Global Health Initiative

The Obama Administration's $63-billion initiative aimed at advancing global health.

Obama Policy Will Take Lives, Spread AIDS, Says African

Zambian Michael Gwaba, who is HIV-positive and alive today because of access to anti-retroviral drugs, is in Seattle this week to ask that Americans pressure the Obama Administration to keep our nation’s promise to help more Africans gain access to life-saving AIDS drugs.

Despite some creative accounting that allows administration officials to keep claiming they are increasing funding for AIDS drugs in Africa, it’s, uh, well, actually not true. More on that in a bit.

by Tom Paulson

Michael Gwaba with John Fawcett and Bob Dickerson of RESULTS, in Belltown

“I’ve come to appeal to the grassroots,” said Gwaba, who lost his brother, wife and infant son to AIDS-related illnesses. He’s in Seattle thanks to the local branch of RESULTS, a nationwide anti-poverty organization.

Gwaba was not always an activist. He says he once thought HIV/AIDS was not his problem, perhaps like some of us who tend to view Africa’s struggle against the pandemic as not our problem. Continue reading →

FILED UNDER: Health, Justice, Politics, Africa, Global Health Initiative, HIV-AIDS, Obama Administration, RESULTS

August 18, 2010 | 6:00 AM | By Tom Paulson

Gender-based Global Health?

Flickr, DFID

Mother and child, Madhya Pradesh, India

Maybe even asking this question is a bad idea. Maybe it’s just me — either because I’m a man and/or a nerd.

But I can’t help but wonder if the latest trend of focusing the global health agenda on women and girls could actually do more harm than good.

There are many reasons why this would seem an obvious choice, why it just makes sense to focus health efforts on women and girls. Here are just a few of those reasons:

Women give birth to all of us. A healthy birth and childhood prevents a lot of ills.
Girls grow up to be women.
Females often get short shrift in many communities and cultures due to gender discrimination. Putting an emphasis on improving female health and welfare can reduce unhealthy inequities.

I don’t think anyone would argue with those fundamental assumptions. Given these realities, it appears both wise and just to focus global health efforts on women and girls.

But how exactly would this be carried out? Continue reading →

FILED UNDER: Basics, Health, Justice, Politics, Global Health Initiative, women's health

August 17, 2010 | 6:00 AM | By Tom Paulson

America’s Global Health Initiative is American

Flickr, by Roger H. Goun

Secretary of State Hilary Clinton

“No nation in history has done more to improve global health,” Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Monday in a speech celebrating the United States’ commitment to fighting disease, saving lives and improving social welfare worldwide.

“We have led the way on some of the greatest health achievements of our time,” said Clinton to a crowd at Johns Hopkins University’s Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies.

She cited the eradication of smallpox (which, technically, was achieved by the World Health Organization and PAHO), the Expanded Program on Immunization (also led by WHO, along with UNICEF and the health ministries of many countries) and the fights against AIDS, TB and malaria. I guess we can legitimately take credit for funding much of that last bunch, though arguably these are all more accurately viewed largely as international collaborations.

What Clinton was leading up to with this somewhat parochial view of global health was to pitch the Administration’s $63 billion Global Health Initiative.

The aim of this project, spread over six years, has many parts but is focused on women and children — and measurable achievements in “health system strengthening.”

An earlier Global Health Initiative, launched in 2002 at the World Economic Forum, was focused on fighting AIDS, TB and malaria, and improving health systems. It was launched by the private sector in part to support the ambitious creation of the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria.

What’s interesting here is how the focal point in global health keeps changing. Continue reading →