SCROLL NEWS / DISCOVERY
Search headlines
Find the stories shaping the conversation.
Results for " National Health " 125 found 🔀 AI-powered Shuffle
How Foreign-Trained Health Workers Saved the NHS £14 Billion
This blog is part of a series focused on the UK’s recruitment of foreign-trained health workers. This first blog details the amount of money the UK’s National Health Service (NHS) has saved by recruiting foreign-trained health workers. The second blog examines whether this saving is offset by foreign aid contributions to health systems strengthening (HSS) and human resources for health (HRH) in countries of origin.
Did Strong Q4 EPS Gains Just Shift National HealthCare's (NHC) Investment Narrative?
National HealthCare Corporation reported past fourth-quarter 2025 results with revenue of US$386.51 million and net income of US$24.85 million, and full-year 2025 revenue of US$1.52 billion with net income of US$120.02 million. The sharp year-over-year increase in quarterly earnings per share from continuing operations, from US$0.39 basic to US$1.60, underscores meaningful efficiency and profitability gains. Next, we’ll examine how this earnings-driven improvement in profitability shapes...
Global webinar on core public health capacities to conduct ship inspections and issue ship sanitation certificates
Ships cross borders every day, connecting countries and serving as a backbone of the global economy. However, outbreaks onboard can disrupt maritime traffic, leading to significant economic and operational negative consequences. Without strong public health capacities to detect, prevent, and respond to public health risks on board ships, maritime travel can also become a pathway for the spread of infectious diseases. To support countries in strengthening these capacities, the World Health Organization (WHO) convened a two-day webinar on 11–12 February, bringing together more than 700 ship inspectors, port health officers, and public health authorities, primarily from the African, Eastern Mediterranean, and European Regions. The webinar came at a pivotal time. With the amended International Health Regulations entering into force on 19 September 2025, the need to focus on public health preparedness has never been greater. Strengthening public health capacities at borders, including onboard conveyances, is a cornerstone of global health security and central to the amended IHR.“The high level of attendance and active participation throughout the two days of the webinar highlighted the growing demand for technical guidance and capacity-building support in ship inspection and issuance of ship sanitation certificates”, said Dr Ninglan Wang, Head of the Borders, Mass Gatherings and Health Protection Measures (BMM) Unit at the Health Emergency Preparedness Department at WHO headquarters. “The dynamic interactions among experts and countries underscored the value of continued cross-border collaboration in the maritime sector and knowledge exchange in this area”. Conducting regular public health inspections on board ships for the issuance of ship sanitation certificates (SSCs) in accordance with the IHR requirements is crucial for ensuring that ships meet specific health standards, thereby minimizing the risk of the international spread of diseases via maritime traffic. These certificates, mandated by the IHR, require ports to have trained personnel who can identify and control public health risks on board vessels and apply recommended control measures. This standardized global procedure not only ensures compliance with the IHR but also promotes consistency in health practices across ports worldwide. SSCs are the globally-recognized tool used to prevent and control known public health risks on ships, providing a common way to register and communicate public health events and measures taken on board between all stakeholders involved in this process, including public health authorities in ports and ship operators. Only SSCs issued by ports authorized by national authorities to issue such certificates are considered valid. As per the IHR, all States Parties are required to send to WHO their list of authorized ports (available here) and to keep it updated. However, many Member States continue to face practical challenges, such as limited resources, high staff turnover, and competing priorities. These realities underscore the value of platforms such as this webinar, which foster collective learning, peer-to-peer exchange, and practical solutions to help countries build and sustain the capacities required under the IHR.Over the two days, participants engaged in presentations and discussions covering a wide range of technical and operational topics, such as the overarching international legal framework governing ship sanitation; considerations for pre-inspection planning; risk assessment factors by type of vessel; the completion and issuance of SSCs and evidence report forms; or practical insights on the inspection of various technical areas, such as food safety, medical facilities, water systems, or vector control, among others. In addition, public health authorities from the Netherlands, Morocco, and Tanzania shared case studies to showcase their practical application of these IHR requirements in their respective countries. Given its success, WHO plans to replicate similar sessions in the future to reach additional time zones and regions and cover other pressing border health-related topics, ensuring that Member States can continue benefiting from these opportunities to share knowledge and expertise.
Hospital Spending Accounted for 40% of the Growth in National Health Spending Between 2022 and 2024
This data note analyzes the extent to which hospital spending has contributed to the growth in national health expenditures in recent years and over the long term using data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) National Health Expenditures Accounts (NHEA).
