Latest news with #W.H.O.
Daily Record
5 days ago
- Entertainment
- Daily Record
Queen's two-word comment after seeing Archie and Lilibet for final time
Princess Lilibet met the Queen during the Platinum Jubilee celebrations in June 2022. Yesterday, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 's daughter, Princess Lilibet turned four years old and the proud mum shared several unseen snaps on her social media to mark the occasion. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex welcomed their youngest child into the world in on June 4, 2021, two years after the birth of her older brother Archie, who is now six. In 2020, the family relocated to the US after Harry and Meghan made the decision to step back from their royal duties. And two years later, in 2022, Harry's grandmother, the longest-serving British monarch, passed away at the age of 96, prompting him and Meghan to return to the UK to be with his family. Looking back on his children's "final visit" to the Queen, Prince Harry suggested she was "bemused" by the youngsters, writes The Mirror. In his autobiography Spare, Harry opened up about her funeral before saying: "The following morning, Meg and I left for America. "For days and days we couldn't stop hugging the children, couldn't let them out of our sight, though I also couldn't stop picturing them with granny, the final visit. "Archie was making deep, chivalrous bows, his baby sister Lilibet cuddling the monarch's shins." Recounting his grandmother's response, he said she referred to them as the "sweetest children", while "sounding bemused". "She'd expected them to be a bit more... American, I think? Meaning, in her mind, more rambunctious," he added. "Now, while overjoyed to be home again, doing drop-offs again, reading Giraffes Can't Dance again, I couldn't stop remembering." After she passed away, her son, Harry's dad, ascended to the throne as King Charles III, with his wife Camilla taking on the role of Queen Consort. Reports suggest that King Charles and Queen Camilla have met Archie a handful of times but have only met Lilibet once during the Platinum Jubilee celebrations for Queen Elizabeth II in June 2022. In recent years, Prince Harry and his family have become distant, a fact he confirmed himself in a recent interview. Speaking to the BBC, the Duke of Sussex expressed a desire for reconciliation, stating: "There's no point continuing to fight any more, life is precious." Harry said that his father "won't speak to him" following a dispute over his security arrangements. This year, Harry faced defeat in a legal case concerning the downgrading of his personal security level. Reflecting on the verdict, he shared: "I'm devastated - not so much as devastated with the loss that I am about the people behind the decision, feeling as though this is okay. Is it a win for them? "I'm sure there are some people out there, probably most likely the people that wish me harm, W.H.O. consider this a huge win." Prince Harry also mentioned that he has decided against pursuing further legal action, as the judgement "proven that there was no way to win this through the courts". He went on to say the decision also meant that he "can't see a world in which I would bring my wife and children back to the UK at this point". Join the Daily Record WhatsApp community! Get the latest news sent straight to your messages by joining our WhatsApp community today. You'll receive daily updates on breaking news as well as the top headlines across Scotland. No one will be able to see who is signed up and no one can send messages except the Daily Record team. All you have to do is click here if you're on mobile, select 'Join Community' and you're in! If you're on a desktop, simply scan the QR code above with your phone and click 'Join Community'. We also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you don't like our community, you can check out any time you like. To leave our community click on the name at the top of your screen and choose 'exit group'.
Daily Mirror
6 days ago
- Entertainment
- Daily Mirror
Queen Elizabeth's 'bemused' two-word Archie and Lilibet comment
Prince Harry claims his grandmother, Queen Elizabeth II, was "bemused" by his two children, Archie and Lilibet, in his autobiography, Spare, on their final meeting Today marks the fourth birthday of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's daughter, Lilibet, with private festivities likely to be held in her honour. The couple, who tied the knot in 2018, welcomed their youngest child into the world in on June 4, 2021, two years after the birth of her older brother Archie, who is now six. Since 2020, the family of four have lived in America, following the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's decision to step back from their senior royal roles. Just two years after their relocation Stateside, Harry's grandmother, the longest-serving British monarch, passed away at the age of 96. Reflecting on his children's "final visit" to Queen Elizabeth II, Prince Harry suggested she was "bemused" by the youngsters, reports the Scottish Daily Express. In his explosive autobiography Spare, he discussed her funeral before continuing: "The following morning, Meg and I left for America. "For days and days we couldn't stop hugging the children, couldn't let them out of our sight, though I also couldn't stop picturing them with granny, the final visit. "Archie was making deep, chivalrous bows, his baby sister Lilibet cuddling the monarch's shins." Recounting his grandmother's response, he said she referred to them as the "sweetest children", while "sounding bemused". "She'd expected them to be a bit more... American, I think? Meaning, in her mind, more rambunctious," he added. "Now, while overjoyed to be home again, doing drop-offs again, reading Giraffes Can't Dance again, I couldn't stop remembering." Following the Queen's passing, her son ascended to the throne as King Charles III, with his wife Camilla taking on the role of Queen Consort. Reports suggest that the Royal couple have met Archie a handful of times but have only met Lilibet once during the Platinum Jubilee celebrations for Queen Elizabeth II in June 2022. In recent years, Prince Harry and his family have become distant, a fact he confirmed himself in a recent interview. Speaking to the BBC, the Duke of Sussex expressed a desire for reconciliation, stating: "There's no point continuing to fight any more, life is precious." Harry revealed that his father "won't speak to him" following a dispute over his security arrangements. This year, Harry faced defeat in a legal case concerning the downgrading of his personal security level. Reflecting on the verdict, he shared: "I'm devastated - not so much as devastated with the loss that I am about the people behind the decision, feeling as though this is okay. Is it a win for them? "I'm sure there are some people out there, probably most likely the people that wish me harm, W.H.O. consider this a huge win." Prince Harry also mentioned that he has decided against pursuing further legal action, as the judgement "proven that there was no way to win this through the courts". He went on to say the decision also meant that he "can't see a world in which I would bring my wife and children back to the UK at this point".
