Hope for global pandemic treaty rises — despite missed deadline

Mariana Lenharo

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-01658-5

IF: 64.8

2024-06-04

Nature

Abstract:Delegates were at an impasse over key issues, but agreements on other public-health emergency measures sparks cautious optimism. Delegates were at an impasse over key issues, but agreements on other public-health emergency measures sparks cautious optimism.

multidisciplinary sciences

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Pandemic treaty: panel calls for "reset" to talks as negotiators miss deadline

Luke Taylor

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.q1193

2024-06-01

BMJ

Abstract:Negotiations of a World Health Organization (WHO) global pandemic accord need a "reset" after member states failed to meet the 24 May deadline, a panel of experts monitoring the talks has said.The future of the accord now hangs in the balance, and any agreement will likely take a minimum of a year to reach as extensive negotiations are still required, member states at the World Health Assembly in Geneva said on 28 May.The accord is intended to prevent a repeat of the global disaster seen during the covid-19 pandemic, which took millions of lives, but negotiators were unable to come up with a draft of the treaty on 24 May so that it could be formally approved by the assembly. Nation states are now discussing how to change the negotiation process so that they can overcome key sticking points, among them disagreement over the redistribution of health products during a...

medicine, general & internal
A pandemic agreement is within reach

Anita Cicero,Alexandra Phelan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adq1055

IF: 56.9

2024-05-03

Science

Abstract:At the end of May, 194 member states of the World Health Organization (WHO) will meet for the World Health Assembly. Negotiations underway now will determine whether they vote then to adopt a pandemic agreement. For the past 2 years, discussions have focused on articulating essential components of a robust and equitable architecture for pandemic preparedness and response. Despite this, talks have failed to produce sufficient consensus on a detailed draft, prompting the intergovernmental negotiating body to propose a "streamlined" version. The new text, released on 16 April, consolidates provisions for research and development, technology transfer, pathogen access and benefit sharing (including pandemic products such as medicines and vaccines), with many particulars deferred to future procedures. Ultimately, success of the agreement will depend on these details and implementation. Nevertheless, member states shouldn't bypass the consensus reached to date, but continue progress to adopt this agreement.
Recovery is missing in the pandemic treaty

Jeremy S Rossman,Vicky van der Togt

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.q2827

2024-12-17

BMJ

Abstract:In early 2022 the World Health Organization (WHO) began drafting an international treaty to tackle the "serious shortcomings" in pandemic preparedness highlighted by the covid-19 pandemic.1 The treaty could improve global health safety, but there are many concerns with the current version, including the inadequate assurance of equity between member states, minimal accounting for human behaviour, and a lack of focus on pandemic recovery.12 Recovery planning is essential to manage the ongoing risks of virus transmission, repair pandemic induced societal damages, and assess response effectiveness to enable preparation for future pandemics.WHO declared an end to the covid-19 public health emergency of international concern in May 2023 but stated "that does not mean covid-19 is over as a global health threat."3 We are currently in a murky phase of the pandemic where the balance between the ongoing risks of covid-19 and the route to recovery are unclear to many individuals and...

medicine, general & internal
WHO member states agree better ways to detect health threats and set new deadline for pandemic treaty

Luke Taylor

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.q1227

2024-06-04

BMJ

Abstract:The negotiation of a pandemic accord intended to prevent the global disaster seen during covid-19 should be completed in the next year, WHO officials in Geneva announced this weekend.WHO extended the deadline for the accord to be finalised—to the 2025 World Health Assembly—after the organisation's 194 member states failed to agree on a text by the 24 May deadline, despite more than two years of negotiations. Although country representatives were unable to agree on the new legally binding global convention on pandemics, they did manage to agree on updates to the international health regulations (IHR), the legally binding framework first drawn up in 1969 to improve the world's response to global health threats."The amendments to the international health regulations will bolster countries' ability to detect and respond to future outbreaks and pandemics by strengthening their own national capacities and coordination between fellow states, on disease surveillance, information sharing, and response,"...