CEPI and Korea discuss future of AI-driven international health cooperation
Seminar held at Korea's National Assembly to discuss the link between AI and health ODA.
Women's health clinic Midi Health closes $100M series D as it aims to scale a national healthcare company
Virtual women's health clinic Midi Health banked a $100 million series D round, hitting "unicorn" status. | Midi Health has grown rapidly in the past five years with a clinician network that spans 500 providers across 50 states serving more than 230,000 patients.
Health care costs are cannibalizing the economy — consumers can fight back
American health care costs are cannibalizing the economy, with 2024 national health expenditures reaching $5.3 trillion, double the developed-world average, and hidden prices being the main reason …
Three months after Hurricane Melissa: PAHO continues supporting health system recovery across the Caribbean
Washington, DC, 28 January 2026 (PAHO)- Ninety days after Hurricane Melissa swept across parts of the Caribbean, countries are transitioning from emergency response toward recovery—while continuing to confront public health risks linked to damaged infrastructure, disrupted services, and heightened vulnerability to disease. The Category 5 storm made landfall first in Jamaica on 28 October 2025, causing widespread damage in several Caribbean nations, mainly across Jamaica, Cuba and Haiti, and placing sustained pressure on national health systems.
Alarm as US mulls prioritising citizens in research funding
A senior White House official said the Trump administration is considering ways to prioritise research funding to American citizens, triggering alarm in the research community that the country could destroy its century-long status as a magnet for overseas talent.Michael Kratsios, director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), said last week that it is “important for us to continue to emphasise the use of federal R&D dollars towards American scientists and technologists that are staffed by Americans in their labs.” Asked about support for Chinese students during a Congressional hearing, Kratsios went on to say that in future funding announcements, the OSTP would “emphasise” that “we're funding American students.”The precise meaning of his impromptu comments, and what they could mean in policy terms, isn’t yet clear. The OSTP did not respond to multiple requests for clarification from Science|Business.But given that US science and technology has relied on overseas talent for the past century, Kratsios’s words have alarmed former US science officials.Immigrants have made up around 30-40% of US Nobel Prize winners since the 1940s, for example. Except for some sensitive projects, countries typically grant research funding on a nationality-blind basis, lest they deter foreign scientists from immigrating. “If director Kratsios’s statements are taken literally and become official policy of the White House, [research-intensive] universities will likely have to close labs if not entire research divisions,” said David Biggs, a former science and technology official in the US State Department. In their most extreme interpretation, Kratsios’s comments would imply that foreign scientists established in the US would see access to funding curtailed. This would “result in many world-leading professors who work in the United States in fields that this administration considers a priority (like fusion energy, artificial intelligence, and quantum computing) leaving the country,” said Cole Donovan, a former US science diplomat, and now associate director at the Federation of American Scientists.CripplingHowever, given the context of the conversation, Kratsios may have been referring more narrowly to funding for doctoral or postdoctoral students. At the hearing, he said he wanted to see labs staffed by US citizens. But even this would have devastating consequences for the US science system, say former officials, because the country is so dependent on early-career foreign researchers. Recent statistics show that nearly half of those in the US with a PhD in science, technology, engineering or mathematics (STEM) are considered short-term visitors, or non-residents in the official terminology. If this included residents who are not yet citizens, the proportion would likely be even higher. “Foreign PhD students are really a significant and core part of the university STEM workforce, and postdocs is similarly large,” said Donovan. Preventing US-based academics from hiring them from overseas would be a serious blow, he said. “If it's the case that this administration intends to limit funding to labs staffed only with US citizens, the effect will be to cripple the American scientific enterprise,” said Chris Marcum, a former OSTP official. “To think that these researchers can simply be replaced is a pipe dream. The labs will close,” said Marcum. Go elsewhereAround half of US-trained postdocs are foreign-born, said Biggs. “If these top international students cannot get funding to do their research, or even if they hear that funding for foreign students has been greatly restricted and will be super competitive, they will no longer choose to study in the US and will go elsewhere.” It’s unclear for now if Kratsios’s comments will translate into a real policy shift. But they could add to turmoil in the US science system since Donald Trump took over as president one year ago. Related articlesNIH turmoil risks reciprocal EU-US access to health research fundingUS set to close office responsible for global science and technology dealsTrump halts new NIH grants to international health-research partnersSince then, nearly 8,000 grants at the National Institutes of Health and National Science Foundation have been frozen or terminated, Naturereports. Courts have overturned most of these cancellations, but the disruption caused remains significant. Both those agencies have also dished out around a quarter fewer grants this year than normal, the journal reported. International student enrolment is also down by 17%. The Trump administration also proposes to cut research budgets by around a third, although Congress may mollify the cuts.
