http://0rz.tw/a433H
這是在2005年IHR時的相關討論，可以了解到印尼、土耳其、羅馬尼亞所面臨的困境
在禽流感及剛過的SARS問題上，疾病流行的爆發所存在的經濟損失。
Calls for more money as the threat looms ever larger
Nov 11th 2005
From Economist.com
At a meeting in Geneva, development banks and health agencies have called for much more money to respond to the outbreak of bird flu and the threat of a human pandemic. Rich countries are working on their own plans in case the co-ordinated global response fails
IN RECENT weeks, the world’s public health officials have been afflicted with a sort of pandemic of meetings about bird flu. Much of this culminated, this week, in a meeting of officials from nations around the world at the headquarters of the World Health Organisation (WHO) in Geneva. Plans were hatched for how best to respond to the threat from a virus that is threatening poultry around the world and which, it is feared, may trigger a pandemic of human flu. And money was discussed. Lots of it.
The meeting revealed a broad consensus that the best short-term strategy was to tackle and eliminate the animal disease. Already, 150m birds have been culled around the world. Countries such as Japan and Malaysia have reacted quickly to eliminate outbreaks of highly pathogenic bird flu and have now been declared free from virus. However, poor countries in Asia such as Vietnam, Cambodia, Thailand and Laos have neither the veterinary facilities for surveillance, the laboratories to test samples, nor the ability to respond swiftly to eradicate outbreaks. It is increasingly clear that the world’s richer nations will have to pay for these countries to raise their capacity in these areas.
While everyone seems to agree that the best strategy for dealing with the threat of a human pandemic is to control flu in birds, little clarity emerged in Geneva on how money would be allocated. The World Bank said it would create a programme to make $500m available to countries in South-East Asia struggling to contain the outbreak; overall, the bank believes that up to $1 billion will be needed over the next three years to handle the poultry crisis. In addition, the Asian Development Bank said it could commit at least $470m (as a mixture of grants and loans) to support Asia’s response—a sum that also includes money to help countries stockpile drugs.
In the short term, international agencies such as the WHO, the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) and the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) say they need about $35m to respond. They are worried that some countries appear to be overwhelmed by the disease. There is also great concern that flu might be carried to poor African nations by migrating birds. It has already spread to the edges of the European Union: last month, the deadly H5N1 strain of the virus was confirmed in poultry in Turkey and Romania. And on Friday, Kuwait announced the first confirmed case in the Middle East.
There is likely to be more clarity in January as to how all this money would be allocated, at yet another bird-flu meeting. However, some overlapping requirements are already emerging. The FAO and OIE have for some time had a largely unfunded global strategy for fighting avian flu. As the disease spreads to new countries, the costs of this plan are spiralling—from $100m earlier this year to $500m now. So far, less than a tenth of this has been made available. Instead, much of the money being discussed by the big international lenders will go directly to individual countries.
More information also emerged this week on the cost-effectiveness of such spending. Milan Brahmbhatt, lead economist for the East Asia and Pacific region at the World Bank, pointed out that while there were huge uncertainties over the severity of any future flu pandemic, the disruption caused by the SARS virus in 2003 led to $200 billion of economic losses in one three-month period. Because a human pandemic could easily cause disruption lasting a year, reports suggest it would cost some $800 billion in global losses; America alone could suffer losses of $100 billion-200 billion from a pandemic that made 50m people ill and killed between 100,000 and 200,000. The Asian Development Bank reckons that a demand shock from a severe outbreak would cause up to $283 billion in damage to Asia’s economies and could tip the world economy into recession.
Although the disease is currently a threat mainly to poultry, many are worried about the supply of anti-viral drugs and vaccines for a human pandemic. Some countries are reported to be stockpiling enough anti-virals for 25% of the population, while others have little or no access to such medicines because of their high costs or shortage of stocks.
So far, 50 countries have placed orders with Roche, a Swiss company, for its drug Tamiflu, which is one of two anti-viral treatments thought to be effective in protecting humans from bird flu. Margaret Chan, assistant director-general of communicable diseases at the WHO, hinted on Wednesday that further funding for new stockpiles of anti-virals was likely to be announced soon, including additional money from the World Bank.
Although the supply of Tamiflu currently outstrips demand, Roche is ramping up production in anticipation of a sharp rise in orders. This year, the company plans to produce 55m doses, a tenfold increase on its capacity in 1999; this is expected to rise to 150m in 2006 and 300m in 2007. Although Roche is delivering the drug on a first-come-first-served basis, there have been some notable exceptions to this rule: the company was quick to send tens of thousands of packs to Indonesia, Turkey and Romania during their recent outbreaks.