medicine, general & internal
The pandemic treaty: a grand global social bargain

Laurence O. Gostin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41591-024-00043-z

IF: 82.9

2024-06-06

Nature Medicine

Abstract:The treaty is a grand social bargain of open sharing of crucial scientific data in real time and equitable allocation of lifesaving medical countermeasures. The treaty is a grand social bargain of open sharing of crucial scientific data in real time and equitable allocation of lifesaving medical countermeasures.

biochemistry & molecular biology,cell biology,medicine, research & experimental
Navigating Hurdles: A Review of the Obstacles Facing the Development of the Pandemic Treaty

Haytham A. Sheerah,Shouq M. Alzaaqi,Ahmed Arafa,Shada AlSalamah,Nelly G. Muriungi,Barbara Fialho C Sampaio,Jasper Tromp,Keyang Liu,Kokoro Shirai,Mellissa Withers,Ahmed Al-Jedai

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s44197-024-00233-5

2024-04-30

Journal of Epidemiology and Global Health

Abstract:The emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic has served as a call for enhanced global cooperation and a more robust pandemic preparedness and response framework. As a result of this pressing demand, dialogues were initiated to establish a pandemic treaty designed to foster a synchronized global strategy for addressing forthcoming health emergencies. In this review, we discussed the main obstacles to this treaty.

public, environmental & occupational health
A global pandemic treaty is in sight: don't scupper it

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-01464-z

IF: 64.8

2024-05-22

Nature

Abstract:Millions of people died of COVID-19 because the fundamental principle of equity between nations was ignored during the outbreak. That must not be allowed to happen again. Millions of people died of COVID-19 because the fundamental principle of equity between nations was ignored during the outbreak. That must not be allowed to happen again.

multidisciplinary sciences
Rifts over equity imperil WHO's pandemic treaty

Jon Cohen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adp3267

IF: 56.9

2024-03-22

Science

Abstract:As deadline nears, negotiations continue over sharing pathogen sequences and vaccine doses

multidisciplinary sciences
The importance of getting the ethics right in a pandemic treaty

G Owen Schaefer,Caesar A Atuire,Sharon Kaur,Michael Parker,Govind Persad,Maxwell J Smith,Ross Upshur,Ezekiel Emanuel

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(23)00364-X

Abstract:The COVID-19 pandemic revealed numerous weaknesses in pandemic preparedness and response, including underfunding, inadequate surveillance, and inequitable distribution of countermeasures. To overcome these weaknesses for future pandemics, WHO released a zero draft of a pandemic treaty in February, 2023, and subsequently a revised bureau's text in May, 2023. COVID-19 made clear that pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response reflect choices and value judgements. These decisions are therefore not a purely scientific or technical exercise, but are fundamentally grounded in ethics. The latest treaty draft reflects these ethical considerations by including a section entitled Guiding Principles and Approaches. Most of these principles are ethical-they establish core values that undergird the treaty. Unfortunately, the treaty draft's set of principles are numerous, overlapping, and show inadequate coherence and consistency. We propose two improvements to this section of the draft pandemic treaty. First, key guiding ethical principles should be clearer and more precise than they currently are. Second, the link between ethical principles and policy implementation should be clearly established and define boundaries on acceptable interpretation, ensuring that signatories abide by these principles.
New international pandemic treaty: potential implications for clinicians worldwide

Sarosh Nagar

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/postgradmedj-2021-141090

2021-09-11

Postgraduate Medical Journal

Abstract:The advent of the SARS-CoV-2 or COVID-19 pandemic has spurred a broad interest in efforts to reform international health institutions. Central to this effort are calls for the creation of a new multilateral pandemic prevention treaty under the auspices of the United Nations or the WHO, with initial treaty talks slated for November.1 Such a treaty is intended to share information about new infectious diseases among member states, develop global pandemic surveillance and response capacity and more.2 If done correctly, such a treaty holds unique potential to help the world effectively detect and contain outbreaks of novel infectious diseases.1 2 Nevertheless, in the debate over a new global health treaty, the benefits and drawbacks of a new agreement to practising clinicians worldwide have been underdiscussed. Indeed, far from what some believe, a new pandemic prevention treaty has significant potential to alleviate...

