Dr. Emma Andrews

The rise of health misinformation—information that is false, inaccurate, or misleading according to the best available evidence at the time—is a growing global crisis. The COVID-19 pandemic, coupled with the spread of social media and generative AI, has contributed to the rapid dissemination of misinformation. According to the Bulletin of the World Health Organization, health misinformation is particularly prevalent online, accounting for 51% of social media posts associated with vaccines and up to 60% of posts related to pandemics.[1]

For marginalized and vulnerable communities globally, the stakes are especially high. Many individuals in these groups already mistrust government institutions and healthcare systems, creating fertile ground for misinformation to take root. In low-and-middle income countries, where access to accurate information may be limited, the consequences can be catastrophic – for example, people may avoid vaccines or lifesaving government-provided medicines.

The Impact of Health Misinformation

Around the world, cultural beliefs or mistrust of formal/western health recommendations can lead to highly persistent health misinformation. For example, during the Ebola outbreaks in West Africa in 2014-2016, misinformation about disease causes and treatments was one factor that delayed containment efforts. Vaccination rollout was hampered by rumors including rumors that the vaccine made women infertile or men impotent. By the time the West Africa Ebola epidemic ended in 2016, approximately 28,600 people had been infected, and 11,325 people had died.[2]

In Pakistan, a recent spike in polio vaccine misinformation on the Internet has been identified as one of the biggest barriers for polio eradication. In 2019, a false rumor about polio vaccine safety and side effects was shared on social media, claiming that children fell sick after receiving the vaccine[3]. The viral videos not only led many parents to refuse to vaccinate their children, but even contributed to the escalation of a mob attack where a small hospital was set on fire in Peshawar. Since the incident, Pakistan has observed a drastic increase in polio cases and it continues to pose serious threats to public health.

In the US, a recent study from the Huntsman Cancer Institute found that of the most popular articles posted on social media in 2018 and 2019 regarding the four most common cancers, one in every three contained false, inaccurate, or misleading information[4]. Not only was most of that misinformation about cancer potentially harmful (for example, by promoting unproven treatments) but people were more likely to engage with the misinformation than with factual information.

Building Trust Through Collaboration And Partnership

Addressing misinformation is not just about debunking falsehoods; it’s about rebuilding trust – and Patient Advocacy Groups (PAGs) are a vital partner in building and sustaining trust within communities. These groups possess a unique understanding of the needs of patients and possess the cultural sensitivities necessary to bridge the gap between patients and stakeholders across healthcare landscape.

Recognizing this, our Global Patient Advocacy team at Pfizer has partnered with community groups and patient advocates to help ensure the patient perspective is reflected in our efforts and to amplifying accurate health messages in ways that resonate culturally.

A leading advocate and partner, Regina Namata Kamoga of Community Health and Information Network [CHAIN], in Uganda explained that “Trust is the key component in addressing misinformation. There were many interventions to address COVID-19 misinformation in Uganda, but they were all top-down and didn’t involve local leaders, religious leaders and community-owned resources. And, guess what? It got worse. If we are serious about overcoming misinformation, there needs to be sustained, deliberate efforts to engage with trusted leaders and expertise at a community level.”

With over 10 community leaders, Pfizer has established a global pan-therapeutic advisory panel, representing perspectives from a range of therapy areas and geographies including Europe, Asia, Africa, Middle East, South America, North America and Australia. The network helps patient advocacy leaders exchange best practices and ideas for supporting their own communities. Together, the group is creating practical guidance on building trust and helping to ameliorate the impact of misinformation among marginalized and vulnerable communities around the world.

Additionally, we have co-developed the Patient Advocacy Leadership Collective, an innovative hub that provides connectivity, community resources, and a collection of tools focused on sustainable capacity building for patient advocates. One such resource, is the Clear-AI Health Literacy tool which helps individuals communicate in a clear and understandable way by incorporating health literacy best practices including readability, understandability, and actionability.

The fight against health misinformation is ongoing, but the solutions are clear: build trust, strengthen local voices, and provide marginalized communities with the tools they need to access and understand reliable health resources.

[1] Borges do Nascimento, I.J., et al., Infodemics and health misinformation: a systematic review of reviews. Bull World Health Organ, 2022. 100(9): p. 544-561.

[2] Ebola in West Africa, Resolve to Save Lives, 2022 Epidemics That Didn’t Happen | Ebola in West Africa

[3] Ittefaq., et al., Polio vaccine misinformation on social media: turning point in the fight against polio eradication in Pakistan – PMC., 2021

[4] The Challenges of Cancer Misinformation on Social Media – NCI

Dr. Emma Andrews, is the VP, Global Patient Advocacy, Pfizer

Courtesy: The Guardian

The World Health Organization (WHO) is the only organisation with the membership, authority and credibility to promote health worldwide. US president Donald Trump’s decision to withdraw the US from the UN body will have huge implications for global health programmes and governance. It will hit the African continent hard. HIV/Aids and polio programmes will suffer, as will drives to stamp out epidemics like mpox and Marburg. Global health experts Lawrence O. Gostin and Alexandra Finch explain the consequences.

