1628 



IMPLICATIONS OF GLOBAL HEALTH PLANNING 



(e) It is more effective to think and plan globally for the health 

 component in the quality of life than it is to make bilateral 

 agreements with other powers to undertake research of interest 

 to them in a certain disease, when in fact, large regions if not the 

 whole world are affected by the disease. Several such bilateral 

 agreements in effect today will probabl}^ accomplish less than if 

 the same money were spent on regional centers involving the 

 participation of many nations, developed and less developed. 

 The WHO cancer center in Lyons, France, is a highly effective 

 example ; there is an urgent need for other multinational centers 

 focusing on specific diseases. 



(f) It was pointed out in the study that evidence did not 

 support the idea that medical assistance should be withheld from 

 less developed countries on the ground that it will merely exac- 

 erbate the population problem, but rather — at least in long-range 

 terms — the reverse. In most explicit terms, the study suggested, 

 and quoted authorities who contended, that good health facili- 

 tated population control. However, the theory of the relationship 

 of the population growth to improvement in public health 

 measures, combined with rising standards of living, is not well 

 developed.^'*" This is a subject deserving of intensive investigation 

 by Congress and additional research efforts in support of such 

 investigation. (See also Issue Three.) 



(g) As a result of politically motivated decisions by UNESCO, 

 some Western nations are withholding funds and some scholars 

 are boycotting UNESCO-sponsored meetings. It is too early to 

 determine whether or not such pro- Arab, Communist, and Third 

 World trends will continue in UNESCO. The question, of course, 

 is whether WHO will experience a similar awkwardness and 

 require adjustments beyond those which it has already satisfac- 

 torily negotiated in response to similar influences in its Eastern 

 Mediterranean Region. The answer is, probably not; WHO is 

 organized in such a way that combinations of bloc votes in its 

 World Health Assembly have less influence over crucial WHO 

 decisions than do the decisions of its more powerful 24-man 

 Executive Board. On the Board, professional representatives of 

 at least four major powers wield strong technical influence over 

 who's major assistance programs. It is important to preserve 

 this arrangement if the United Nations itself should become less 

 effective and future development should leave WHO to go it alone. 



(h) In summary, it seems reasonable today to reach conclusions 

 similar to those in the original analysis : 



That multinational cooperation in ^VHO and PAHO will con- 

 tinue to contribute effectively to the technical and organizational 

 health needs of the world, of regions, and of the participating 

 member countries. 



»» Qulmby, The Polilkt of Global Health, pp. 751-752. 