medicine, general & internal
Study on major legal issues and solutions in pandemic treaty negotiations

Weiqi Chen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2024.1413036

2024-09-20

Abstract:In December 2021, WHO's 194 member states began reaching a consensus to start the process of drafting and negotiating a pandemic treaty under the WHO Act. Although there is already a PHEIC system to deal with sudden public health events such as pandemics, the system is not sufficient to deal with global pandemic events. The draft WHO Pandemic Agreement reflects the negotiating process until 24 May 2024. The negotiating team is faced with legal issues such as the treatment of the relationship between the pandemic treaty and the International Health Regulations, the determination of the contracting model, the attribution of the pandemic definition power and the construction of the dispute settlement mechanism. Through a study of the articles of the current draft and a comparative analysis with other treaties, this paper discusses the need to distinguish the functions of the pandemic treaty and the International Health Regulations (IHR), adopt a soft and hard contracting model, establish an open and transparent pandemic determination mechanism, reform the institutional functions of WHO, and establish an effective dispute settlement mechanism in order to solve the above problems. Ultimately, fairness and justice in international public health governance will be achieved.
Pandemic treaty as an instrument to strengthen global health security: Global health diplomacy at its crux

Vijay Kumar Chattu,Rajani Mol,Bawa Singh,K Srikanth Reddy,Arian Hatefi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.34172/hpp.42744

2024-03-14

Abstract:Background: The World Health Assembly (WHA), on 1st December 2021, unanimously agreed to launch a global process to draft and negotiate a convention, agreement, or other international instrument under the World Health Organization's (WHO's) constitution to strengthen pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response. We aimed to explore the role of global health diplomacy (GHD) in pandemic treaty negotiations by providing deep insight into the ongoing drafting process under the WHO leadership. Methods: We conducted a narrative review by searching Scopus, Web of Sciences, PubMed, MEDLINE, and Google Scholar search engine using the keywords "Pandemic Treaty," OR "International Health Regulations," OR "International conventions," OR "International treaties" in the context of recent COVID-19 pandemic. Besides, we included articles recommending the need for GHD, leadership and governance mechanisms for this international treaty drafting approved by the WHA. Results: Amid the COVID-19 pandemic, the concept of GHD bolstered the international system and remained high on the agendas of many national, regional and global platforms. As per Article 19 of the WHO constitution, the Assembly established an intergovernmental negotiating body (INB) to draft and negotiate this convention/ agreement to protect the world from disease outbreaks of pandemic potential. Since GHD has helped to strengthen international cooperation in health systems and address inequities in achieving health-related global targets, there is a great scope for the successful drafting of this pandemic treaty. Conclusion: The pandemic treaty is a defining moment in global health governance, particularly the pandemic governance reforms. However, the treaty's purpose will only be served if the equity considerations are optimized, accountability mechanisms are established, and a sense of shared responsibility is embraced. While fulfilling treaty commitments might be complex and challenging, it provides an opportunity to rethink and build resilient systems for pandemic preparedness and response in the future.
Shaping Global Health Law through United Nations Governance: The UN High-Level Meeting on Pandemic Prevention, Preparedness and Response