So far, Roche has been approached by 150 companies and countries that are interested in working with the firm to produce Tamiflu. Most, though, only have the capability to put the active ingredient into capsules, as opposed to making it themselves. Although there have been reports that Roche will supply ingredients and know-how to allow Vietnam to manufacture the drug, in fact the ongoing negotiations are only about encapsulation. Of the 64 people who have so far died of bird flu, 42 were infected in Vietnam.
Roche says it wants to select partners by the end of November to help it speed up its own processes and add production capacity. Some countries and companies have said they will reverse-engineer and produce Tamiflu without help from Roche; it emerged this week that Chinese government scientists are trying to develop their own version of the drug. A Roche spokesperson said on Wednesday it would do everything it can to avoid this, and that it was “not on a collision course with any government in the world”. The company currently charges governments in rich countries €15 ($18) per course of ten Tamiflu tablets, and those in poor countries €12. It says this is well below its normal price, and rules out further reductions.
The big question, though, is how prepared the world’s governments want to be. The level of 25% (of population covered by stockpiles) is based on previous pandemics that suggest about a quarter of all people would get sick. Some countries have ordered more than this so that emergency workers can take the drug continuously to prevent them catching the virus.
Last week, the United States revealed that it would spend $7.1 billion preparing for a flu pandemic. Much of this money will be spent on buying drugs, while only $250m will be made available for foreign assistance. Such a wide disparity between the finance available for national and international programmes is by no means unique. While the most rational way to tackle the problem is to focus resources on stamping out highly contagious bird flu in a co-ordinated global way, rich countries are obliged to draw up their own fall-back plans in case such a strategy fails. However, the costs of responding at home are far higher than elimination at source.
2007年9月7日 星期五
How Dr Chan intends to defend the planet from pandemics
關於這次SEAR會議，我想要負責處理SEAR會員國的印尼針對辛布宣言裡面所重視的部份進行探討它的因素！
光狐
http://0rz.tw/a931U
The World Health Organisation
基本上講述印尼為什麼不提供禽流感病毒樣本的原因來自於窮國雖然提供疾病的樣本，但是卻無法拿到足夠的疫苗來預防疾病，而這些國家卻也是最有可能爆發流行的國家。所以這就是現在的WHO秘書長陳馮富珍所以想辦法解決的問題。
How Dr Chan intends to defend the planet from pandemics
Jun 14th 2007 | GENEVA
From The Economist print edition
The new powers vested in a UN agency's boss should, in theory, cut the risk of killer diseases raging round the world
WITH its big electronic screens and global satellite links, the command centre feels like the heart of a vast military campaign. Every morning, there are strategy sessions to mull the latest intelligence, and rapid-response teams are sent to remote places at the commander's bidding.
In this case, the control room answers not to any general, but to the World Health Organisation (WHO)—the Geneva-based United Nations agency whose job is to monitor and respond to infectious diseases. In recent years, it has nipped in the bud over six dozen outbreaks that could have led to global crises. Unless outbreaks are spotted early, and virus strains shared with researchers worldwide, there is a recurring risk of a pandemic similar to the strains of influenza which caused havoc over the past century (see table).
That may sound obvious, but in practice, countries don't always help the WHO. In 2002, when the respiratory disease dubbed SARS emerged in China, the authorities hid the early signs for fear of hurting trade and tourism. More recently, Indonesia has been mired in a more intractable dispute—raising hard questions about the balance of economic power in the world.
Last year, the Indonesians stopped giving the WHO samples of the H5 virus which is responsible for avian flu, a disease that has forced a mass slaughter of poultry in many countries and could, if it mutates, cause a deadly epidemic among humans. Indonesia won some sympathy for its complaint that it was giving away precious intellectual property, while it might well be unable to afford the vaccines which are then developed. There was little the WHO could do in response.
However the agency's hand will be strengthened by a treaty that enters force on June 15th. The new “international health regulations” (IHRs) oblige governments to co-operate with Margaret Chan, the WHO's director-general, and report potential pandemics at once. If it succeeds, this could lead to a “good-governance revolution” in disease prevention, says David Fidler of Indiana University.
But will it work? Sceptics are not short of arguments. The new system requires countries to do a lot of things to improve public health, but provides no money. Implementing the treaty could prove hard in federal states like Canada and the United States, adds Kumanan Wilson of the University of Toronto; some of the actions required by the IHRs are handled at state or provincial level. Even so, the IHRs have one advantage over treaties like the Kyoto protocol on climate change. At least in the short term, Kyoto imposes heavy costs on some countries that are hard to explain to voters. But every country has an immediate, obvious interest in avoiding pandemics. That, in principle, could put a great deal of power in Dr Chan's hands.