The health care debate is back in Washington. It never really went away
The ongoing debate over health care in the U.S. remains as contentious as ever. Since President Harry Truman's failed attempt to establish a national health care program in 1945, every president has grappled with the government's role in health care.
National health spending soared for 2nd consecutive year in 2024
The 7.2 percent increase comes as Americans continue to seek out medical care at high levels.
National health ranking puts Georgia near bottom of list. Here's why
An annual health report from UnitedHealth report found Georgia ranked 38th nationally, in part from recreational drug use and high costs.
Climate-Resilient Health Systems for Sustained Value Chains, Healthcare Access and Services - Global Center on Adaptation
Climate-Resilient Health Systems for Sustained Value Chains, Healthcare Access and Services GCA Webinar Series on Adaptation Insights Zoom VIRTUAL 22 January 2026, 15:00 CET Register here nbs-for-infrastructure Share this post: Source: Background Climate change poses unprecedented threats to health systems globally, particularly in vulnerable regions across Africa and beyond. The cascading impacts of extreme weather events, rising temperatures, and shifting disease patterns are disrupting healthcare delivery and access, infrastructure integrity, and supply chains essential for maintaining public health. Event DescriptionThe Climate-Resilient Health Systems for Sustained Value Chains, Healthcare Access and Services webinar will convene a panel discussion on the upcoming Climate Adaptation Insights on Health report and engage key stakeholders across government, development partners, private sector, and civil society in understanding the critical intersections between climate change adaptation and health system strengthening. By sharing insights on systemic vulnerabilities, interdependencies across the health system and supporting systems, and innovative adaptation approaches, this event will catalyze dialogue and action toward building climate-resilient health systems that can sustain healthcare access and services under changing climate conditions. The webinar will bring together participants from healthcare practitioners, multilateral development banks, international health organizations, climate finance institutions, research institutions, and civil society organizations globally. nbs-for-infrastructure Share this post:
Oregon ranks 19th in national health report
A state-by-state health report card, out today from the United Health Foundation, puts Oregon at No. 19 in the nation.
Western Pacific Region achieves milestone: 19 countries complete comprehensive health information system assessments
The Health Information and Digital Health (HID) unit in the WHO Regional Office for the Western Pacific has successfully supported 19 countries, covering 99% of the Region’s population, to conduct comprehensive health information system (HIS) assessments, surpassing the regional target of 15 set for 2025 and advancing efforts toward universal health coverage. Using SCORE, a technical package of essential interventions, recommended actions, tool and resources developed by WHO and partners to address challenges in meeting HIS needs, these assessments systematically assess health data availability and quality, enabling countries to monitor trends, identify and respond to emerging health challenges, and improve policies and programmes for healthier families, communities and societies. The first round of SCORE assessments were conducted between 2019-2021 in 14 countries in the Region and over 130 countries globally. The second round of SCORE assessments were conducted between 2024-2025.SCORE assessments are a key priority identified by Member States and WHO at all levels, including within WHO-Country/Multi-Country Cooperation Strategies, the Regional Vision Weaving Health for Families, Communities and Societies in the Western Pacific Region (2025–2029), and the WHO Fourteenth General Programme of Work (GPW 14, 2025–2028). Within the Regional Vision, implementing SCORE assessments is a key action for technology and innovation to advance health equity (strand 5).The SCORE for Health Data technical package is based on five key interventions, represented by the acronym SCORE. Interventions S, C and O focus on strengthening core data sources. Survey (S) covers population-based health surveys, surveillance systems and censuses, including their capacity to monitor health-related SDGs. Count (C) focuses on birth, death and cause of death registration as parts of a functional CRVS system. Optimize (O) addresses routine health service data and key health service inputs such as health financing and health