Benjamin Mason Meier,Alexandra Finch,Nina Schwalbe

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4608525

2023-01-01

SSRN Electronic Journal

Abstract:The United Nations (UN) General Assembly High-Level Meeting (HLM) on pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response (PPPR) was a missed opportunity to bring high-level commitment and momentum to the global governance of health emergencies. Intended to bring much-needed attention to a policy issue that is rapidly slipping down the international agenda, the fraught diplomacy among member states, lack of consensus on key issues, and weak UN Political Declaration in New York foreshadow a difficult road ahead for upcoming negotiations under the World Health Organization (WHO) in Geneva. The UN General Assembly could have provided momentum to these Geneva processes and advanced commitments on leadership, equity, global financing, and international accountability; however, UN inaction leaves WHO at the helm of global governance for PPPR. While WHO is the appropriate body to lead the health aspects of PPPR, an opportunity for a multisectoral approach to prepare for and respond to pandemic threats has been lost. This column chronicles the evolving engagement of the UN in global health governance, examines the diplomatic process leading to the UN HLM on PPPR, and assesses the contributions and missed opportunities of its resulting Political Declaration.
The Pandemic Treaty, the Pandemic Fund, and the Global Commons: our scepticism

Nelson Aghogho Evaborhene,Echezona Ejike Udokanma,Yusuff Adebayo Adebisi,Chinonso Emmanuel Okorie,Zacharia Kafuko,Hawa Marguerite Conde,Cynthia Waliaula,Sheila Mburu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2022-011431

Abstract:The call to strengthen global health governance against future outbreaks through a binding treaty on pandemics has attracted global attention and opinion. Yet, few of these perspectives have reflected the voices from early career global health professionals in Africa. We share our perspectives on the Pandemic Treaty, and specifically our scepticism on the limitations of the current top-down approach of the treaty, and the need for the treaty to centre equity, transparency and fairness to ensure equitable and effective cooperation in response to global health emergencies. We also highlight the challenges intergovernmental organisations for health faced in coordinating nation states during the COVID-19 crisis and how a Pandemic Treaty would address these challenges. We argue that lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic provide a critical opportunity to strengthen regional institutions in Africa-particularly in a multipolar world with huge disparities in power and resources. However, addressing these challenges and achieving this transformation may not be easy. Fiscal space in many countries remains constrained now more than ever. New tools such as the Pandemic Fund should be designed in ways that consider the specific needs and capacities of countries. Therefore, strengthening countries' capacities overall requires an increase in domestic investment. This paper calls for wider structural reforms such as debt restructuring among other tools to strengthen countries' capacities.
Negotiating a pandemic treaty is just the first step — how will countries comply?

Tae Jung Park

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-01586-4

IF: 64.8

2024-06-05

Nature

Abstract:Governments must act now on vaccine and pathogen-sample sharing, or any agreement will be a promise only on paper. Governments must act now on vaccine and pathogen-sample sharing, or any agreement will be a promise only on paper.

multidisciplinary sciences
Coronavirus Disease 2019 emergency is over but the pandemic is not: implications for a new global order

Okesanya Olalekan John,Emery Manirambona,Julian M. A. Buban,Olaleke Noah Olabode,Don Eliseo Lucero‐Prisno

