The coronavirus outbreak: the central role of primary care in emergency preparedness and response

On the last day of 2019, a cluster of cases of a pneumonia with unknown cause were reported by the Chinese authorities to the World Health Organization (WHO), believed to be connected to a seafood market in Wuhan, China. This market was closed the following day. On 7 January 2020, a novel coronavirus was isolated, and known pathogens were ruled out.1 Coronaviruses usually cause respiratory illness ranging from the common cold to severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). Clinical symptoms and signs of the Wuhan coronavirus include fever, with some sufferers experiencing difficulty breathing and bilateral pulmonary infiltrates seen on chest X-ray. WHO are referring to it as ‘2019-nCov’. At the time of writing, there have been over 4,500 confirmed cases and 106 deaths, including among healthcare workers. Over 98% of these cases are within mainland China, but cases have also been confirmed in tens of other countries

US and EU Free Trade Agreements and implementation of policies to control tobacco, alcohol, and unhealthy food and drinks: a quasi-experimental analysis

BACKGROUND: Identifying and tackling the factors that undermine regulation of unhealthy commodities is an essential component of effective noncommunicable disease (NCD) prevention. Unhealthy commodity producers may use rules in US and EU Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) to challenge policies targeting their products. We aimed to test whether there was a statistical relationship between US and EU FTA participation and reduced implementation of WHO-recommended policies. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We performed a statistical analysis assessing the probability of at least partially implementing 10 tobacco, alcohol, and unhealthy food and drink policies in 127 countries in 2014, 2016, and 2019. We assessed differences in implementation of these policies in countries with and without US/EU FTAs. We used matching to conduct 48 covariate-adjusted quasi-experimental comparisons across 27 matched US/EU FTA members (87 country-years) and performed additional analyses and robustness checks to assess alternative explanations for our results. Out of our 48 tests, 19% (9/48) identified a statistically significant decrease in the predicted probability of at least partially implementing the unhealthy commodity policy in question, while 2% (1/48) showed an increase. However, there was marked heterogeneity across policies. At the level of individual policies, US FTA participation was associated with a 37% reduction (95%CI: -0.51 to -0.22) in the probability of fully implementing graphic tobacco warning policies, and a 53% reduction (95%CI: -0.63 to -0.43) in the probability of at least partially implementing smoke-free place policies. EU FTA participation was associated with a 28% reduction (95%CI: -0.45 to -0.10) in the probability of fully implementing graphic tobacco warning policies, and a 25% reduction (95%CI: -0.47 to -0.03) in the probability of fully implementing restrictions on child marketing of unhealthy food and drinks. There was a positive association with implementing fat limits and bans, but this was not robust. Associations with other outcomes were not significant. The main limitations included residual confounding, limited ability to discern precise mechanisms of influence, and potentially limited generalisability to other FTAs. CONCLUSIONS: US and EU FTA participation may reduce the probability of implementing WHO-recommended tobacco and child food marketing policies by between a quarter and a half-depending on the FTA and outcome in question. Governments negotiating or participating in US/EU FTAs may need to establish robust health protections and mitigation strategies to achieve their NCD mortality reduction targets

Trust, but Verify Comment on "'Part of the Solution': Food Corporation Strategies for Regulatory Capture and Legitimacy".

According to Lacy-Nichols and Williams, the food industry is increasingly forestalling regulation with incremental concessions and co-option of policy-making discourses and processes; bolstering their legitimacy via partnerships with credible stakeholders; and disarming critics by amending their product portfolios whilst maintaining high sales volumes and profits. Their assessment raises a number of fundamental philosophical questions that we must address in order to form an appropriate public health response: is it appropriate to treat every act of corporate citizenship with cynicism? If voluntary action leads to better health outcomes, does it matter whether profits are preserved? How should we balance any short-term benefits from industry-led reforms against the longer-term risk stemming from corporate capture of policy-making networks? I argue for a nuanced approach, focused on carefully defined health outcomes; allowing corporations the benefit of the doubt, but implementing robust binding measures the moment voluntary actions fail to meet independently set objectives

You're not speaking my language: reframing NCDs for politicians and policy makers.