New York Times
05-05-2025
- Health
- New York Times
How to Fill the America-Shaped Hole in Global Health
Global health and development are too dependent on Western charity. The status quo was always going to unravel eventually. Since President Trump took office for the second time more than 100 days ago, he has initiated the largest remaking of this system in decades — beginning with the announcement that the United States will withdraw from the World Health Organization and the dismantling of the United States Agency for International Development. The consequences are dire. The United States has been the largest funder of global health since at least 2000 and is a key source of research and development and technical expertise. As a former adviser to the W.H.O.'s director general, I've seen how vital these contributions are. That's why I believe the W.H.O. should try to make a deal with Mr. Trump — not because the current system is ideal but because the stakes are too high to let the United States walk away. Until a more resilient system is built, the W.H.O. should work to secure U.S. membership and make the global health ecosystem stronger in the process. This includes addressing Mr. Trump's concerns about the Covid-19 response, the U.S. footing an outsize share of the global health bill and the need for institutional reform. Mr. Trump has accused the W.H.O. of being slow to declare a public health emergency and not doing enough to investigate the origins of the pandemic. But the W.H.O. declared a public health emergency in January of 2020 and has kept both natural origin and lab leak hypotheses on the table. It has also repeatedly pressed China for transparency on the virus's origins. Still, the W.H.O. can do more to assuage concerns about its pandemic response. The organization and its members could call for a moratorium, which people close to Mr. Trump support, on risky virus research. Doing more to recognize potential missteps — like not emphasizing airborne transmission of Covid early on — can help regain trust. When it comes to future pandemic responses, the W.H.O. should adopt the U.S. military's approach of red teaming, in which groups are tasked with role-playing as an enemy to identify weaknesses in an organization's operation. A version of this approach could help the W.H.O. identify flaws in how it responds to public health emergencies. Mr. Trump has often criticized the fact that the United States contributes much more to global health efforts than other countries. U.S. funding makes up around 15 percent of the W.H.O.'s budget. The W.H.O. could agree to a reduction in America's contributions and make up some of the difference by asking other countries to increase theirs. Funding could also be more focused on results. In recent years, the W.H.O. has intensified efforts to gather data to track its programs' progress toward helping countries improve overall health and well-being of their citizens, expanding access to universal health coverage and expanding protection from health emergencies. The W.H.O. should ensure that more money goes to programs with the greatest proven impact. The W.H.O. could also address criticism that the agency failed to properly condemn Hamas when it was accused of militarizing health facilities during the war in Gaza. It could create an independent group to review and recommend improvements to current practices around monitoring and reporting on militarizing these settings. This might draw the interest of the White House while helping to reinforce norms of international law. Of course, it may be impossible to persuade Mr. Trump to change his mind. If that's the case, then countries must be ready to take greater ownership of, accountability for and investment in their public health needs. As Nigeria's health minister, Muhammad Ali Pate, recently said, 'The U.S. government is not responsible, ultimately, for the health and the security of Nigerian people. At the end of the day, the responsibility is ours.' The key to creating that independence is supporting local scientists and entrepreneurs. Countries need the capability to produce their own health products like drugs, diagnostics and vaccines. The African Union's goal is to locally produce 60 percent of the vaccines the continent uses by 2040, up from less than 1 percent in recent years. Some groups are already working toward this goal, such as the Institut Pasteur de Dakar in Senegal's efforts to increase vaccine production, and companies in Egypt and South Africa will use mRNA technology to develop better vaccines. Other countries should bolster similar efforts. Expanding homegrown health services is also a key part of this equation. M-mama, an emergency referral and transport system led by the Tanzanian government, has doubled its provision of maternal and newborn emergency trips in regions across Tanzania while reducing the cost of these trips. Talk therapy services in places like Zimbabwe and Uganda have shown great success in providing mental health access where psychiatrists are scarce. Hewatele, a nonprofit in East Africa, has developed a low-cost system for producing and distributing medical oxygen to communities where many children die from pneumonia and other respiratory infections. Another way to reduce global dependence on the U.S. government is to expand funding that comes from the private sector and development banks around the world. The best way to enable this is to support alternative financing models. The Global Health Investment Fund, for example, blended public and private funding to support the development of drugs, vaccines and other public health interventions. One of its greatest successes was supporting a South Korean company that became the only company in the world making the cholera vaccine when the global emergency stockpile ran dry in 2024. The golden age of global health as led by the United States is over. The rest of the world must now focus on building a healthier world that is less dependent on U.S. aid — and less susceptible to U.S. influence and disruption. Greater self-reliance is the path to truly sustainable development.
