The United States has signed bilateral health agreements with fourteen African countries. The deals combine US funding with domestic money and ask partner states to increase health spending, report outbreaks quickly and expand disease surveillance. Kenya was the first to sign a Memorandum of Understanding in December. The Kenyan High Court has paused parts of the agreement that involve transfer and sharing of sensitive health data until a hearing in February.
Critics say the agreements raise questions about control of health data and pathogen samples. The State Department says support depends on countries meeting key health metrics. Experts warn that once specimens leave a country there are few guarantees about how they will be used. Many call for legislative review, stronger safeguards and regional surveillance approaches.
Difficult words
- bilateral — Involving two countries or two sides.
- funding — Money given to support a project or service.
- surveillance — Careful watching and checking for problems.
- Memorandum of Understanding — A written agreement between two organizations or countries.
- sensitive — Needing careful handling because of privacy or risk.
- specimen — A sample taken for study or testing.specimens
Tip: hover, focus or tap highlighted words in the article to see quick definitions while you read or listen.
Discussion questions
- Do you think countries should share health data with other countries? Why or why not?
- What rules or actions could protect sensitive health data better?
- How would you feel if specimens from your country went to another country for study?
Related articles
Experimental vaccine gives lasting protection in mice against CCHF
A new mouse study reports an experimental vaccine that produced rapid protection and antibodies that lasted up to 18 months. Researchers say a booster strengthened and extended immune responses and plan manufacturing steps before human trials.
Study finds Abbott-Bioline malaria test gives many false negatives
A study on the Thailand–Myanmar border found the Abbott-Bioline rapid malaria test missed many infections. Researchers call it “not fit for purpose”; WHO and the manufacturer are reviewing the test and further studies are under way.