Why We Can’t Allow Funding to be Cut for NTD Programs
By David Obadina
Neglected Tropical Diseases affect 1 in 6 people in the world and affect the world’s poorest populations (Hotez). They are parasitic diseases transmitted from the bite of a fly or from contaminated soil or water (Hotez). Recently, they have been gaining more traction but still pale in comparison to funding and attention for HIV, Tuberculosis and Malaria. These are curable diseases but due to lack of political will, they persist (Hotez). The budget allocated for the USAID NTD Program accounts for only 1% of global health spending but even this miniscule slice of the budget is in danger (USAID). Global health in general seems to be in danger with the Trump Administration as it goes against his “America First” mentality. Furthermore, President Trump expressed during his campaign that the U.S. should reduce the amount of foreign aid it gives out and now in office has proposed a 29% cut in funding for the state department (Collins). This directly endangers funding for NTD programs, impedes the progress that has been made and places millions in danger of NTDs
Democratic President Jimmy Carter was the first US president to publicly acknowledge the need for eliminating NTDs and made the initial strides give the movement ground (Goraleski). Democratic President Bill Clinton also did his part in voicing concern over NTDs and supporting USAID. Under Republican President George W. Bush, in 2008 $350 million was pledged towards NTD treatment programs and he made consistent efforts to give NTDs a seat at the table in the US global health agenda (Goraleski). The USAID NTD Program was founded under the Bush administration as a result of his tremendous dedication to global health. This was continued under Democratic President Barack Obama and NTD programs have been able to reach increasingly more countries. There has been clear bipartisan support for global health and NTDs but now it is in danger.
With a lack of funding NTD programs will not be able to operate in certain countries. The USAID NTD Program will have to reduce its assistance under new budget constraints and that results in less people being protected from NTDs. The United States is the world leader in global health and specifically in NTD treatment and control programs (Gillum). As the leader and largest funder, the US sets an example for the rest of the world and any change in course that a leader makes may be followed by the global community. The hope is that other countries would step up and fill the funding gap but that is a dangerous risk that many lives in low and middle-income countries cannot afford to take.
Another NTD, Ebola, gained a great deal of notoriety this past fall of 2014 due to a major outbreak that began in Guineau and spread to Liberia, Sierra Leone, Nigeria. However, the disease was not just contained to West Africa. Travellers carried to disease to the United States and to Spain. This is a prime example of how disease control can become a national security issue. Ebola differs from the rest of NTDs biologically because it is a viral infection and not bacterial or transmitted by parasites (Hotez). According to the Swiss Tropical and public Health institute, it is estimated that at least half the entire population of Guineau, Sierra Leone and Liberia combined is infected with at least one NTD besides Ebola (Hotez). These dehabilitating diseases make it easier to contract Ebola and also increase infection rates due to the appearance of sores that can arise from NTDs such as lymphatic filariasis, snail fever and onchocerciasis (Hotez). The high prevalence of NTDs in these countries has without a doubt contributed to the severity of the 2014 Ebola outbreak and this factor remains. Researchers predict that it is not a matter of if there will be another Ebola outbreak but when.
With mounting pressure from the Trump Administration to cut down the budget of USAID, the global health community must take a stand and stand behind the commitments we have made with our partners across the globe. NTD control programs simply won’t survive cuts in the budget and as mentioned previously, this will have a cascade of effects. Funding must be maintained and further investments must be made to address the root problems at hand regarding NTDs and poverty.
Works Cited
Collins, Chris. “The Business Case For Global Health In The Trump
Administration.” The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 09 Jan. 2017. Web. 24 Feb. 2017.
D’Cruz, Brian. “Volunteer Physician Discusses Importance of Funding For NTD
Research.” KFF. Breakthroughs, 9 Jan. 2014
Daar AS (2008) The CNCDs and the NTDs: Blurring the Lines Dividing
Noncommunicable and Communicable Chronic Diseases. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 2.10 (2008): e312.
Gillum, Leslie A. et al. “NIH Disease Funding Levels and Burden of Disease.” Ed.
Joseph Ross. PLoS ONE 6.2 (2011): e16837. PMC. Web. 2 Feb. 2017.
Goraleski, Karen. Neglected Tropical Diseases and the 2012 US Presidential Election.
PLoS Negl Trop Dis 5.11 (2011): e1431.
Hotez, Peter. Neglected Tropical Diseases in the Ebola-Affected Countries of West
Africa. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 9.6 (2015): e0003671.
Hotez, Peter J. et al. “The Global Burden of Disease Study 2010: Interpretation and
Implications for the Neglected Tropical Diseases.” Ed. Nilanthi de Silva. PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases 8.7 (2014): e2865. PMC. Web. 26 Jan. 2017.
Islam, Sheikh Mohammed Shariful et al. “Non‐Communicable Diseases (NCDs) in
Developing Countries: A Symposium Report.” Globalization and Health 10 (2014): 81. PMC. Web. 26 Jan. 2017.
Mccoy, D., S. Chand, and D. Sridhar. “Global Health Funding: How Much, Where It
Comes from and Where It Goes.” Health Policy and Planning 24.6 (2009): 407-17. Web.
Noblick J, Skolnik (2011) Linking Global HIV/AIDS Treatments with National Programs
for the Control and Elimination of the Neglected Tropical Diseases. PLoS Negl
Trop Dis 5.7 (2011): e1022.
“USAID: Budget/Performance/Accountability.” U.S. Agency for international
Development. Web. 24 Feb. 2017
Zaghloul MS, Nouh A, Moneer M, El-Baradie M, Nazmy M, Younis A: Time-trend in
epidemiological and pathological features of schistosoma-associated bladder cancer. J Egypt Natl Canc Inst. 2008, 20 (2): 168-174.
