By Maria Cheng and Jamey Keaten

When the World Health Organization declared the coronavirus a pandemic one year ago Thursday, it did so only after weeks of resisting the term and maintaining that the highly infectious virus could still be stopped.

A year later, the U.N. agency is still struggling to keep on top of the evolving science of COVID-19, to persuade countries to abandon their nationalistic tendencies and help get vaccines where they’re needed most.

The agency made some costly missteps along the way: It advised people against wearing masks for months and asserted that COVID-19 wasn’t widely spread in the air. It also declined to publicly call out countries — particularly China — for mistakes that senior WHO officials grumbled about privately.

That created some tricky politics that challenged WHO’s credibility and wedged it between two world powers, setting off vociferous Trump administration criticism that the agency is only now emerging from.

President Joe Biden’s support for WHO may provide some much-needed breathing space, but the organization still faces a monumental task ahead as it tries to project some moral authority amid a universal scramble for vaccines that is leaving billions of people unprotected.

“WHO has been a bit behind, being cautious rather than precautionary,” said Gian Luca Burci, a former WHO legal counsel now at Geneva’s Graduate Institute. “At times of panic, of a crisis and so on, maybe being more out on a limb — taking a risk — would have been better.”

WHO waved its first big warning flag on Jan. 30, 2020, by calling the outbreak an international health emergency. But many countries ignored or overlooked the warning.

Only when WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus declared a “pandemic” six weeks later, on March 11, 2020, did most governments take action, experts said. By then, it was too late, and the virus had reached every continent except Antarctica.

A year later, WHO still appears hamstrung. A WHO-led team that traveled to China in January to investigate the origins of COVID-19 was criticized for failing to dismiss China's fringe theory that the virus might be spread via tainted frozen seafood.

That came after WHO repeatedly lauded China last year for its speedy, transparent response — even though recordings of private meetings obtained by The Associated Press showed that top officials were frustrated at the country's lack of cooperation.

“Everybody has been wondering why WHO was so praising of China back in January" 2020, Burci said, adding that the praise has come back “to haunt WHO big-time.”

Some experts say WHO’s blunders came at a high price, and it remains too reliant on iron-clad science instead of taking calculated risks to keep people safer — whether on strategies like mask-wearing or whether COVID-19 is often spread through the air.

“Without a doubt, WHO’s failure to endorse masks earlier cost lives,” said Dr. Trish Greenhalgh, a professor of primary care health sciences at Oxford University who sits on several WHO expert committees. Not until June did WHO advise people to regularly wear masks, long after other health agencies and numerous countries did so.

Greenhalgh said she was less interested in asking WHO to atone for past errors than revising its policies going forward. In October, she wrote to the head of a key WHO committee on infection control, raising concerns about the lack of expertise among some members. She never received a response.

“This scandal is not just in the past. It’s in the present and escalating into the future,” Greenhalgh said.

Raymond Tellier, an associate professor at Canada's McGill University who specializes in coronaviruses, said WHO’s continued reluctance to acknowledge how often COVID-19 is spread in the air could prove more dangerous with the arrival of new virus variants first identified in Britain and South Africa that are even more transmissible.

“If WHO’s recommendations are not strong enough, we could see the pandemic go on much longer,” he said.

With several licensed vaccines, WHO is now working to ensure that people in the world’s poorest countries receive doses through the COVAX initiative, which is aimed at ensuring poor countries get COVID-19 vaccines.

But COVAX has only a fraction of the 2 billion vaccines it is hoping to deliver by the end of the year. Some countries that have waited months for shots have grown impatient, opting to sign their own private deals for quicker vaccine access.

WHO chief Tedros has responded largely by appealing to countries to act in “solidarity,” warning that the world is on the brink of a “catastrophic moral failure” if vaccines are not distributed fairly. Although he has asked rich countries to share their doses immediately with developing countries and to not strike new deals that would jeopardize the vaccine supply for poorer countries, none have obliged.

“WHO is trying to lead by moral authority, but repeating ‘solidarity’ over and over when it’s being ignored by countries acting in their own self-interest shows they are not recognizing reality,” said Amanda Glassman, executive vice president of the Center for Global Development. “It’s time to call things out for the way they are.”

Yet throughout the pandemic, WHO has repeatedly declined to censure rich countries for their flawed attempts to stop the virus. Internally, WHO officials described some of their biggest member countries' approaches to stemming COVID-19 as “an unfortunate laboratory to study the virus” and “macabre.”