The new treaty commits countries to tell her within 24 hours of any emerging global health threat, something they have often failed to do. In a break with normal UN practice, the WHO will no longer be required only to rely on data from member governments: it can now use non-government sources, including the press and the internet, in its surveillance. If a country tries to hide vital data about a potential pandemic, Dr Chan can override national sensitivities and ring the alarm bells.
That sounds promising, but it does not quite deal with the problem raised by Indonesia. Poor countries, where most potential pandemics start, rarely have the health facilities or vaccine-making capacity to combat a serious outbreak on their own; they rely on external help and vaccine imports. They complain that big firms in rich countries are exploiting their vulnerability. Indonesian officials put it bluntly: why should they hand over precious virus strains when the resultant vaccine may never benefit their people?
The Indonesians have a point. It is true that most of the factories that make pandemic vaccines are located in rich countries, and those plants cannot make enough to cover even the rich world's needs. And in previous global health panics, it has been obvious that rich states think of their own voters first. So at a WHO assembly in May, rich countries agreed that the poor must have access to life-saving vaccines in the event of a pandemic; Indonesia duly agreed to share its virus samples again. On June 13th Dr Chan announced plans to create a global stockpile of avian flu vaccine with the help of donations from GlaxoSmithKline, a British drugs firm, and others.
Fine, but how exactly any strategic stockpile will be split up during a global pandemic remains a mystery. The new rules do not offer much help on that front.
What Indonesia and other poor states really want is to have vaccine-making units within their borders. The WHO has helped a few poor countries to start such plants, but the technology involved is tricky. Not every country in the world can expect to have such factories; and those that do may well resist the idea of helping rival states. As Laurie Garrett of America's Council on Foreign Relations notes, Indonesian politicians would balk at sharing vaccines with Papua New Guinea. That explains why stockpiling and building new factories are partial answers at best to the global challenge.
Perhaps the best reason to take the IHRs seriously is that by making it harder for governments to hide pandemic data, they make innovation more likely. And innovation is desperately needed: today's vaccines cannot be made in the volume needed for the whole world, and they cannot keep up with the evolution of some virus strains. But as Joseph Hogan of GE, an industrial firm with a health division, points out, smarter vaccines and more efficient manufacturing may solve that problem. Vijay Samant of Vical—one of several firms now investing heavily in a new generation of pandemic technology—also welcomes the increased powers for Dr Chan and her agency. “Without access to the latest strains, researchers can't come up with new vaccines,” he argues. Dr Chan faces a big job, and big expectations.
光狐
http://0rz.tw/a931U
The World Health Organisation
基本上講述印尼為什麼不提供禽流感病毒樣本的原因來自於窮國雖然提供疾病的樣本，但是卻無法拿到足夠的疫苗來預防疾病，而這些國家卻也是最有可能爆發流行的國家。所以這就是現在的WHO秘書長陳馮富珍所以想辦法解決的問題。
How Dr Chan intends to defend the planet from pandemics
Jun 14th 2007 | GENEVA
From The Economist print edition
The new powers vested in a UN agency's boss should, in theory, cut the risk of killer diseases raging round the world
WITH its big electronic screens and global satellite links, the command centre feels like the heart of a vast military campaign. Every morning, there are strategy sessions to mull the latest intelligence, and rapid-response teams are sent to remote places at the commander's bidding.
In this case, the control room answers not to any general, but to the World Health Organisation (WHO)—the Geneva-based United Nations agency whose job is to monitor and respond to infectious diseases. In recent years, it has nipped in the bud over six dozen outbreaks that could have led to global crises. Unless outbreaks are spotted early, and virus strains shared with researchers worldwide, there is a recurring risk of a pandemic similar to the strains of influenza which caused havoc over the past century (see table).
That may sound obvious, but in practice, countries don't always help the WHO. In 2002, when the respiratory disease dubbed SARS emerged in China, the authorities hid the early signs for fear of hurting trade and tourism. More recently, Indonesia has been mired in a more intractable dispute—raising hard questions about the balance of economic power in the world.
Last year, the Indonesians stopped giving the WHO samples of the H5 virus which is responsible for avian flu, a disease that has forced a mass slaughter of poultry in many countries and could, if it mutates, cause a deadly epidemic among humans. Indonesia won some sympathy for its complaint that it was giving away precious intellectual property, while it might well be unable to afford the vaccines which are then developed. There was little the WHO could do in response.
However the agency's hand will be strengthened by a treaty that enters force on June 15th. The new “international health regulations” (IHRs) oblige governments to co-operate with Margaret Chan, the WHO's director-general, and report potential pandemics at once. If it succeeds, this could lead to a “good-governance revolution” in disease prevention, says David Fidler of Indiana University.
