# 5366
The full title of the 33 page draft report is:
It has been released in advance of the Fourth IHR Review Committee meeting, scheduled for March 28-30th in Geneva.
In it you’ll find a mixed grade for the World Health Organization’s handling of the pandemic, giving good marks in some areas, while citing a number of shortcomings in others.
Maria Cheng, AP medical writer provides this report, which includes comments from CIDRAP director Michael Osterholm :
WHO's response to swine flu pandemic flawed
An expert panel commissioned by the World Health Organization to investigate its handling of the swine flu pandemic has slammed mistakes made by the U.N. body and warned tens of millions could die if there is a severe flu outbreak in the future.
By MARIA CHENG
While the media’s interest will no doubt be focused on the flaws detected in the WHO’s response, it would be unfair to focus solely on those aspects.
Pandemics are tremendously complex, and rapidly evolving, events. The WHO has neither the resources, or the mandate, to manage the global response to an infectious disease outbreak.
This report provides 3 summary conclusions, along with a number of recommendations. Follow this link to read them in their entirety.
Summary conclusion 1
The IHR helped make the world better prepared to cope with public health emergencies. The core national and local capacities called for in the IHR are not yet fully operational and are not now on a path to timely implementation worldwide.
Summary conclusion 2
WHO performed well in many ways during the pandemic, confronted systemic difficulties and demonstrated some shortcomings. The Committee found no evidence of malfeasance.
Summary conclusion 3
The world is ill-prepared to respond to a severe influenza pandemic or to any similarly global, sustained and threatening public health emergency. Beyond implementation of core public health capacities called for in the IHR, global preparedness can be advanced through research, strengthened health-care delivery systems, economic development in low-and middle-income countries and improved health status.
While many criticisms have been lobbed at the WHO over their handling of the pandemic, my own view of their response has been considerably less harsh.
Aside from the occasional communications faux pas – some of which I’ve mentioned in this blog – I’ve felt that overall they did pretty well given the circumstances.
Not perfect, of course. And certainly with room for improvement.
But hardly the bungled job that some of the more vocal members of the European Parliament would have us believe (see WHO To Review Their Pandemic Response).
The most important point of this report is not that there were (as might be expected) flaws in the WHO’s response to the last pandemic, but that we remain ill prepared to deal with a severe pandemic in the future.
Post Mortems like these are necessary, and often very useful.
But once completed - and the appropriate lessons taken from it - the need is to look towards the future.