workforce.Interventions R and E focus on data use for action. Review (R) examines regular analytical reviews of health sector progress and performance, together with national analytical capacity. Enable (E) looks at the policy, governance, and digital foundations needed to support effective data use.The Western Pacific Region shows relatively strong performance in the Review (R) and Count (C) interventions. Most countries in the Region demonstrate good analytical reporting and institutional capacity for analysis and learning. More than two-thirds of countries show more mature CRVS systems, driven by improvements in birth and death registration. However, medical certification of cause-of-death remains a key gap, with limited or low coverage in over half of countries in the Region.Performance under the Survey (S) intervention is mixed. While surveillance systems are generally strong, several countries in the Region continue to face challenges in implementing their surveys and censuses. Monitoring health-related SDGs is still a challenge for more than a third of countries in the Region.The greatest challenges are observed in the Optimize (O) and Enable (E) interventions. More than half of countries have lower maturity levels in routine health service and resource systems. Two-thirds of countries also face challenges with effective use of data and evidence for policy and action, largely due to gaps in digital infrastructure, governance and legislation for health data systems, and especially in data and sharing.  As part of the SCORE methodology, multi-stakeholder consultations and validation workshops were conducted in many countries to review findings and plan strategies for HIS strengthening. The HID unit continues to provide targeted support to facilitate dialogue and assist countries in developing HIS improvement plans. These plans guide governments and partners to align investments and coordinate efforts for maximum impact.WHO also assists countries with tailored technical support to address key gaps as requested by countries/national health authorities. SCORE assessments should be conducted periodically to monitor progress in HIS strengthening, although progress across addressing gaps identified in SCORE should be continually tracked as countries implement improvements.Additional countries will be supported to implement SCORE in 2026. The Regional Vision delivery-for-impact target, endorsed by Member States, is for all countries and areas to have implemented SCORE assessments and have an increased SCORE index by 2029 while WHO is aiming for 80% of Member States in the Region to conduct round two assessments. Countries yet to complete assessments are therefore encouraged to contact the HID unit at the WHO Regional Office for the Western Pacific for tailored support.The implementation of SCORE HIS assessments in the Western Pacific Region was supported by The Gates Family Foundation.
MSU awarded $700K, Flint to co-design national health equity program
The work funded by this grant aims to establish priorities and mechanisms for future health equity programs, placing Flint residents at the forefront of health research and decision-making.
How New Public Health Changes Could Leave Vulnerable Children Behind
A look at how evolving national health policies could reshape the future of kids’ care, from vaccines to essential treatments.
6 Changes to National Health Policy to Watch in 2026
From the passage of a massive bill that reduced federal funds for Medicaid to a comprehensive overhaul of a federal vaccine advisory panel, Congress and the Trump administration delivered major changes to America’s public health system in 2025. Many of those changes are poised to reshape coverage,
Supporting Breakthrough Health Advancements in Eswatini Under the America First Global Health Strategy - United States Department of State
Today, the United States and the Government of the Kingdom of Eswatini signed a five-year Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) on global health cooperation that includes strategic investments to strengthen national health efforts, leverage American technology, and facilitate the long-term sustainability of Eswatini’s health system. The Department of State, working with Congress, intends to provide up […]
A new dawn in global health: UHC as the path toward national health stewardship
The UHC High‑Level Forum in Tokyo marked an unmistakable turning point. It signaled a shift from dialogue to pragmatic action, with health and finance ministries jointly designing country‑owned, fiscally grounded UHC strategies to move beyond fragmented, crisis‑driven responses toward resilient, durable health systems that can make Universal Health Coverage (UHC) a reality. UHC means ensuring...