But will it work? Sceptics are not short of arguments. The new system requires countries to do a lot of things to improve public health, but provides no money. Implementing the treaty could prove hard in federal states like Canada and the United States, adds Kumanan Wilson of the University of Toronto; some of the actions required by the IHRs are handled at state or provincial level. Even so, the IHRs have one advantage over treaties like the Kyoto protocol on climate change. At least in the short term, Kyoto imposes heavy costs on some countries that are hard to explain to voters. But every country has an immediate, obvious interest in avoiding pandemics. That, in principle, could put a great deal of power in Dr Chan's hands.
The new treaty commits countries to tell her within 24 hours of any emerging global health threat, something they have often failed to do. In a break with normal UN practice, the WHO will no longer be required only to rely on data from member governments: it can now use non-government sources, including the press and the internet, in its surveillance. If a country tries to hide vital data about a potential pandemic, Dr Chan can override national sensitivities and ring the alarm bells.
That sounds promising, but it does not quite deal with the problem raised by Indonesia. Poor countries, where most potential pandemics start, rarely have the health facilities or vaccine-making capacity to combat a serious outbreak on their own; they rely on external help and vaccine imports. They complain that big firms in rich countries are exploiting their vulnerability. Indonesian officials put it bluntly: why should they hand over precious virus strains when the resultant vaccine may never benefit their people?
The Indonesians have a point. It is true that most of the factories that make pandemic vaccines are located in rich countries, and those plants cannot make enough to cover even the rich world's needs. And in previous global health panics, it has been obvious that rich states think of their own voters first. So at a WHO assembly in May, rich countries agreed that the poor must have access to life-saving vaccines in the event of a pandemic; Indonesia duly agreed to share its virus samples again. On June 13th Dr Chan announced plans to create a global stockpile of avian flu vaccine with the help of donations from GlaxoSmithKline, a British drugs firm, and others.
Fine, but how exactly any strategic stockpile will be split up during a global pandemic remains a mystery. The new rules do not offer much help on that front.
What Indonesia and other poor states really want is to have vaccine-making units within their borders. The WHO has helped a few poor countries to start such plants, but the technology involved is tricky. Not every country in the world can expect to have such factories; and those that do may well resist the idea of helping rival states. As Laurie Garrett of America's Council on Foreign Relations notes, Indonesian politicians would balk at sharing vaccines with Papua New Guinea. That explains why stockpiling and building new factories are partial answers at best to the global challenge.
Perhaps the best reason to take the IHRs seriously is that by making it harder for governments to hide pandemic data, they make innovation more likely. And innovation is desperately needed: today's vaccines cannot be made in the volume needed for the whole world, and they cannot keep up with the evolution of some virus strains. But as Joseph Hogan of GE, an industrial firm with a health division, points out, smarter vaccines and more efficient manufacturing may solve that problem. Vijay Samant of Vical—one of several firms now investing heavily in a new generation of pandemic technology—also welcomes the increased powers for Dr Chan and her agency. “Without access to the latest strains, researchers can't come up with new vaccines,” he argues. Dr Chan faces a big job, and big expectations.
2007年9月6日 星期四
WHO’s Regional Committee for South-East Asia calls for continued solidarity to tackle the health challenges
這篇大致上是在描述東南亞國家面臨的一些問題
裡面有提到一個基金
還有提到下次(61屆)會在印度新德里舉辦
Thimphu, Bhutan, 3 September, 2007: The 60th session of WHO’s Regional Committee for South-East Asia concluded here today with a call for continued solidarity and joint endeavours for health development by Member countries. It noted with satisfaction the progress in the implementation of WHO’s collaborative programmes and activities in the Region.
The session took several momentous decisions and would be viewed, “As the session where regional solidarity and togetherness were further strengthened”, said Dr Samlee Plianbangchang, Regional Director for WHO South-East Asia Region.
Member countries of WHO’s South East Asia Region account for approximately 25% of the world population. However, they bear 40% of the world’s disease burden. The Region has the largest number of children missed by immunization, the highest number of deaths from measles, and from complications of pregnancy and childbirth.
Notably, the Committee adopted a resolution to establish the South-East Asia Regional Health Emergency Fund (SEARHEF). The Region is vulnerable to natural and man-made emergencies which impact human health, and accounted for 58% of deaths due to disasters worldwide. This Fund would provide financial support to Member Countries in the first three months after the onset of an emergency. It would be an instrument to tide over affected Member countries in the face of an emergency. The Fund is not meant to finance bulk relief, recovery, reconstruction and rehabilitation which are funded by established mechanisms like Flash Appeals, Consolidated Appeals Process (CAP) and Central Emergency Response Fund (CERF) The Fund would build a corpus from within countries and by raising voluntary contributions. Thailand announced a contribution of US $100,000 for the Fund, during the Regional Committee session.