New York Times
16-04-2025
- Health
- New York Times
Countries Agree on Treaty Aimed at Preventing Global Health Crises
After three years of contentious negotiations, the member nations of the World Health Organization have agreed on a draft of a 'pandemic treaty' designed to help the global community better prevent and respond to health crises. The agreement is aimed at averting the fractious, faltering response to the Covid-19 pandemic, which left many poor nations with limited access to vaccines and treatments. It would oblige wealthy nations to share key information on pathogens, and technology for interventions such as vaccines, with the rest of the world. The member states are expected to adopt the treaty, which will be legally binding, next month. The United States, which stopped participating in negotiations after President Trump announced plans to withdraw from the W.H.O., is not expected to ratify the treaty. The draft treaty is more limited in scope than the vision the W.H.O. first proposed during the throes of the Covid pandemic, but it is significant as the first major multilateral agreement in a world where the United States is no longer the unquestioned anchor. 'It shows that with or without the U.S., the world can pull together for global health, and a recognition that pandemics require global solidarity,' said Nina Schwalbe, a global health consultant who has held leadership roles in U.S. and international organizations and who followed the negotiations closely. 'They pushed past their red lines and they got to agreement. That's no easy feat for 191 states. And there's a lot in there. It's maybe not as strong as we wanted on many issues, but there's lots to build on.' In December 2021, the W.H.O. convened a group of negotiators to hammer out the terms of a new global agreement that it hoped would help countries respond more swiftly and effectively to future health threats. Negotiations were slow and difficult and often derailed by national interests. High-income countries were averse to firm language on sharing diagnostics, treatments and other technologies, and developing countries were reluctant to take on new obligations that did not come with additional resources. European nations with large pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries — along with the United States, when it was participating in the talks under the Biden administration — in particular resisted the language on sharing technology and intellectual property. To reach the final deal, Europe accepted concessions on that language, while African countries gave Europe more of what it wanted on agricultural and wildlife surveillance. Brazil was crucial in brokering an 11th-hour agreement between the Group of 7 nations, led by Germany, and blocs of developing countries that were often in opposition, especially over what they saw as equity issues. China was a largely silent participant in the negotiations, participants said, aligned with the bloc demanding greater equity but not advancing major agenda items. Under the terms of the accord, China would be compelled to be more forthcoming about an outbreak than it was about the coronavirus in the early days of the pandemic. The draft treaty includes a provision guaranteeing that countries that share pathogen samples and genetic sequences will get access to any diagnostics, vaccines or treatments that are developed as a result. The W.H.O. would receive a minimum of 10 percent of manufacturers' products as they are made, as a donation, and up to another 10 percent at 'affordable prices,' to distribute to the world's poorest countries. The draft treaty does not have any enforcement mechanism, which means that in a situation like the fierce competition for Covid vaccines, there would be no way to ensure countries adhere to the terms to which they had agreed. But in a time of multiplying infectious disease threats — including avian influenza, mpox and Marburg virus — some public health experts said that the treaty was groundbreaking, in part because it takes a holistic view of epidemics, addressing not only how to respond to new outbreaks but also the steps to prevent them in the first place. For instance, the treaty requires member nations to develop their own pandemic prevention and surveillance plans. As part of those plans, the treaty says, countries should identify circumstances under which pathogens might jump from animals into humans, a phenomenon known as spillover, and take actions to reduce that risk. 'This agreement, if adopted next month, would be the first binding international agreement toward spillover prevention,' said Dr. Neil Vora, a senior adviser at Conservation International and the executive director of the Preventing Pandemics at the Source Coalition. 'And that is urgently needed and represents a leap forward.' Some nations initially balked at some of these pandemic prevention obligations, viewing them as onerous and expensive, said Alexandra Finch, a senior associate at the O'Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law at Georgetown University. The lack of a dedicated source of funding in the treaty to help countries pay for this work emerged as an early sticking point, Ms. Finch said. But the final language says nations will embark upon this work 'subject to the availability of resources.' 