The New WHO Pandemic Treaty and Global Health Governance: Incorporating Common but Differentiated Responsibilities into PABS - Georgetown Journal of International Affairs
On May 20, 2025, the World Health Assembly unanimously adopted the World Health Organization (WHO) Pandemic Agreement, an international treaty designed to strengthen pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response. The product of three years of arduous negotiations, the treaty marks a new era of global cooperation in public health. However, core aspects of the agreement remain unresolved—notably the Pathogen Access and Benefit-Sharing (PABS) System, which is intended to ensure equitable access to pandemic-related materials and benefits. To support the successful implementation of the WHO Pandemic Agreement, the principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities” should be formally incorporated into the negotiating agenda of the PABS annex. Introduction For the first time, an international treaty has enshrined the principle of “One Health,” the compelling idea that the health of animals, humans, and the environment all contribute to pandemic risks. SARS (2003), H1N1 (2009–10), Ebola (2014–16), and COVID-19 all emerged through zoonotic spillover from animal hosts—respectively, civets, hogs, and bats. Together, they underscore the need for a coordinated, cross-sectoral approach. The Pandemic Agreement responds to this call, requiring state parties to acknowledge the ecological interplay and commit to a comprehensive “One Health” strategy. Specifically, Article 5 charges governments to address “the drivers of pandemics and the emergence and re-emergence of infectious disease at the human-animal-environment interface,” including wild animal markets, deforestation, and antibiotic overuse. Yet the effectiveness of this “One Health” vision depends equally on the free flow of scientific information and data among countries and institutions. Just as environmental and animal health factors have been neglected in past global frameworks, so too has data sharing been marginalized, despite its centrality to timely detection and response. The Pandemic Agreement takes an important step by requiring governments to enhance data collection and cooperate with the World Health Organization (WHO). However, these provisions will remain aspirational without a robust Pathogen Access and Benefit-Sharing (PABS) annex. The PABS system will determine whether countries and researchers can rapidly exchange pathogen samples and genetic data while ensuring equitable access to resulting research and development, including diagnostics, therapeutics, and vaccines. Without such mechanisms, the treaty’s promise to operationalize “One Health” and strengthen global preparedness will risk becoming largely symbolic, echoing earlier failures to translate shared principles into coordinated action. Equity Concerns When the 2025 Health Assembly adopted the Pandemic Agreement, it left the difficult question of access to pathogens and the sharing of resulting benefits to be addressed in a separate agreement. Negotiations on this separate agreement, PABS, are now underway in Geneva. Yet governments remain divided over fundamental questions of equity between the countries that primarily contribute to the system and those that primarily draw from it—and consequently benefit. For example, wildlife in countries bordering the equator is likely to produce PABS materials, but companies in Europe are likely to use them to develop lucrative products. The most likely contributor countries are likely to be those biodiverse countries around the equator, such as Brazil, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and Indonesia, where the number of human-mammalian viral host interactions is large. Conversely, countries most likely to benefit from this material are those with the technology, investors, and infrastructure to capitalize on genomic data, such as the United States, EU member states, and Japan. This imbalance reflects a broader pattern seen in prior international frameworks. Now, as in the past, the wealthiest countries in the world (a useful heuristic is membership of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)) disproportionately benefit from systems in which pathogens and genomic sequencing data are contributed to a common source. Under the International Agreement on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (the “Plant Treaty” or “Seed Treaty”) and the Pandemic Influenza Preparedness (PIP) Framework, companies from Europe and North America disproportionately withdraw biological samples and data for development into lucrative medical products. Their governments and companies have both statutory and contractual claims to the products that those companies correspondingly produce. PABS appears poised to follow the same pattern. The text calls for strong language on access to pathogens and associated data, but the corresponding benefits that should flow to poorer countries are couched in equivocal or non-binding language. Common but Differentiated Responsibilities To address these inequities, the principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities” should be formally incorporated into the negotiating agenda of the PABS annex. Common but differentiated responsibilities are often a feature of climate change negotiations. The basic principle is that, even though all countries should reduce carbon emissions, governments that became rich and powerful through massive carbon emissions (e.g., France, the United Kingdom, the United States) should have a greater obligation to address the resulting crises. Applied to PABS, it would require that governments hosting and supporting companies developing lucrative products carry greater obligations toward the cost of running the PABS system; share benefits or final medical products; and transfer technology to help countries worldwide develop their own capacities to innovate and manufacture vaccines during an emergency. For example, an annex could mandate that any company based in an OECD country that withdraws PABS material would be obligated to donate the resulting diagnostics, therapeutics, or vaccines to the WHO during a public health emergency or pandemic. Questions remain about how robust those donations would be, but the principle is that they should deliver highly significant lifesaving benefits to be equitably shared. Theoretically, this approach mirrors the PIP Framework, in which companies withdrawing influenza samples are required