The Committee deliberated on several issues of regional priority including: i)Nutrition and food safety, ii)Scaling up prevention and control of chronic noncommunicable diseases, iii) TB control iv)Revised malaria control strategy, v)Avian and pandemic influenza preparedness, vi) Public health, innovation and intellectual property rights, and vii) WHO and reforms of the UN system.
The Regional Committee decided that the Technical discussions in 2008 would be on the subject of “Revitalising Primary Health”.
The Regional Committee decided that its 61st session would be held at the SEARO office in New Delhi.
For any clarification or additional information, please contact Ms Vismita Gupta-Smith, the Public Information and Advocacy officer, phone: 91-11-23370971 and mobile: 91- 9871329861 Email: guptasmithv@searo.who.int and Ms Harsaran Pandey, STP-Information Officer, at telephone: 011 23309 465; mobile: 9811021001, email pandeyh@searo.who.int.
All press releases, fact sheets and other WHO media material may be found at: www.searo.who.int.
http://www.searo.who.int/en/Section316/Section503/Section2358_13505.htm
裡面有提到一個基金
還有提到下次(61屆)會在印度新德里舉辦
Thimphu, Bhutan, 3 September, 2007: The 60th session of WHO’s Regional Committee for South-East Asia concluded here today with a call for continued solidarity and joint endeavours for health development by Member countries. It noted with satisfaction the progress in the implementation of WHO’s collaborative programmes and activities in the Region.
The session took several momentous decisions and would be viewed, “As the session where regional solidarity and togetherness were further strengthened”, said Dr Samlee Plianbangchang, Regional Director for WHO South-East Asia Region.
Member countries of WHO’s South East Asia Region account for approximately 25% of the world population. However, they bear 40% of the world’s disease burden. The Region has the largest number of children missed by immunization, the highest number of deaths from measles, and from complications of pregnancy and childbirth.
Notably, the Committee adopted a resolution to establish the South-East Asia Regional Health Emergency Fund (SEARHEF). The Region is vulnerable to natural and man-made emergencies which impact human health, and accounted for 58% of deaths due to disasters worldwide. This Fund would provide financial support to Member Countries in the first three months after the onset of an emergency. It would be an instrument to tide over affected Member countries in the face of an emergency. The Fund is not meant to finance bulk relief, recovery, reconstruction and rehabilitation which are funded by established mechanisms like Flash Appeals, Consolidated Appeals Process (CAP) and Central Emergency Response Fund (CERF) The Fund would build a corpus from within countries and by raising voluntary contributions. Thailand announced a contribution of US $100,000 for the Fund, during the Regional Committee session.
The Committee deliberated on several issues of regional priority including: i)Nutrition and food safety, ii)Scaling up prevention and control of chronic noncommunicable diseases, iii) TB control iv)Revised malaria control strategy, v)Avian and pandemic influenza preparedness, vi) Public health, innovation and intellectual property rights, and vii) WHO and reforms of the UN system.
The Regional Committee decided that the Technical discussions in 2008 would be on the subject of “Revitalising Primary Health”.
The Regional Committee decided that its 61st session would be held at the SEARO office in New Delhi.
For any clarification or additional information, please contact Ms Vismita Gupta-Smith, the Public Information and Advocacy officer, phone: 91-11-23370971 and mobile: 91- 9871329861 Email: guptasmithv@searo.who.int and Ms Harsaran Pandey, STP-Information Officer, at telephone: 011 23309 465; mobile: 9811021001, email pandeyh@searo.who.int.
All press releases, fact sheets and other WHO media material may be found at: www.searo.who.int.
http://www.searo.who.int/en/Section316/Section503/Section2358_13505.htm
Something interesting
By Bush,
I searched google by "辛布+宣言+台灣",
and our blog came out in the first place of the search list.
Haahhh...
I searched google by "辛布+宣言+台灣",
and our blog came out in the first place of the search list.
Haahhh...
2007年9月4日 星期二
International Health Regulations (IHR) 2005
這個在這期的資訊中應該會常常看到，大家可以參考
http://www.who.int/csr/ihr/en/
International Health Regulations (2005)
The successful implementation of the International Health Regulations (2005) or IHR (2005), with the technical support of WHO, by all the countries who committed themselves to meet the new requirements of the Regulations will contribute significantly to enhancing national, regional and international public health security.