President Donald Trump’s decision to withdraw the US from the World Health Organization (WHO) will be keenly felt across the globe, with profound implications for health in Africa. In the executive order putting the withdrawal process in place, Trump also paused the transfer of US funds, support and resources to the WHO.

Trump’s executive order is his second attempt to pull the US out of the agency. He has also complained that the US financial contribution to the international organisation is “onerous”. The biggest impacts will come from the loss of US funding. The US is by far the WHO’s largest state donor, contributing approximately 18% of the agency’s total funding.

The WHO’s funding is split into two tranches. There are assessed contributions: countries’ membership fees, to which all WHO members agree and over which the WHO has full control. The US accounts for 22%, or US$264 million of these, for the current 2024/25 budget. The US is yet to pay the WHO its assessed contributions for 2024 and 2025. Withdrawing from the organisation without paying these fees would violate US law and must be challenged in the US courts.

Then there are voluntary contributions: donations by member countries, foundations and other sources, usually earmarked to that donor’s priorities. The US contributes 16%, or US$442 million, of all voluntary contributions. In the case of the US, these  priorities include HIV/AIDS, polio eradication and health emergencies.

As experts in global health law, we are deeply concerned about the impacts of this order, which will be far reaching. The US withdrawal from the WHO threatens core health programmes in Africa. It will weaken the ability of African countries to respond to health emergencies, and could lead to increases in death and illness on the continent. It will also have broader implications for leadership and governance in global health.

Impact on core programmes

Trump’s decision to withdraw comes at a time when the WHO’s health priorities in Africa were already underfunded. Eight of 12 areas were funded less than 50% earlier this year. Twenty-seven percent of all US funding through the WHO for the African region goes to polio eradication, 20% supports improved access to quality essential health services, and much of the balance goes to pandemic preparedness and response.

The WHO/US partnership has long supported the HIV/AIDS response in Africa, but the redirection and reduction in funds could reduce the availability of prevention, testing and treatment programmes across the continent. This threatens progress to end AIDS by 2030. The funding gap will also have an impact on programmes designed to increase access to quality essential health services, including the prevention and treatment of tuberculosis and malaria, and child and maternal health services.

If the WHO is forced to cut back on these services due to a lack of financing, it could lead to increases in mortality and morbidity in Africa. European countries filled the financing gap in 2020 when Trump last withheld US funding from the WHO. But it is unlikely that they will be able to do so again, as countries across Europe are facing their own geopolitical and financial challenges.

The WHO’s budget was already thinly spread, and its mandate keeps growing. Through its new investment round, the WHO raised US$1.7 billion in pledges, and is expecting another US$2.1 billion through partnerships and other agreements. Yet even before the US president’s executive order, this left a funding gap of approximately US$3.3 billion (or 47%) for the WHO’s 2025-2028 strategy. If the gap left by the loss of US funding cannot be filled from other sources, it will fall to African nations to fund health programmes and services that are cut, placing a greater strain on governments reckoning with limited fiscal space.

Weakened response to health emergencies

Trump’s decision comes at a pivotal moment for health in Africa, which is experiencing major outbreaks. The US has been a key actor supporting WHO-led emergency responses to outbreaks. Last year, the US partnered with the WHO and Rwanda to rapidly bring a Marburg outbreak under control. The Marburg virus continues to threaten the continent. Tanzania has just confirmed an outbreak.

Earlier in August 2024, the WHO and Africa Centres for Disease Control each declared mpox on the continent to be a public health emergency. The Biden administration delivered 60,000 vaccines, pledged 1 million more, and contributed over US$22 million to support capacity building and vaccination. But now US health officials have been instructed to immediately stop working with the WHO, preventing US teams in Africa from responding to Marburg virus and mpox.

Even before these outbreaks, the US supported WHO-led emergency responses to COVID-19, Ebola and HIV/AIDS. The US withdrawal could lead to increased transmission, sickness and death in vulnerable regions. Similarly, strong partnership between the WHO and the US has helped build health system capacities in Africa for public health emergencies.

US experts have supported nearly half of all WHO joint external evaluation missions to assess countries’ pandemic preparedness and response capacities under the International Health Regulations. This is a binding WHO agreement to help countries prepare for, detect and initially respond to health emergencies globally. The US withdrawal from the WHO risks eroding these efforts, though it may also accelerate a regionalisation of health security already underway in Africa, led by the African Union through the Africa CDC.

