Latest news with #CenterforGlobalDevelopment
NDTV
23-07-2025
- Health
- NDTV
Superbugs Threaten Millions Of Lives And $2 Trillion Loss By 2050, Study Warns
A new study warns that antibiotic-resistant "superbugs" could kill millions more people globally and cost the world economy nearly $2 trillion each year by 2050. The UK government-funded research, conducted by the Center for Global Development think tank, reveals that rising antimicrobial resistance (AMR) could cause annual global GDP losses of around \$1.7 trillion over the next 25 years. Wealthy nations such as the US, UK, and EU are expected to face some of the heaviest economic and health impacts. The findings have sparked criticism over recent international aid cuts. The UK government recently announced the end of funding for the Fleming Fund, which helps combat AMR in low- and middle-income countries. Similarly, the Trump administration confirmed \$9 billion in cuts to its foreign aid budget, while several European nations have also reduced overseas aid spending. Experts say such measures are short-sighted, as tackling AMR globally is vital to protect health systems and economies worldwide. Without urgent action, drug-resistant infections could become one of the biggest health and economic threats of the century. Anthony McDonnell, the lead author of the research and a policy fellow at the Center for Global Development, told The Guardian:"When we conducted our research on the economic impacts of antimicrobial resistance, it was anticipated that resistance rates would continue to follow historical trends. "However, the sudden cuts to Official Development Assistance by the US, which has cut its aid spend by roughly 80%; the UK, which has announced aid cuts from 0.5% to 0.3% of gross national income; and substantial reductions by France, Germany, and others, could drive up resistance rates in line with the most pessimistic scenario in our research. "Even countries that have been successful in keeping AMR rates under control cannot afford to be complacent. Unless AMR programmes are protected from aid cuts, resistance rates across the world will likely increase at a rate in line with the worst-affected countries. "This would result in millions more people dying worldwide, including across G7 nations. Investing in treatment for bacterial infections now will save lives and deliver billions in long-term economic returns." The research calculated the economic and health burden of antibiotic resistance for 122 countries and forecast that in that in this most pessimistic scenario, by 2050, GDP losses in China could reach just under $722bn a year, the US $295.7bn, the EU $187bn, Japan $65.7bn and the UK $58.6bn.
Irish Examiner
21-07-2025
- Health
- Irish Examiner
Superbugs could kill millions more and cost $2tn a year by 2050, study shows
Superbugs could cause millions more people to die worldwide and cost the global economy just under $2tn a year by 2050, modelling shows. A British government-funded study shows that without concerted action, increased rates of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) could lead to global annual GDP losses of $1.7tn over the next quarter of a century. The research, by the Center for Global Development thinktank, found the US, British and EU economies would be among the hardest hit, prompting accusations that recent swingeing aid cuts are self-defeating. The Trump administration has confirmed $9bn in cuts to its foreign aid budget, while a number of European countries have also reduced spending on overseas aid. Anthony McDonnell, the lead author of the research and a policy fellow at the Center for Global Development, said: 'When we conducted our research on the economic impacts of antimicrobial resistance, it was anticipated that resistance rates would continue to follow historical trends. 'However, the sudden cuts to Official Development Assistance by the US, which has cut its aid spend by roughly 80%; the UK, which has announced aid cuts from 0.5% to 0.3% of gross national income; and substantial reductions by France, Germany, and others, could drive up resistance rates in line with the most pessimistic scenario in our research. 'Even countries that have been successful in keeping AMR rates under control cannot afford to be complacent. Unless AMR programmes are protected from aid cuts, resistance rates across the world will likely increase at a rate in line with the worst-affected countries. This would result in millions more people dying worldwide, including across G7 nations. Investing in treatment for bacterial infections now will save lives and deliver billions in long-term economic returns. The research calculated the economic and health burden of antibiotic resistance for 122 countries and forecast that in this most pessimistic scenario, by 2050, GDP losses in China could reach just under $722bn a year, the US $295.7bn, the EU $187bn, Japan $65.7bn and Britain $58.6bn. According to the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME), deaths from AMR are expected to increase 60% by 2050, with 1.34 million people in the US and 184,000 in Britain alone predicted to die each year from antibiotic-resistant bugs, while numbers of those becoming seriously ill from drug-resistant bacteria are also expected to jump. Superbugs increase the number of hospital admissions and lead to longer and more intensive hospital stays, costlier second-line treatments and more complex care, meaning resistant infections are roughly twice as expensive to treat as those for which antibiotics are effective. The study estimates global health costs of treating AMR could increase by just under $176bn a year. Higher rates of resistant bugs would also shrink the British, EU and US workforces by 0.8%, 0.6% and 0.4% respectively, the study found. The Guardian