The entry into force of the IHR (2005) on 15 June 2007 is a public health landmark for the World Health Organization (WHO) and its Member States. The global community has a new legal framework to better manage its collective defences against acute public health risks that can spread internationally and have devastating impacts on human health as well as unnecessary negative interference on trade and travel.
連結裡面還有相關文件下載，關於辛布宣言中的東西可以延伸到這邊來查詢
http://www.who.int/csr/ihr/en/
International Health Regulations (2005)
The successful implementation of the International Health Regulations (2005) or IHR (2005), with the technical support of WHO, by all the countries who committed themselves to meet the new requirements of the Regulations will contribute significantly to enhancing national, regional and international public health security.
The entry into force of the IHR (2005) on 15 June 2007 is a public health landmark for the World Health Organization (WHO) and its Member States. The global community has a new legal framework to better manage its collective defences against acute public health risks that can spread internationally and have devastating impacts on human health as well as unnecessary negative interference on trade and travel.
連結裡面還有相關文件下載，關於辛布宣言中的東西可以延伸到這邊來查詢
辛布宣言
http://www.searo.who.int/en/Section316/Section503/Section2358_13502.htm
本次的東南亞衛生部長級會議對於本宣言相當有關係，大家可以從這邊尋找相關的議題
25th Meeting of Ministers of Health
Thimphu, Bhutan, 31 August – 1 September 2007
Thimphu Declaration on International Health Security in the South-East Asia Region
We, the Health Ministers of Member States of the World Health Organization’s South-East Asia Region participating in the Twenty-fifth Health Ministers’ Meeting in Thimphu, Bhutan, recognize that in the concept of International Health Security lies the realization that there is a need to reduce the vulnerability of people around the world to the escalation of existing, new, acute or rapidly spreading risks to health, particularly those that threaten to transcend international borders.
We also recognize that rapid globalization with easy, frequent travel, as well as large-scale trade, give an ample opportunity for communicable diseases to spread across borders quickly and with ease.
We are aware that the world climate is changing. Temperatures are rising; tropical storms are increasing in frequency and intensity; polar ice caps and permafrost regions are melting. The acute impact of climate change–related events may be local, but their causes are global.
We are also concerned that no single institution, sector or country has all the capacities needed to respond to international public health emergencies caused by epidemics, natural disasters and humanitarian or environmental emergencies.
We are of the view that the impact of the above threats on human health has serious implications for morbidity and mortality, and will delay internationally agreed upon development goals.
We reiterate our commitment to the World Health Assembly Resolutions related to Emergency Preparedness and Response and International Health Regulations (IHR) 2005.
We note the efforts of WHO’s Regional Office for South-East Asia to:
1)Systematize and measure emergency preparedness and response in health systems through benchmarks, standards and indicators;
2)Systematically support countries in the full implementation of the International Health Regulations (IHR) 2005 strengthening core capacities;
3)Support short-term strategies in stockpiling anti-virals, personal protective devices and pre-pandemic vaccines, as well as long-term strategies to increase influenza vaccine production capacity in the Region; and
4)To mobilize adequate resources to support these activities.
To achieve effective solutions to address issues related to International Health Security, we are committed to:
1.Take further action to improve emergency preparedness and response in line with the World Health Assembly and Regional Committee Resolutions WHA 58.1, WHA 59.20, SEA/RC 57/3, and SEA/RC 58/3;
2.Take further action to implement the International Health Regulations (IHR) 2005 in line with World Health Assembly and Regional Committee Resolutions WHA 58.3 and WHA 59.2, and SEA/RC 58/7;
3.Develop and systematically implement National Emergency Preparedness Plans, taking into account the significant role of private health providers based on country-specific priority benchmarks and indicators within one year and to revisit the plans regularly;
4.Develop and implement action plans towards strengthening core capacities for countries for International Health Regulations (IHR) 2005;
5.Develop and implement national action plans for mitigation and adaptation to address the health impacts of global warming and climate change.
6.Mobilize adequate resources for these initiatives and participate actively in developing and maintaining partnerships related to improving these areas of health.
We, the Health Ministers of WHO’s South-East Asia Region, fully support the establishment of the South-East Asia Regional Health Emergency Fund and commit to the function of the Working Group as well as efforts towards resource mobilization.
We, the Health Ministers of WHO’s South-East Asia Region, urge all Member States as well as the WHO Director-General and the Regional Director for the South-East Asia Region to continue to provide leadership and technical support in building partnerships between governments, United Nations and bilateral agencies, members of academia, professional bodies, NGOs, the private sector and the media and civil society, and to jointly advocate effective follow-up on all aspects of this Thimphu Declaration on International Health Security in the South-East Asia Region.
