The administration’s recent unilateral decision by the Trump administration to rescind COVID-19 grants to states and localities. Their resolution expresses grave concern for the future of America’s public health. This maneuver resulted in a budget hole of approximately $4 million. As a result, it dangerously limits the nation’s capacity to prepare for and respond to emerging and reemerging infectious diseases. The United States has announced its withdrawal from the World Health Organization (WHO) and defunded it largely. On top of this, the ill-advised dismantling of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) has compounded these challenges. Both of these actions can deal a grave blow to our already fragile public health infrastructure. This underlying infrastructure is terribly important to fighting infectious diseases — at home and abroad.
The effects of these cuts reach beyond U.S. borders. The world vaccine alliance, GAVI, is an important partner in distributing these lifesaving medications and vaccines. Yet today it is once again under the knife for deep cuts. GAVI’s efforts have been critical in halting epidemics, like the West African Ebola outbreak over a decade ago. As its resources are stretched to breaking point, any closure of GAVI would have catastrophic consequences for global health initiatives.
That’s right, the Office of Infectious Disease and HIV/AIDS Policy was eliminated. Consequently, today its entire staff is now out of work. This office was instrumental in coordinating efforts to combat infectious diseases and allocate funding for pandemic preparedness, vaccines, and malaria treatment. Yet the sudden end of funding cuts risk erasing life- and economy-saving pandemic response in unique institutions able to respond acutely to ongoing viral dangers.
The Impact of Funding Cuts on Global Health
These moves to rescind remaining COVID-19 grants and pull out of key international medicine organizations have tsunamied public health experts. Janeen Madan Keller, deputy director of global health policy, Center for Global Development, stressed the global, connected reality of infectious diseases, noting that “We know that infectious diseases don’t respect borders.”
She’s unapologetic about calling for more international cooperation today. This points to the strong, preventive role our health systems must play in identifying and containing outbreaks before they ever get to U.S. soil. So it’s really, really important that we have the ability to prevent these outbreaks in their tracks,” she further explained. This view has become increasingly widespread in the public health community, as experts increasingly understand that international collaboration is vital to protecting national health.
GAVI has had extraordinary impact on that mission. From 2000 to 2023, it immunized more than 1.1 billion children and saved 18.9 million lives across the globe. Its efforts have been crucial to the creation of a stockpile of Ebola vaccines and rapid response to other outbreaks, including during the pandemic. As we look ahead to the possible disbanding of GAVI, the risks for international health initiatives are profound. This endangers U.S. citizens who depend on stable global health ecosystems.
Matifadza Hlatshwayo Davis, health director for the city of St. Louis, expressed her horror over what public health has become. She emphasized that fear, silence, and clandestine shutdowns are creating major disutilities in the system. She stressed that just slashing funding is not the answer when there is no plan in place. If we’re talking about efficient, there’s nothing efficient about this,” she added.
Local Implications and Public Health Infrastructure
With federal funding ending, local health departments are left to navigate the growing challenge of providing vital services while left in the dark. The closure of pandemic preparedness centers will hamper efforts to fight off viruses, leading to greater vulnerability in communities across the nation. Hlatshwayo Davis expressed her frustration with how taxpayer dollars are being managed during this turbulent time: “This is not a way that I want my taxpayer dollars handled with this level of chaos.”
Dara Lieberman, director of government relations for Trust for America’s Health, noted alarming trends in funding cuts: “We’ve seen Congress rescind money that had not been spent yet… but I’ve never seen money that was actually out in the field being pulled back.” This unprecedented step begs the question whether these agencies are truly effective and accountable in protecting the health and safety of the public.
Dismantling the Office of Infectious Disease and HIV/AIDS Policy further exacerbates the struggles of local health departments. Yet this move deepens the challenges they are already dealing with. Without dedicated resources and personnel focused on infectious disease management, communities may find themselves ill-equipped to respond to emerging threats.
The Road Ahead: A Call for Action
Public health experts are already ringing that bell. They caution that continued cuts to the federal agencies dedicated to disease prevention would set back decades of progress combating infectious diseases. Janeen Madan Keller cautioned that efforts to roll back our ability to detect and contain outbreaks would make us lose years of progress. She went on to stress that they would be endangering the lives of Americans too.
As the nation reflects on its public health strategy, experts like Anna Person, an HIV infectious diseases physician at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, emphasize the need for continued investment in healthcare initiatives. “We have the tools to end the HIV epidemic in the United States,” she confidently declared. She noted that past efforts have already proven to have tremendous potential.
Person expressed concern about current trends: “Now, we are on a fast track to undoing decades of progress.” Every day that passes without the robust funding necessary puts at risk progress made against far too many health threats.
The loss of public health infrastructure in the US and abroad coincides with an urgency for global collaboration that hasn’t been needed more than it is today. Keller highlighted that “this amount really is quite modest when we compare it to the outsized benefits it has on the lives of people who live here in the United States, as well as on the lives of people around the world.”
Leave a Reply