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/gh9.0000000000000207

2023-01-01

International Journal of Surgery

Abstract:On December 8, 2019, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) first appeared in the city of Wuhan, located in the Hubei province of China. On January 30, 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) formally announced the COVID-19 outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern whereas on March 11, 2020, the outbreak was declared as a global pandemic1. According to the latest available data by WHO as of May 7, 2023, there have been over 765 million confirmed cases and over 6.9 million deaths reported worldwide due to COVID-192. On May 5, 2023, the WHO officially ended the emergency declaration for COVID-19, marking a significant milestone in the global response to the pandemic. This initial declaration was made over 3 years ago and reflects the ongoing efforts to recover from a crisis that has resulted in millions of deaths and unprecedented disruptions to daily life worldwide. Despite the announcement, WHO officials have emphasized that this does not indicate the end of the pandemic. They have warned countries against dismantling their COVID-19 response systems and advised maintaining vigilance in tackling the ongoing global health crisis3. The United States announced its decision to lift its own COVID-19 emergency designation on May 11. As this action aligns with the lifting of the WHO designation as a “public health emergency of international concern,” it is seen as a significant development in the ongoing global response to the novel coronavirus4. Following the WHO’s lead, many other countries have already taken steps to lift their own states of emergency related to COVID-19. In addition, several nations have reduced or eliminated public health restrictions that were implemented to contain the spread of the virus. However, it is important to note that the global pandemic is still ongoing, and experts continue to stress the importance of maintaining precautionary measures and public health strategies to effectively manage the situation3. As the end of the COVID-19 emergency status is being announced, there is an urgent need for a new post-COVID-19 global order to guide the evolving nature of our relationship with the virus as we continue to adapt and navigate through the challenges posed by the pandemic. The global unity and support fostered during the period of worldwide lockdown and outbreak provide a strong basis for future endeavors. It is important to cultivate and maintain this sense of solidarity beyond the current circumstances as we look to manage this virus5. The COVID-19 pandemic exposed the vulnerabilities and weaknesses of many countries and the existing global order. To this end, there is a need for precautionary measures to be implemented globally to detect early indications of a previously unknown and potentially hazardous pathogen and respond to it. Authorities have already begun to take such measures: in October 2022, the US government announced the formulation of a national biodefense strategy plan that aims to establish global testing capabilities for a new pathogen within 12 hours, implement rapid testing within 1 week, develop pathogen-specific testing within 30 days, release a new specific vaccine within 100 days, manufacture enough doses for each country within 130 days, and ensure availability for high-risk populations worldwide within 200 days. In addition, the plan aims to repurpose existing drugs for the new pathogen within 90 days and develop new therapeutic options within 180 days6. Although developing such capabilities will require significant investment in both facilities and human resources, doing so can save immense value and an immeasurable number of human lives worldwide. The continuing presence of COVID-19 and the latent potential for pathogenic evolution mean that the occurrence of another catastrophic pandemic is not outside the realm of possibility. Preventing such a situation necessitates thorough early preparation and far-reaching foresight in a spirit of global preparedness and togetherness6. It is crucial to have robust global-level preparedness metrics, comprehensive health education, and nationwide community engagement to enforce preventive measures and avoid crowded gatherings. Caution should be exercised regarding the consumption of and interaction with wild animals to prevent the spread of unforeseen zoonotic diseases. In addition, revitalizing public health, strong global health care, and community resilience are essential in effectively responding to health threats and building trust in global health care and public services7. Ethical approval Not applicable. Sources of funding None. Author contributions All authors contributed equally to the writing of this article, and have read and approved the final draft. Conflict of interest disclosures The authors declare that they have no financial conflict of interest with regard to the content of this report. Research registration unique identifying number (UIN) NA. Guarantor Okesanya Olalekan John.
Global Health Security Demands a Strong International Health Regulations Treaty and Leadership From a Highly Resourced World Health Organization

Frederick M. Burkle

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/dmp.2015.26

IF: 5.556

2015-02-18

Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness

Abstract:Abstract If the Ebola tragedy of West Africa has taught us anything, it should be that the 2005 International Health Regulations (IHR) Treaty, which gave unprecedented authority to the World Health Organization (WHO) to provide global public health security during public health emergencies of international concern, has fallen severely short of its original goal. After encouraging successes with the 2003 severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) pandemic, the intent of the legally binding Treaty to improve the capacity of all countries to detect, assess, notify, and respond to public health threats has shamefully lapsed. Despite the granting of 2-year extensions in 2012 to countries to meet core surveillance and response requirements, less than 20% of countries have complied. Today it is not realistic to expect that these gaps will be solved or narrowed in the foreseeable future by the IHR or the WHO alone under current provisions. The unfortunate failures that culminated in an inadequate response to the Ebola epidemic in West Africa are multifactorial, including funding, staffing, and poor leadership decisions, but all are reversible. A rush by the Global Health Security Agenda partners to fill critical gaps in administrative and operational areas has been crucial in the short term, but questions remain as to the real priorities of the G20 as time elapses and critical gaps in public health protections and infrastructure take precedence over the economic and security needs of the developed world. The response from the Global Outbreak Alert and Response Network and foreign medical teams to Ebola proved indispensable to global health security, but both deserve stronger strategic capacity support and institutional status under the WHO leadership granted by the IHR Treaty. Treaties are the most successful means the world has in preventing, preparing for, and controlling epidemics in an increasingly globalized world. Other options are not sustainable. Given the gravity of ongoing failed treaty management, the slow and incomplete process of reform, the magnitude and complexity of infectious disease outbreaks, and the rising severity of public health emergencies, a recommitment must be made to complete and restore the original mandates as a collaborative and coordinated global network responsibility, not one left to the actions of individual countries. The bottom line is that the global community can no longer tolerate an ineffectual and passive international response system. As such, this Treaty has the potential to become one of the most effective treaties for crisis response and risk reduction worldwide. Practitioners and health decision-makers worldwide must break their silence and advocate for a stronger Treaty and a return of WHO authority. ( Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2015;9:568–580)