本次的東南亞衛生部長級會議對於本宣言相當有關係，大家可以從這邊尋找相關的議題
25th Meeting of Ministers of Health
Thimphu, Bhutan, 31 August – 1 September 2007
Thimphu Declaration on International Health Security in the South-East Asia Region
We, the Health Ministers of Member States of the World Health Organization’s South-East Asia Region participating in the Twenty-fifth Health Ministers’ Meeting in Thimphu, Bhutan, recognize that in the concept of International Health Security lies the realization that there is a need to reduce the vulnerability of people around the world to the escalation of existing, new, acute or rapidly spreading risks to health, particularly those that threaten to transcend international borders.
We also recognize that rapid globalization with easy, frequent travel, as well as large-scale trade, give an ample opportunity for communicable diseases to spread across borders quickly and with ease.
We are aware that the world climate is changing. Temperatures are rising; tropical storms are increasing in frequency and intensity; polar ice caps and permafrost regions are melting. The acute impact of climate change–related events may be local, but their causes are global.
We are also concerned that no single institution, sector or country has all the capacities needed to respond to international public health emergencies caused by epidemics, natural disasters and humanitarian or environmental emergencies.
We are of the view that the impact of the above threats on human health has serious implications for morbidity and mortality, and will delay internationally agreed upon development goals.
We reiterate our commitment to the World Health Assembly Resolutions related to Emergency Preparedness and Response and International Health Regulations (IHR) 2005.
We note the efforts of WHO’s Regional Office for South-East Asia to:
1)Systematize and measure emergency preparedness and response in health systems through benchmarks, standards and indicators;
2)Systematically support countries in the full implementation of the International Health Regulations (IHR) 2005 strengthening core capacities;
3)Support short-term strategies in stockpiling anti-virals, personal protective devices and pre-pandemic vaccines, as well as long-term strategies to increase influenza vaccine production capacity in the Region; and
4)To mobilize adequate resources to support these activities.
To achieve effective solutions to address issues related to International Health Security, we are committed to:
1.Take further action to improve emergency preparedness and response in line with the World Health Assembly and Regional Committee Resolutions WHA 58.1, WHA 59.20, SEA/RC 57/3, and SEA/RC 58/3;
2.Take further action to implement the International Health Regulations (IHR) 2005 in line with World Health Assembly and Regional Committee Resolutions WHA 58.3 and WHA 59.2, and SEA/RC 58/7;
3.Develop and systematically implement National Emergency Preparedness Plans, taking into account the significant role of private health providers based on country-specific priority benchmarks and indicators within one year and to revisit the plans regularly;
4.Develop and implement action plans towards strengthening core capacities for countries for International Health Regulations (IHR) 2005;
5.Develop and implement national action plans for mitigation and adaptation to address the health impacts of global warming and climate change.
6.Mobilize adequate resources for these initiatives and participate actively in developing and maintaining partnerships related to improving these areas of health.
We, the Health Ministers of WHO’s South-East Asia Region, fully support the establishment of the South-East Asia Regional Health Emergency Fund and commit to the function of the Working Group as well as efforts towards resource mobilization.
We, the Health Ministers of WHO’s South-East Asia Region, urge all Member States as well as the WHO Director-General and the Regional Director for the South-East Asia Region to continue to provide leadership and technical support in building partnerships between governments, United Nations and bilateral agencies, members of academia, professional bodies, NGOs, the private sector and the media and civil society, and to jointly advocate effective follow-up on all aspects of this Thimphu Declaration on International Health Security in the South-East Asia Region.
2007年9月3日 星期一
Health Ministers adopt Thimphu declaration
這是這次主題的新聞稿，主要講述這次第60次東南亞區的衛生部長級會談，主要在不丹舉辦(不丹也有一些特殊的衛生成就)，然後一些各方要合作的議題等等！
http://www.searo.who.int/en/Section316/Section503/Section2358_13500.htm
Health Ministers adopt Thimphu declaration
Health Ministers of WHO’s South-East Asia region discuss important health issues
SEA/PR/1451
Thimphu, 1 September 2007: Today Health Ministers from 11 Member States of WHO’s South East Asia Region adopted the “Thimphu Declaration on International Health Security in the South-East Asia Region”. The Thimphu Declaration recognizes natural and manmade health emergencies, emerging infectious diseases and climate change as threats to international health security.
The Declaration focuses on commitment to the International Health Regulation (IHR 2005), systematic emergency preparedness and response. It supports the establishment of the South-East Asia Regional Health Emergency Fund. It also calls on countries to develop national mitigation and adaptation plans to address the health impact of global warming and climate change.
