News

At GHTC, we get to read stories every day about incredible innovations in global health. Most of the technologies we see are inventive, some are revolutionary, and a few are so unusual, one might think they were ripped from the pages of a science fiction novel. Now, we’re testing how well you know these global health technologies with our annual Halloween game: the TRICK or TREATment quiz.For each question, we will present a description of a global health technology. Choose TREATment if you believe this innovation exists and has market approval. Choose TRICK if you think we are trying to pull one over on you and, instead, the product is still in development or is just a figment of our imagination.  Loading...(function(i,s,o,g,r,a,m){var ql=document.querySelectorAll('A[quiz],DIV[quiz],A[data-quiz],DIV[data-quiz]'); if(ql){if(ql.length){for(var k=0;k

President Joe Biden has made clear that addressing climate change is a top priority for his administration. Since January, the president has issued executive actions in pursuit of tackling the climate crisis; opened a new federal office for climate change, health, and equity; and convened two meetings of the Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate, one of which was part of a larger leaders summit intended to rally world leaders to strengthen climate ambition in the lead-up to the 26th United Nations Climate Change Conference of the Parties (COP26) in early November, during which countries hope to negotiate shared climate commitments.Amid these ongoing and vital conversations, GHTC is taking stock of how global health and climate are intertwined and how innovation can address these twin issues and mitigate the impact of climate change on human health. As the Unites States prepares to engage in COP26, we hope to see continued commitments and concrete actions to combat the climate crisis, including climate-related global health challenges.Climate-related global health risksClimate and global health are inextricably linked: Climate change could put billions more people worldwide at risk of vector-borne and zoonotic diseases like malaria and dengue. Changing temperatures have been described as a “threat multiplier” of antimicrobial resistance, due to warm conditions being more favorable for bacterial reproduction. The climate crisis exacerbates food instability and malnutrition as a result of droughts and other extreme weather events—circumstances which also prove opportune for disease outbreaks. The threat of a “Disease X” outbreak occurring, and spreading globally, is greater than ever before due to deforestation and other climate-related risk factors.These risks will not be felt equally around the world. Children are among the most vulnerable—and will be exposed for the longest—to health risks resulting from climate change, given their physical and cognitive immaturity. Health effects are also expected to be worse for people who are older, have preexisting medical conditions, or are living in poverty or in low- and middle-income countries. These populations are less able to insulate themselves through technology, housing, social networks, health services, and other infrastructure. Food insecurity is likely to particularly affect Indigenous communities, many of which rely on local food sources, such as fish. Women and girls, too, are often underprioritized in responses to climate-induced disasters, which can inhibit their agency and access to sexual and reproductive health services, from contraception to HIV prevention and treatment.Existing efforts by US agenciesThe US government is beginning to recognize and take on the interconnected fight against climate change and global health crises through programs at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), National Institutes of Health (NIH), and US Agency for International Development (USAID).For example, CDC’s Climate and Health Program assists states, cities, territories, and tribes in the United States with protecting human health from a changing climate by providing data, tools, and technical guidance to reduce vulnerability and increase resilience.NIH has launched a Working Group on Climate Change and Health aimed at addressing climate change and its health effects through research and innovation, and its National Institute of Environmental Health Services Climate Change and Human Health Program funds research aimed at understanding the health effects of climate change.USAID conducts a breadth of climate-related work, playing a crucial role in mitigating climate change and supporting resilience against its global impact—including by strengthening resilient food systems. USAID-supported programs have worked to develop and distribute disease-, heat-, and drought-tolerant seeds as well as nutrient-dense foods. For example, to support response to climate change–induced droughts and dry climates, USAID has invested in a public-private partnership to develop a variety of drought-tolerant maize, which was used by 6 million farmers in 2016 when the El Niño drought hit Southern and Eastern Africa.Looking ahead: What more should the US government do?In line with its expressed priorities, the US administration should continue to sustain and expand investment in climate change innovation—embracing a comprehensive agenda that recognizes the need to not only directly improve climate health, but also mitigate its impact on human health. While US health agencies have demonstrated some capacity to take on climate action for health, there is much more to be done.US agencies addressing climate change should consistently consider its ripple effect on global health and integrate a broad range of health-related climate innovation into their work—for instance, through emerging infectious disease surveillance, health and environmental systems capacity strengthening, or research to further understand both threats and the ways they interact.We will never achieve global health goals without also protecting our environment, and we won’t succeed in preventing the climate crisis’s worst impacts without bolstering investments in global health. GHTC looks forward to seeing continued commitment and global leadership from the US government to advance innovation to address these deeply intertwined challenges.

Interested in more global health innovation news? Every week GHTC scours media reports worldwide to deliver essential global health R&D news and content to your inbox. Sign up now to receive our weekly R&D News Roundup email. A six-month oral treatment regimen for rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis (TB) is substantially more effective than the current standard of care, according to preliminary trial results presented at the 52nd Union World Conference on Lung Health on Wednesday. The TB-Practecal trial tested a six-month regimen of bedaquiline, pretomanid, linezolid, and moxifloxacin (BPaLM) among 552 patients against the locally accepted standard of care at seven trial sites across Belarus, South Africa, and Uzbekistan. Findings showed around 89 percent of patients in the BPaLM group were cured, compared to 52 percent in the standard of care group. Current standard care for rifampicin-resistant TB can require up to 20 pills daily, along with injections, for up to 20 months.A new fingerstick blood test could be a promising tool for screening TB patients, interim study results indicate. The test, developed by Cepheid, gives results in under one hour using a few drops of blood. The new results, from a study of 195 participants in Gambia, Uganda, South Africa, and Vietnam, show an overall sensitivity of 91 percent and specificity of 86 percent, regardless of HIV status or geographical location, which meets the World Health Organization’s minimum specifications for a TB triage test. Researchers plan to expand trials to further test the technology’s accuracy, including among people who have other risk factors for TB, as well for people who have both TB and COVID-19.On Friday, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released a briefing document indicating the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine is more than 90 percent effective against symptomatic COVID-19 among children ages 5 to 11. The data is based on a 10-microgram vaccine dose, a third of the dose used for adults and older children, which minimizes side effects but still induces a strong immune response. The antibody response was comparable to the one seen in individuals 16 to 25 years old, and no new safety problems were identified in the companies' studies. The FDA also released an analysis later Friday showing the protection “would clearly outweigh” the risks of the shot. FDA advisers will meet Tuesday to discuss expanding authorization of the vaccine, currently greenlit for people over 12, to those ages 5 to 11.