public, environmental & occupational health
China and the WHO pandemic treaty: a dive into stance, underpinnings, and implications

Ying Huang,Shisong Jiang,Emmanuel Kumah

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2024.1335751

IF: 5.2

2024-01-31

Frontiers in Public Health

Abstract:The COVID-19 pandemic exposed gaps in global health governance, catalyzing proposals for a new WHO pandemic treaty. This paper investigates China's stance on the treaty, recognizing it as reflective of many developing countries' concerns, through a qualitative analysis of its interventions during the treaty's drafting and negotiations and an examination of historical and geopolitical factors. Findings reveal China's emphasis on respecting state sovereignty, differentiated obligations for developing nations, preventing stigma, and concrete capacity building—concerns shared across the Global South. Its posture balances pragmatism and principle, reflecting differentiated responsibilities as a major power and developing country along with philosophical divergences from Western legal thinking. While endorsing global cooperation, China insists on voluntary terms without impinging on policy space. Implications suggest that accommodating China's concerns about invasive compliance mechanisms and inequitable burdens through flexible provisions can shape the treaty's acceptance and architecture. Creative solutions reconciling sovereignty and collective action combined with concrete equity measures and depoliticized cooperation will determine the treaty's success. China's major role indicates its endorsement, representative of the Global South's voice, is essential for an impactful pandemic treaty and reformed global health governance.

public, environmental & occupational health
Strengthening the COVID-19 pandemic response, global leadership, and international cooperation through global health diplomacy

Sumbal Javed,Vijay Kumar Chattu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.34172/hpp.2020.48

2020-11-07

Health Promotion Perspectives

Abstract:The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continues to claim lives around the world and, to some extent, reflects the failure of international cooperation. Global health diplomacy (GHD)can be a bridge for international cooperation for tackling public health crises, strengthening health systems through emphasizing universal health coverage for sustainable and equitable development, and rebuilding multilateral organizations. It can be a catalyst for future global health initiatives. Health should not be used as a political tool at the cost of people’s lives, nor should it become a proxy for geopolitics but can be used to diffuse tensions and create a positive environment for political dialogue. Health diplomacy’s focus should be to mitigate inequality by making available diagnostics, therapeutics, and vaccines as a global public good. The implications for the lack of international cooperation will lead to increased global disparities and inequities as the countries that cannot procure vaccines will find their population more vulnerable to the pandemic’s repercussion. Though the international cooperation on trade has suffered the impact of geopolitical shifts and competition, through engaging in GHD, the governments can align the trade and health policies. Amid this global health crisis, the World Health Organization (WHO) has faced an increase in International Health Regulations violations, limiting its influence and response during this COVID-19 pandemic. Nations need to develop a sense of cooperation that serves as the basis for a mutual strategic trust for international development. The priorities of all the countries should be to find the areas of common interest, common operational overlap on development issues, and resource allocation for this global fight against COVID-19.
A multinational Delphi consensus to end the COVID-19 public health threat