Restructuring of governance

The US was instrumental in establishing the WHO and shaping WHO norms and standards, in particular driving amendments to the International Health Regulations adopted in June 2024. This included improved obligations to facilitate the rapid sharing of information between the WHO and countries.

The US has also been a key figure in ongoing negotiations for a new international treaty, a Pandemic Agreement. This would create new rights and obligations to prevent, prepare for and respond to pandemics with elements that go beyond the International Health Regulations. These include obligations on the equitable sharing of vaccines.

Trump’s executive order would prevent these instruments from being implemented or enforced in the US. This would only entrench inequitable dynamics when the next global health emergency breaks out, given the concentration of global pharmaceutical companies in the US.

The order also pulls the US out of the Pandemic Agreement negotiations. This will inevitably create new diplomatic dynamics. Optimistically, this could provide enhanced opportunities for African nations to strengthen their position on equity. The US departure from the WHO will create a leadership vacuum, ushering in a restructuring of power and alliances for global health.

This vacuum could cede influence to US adversaries, opening the door to even greater Chinese influence on the African continent. But it also presents opportunities for greater African leadership in global health, which could strengthen African self-reliance. Trump has directed the US to find “credible and transparent” partners to assume the activities the WHO would have performed. And yet there is no substitute for the WHO, with its worldwide reach and stature.

For more than 75 years, the WHO has been, and remains, the only global health organisation with the membership, authority, expertise and credibility to protect and promote health for the world’s population. For this reason, the African Union, among scores of other bodies and leaders, has already urged Trump to reconsider. It is now time for the global community to stand up for the WHO and ensure its vital health work in Africa and beyond can thrive.

Lawrence O. Gostin is a Professor; Founding Linda D. & Timothy J. O’Neill Professor of Global Health Law, at Georgetown University;  Alexandra Finch is a Senior Associate at the O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law and Adjunct Professor of Law at Georgetown University, Georgetown University

Courtesy: The Conversation

Baba Yunus Muhammad

Despite enduring international sanctions and economic challenges—factors that often constrain a nation’s healthcare capacity—Iran’s medical tourism sector is emerging as a dynamic force, particularly for Muslim patients. Sanctions can limit access to advanced medical equipment, pharmaceuticals, and international collaboration, yet Iran has adeptly navigated these barriers to sustain and even enhance its healthcare capabilities. This resilience underscores the strategic initiatives that have enabled Iran to maintain high standards while offering culturally and religiously tailored services, including halal-certified pharmaceuticals and same-gender healthcare providers. By offering culturally and religiously tailored services such as halal-certified pharmaceuticals, same-gender healthcare providers, and adherence to Islamic values, Iran is carving out a unique niche in the global healthcare market.

In 2024 alone, the nation attracted around 1.2 million medical tourists, contributing an estimated $1 billion to its economy, according to state media. This demonstrates not only the growing appeal of Iran’s healthcare system but also the broader global demand for affordable, high-quality medical services that respect cultural and religious sensitivities.

The Rising Demand for Medical Tourism

Medical tourism has become a global phenomenon, driven by several factors, including high treatment costs, lengthy waiting times, and limited insurance coverage in many countries. Iran, with its competitive pricing and high standards of care, offers a compelling alternative. A 2020 study revealed that medical treatments in Iran cost up to 65% less than in the United States and 40% less than in Western Europe. For Muslim patients, the added benefit of receiving care aligned with Islamic principles further strengthens Iran’s appeal.

Islamic Healthcare: A Key Differentiator

Iran’s approach to medical tourism goes beyond affordability and quality by integrating Islamic principles into its healthcare services, a strategy that stands out even among other Muslim-majority nations. Unlike many countries where Islamic influence in healthcare is minimal or implicit, Iran’s deliberate and holistic incorporation of these principles extends across all facets of patient care, from halal-certified medications to culturally sensitive treatment environments. This comprehensive approach not only aligns with the ethical and spiritual needs of Muslim patients but also positions Iran as a global frontrunner in Islamic healthcare tourism. This has positioned the country as a leader in “Islamic healthcare tourism,” addressing a significant gap in the global market for healthcare that respects Muslim values.