Time of India
21-07-2025
- Health
- Time of India
Antimicrobial resistant superbugs could kill millions, cost $2 trillion yearly by 2050: Report
Representative AI-generated image Antimicrobial-resistant superbugs could lead to substantial global mortality and economic losses of approximately $2tn annually by 2050, according to a study, quoted by the Guardian. Analysis from a UK government-sponsored research reveals that rising antimicrobial resistance (AMR) could result in yearly global GDP losses of $1.7 trillion over the next 25 years without decisive intervention. The Center for Global Development's research indicates severe economic impact on the US, UK and EU economies. Recent reductions in aid funding appear counterproductive, particularly as the UK government has eliminated Fleming fund support for AMR prevention in developing nations. Similarly, the US has confirmed $9 billion in foreign aid reductions, with European nations following suit. Anthony McDonnell, who led the research at the Center for Global Development, explained that initial projections were based on historical resistance trends. He noted that significant aid reductions by the US (80%), UK (from 0.5% to 0.3% of GNI), France, and Germany could accelerate resistance rates to worst-case scenarios. He emphasised that no country, regardless of their AMR control success, should be complacent. Without protecting AMR programmes from funding cuts, global resistance rates could escalate to match severely affected nations, resulting in increased mortality worldwide and substantial economic consequences. The study, covering 122 countries, projects annual GDP losses by 2050 could reach $722 billion in China, $295.7 billion in the US, $187 billion in the EU, $65.7 billion in Japan, and $58.6 billion in the UK under pessimistic scenarios. The Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation forecasts a 60% increase in AMR-related deaths by 2050, with annual mortality reaching 1.34 million in the US and 184,000 in the UK. Drug-resistant infections are expected to rise significantly. Antibiotic-resistant infections double treatment costs due to increased hospitalisations, extended stays, expensive alternative treatments, and complex care requirements. The research estimates global AMR treatment costs could rise by $176bn annually, with UK costs increasing from $900m to $3.7bn and US costs from $15.5bn to $57bn. The study indicates workforce reductions of 0.8% in the UK, 0.6% in the EU, and 0.4% in the US due to resistant infections. However, increased investment in addressing superbugs could boost annual economic growth by $156.2bn in the US and $12bn in the UK by 2050. Dr Mohsen Naghavi from IHME warned that without immediate action, current medicines might become ineffective, potentially making simple infections lethal, according to The Guardian. This requires governmental policy changes, new drug development, and public education about antibiotics' ineffectiveness against viruses. A UK government representative highlighted their 10-year health strategy addressing AMR, citing progress in reducing antibiotic use in meat production and developing new treatment incentives whilst maintaining international cooperation.
Hans India
21-07-2025
- Health
- Hans India
Antibiotic resistance to drive treatment cost from $66 bn to $159 bn yearly by 2050: Study
New Delhi: The increasing resistance to antibiotics may not only lead to an increase in deaths but may also surge treatment costs from the current $66 billion per year to $159 billion per year by 2050, according to a study. Antibiotic-resistant bacteria or superbugs, which emerge due to the misuse and overuse of antibiotics, can increase the number of hospital admissions and lead to longer and more intensive hospital stays. Resistant infections are roughly twice as expensive to treat as those for which antibiotics are effective, posing a significant threat to global health and economic stability. However, its impact would be more pronounced in low- and middle-income countries, noted the study. The study by the think tank Center for Global Development integrates human health burden projections with economic models to provide a comprehensive analysis of the impact of AMR on global economies and health systems. 'We estimate that the impact of antimicrobial resistance falls most heavily on low- and lower-middle-income countries. Antimicrobial resistance increases the cost of health care by $66 billion, and this will rise to $159 billion in our business-as-usual scenario where resistance rates follow historical trends,' said the researchers, led by Anthony McDonnell, a policy fellow at the Center for Global Development. The study adopted a multifaceted approach to estimate the economic burden of AMR. Projections of the health burden were taken from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME), which estimates deaths from AMR to soar by 60 per cent by 2050. The numbers of those becoming seriously ill from drug-resistant bacteria are also expected to jump. Health burden estimates from the IHME suggest that if resistance follows trends since 1990, AMR will lead to 38.5 million deaths between 2025 and 2050. 'If resistance rates follow historical trends since 1990, the direct health care costs of AMR are projected to rise to $159 billion per year by 2050 (1.2 per cent of global health expenditure). This increase is attributed to higher treatment intensities and economic growth in regions most affected by AMR,' the researchers said. The study called for improving innovation and access to high-quality treatment. It showed that if nobody died from AMR, "the global population will be 22.2 million larger by 2050'.