Jeffrey V Lazarus,Diana Romero,Christopher J Kopka,Salim Abdool Karim,Laith J Abu-Raddad,Gisele Almeida,Ricardo Baptista-Leite,Joshua A Barocas,Mauricio L Barreto,Yaneer Bar-Yam,Quique Bassat,Carolina Batista,Morgan Bazilian,Shu-Ti Chiou,Carlos Del Rio,Gregory J Dore,George F Gao,Lawrence O Gostin,Margaret Hellard,Jose L Jimenez,Gagandeep Kang,Nancy Lee,Mojca Matičič,Martin McKee,Sabin Nsanzimana,Miquel Oliu-Barton,Bary Pradelski,Oksana Pyzik,Kenneth Rabin,Sunil Raina,Sabina Faiz Rashid,Magdalena Rathe,Rocio Saenz,Sudhvir Singh,Malene Trock-Hempler,Sonia Villapol,Peiling Yap,Agnes Binagwaho,Adeeba Kamarulzaman,Ayman El-Mohandes,COVID-19 Consensus Statement Panel

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-05398-2

IF: 64.8

Nature

Abstract:Despite notable scientific and medical advances, broader political, socioeconomic and behavioural factors continue to undercut the response to the COVID-19 pandemic1,2. Here we convened, as part of this Delphi study, a diverse, multidisciplinary panel of 386 academic, health, non-governmental organization, government and other experts in COVID-19 response from 112 countries and territories to recommend specific actions to end this persistent global threat to public health. The panel developed a set of 41 consensus statements and 57 recommendations to governments, health systems, industry and other key stakeholders across six domains: communication; health systems; vaccination; prevention; treatment and care; and inequities. In the wake of nearly three years of fragmented global and national responses, it is instructive to note that three of the highest-ranked recommendations call for the adoption of whole-of-society and whole-of-government approaches1, while maintaining proven prevention measures using a vaccines-plus approach2 that employs a range of public health and financial support measures to complement vaccination. Other recommendations with at least 99% combined agreement advise governments and other stakeholders to improve communication, rebuild public trust and engage communities3 in the management of pandemic responses. The findings of the study, which have been further endorsed by 184 organizations globally, include points of unanimous agreement, as well as six recommendations with >5% disagreement, that provide health and social policy actions to address inadequacies in the pandemic response and help to bring this public health threat to an end.

Hope for global pandemic treaty rises — despite missed deadline

Pandemic treaty: panel calls for "reset" to talks as negotiators miss deadline

A pandemic agreement is within reach

Recovery is missing in the pandemic treaty

WHO member states agree better ways to detect health threats and set new deadline for pandemic treaty

The pandemic treaty: a grand global social bargain

Navigating Hurdles: A Review of the Obstacles Facing the Development of the Pandemic Treaty

A global pandemic treaty is in sight: don't scupper it

Rifts over equity imperil WHO's pandemic treaty

The importance of getting the ethics right in a pandemic treaty

New international pandemic treaty: potential implications for clinicians worldwide

Study on major legal issues and solutions in pandemic treaty negotiations

Pandemic treaty as an instrument to strengthen global health security: Global health diplomacy at its crux

Shaping Global Health Law through United Nations Governance: The UN High-Level Meeting on Pandemic Prevention, Preparedness and Response

The Pandemic Treaty, the Pandemic Fund, and the Global Commons: our scepticism

Negotiating a pandemic treaty is just the first step — how will countries comply?

Coronavirus Disease 2019 emergency is over but the pandemic is not: implications for a new global order

Global Health Security Demands a Strong International Health Regulations Treaty and Leadership From a Highly Resourced World Health Organization

China and the WHO pandemic treaty: a dive into stance, underpinnings, and implications

Strengthening the COVID-19 pandemic response, global leadership, and international cooperation through global health diplomacy

A multinational Delphi consensus to end the COVID-19 public health threat