to pay half of the operating costs. In practice, however, the framework has fallen short. The PIP Framework Secretariat has struggled to secure payments from companies, with companies often disagreeing over how much is owed. Additionally, without another pandemic influenza to test the strength of the agreement during a public health emergency, corporate compliance with sharing mechanisms remains unknown. Even if these limitations did not characterize the PIP Framework, partially paying for operating expenses does not address the inequity in access to genetic data and pathogen samples that left less developed countries last in line for COVID-19 vaccines (and, before them, H1N1). Common but differentiated responsibilities would go further, addressing governments’ legitimate grievances regarding information sharing. It would make withdrawals of PABS material and resulting products more transparent, building trust across the board. Enforcement and Enduring Success A key implication of this approach is that the governing mechanism of the PABS must have real enforcement authority. The WHO Pandemic Agreement delegates its core governance responsibilities to a Conference of the Parties (COP)—a governing body composed of one representative from each participating government, similar to those established under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. The proposed WHO Pandemic Agreement COP is charged with oversight functions but ultimately possesses no real authority to compel a government to take any action it does not wish to take. The text does not give the COP the ability to, for example, sanction a party that does not comply with either textual obligations or PABS provisions. In other words, there are no effective mechanisms in place to ensure compliance. Perhaps just as significant, establishing a meaningful enforcement mechanism within the PABS system would strengthen the WHO’s credibility and its ability to ensure compliance across global health governance. By setting a precedent for accountability, such a mechanism could enhance the organization’s authority not only within the Pandemic Agreement but also in enforcing the revised International Health Regulations and other frameworks for public health emergencies. Conclusion The PABS annex can—and should—be different. It should establish clear responsibilities for funding as well as for sharing the diagnostics, therapeutics, and vaccines that result from contributions to the system. The system, in turn, must include a dedicated body empowered to hold governments and the corporations they sponsor accountable for their responsibilities before, during, and after pandemics. Doing so would restore trust in the broader agreement, which was eroded as commitments were repeatedly diluted while parties scrambled to meet their own self-imposed deadlines during the Pandemic Agreement negotiations. A robust PABS Annex would cement a grand social bargain. Wealthier countries and their corporations would gain unimpeded access to scientific information essential for developing and manufacturing lifesaving medical products. As such, they would stand to gain considerable economic benefit. Yet that privilege must be matched with responsibility. The grand bargain must include not only the right to innovate, but also the duty to ensure that innovation serves all. As medical products are developed and produced through collective contributions, every person must have equal access. All human beings deserve an equitable chance to survive—to save their own life, the lives of their families, and the well-being of their communities. … Sam Halabi, JD, MPhil, is the Bette Jacobs Endowed Professor at Georgetown University’s School of Health and the Director of the Center for Transformational Health Law at Georgetown Law. He serves as the co-lead for the WHO’s Working Group on Regulatory Consideration on AI and Health’s training workstream. He earned his JD from Harvard, his MPhil from Oxford, and undergraduate degrees from Kansas State University. Lawrence Gostin, LLD (Hon.), JD, BA, is University Distinguished Professor and Founding Director and Timothy and Linda O’Neill Professor of the O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law. He is the author of Global Health Security: A Blueprint for the Future (Harvard University Press, 2021); Global Health Law (Harvard University Press, 2014); Public Health Law: Power, Duty, Restraint (University of California Press, 3rd ed., 2016); Public Health Law and Ethics: A Reader (University of California Press, 3rd ed., 2018); Law and the Health System (Foundation Press, 2014); Principles of Mental Health Law & Practice (Oxford University Press, 2010). He also directs the WHO Collaborating Center at Georgetown University. Image Credit: United States Mission Geneva, CC BY 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons
PAHO ramps up support to Caribbean health systems one month after Hurricane Melissa
Washington, D.C., 3 December 2025 (PAHO)– One month after Hurricane Melissa tore through the Caribbean, the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) continues working closely with national health authorities of Jamaica, Haiti, and Cuba to restore essential services, prevent and respond to disease outbreaks, and strengthen health systems in the hardest-hit countries.
New Nonprofit Addresses National Health Crisis Empowering People Nationwide to Heal from Trauma and Build Resilience
A new national nonprofit is taking a grassroots approach to one of America's most urgent health challenges: Trauma. Remarkably Resilient, Inc., founded by sisters Kathleen Harnish McKune and Karen Dickson, today announces the official national launch of its Remarkably Resilient Together (RRT) campaign – a neuroscience-informed movement that comprises accessible, easy-to-use tools to help vulnerable individuals, families and professionals heal from trauma, manage stress and build resilience.
National Health Organizations: Flu Shots Critical for Individuals with Diabetes, Heart, and Lung Disease
During National Influenza Vaccination Week, experts encourage everyone age 6 months and older to get vaccinated to reduce risk of severe illness and hospitalization
My Number Switch: Former Health Insurance Cards Expire in Japan
As part of the Japanese government’s efforts to encourage the use of My Number cards incorporating health insurance information, previously standard national health insurance cards expire on December 1. This guide explains the situation and what to do, if action is needed.