnosed with acute lymphoblastic leukemia survived more than five years. Today it's more than 90 percent. And the five-year survival rate for all cancers has risen from 49 percent in the mid-1970s to 69 percent in 2019. We've made strikes against the toughest of cancers, like Jon's multiple myeloma. Around when Jon was diagnosed, the five-year survival rate was just 34 percent. Today it's as high as 62 percent, and more and more people like Jon are living for decades. 'There has been a revolution in cancer survival,' Jon told me. 'Some illnesses now have far more successful therapies than others, but the gains are real.' Three cancer revolutions The dramatic bend in the curve of cancer deaths didn't happen by accident — it's the compound interest of three revolutions. While anti-smoking policy has been the single biggest lifesaver, other interventions have helped reduce people's cancer risk. One of the biggest successes is the HPV vaccine. A study last year found that death rates of cervical cancer — which can be caused by HPV infections — in US women ages 20–39 had dropped 62 percent from 2012 to 2021, thanks largely to the spread of the vaccine. Other cancers have been linked to infections, and there is strong research indicating that vaccination can have positive effects on reducing cancer incidence. The next revolution is better and earlier screening. It's generally true that the earlier cancer is caught, the better the chances of survival, as Jon's own story shows. According to one study, incidences of late-stage colorectal cancer in Americans over 50 declined by a third between 2000 and 2010 in large part because rates of colonoscopies almost tripled in that same time period. And newer screening methods, often employing AI or using blood-based tests, could make preliminary screening simpler, less invasive and therefore more readily available. If 20th-century screening was about finding physical evidence of something wrong — the lump in the breast — 21st-century screening aims to find cancer before symptoms even arise. Most exciting of all are frontier developments in treating cancer, much of which can be tracked through Jon's own experience. From drugs like lenalidomide and bortezomib in the 2000s, which helped double median myeloma survival, to the spread of monoclonal antibodies, real breakthroughs in treatments have meaningfully extended people's lives — not just by months, but years. Perhaps the most promising development is CAR-T therapy, a form of immunotherapy. Rather than attempting to kill the cancer directly, immunotherapies turn a patient's own T-cells into guided missiles. In a recent study of 97 patients with multiple myeloma, many of whom were facing hospice care, a third of those who received CAR-T therapy had no detectable cancer five years later. It was the kind of result that doctors rarely see. 'CAR-T is mind-blowing — very science-fiction futuristic,' Jon told me. He underwent his own course of treatment with it in mid-2023 and writes that the experience, which put his cancer into a remission he's still in, left him feeling 'physically and metaphysically new.' A welcome uncertainty While there are still more battles to be won in the war on cancer, and there are certain areas — like the rising rates of gastrointestinal cancers among younger people — where the story isn't getting better, the future of cancer treatment is improving. For cancer patients like Jon, that can mean a new challenge — enduring the essential uncertainty that comes with living under a disease that's controllable but which could always come back. But it sure beats the alternative. 'I've come to trust so completely in my doctors and in these new developments,' he said. 'I try to remain cautiously optimistic that my future will be much like the last 20 years.' And that's more than he or anyone else could have hoped for nearly 22 years ago. A version of this story originally appeared in the Good News newsletter. Sign up here!