Richard Horton correctly identified inadequate framing as an important reason for why the world’s leading causes of death and disability—noncommunicable diseases (NCDs)—are not being seriously addressed by global leader

The philosophical foundations of 'health for all' and Universal Health Coverage.

The WHO constitution calls for 'health for all' and Universal Health Coverage has been called "the ultimate expression of fairness", however it is not always clear how health systems can move towards equity. Should we prioritise the needs of the worst off? And if so, should we direct resources to these marginalised groups or marginalised individuals? This article provides an overview of the philosophical underpinnings of health equity and proportionate universalism, highlighting the trade-offs involved in operationalising a core tenant of global health practice

Non-communicable disease policy implementation from 2014 to 2021: a repeated cross-sectional analysis of global policy data for 194 countries

Background: Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) are the world's leading cause of death and disability. Global implementation of WHO-recommended NCD policies has been increasing with time, but in 2019 fewer than half of these policies had been implemented globally. In 2022, WHO released updated data on NCD policy implementation, on the basis of surveys conducted in 2021 during the COVID-19 pandemic. We sought to examine whether the trajectory of global policy implementation changed during this period. Methods: In this repeated cross-sectional analysis, we used data from the 2015, 2017, 2020, and 2022 WHO progress monitors to calculate NCD policy implementation scores for all 194 WHO member states. We used Welch's ANOVA and Games-Howell post-hoc pairwise testing to examine changes in mean implementation scores for 19 WHO-recommended NCD policies, with assessment at the global, geographical, geopolitical, and country-income levels. We collated sales data on tobacco, alcohol, and junk foods to examine the association between changes in sales and the predicted probability of implementation of policies targeting these products. We also calculated the Corporate Financial Influence Index (CFII) for each country, which was used to assess the association between corporate influence and policy implementation. We used logistic regression to assess the relationship between product sales and the probability of implementing related policies. The relationship between CFII and policy implementation was assessed with Pearson's correlation analysis and random-effects multivariate regression. Findings: Across the 194 countries, in the years preceding publication of each progress monitor, mean total policy implementation score (out of a potential 18·0) was 7·0 (SD 3·5) in 2014, 8·2 (3·5) in 2016, 8·6 (3·6) in 2019, and 8·6 (3·6) in 2021. Only the differences in mean implementation score between 2014 and the other three report years were deemed statistically significant (pairwise p<0·05). Thus the steady improvement in mean global NCD policy implementation stalled in 2021 at 47·8%. However, from 2019 to 2021, we identified shifts in individual policies: global mean implementation scores increased for policies on tobacco, clinical guidelines, salt, and child food marketing, and decreased for policies on alcohol, breastmilk substitute marketing, physical activity mass media campaigns, risk factor surveys, and national NCD plans and targets. Six of the seven policies with the lowest levels of implementation (global mean score <0·4 out of a potential 1·0) in both 2019 and 2021 were related to tobacco, alcohol, and unhealthy food. From 2020 onwards, we identified weak or no associations between sales of tobacco, alcohol, and junk foods and the predicted probability of implementing policies related to each commodity. Country-level CFII was significantly associated with total policy implementation score (Pearson's r –0·49, 95% CI –0·59 to –0·36), and this finding was supported in multivariate modelling for all policies combined and for all commercial policies except alcohol policies. Interpretation: NCD policy implementation has stagnated. Progress in the implementation of some policies is matched by decreased implementation of others, particularly those related to unhealthy commodities. To prevent NCDs and their consequences, and attain the Sustainable Development Goals, the rate of NCD policy adoption must be substantially and urgently increased before the next NCD progress monitor and UN high-level meeting on NCDs in 2024. Funding: None

What's in a name? A call to reframe non-communicable diseases.

The global health community does not spend much time on branding, which perhaps explains why existing classifications for the three largest groups of diseases are both outdated and counterproductive. The first Global Burden of Disease study1 described infectious diseases, non-communicable diseases (NCDs), and injuries. This grouping reflected a predominantly infectious disease burden in low-income and middle-income countries, which has since tilted towards NCDs. A name that is a longwinded non-definition, and that only tells us what this group of diseases is not, is not befitting of a group of diseases that now constitute the world's largest killer