1. Halal Pharmaceuticals and Products: Iran ensures the availability of halal-certified medications and medical products, such as gelatin-free capsules and alcohol-free syrups, which adhere to Islamic dietary and ethical standards. This specificity helps build trust among patients seeking compliance with their religious values. For Muslim patients, this eliminates concerns about consuming or using products derived from prohibited sources.
2. Gender-Sensitive Healthcare: Recognizing the importance of modesty in Islam, Iran’s hospitals and clinics offer same-gender healthcare providers for sensitive treatments. This practice not only respects Islamic values but also fosters trust and comfort among patients.
3. Culturally Appropriate Environments: Healthcare facilities in Iran are designed to accommodate the needs of Muslim families, including prayer rooms, halal meals, and privacy-conscious spaces. These features make the country especially attractive to conservative Muslim communities.
4. Integration with Religious Practices: Many medical tourists combine treatments with visits to Iran’s sacred Islamic sites. Cities like Mashhad, home to the holy shrine of Imam Reza, offer a blend of spiritual and physical healing, making the journey both meaningful and holistic.

Expanding Healthcare Infrastructure

To support its growing medical tourism industry, Iran has made significant investments in healthcare infrastructure. Currently, 247 hospitals and medical centers are licensed to treat international patients, with specialized departments staffed by multilingual professionals to ensure seamless communication.

“The Iranian government has prioritized medical tourism as part of its broader economic diversification strategy,” says Mohammadreza Sheikhy-Chaman, a health economics expert. By modernizing facilities and introducing cutting-edge technologies like CyberKnife systems for advanced treatments, Iran is positioning itself as a hub for specialized care. This strategy is intricately linked with broader economic policies, such as boosting foreign exchange earnings, enhancing healthcare infrastructure, and fostering partnerships with international stakeholders. Furthermore, the government’s focus on streamlining visa procedures for patients and their companions strengthens its position in the global market, creating a more accessible and appealing medical tourism environment.

These advancements are complemented by streamlined visa procedures for patients and their companions, making travel to Iran more accessible and hassle-free.

Key Medical Services and Specialties

Iran offers a wide range of medical services that attract patients from across the globe, distinguishing itself through competitive pricing, high-quality care, and innovative specialties. Compared to regional and global competitors, Iranian providers excel in delivering cost-effective treatments without compromising on quality. For instance, advanced orthopedic surgeries and organ transplants in Iran often outperform many countries in both affordability and success rates. Moreover, the country’s innovation in areas like minimally invasive procedures and fertility technologies adds to its appeal on the global stage. Popular treatments include:

• Cosmetic Procedures: Iran has gained a reputation as a global hub for aesthetic surgeries, including rhinoplasty, earning the nickname “nose job capital of the world.”
• Fertility Treatments: With advanced reproductive technologies and ethical practices rooted in Islamic law, Iran is a leading destination for fertility care.
• Orthopedic and Organ Transplants: High success rates and affordable costs make these treatments particularly appealing.
• Traditional and Alternative Therapies: Regions like Uramanat in Kurdistan province are known for their rare medicinal plants and traditional remedies, offering unique alternative therapies.

Medical Tourism and Cultural Integration

Iran’s cultural and religious heritage adds another layer of appeal for medical tourists. The country’s major medical hubs—Tehran, Shiraz, Mashhad, and Isfahan—are also rich in history and culture. Hospitals and facilitators now offer packages that combine medical treatments with cultural and religious experiences.

For example, patients undergoing surgery in Shiraz can explore the ancient ruins of Persepolis or visit the tombs of renowned poets Hafez and Saadi. In Mashhad, medical tourists often visit the holy shrine of Imam Reza, blending spiritual rejuvenation with physical recovery.

A Hub for Muslim Medical Tourists

Iran’s alcohol-free policies, strict adherence to Islamic dress codes, and emphasis on halal tourism make it a natural choice for Muslim families seeking healthcare. These factors, combined with the country’s shared language and cultural ties with neighboring nations, such as Iraq, Turkiye, and Azerbaijan, enhance its appeal.

“Many Muslim medical tourists view their journey as more than just a health-related trip—it’s an opportunity to deepen their spiritual connection and explore Islamic history,” says Mohammad Amin Shakeri, CEO of Elajiran Medical Tourism.

Hospitals and tourism agencies are increasingly offering all-inclusive packages that address patients’ medical needs while enriching their recovery period with guided tours, bazaars, and sacred sites.

Conclusion: A Holistic Approach to Medical Tourism

Iran’s integration of Islamic values into its medical tourism sector sets it apart in the global healthcare market. By offering affordable, high-quality care in a culturally and religiously sensitive environment, the country has successfully positioned itself as a leading destination for Muslim medical tourists.

As Iran continues to modernize its healthcare infrastructure and expand its range of services, it is poised to become a model for Islamic healthcare tourism. Its ability to seamlessly combine medical, cultural, and spiritual experiences ensures that patients leave not only healthier but also enriched by their journey—a promise of healing in every sense of the word.

Baba Yunus Muhammad is President of the Africa Islamic Economic Forum[AFRIEF]