More recently, Tedros seems to have found a slightly firmer voice — speaking truth to leaders like Germany’s president about the need for wealthy countries to share vaccines or criticizing China for dragging its heels in not quickly granting visas to the WHO-led investigative team.

Irwin Redlener of Columbia University said WHO should be more aggressive in instructing countries what to do, given the extremely unequal way COVID-19 vaccines are being distributed.

“WHO can’t order countries to do things, but they can make very clear and explicit guidance that makes it difficult for countries not to follow,” Redlener said.

WHO's top officials have said repeatedly it is not the agency's style to criticize countries.

At a press briefing this month, WHO senior adviser Dr. Bruce Aylward said simply: “We can’t tell individual countries what to do.”

___

AP Medical Writer Maria Cheng reported from London.

Share:
More In Politics
Snap, Youtube, TikTok to Face Questioning from Lawmakers
Later today House Republicans will grill Snap, Tiktok and Youtube on how their products affect the mental health of teenagers. It comes after a report revealed that Facebook's photo sharing platform, Instagram, can be harmful to teen's mental health. Rishi Bharwani, Director of Partnerships and Policy, Accountable Tech joined Cheddar's Opening Bell to discuss.
Paid Family Leave Program in Flux
As the White House and Congressional leaders work towards finalizing the legislative framework of the Build Back Better budget deal, paid family leave, one of the hallmarks of President Joe Biden's Social Safety Net agenda, still stands in flux. Molly Day, Executive Director, Paid Leave for the U.S. joined Cheddar's Opening Bell to discuss why the finalization of this bill is imperative.
New York City Workers Protest Vaccine Mandate
Marjorie Mesidor, Esq., Partner, Phillips and Associates, PLLC and Dr. Anthony Santela, professor of health administration and university covid coordinator at the University of New Haven join J.D. Durkin and None Of The Above to talk about the expected fallout from New York City's vaccine mandate.
COP26 Summit In Glasglow Officially Underway
Leaders around the world have come together to discuss plans to bring action towards the Paris Agreement along with solutions on how to solve the evolving climate change crisis at the COP26 Summit. President and CEO of Center for International Environmental Law Carroll Muffett, joined Cheddar to discuss more.
What's Next for World Leaders After COP26 Commitments to Abate Climate Change
Rachel Cleetus, the policy director and lead economist of the climate and energy program for the Union of Concerned Scientists, joined Cheddar to break down some of the key goals from the COP26 summit and why leaders must focus on the science of climate change instead of getting bogged down by petty politics and the fossil fuel industry. "The main thing they have to do, make sure we're cutting our emissions sharply within this decade because the science shows that we have to cut global emissions in half by 2030 if we're going to meet our goals of averting some of the most catastrophic impacts of climate change," she said.
Election Day, Climate Pledges & Cautionary TV Tale
Carlo and Baker cover the big races to watch on this off-cycle Election Day, the concrete pledges starting to come out of COP26, Jeffrey Epstein keeps causing CEOs to lose their jobs, and Ryan Murphy's TV hit that wasn't.
November Begins with Record Closes, Clorox Reports Earnings
The Dow, S&P, and Nasdaq begin November by not only ending Monday's session higher but with a record close as well. Melissa Armo, Founder and Owner of The Stock Swoosh, has her eye on major economic storylines and joins Cheddar News' Closing Bell to discuss what role the news could play on Wall Street.
Climate-Focused Investing in Focus at COP26
The UN climate change conference kicked off on Sunday with about 120 world leaders and delegates gathering in Glasgow, Scotland this week, as experts continue to warn about the harms of heightened emissions and the effects on climate change. The topic of ESG investing is expected to be a top priority at the summit. Jefferies global head of ESG and sustainability research Aniket Shah joined Cheddar News' Closing Bell to discuss.
Schools Reconsider Gifted and Talented Programs Amid Race, Class Disparities
Gifted and talented education programs in schools throughout the United States are falling under greater scrutiny as the race and class divide in the programs remain wide. Marcia Gentry, a professor of educational studies and the director of the Gifted Education Research and Resource Institute at Purdue University, joined Cheddar to weigh in on if advanced tracking for students can also be equitable for lower income students and students of color.
Supreme Court Weighs in on Texas Abortion Law
The Supreme Court is now weighing in on one of the nation's most restrictive abortion laws. The Texas law, which was enacted on September 1, bans abortions after six weeks of pregnancy. In addition, it allows any private citizen to sue anyone who helps a woman get an abortion. Jimmy Hoover, Supreme Court Editor-At-Large at Law360, joined Cheddar News to discuss more.
Load More