'I did wish that there was a dedicated funding line for prevention,' Ms. Finch said. 'Countries could have been a bit more comfortable being more ambitious.' Another contentious issue was the language on technologies, such as vaccines, that are developed with public funding. Countries will be required to develop national policies for putting public-interest conditions on research and development funding, given to either universities or companies, that guarantee 'timely and equitable access' to resulting drugs or diagnostics during pandemics. Such conditions could include publishing clinical trial results; allowing other companies to manufacture the products, regardless of patents; and capping prices, said Michelle Childs, policy advocacy director for the nonprofit drug development agency DNDi, who was in Geneva during the talks to provide suggestions to negotiators. Those measures could help avoid what happened during the Covid pandemic, when the Biden administration could not compel vaccine makers to share information on products they had developed relying heavily on government-funded research. Deisy Ventura, a professor of global health ethics at the University of São Paulo, said that finalizing the treaty without the direct involvement of the United States helped create space for an important shift in thinking about pandemic response. She described the U.S. perspective as a primarily biomedical approach focused on how to keep pathogens from entering the country's borders. 'Surveillance systems that keep diseases where they originate — that's not a vision of global health that is about eradicating diseases or changing the social conditions that allow them to emerge,' she said. The agreement is 'very far from what we were dreaming of' when negotiations began, 'that we will have joint, multilateral coordination and that national selfishness will be overcome,' Dr. Ventura said. But, she added, it nevertheless has huge symbolic value. 'It is an indispensable political gesture: 191 countries that are affirming the possibility of building multilateralism without depending on the United States,' she said. 'The agreement is less important than the fact that the negotiations did not fail.' Ms. Schwalbe said the agreement still had value without U.S. participation even though the United States led the world in developing the Covid vaccines that helped end that pandemic. 'We got spoiled thinking that a vaccine was going to be the answer to the next pandemic, and that's not a given,' she said. 'But in terms of preventing spillover with animals, protecting the work force better, there's so many things that can be done right now that will better prepare the world. And the U.S., the only thing that we're going to lose is us being not as prepared.' The absence of the United States was unfortunate, Dr. Vora said. 'Pathogens do not respect borders,' he said. 'If there's any weak link in the chain, then all of us are susceptible.' But, Dr. Vora added, the absence of one country should not detract from a 'landmark' achievement. 'It makes the world a safer place, and it's a great starting point for additional action,' he said. 'Because we have a lot of threats knocking at our door right now.'
New York Times
15-04-2025
- Health
- New York Times
Director of Field Hospital in Southern Gaza Says Israeli Strike Killed a Guard
An Israeli strike killed a security guard and wounded 10 patients at a field hospital in southern Gaza on Tuesday, according to the director of the medical facility. The deadly attack on the grounds of the Kuwait Specialty Field Hospital came two days after Israel attacked the Al Ahli Arab Hospital in Gaza City, one of the last functioning medical centers in Gaza. Israel has said the strike on the Al Ahli hospital was targeting a Hamas command center, without providing evidence. On Tuesday, the Israeli military said it was looking into the reports about the strike on the Kuwait Specialty Field Hospital. Dr. Suhaib al-Hamss, the field hospital's director, said that the guard was killed protecting the entrance to the facility. Four of the wounded suffered serious injuries, he added. 'It was a powerful strike,' Dr. al-Hamss, 37, said in a phone interview. 'Everything fell over.' The Israeli military offensive in Gaza has caused immense damage to hospitals and the health care system in the enclave. The World Health Organization reported last month that 33 of Gaza's 36 hospitals had been damaged during the war, and that only 21 remained partly functional. The W.H.O. also warned on Saturday that hospitals in Gaza face a looming medicine shortage because Israel has blocked aid deliveries for six weeks. Israel has accused Hamas of exploiting health facilities by using them for military purposes — allegations that the militant group has denied. Dr. al-Hamss said that the hospital's location was known to the Israeli authorities as it had been shared through intermediaries before the attack. He added that staff were vetted and that Hamas government offices were not hosted at the medical facility. 'We're not doing anything other than medicine,' he said. The Kuwait Specialty Field Hospital was treating a minimum of 3,500 patients every day, according to Dr. al-Hamss. 'The hospital,' he said, 'is providing a solution to the people in light of the collapse of the heath sector in Gaza.'