Winnipeg Free Press
15-07-2025
- Politics
- Winnipeg Free Press
Dressing up ignorance as a compliment
Opinion Recently, U.S. President Donald Trump told Liberian President Joseph Boakai that he 'speaks beautiful English.' It barely made headlines, lost among the many offensive things Trump says and does on a seemingly daily basis. But for many racialized people, it landed with a familiar sting. It was a classic microaggression, delivered on a global stage to a man who had climbed to the highest rung of leadership in his country. During a meeting with five West African leaders at the White House, Trump asked Boakai where he had learned to speak 'so beautifully,' following up with: 'Where were you educated? Where? In Liberia?' Boakai's government said it took no offence. What else could they say? Liberia has been heavily dependent on U.S. aid for decades, with American assistance accounting for nearly 2.6 per cent of its gross national income, according to the Center for Global Development. And now, with that aid recently cut, it's easy to understand why Boakai might have felt he had to grin and bear it. But Trump's comment isn't a compliment. It's a reminder of the often unspoken assumption that people who look a certain way couldn't possibly speak well, let alone lead a country. It's an insult wrapped in admiration, and one I, and many like me, have heard far too often. I still remember one night from my teens. I was driving with my dad down Academy Road when we hit black ice and spun into a pole. We were unharmed, and since we weren't far from home, we started walking. A white woman pulled over and kindly offered us a ride. We accepted, grateful. But during that short drive, a series of seemingly innocent questions began to reveal something else. She spoke only to me, even when asking about my dad, who was sitting right there. She asked if we had insurance. Then if I was in school. I told her I was in my first year of university. 'That's wonderful,' she said. 'Your English is really good. Where did you learn to speak it? It must be such a help for your dad.' My dad, who taught English, whose only language is English, sat beside me in silence. He had become invisible in her eyes. Her assumptions about our race overrode everything else. After the end of British colonization in our homeland, my dad was one of the first racialized teachers allowed to teach in a system that once excluded people like him. He spoke English fluently, yet he was treated as though he didn't understand. These kinds of comments don't happen in isolation. When Trump told Boakai he spoke 'beautiful English,' he wasn't complimenting eloquence; he was expressing surprise. To be fair, perhaps Trump didn't intend to be offensive. Hear me out. The White House later pointed out that he has complimented white leaders on their English as well, commenting on their British or Australian accents, for example. But that's not the same. Admiring a posh accent from a white leader is different than expressing disbelief that a Black African president could possibly speak English 'so beautifully.' It's not about tone; it's about expectation. And context matters. English has been the official language of Liberia since the country's founding in the 1800s. Trump's question didn't reveal curiosity. It revealed ignorance. It's the same kind of surprise racialized professionals encounter in boardrooms and classrooms when we're told we're 'so articulate,' with a tone that implies, 'You're not like the others.' These microaggressions may seem small, harmless even, to those who say them. But they add up. They remind us that no matter how well we speak, how many degrees we earn, or how accomplished we are, we are still seen as exceptions. The problem isn't that racialized people don't speak English well. Many of us are fluent in English and several other languages too. The problem is the deeply embedded belief that we shouldn't be. I don't think the woman who drove us home was trying to be unkind. I believe she thought she was being warm and welcoming. But kindness and racism are not mutually exclusive. Microaggressions like hers and like Trump's are rooted in the same idea: that whiteness is the norm, and everything else is foreign. I didn't say anything that day. But I've thought about that moment often. How small it made us feel. How large the assumptions were, based on nothing but the colour of our skin. In case you're wondering: my skin is brown. I was born in a foreign land. My English is excellent. My French is pretty good. My Spanish isn't bad either. But what I really wish is that I spoke Arabic. Now that's a beautiful language. Samantha Turenne is a Winnipeg writer.