The meetings of the Health Ministers of the SEAR countries are an important forum for considering regional health issues, common approaches and development of inter country collaborations and strategies. Thimphu is hosting the 25th Health Ministers Meeting this year.
In his inaugural address, H.E. Lyonpo Kinzang Dorji, Prime Minister of Bhutan listed some of the key public health achievements in Bhutan. He noted that no polio case has been reported since 1986, and leprosy and Iodine deficiency disorders have been eliminated. Bhutan has achieved universal child immunization, nearly 90% of rural water supply coverage as well as basic health care services for all citizens. He said that the primary health approach had been instrumental in attaining these public health successes.
Dr Samlee Plianbangchang, WHO Regional Director for South-East Asia, in his address, said that the avian influenza outbreaks in the Region had shown the vulnerability of countries to cross- border disease outbreaks. Dr Samlee underlined the significance of the Thimphu Declaration and said it “Elaborates the threats posed to human health either by climate change or other international and interrelated factors and the need for regional solidarity to meet these threats”.
WHO Director-General Dr Margaret Chan recognized the commitment of the SEAR Member countries to poverty reduction and said, “Your commitment shows great political courage in the face of a challenge magnified many times in this most populous region in the world”. Dr Margaret Chan also commended Bhutan’s commitment to Gross National Happiness as the best measure of true progress in development. She said that this objective is closely aligned with the comprehensive definition of health set out in WHO’s Constitution.
For any clarification or additional information, please contact Ms Vismita Gupta-Smith, the Public Information and Advocacy officer, phone: 91-11-23370971 and mobile: 91- 9871329861 Email: guptasmithv@searo.who.int and Ms Harsaran Pandey, STP-Information Officer, at telephone: 011 23309 465; mobile: 9811021001, email pandeyh@searo.who.int
All press releases, fact sheets and other WHO media material may be found at: www.searo.who.int.
http://www.searo.who.int/en/Section316/Section503/Section2358_13500.htm
Health Ministers adopt Thimphu declaration
Health Ministers of WHO’s South-East Asia region discuss important health issues
SEA/PR/1451
Thimphu, 1 September 2007: Today Health Ministers from 11 Member States of WHO’s South East Asia Region adopted the “Thimphu Declaration on International Health Security in the South-East Asia Region”. The Thimphu Declaration recognizes natural and manmade health emergencies, emerging infectious diseases and climate change as threats to international health security.
The Declaration focuses on commitment to the International Health Regulation (IHR 2005), systematic emergency preparedness and response. It supports the establishment of the South-East Asia Regional Health Emergency Fund. It also calls on countries to develop national mitigation and adaptation plans to address the health impact of global warming and climate change.
The meetings of the Health Ministers of the SEAR countries are an important forum for considering regional health issues, common approaches and development of inter country collaborations and strategies. Thimphu is hosting the 25th Health Ministers Meeting this year.
In his inaugural address, H.E. Lyonpo Kinzang Dorji, Prime Minister of Bhutan listed some of the key public health achievements in Bhutan. He noted that no polio case has been reported since 1986, and leprosy and Iodine deficiency disorders have been eliminated. Bhutan has achieved universal child immunization, nearly 90% of rural water supply coverage as well as basic health care services for all citizens. He said that the primary health approach had been instrumental in attaining these public health successes.
Dr Samlee Plianbangchang, WHO Regional Director for South-East Asia, in his address, said that the avian influenza outbreaks in the Region had shown the vulnerability of countries to cross- border disease outbreaks. Dr Samlee underlined the significance of the Thimphu Declaration and said it “Elaborates the threats posed to human health either by climate change or other international and interrelated factors and the need for regional solidarity to meet these threats”.
WHO Director-General Dr Margaret Chan recognized the commitment of the SEAR Member countries to poverty reduction and said, “Your commitment shows great political courage in the face of a challenge magnified many times in this most populous region in the world”. Dr Margaret Chan also commended Bhutan’s commitment to Gross National Happiness as the best measure of true progress in development. She said that this objective is closely aligned with the comprehensive definition of health set out in WHO’s Constitution.
For any clarification or additional information, please contact Ms Vismita Gupta-Smith, the Public Information and Advocacy officer, phone: 91-11-23370971 and mobile: 91- 9871329861 Email: guptasmithv@searo.who.int and Ms Harsaran Pandey, STP-Information Officer, at telephone: 011 23309 465; mobile: 9811021001, email pandeyh@searo.who.int
All press releases, fact sheets and other WHO media material may be found at: www.searo.who.int.
訂閱：
文章 (Atom)