1629 



That the massive prestige and universal respect commanded 

 by WHO justifies a greater involvement of the U.S. Government 

 and American health experts in supporting and shaping the WHO 

 programs for those global health problems which do not lend 

 themselves to typical bilateral aid. 



That a U.S. role of positive promotion of WHO should be 

 viewed as beneficial if not, indeed, essential to the success of 

 that agency's rational attack on world health problems, with 

 commensurate benefits to U.S. national health. 



Some Illustrative Questions 



The study of The Politics of Global Health poses a variety of questions 

 for congressional consideration. The following are some examples: 



Would it be desirable, and reahstic, for the United States to assume 

 a more positive and supportive role in the field of global health as a 

 means of strengthening its overall diplomatic posture? 



If so, what steps should Congress take: 



(a) To inform itself more fully about needs and opportunities? 



(b) To persuade the American pubUc of the appropriateness of 

 such a move? 



What can be learned from public health/preventive medicine and 

 health care programs of the People's Republic of China? 



Could the United States effectively promote regional health activi- 

 ties as a low-profile way of contributing to "technological end runs" 

 in areas of mihtary conflict, such as the Middle East, or of lesser 

 poU tidal confrontation, as in sections of Africa? Should it seek to do 

 so? 



How should U.S. programs in the international health field be 

 coordinated? What should be the respective roles of the Department 

 of State and the mission-oriented agencies? 



How ejffective is the monitoring of the World Health Organization 

 by U.S. agencies? How well do they report on WHO's budgetary needs 

 and the importance of WHO's activities to the United States? Do 

 the new Office of Science and Technology Policy in the Executive 

 Office of the President, the National Science Foundation's Directorate 

 of Scientific, Technological, and International Affairs, and/or the 

 State Department take an active interest and play a constructive role 

 in this connection? Who should account to Congress and the U.S. 

 public regarding U.S. support of ongoing and projected WHO activ- 

 ities? Is a new inst itutional and mecha nism needed ? 



Should there be more intensive eflForts to inform the pubHc through 

 the press of the existence of the World Health Organization and its 

 objectives and achievements? (One of the few related areas to receive 

 recent attention is that of WHO's goal of eradicating smallpox in the 

 near future. This will be the first time in all history that man has suc- 

 ceeded in eliminating globally a human disease.) 



ISSUE THREE— BEYOND MALTHUS: THE FOOD/PEOPLE EQUATION « 



In a world shrunk by television, electronic communications, and air 

 transport, the tragedy of famine is increasingly everyone's concern. 

 Although technologies of food production and population control are 



1" U.S. Congress, House, Committee on Foreign Affairs, Beyond Malttius: The Food/People Equationi 

 in the series Science, Technology, and American Diplomacy, prepared for the Subcommittee on Nations' 

 Security Policy and Scientific Developments by Allan S. Nanes, Foreign Afiairs Division, Congressiona' 

 Research Service, Library of Congress, 1971. See vol. II, pp. 765-864. 



