File Copyright Online - File mutual Divorce in Delhi - Online Legal Advice - Lawyers in India

WHO: Is there any hope?

World Health Organisation i.e. WHO, as the name suggests is an organisation that works in the health care sector and is an recognized authority all over the worldor it can be said it is an international organization dealing with public health care. It is referred as an agency of the United Nations, established in the year 1948, having headquarters in Geneva. It has been derived from one of the main organs of The United Nations that is United Nations Economic and Social Council.

The main functions of the WHO is to keep check of the healthcare sector all around the world and to monitor the health risks and diseases being running and also to promote the health sector so that the people globally have a good and healthy life. The establishment of such authority/ organization was a necessity as since the failure of the League of Nations, the need for a supervising authority to watch the spread of the diseases and to protect the people from its contact.

During this time WHO has been playing a very crucial role in helping the spread of diseases and eradicate it, with people having faith and showing trust on them it is an essential part of the global healthcare. From dealing with the disease such as HIV AIDS to Ebola, Tuberculosis to Malaria it has been working for each one of them, and it has accomplished a very good work in all this. But in recent years the trust and faith of people has been falling and the performance graph is declining with the failure in the accomplishment of the duties and lack of efficiency in the work.

WHO has been working for the betterment of health sector and giving crucial and important information on time about any possibility of threat by any means which could help the states to take proper measures and make policies regarding the same so that it can be avoided. Over the years WHO has been doing the same, and many states are dependent on WHO in many ways who are underdeveloped or are struggling in the health sector and don't have proper and necessary medicinal stuff to handle the situation.

They still need the support and help of WHO which would help them to have a stand in this difficult world. Though in recent times WHO might have been negligent in its act but the demolishing of WHO is not an option or any remedy for its fall or decline in its field. A proper framing and restructure of the organisation is what is required for its better and well-functioning and regain the trust of people. Just like how a dull wall needs to be painted for a longer life the same needs to be done with the WHO. Blaming or transferring the fault on one another is not the solution to this big problem rather it should be saved from getting crushed by this burden.

A proper panel of team who would work for a greater cause and benefit the whole without any personal profit is what required for the transformation of the WHO. Proper funding and further allocation of those funds is also an important task which need to be taken care of. USA is the biggest investor in the current WHO, but China is the dominant investor and trade partner in many of the country's most vulnerable to a pandemic. A Chinese version of the WHO would not allow the transparency that the world needs from such an organization.

Such organisations cannot work behind the curtains i.e. there should be transparency in the work which they're doing because if there's any kind of leak or loopholes in the system then the whole meaning and fun functioning becomes corrupt and it lands us nowhere but back to zero and it would lead to wastage of money, resources and time which would only leave a greater negative impression on the world which is the last thing anyone would want.

The international agency has certainly come in for its share of criticism, and some of it is warranted. The WHO was slow to publicly recognize the scale of the threat posed by the outbreak in China. Though the organization declared the virus a global health emergency in January, Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus didn't begin characterizing it as a pandemic until March 11, when the virus had already been confirmed in at least 114 countries. In part, that's probably because, like most large bureaucracies, the WHO is a cautious institution.

The study concluded that 73 of 289 strong recommendations the agency issued over a recent five-year stretch - on topics ranging from maternal health to tuberculosis were based on low-quality evidence and warranted only conditional advice.

Historically, WHO recommendations have been extremely untrustworthy and not evidence-based, said Dr. Gordon Guyatt, the study's lead author. Things have gotten better, but there is still a ways to go. If the truth is that an intervention is ineffective or minimally effective, [patients and health workers] would want to know this.

Written By:
  1. Harshit S Gahlot &
  2. Sonakshi Chaturvedi

Law Article in India

Ask A Lawyers

You May Like

Legal Question & Answers



Lawyers in India - Search By City

Copyright Filing
Online Copyright Registration


LawArticles

Section 482 CrPc - Quashing Of FIR: Guid...

Titile

The Inherent power under Section 482 in The Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (37th Chapter of th...

Whether Caveat Application is legally pe...

Titile

Whether in a criminal proceeding a Caveat Application is legally permissible to be filed as pro...

How To File For Mutual Divorce In Delhi

Titile

How To File For Mutual Divorce In Delhi Mutual Consent Divorce is the Simplest Way to Obtain a D...

Copyright: An important element of Intel...

Titile

The Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) has its own economic value when it puts into any market ...

The Factories Act,1948

Titile

There has been rise of large scale factory/ industry in India in the later half of nineteenth ce...

Law of Writs In Indian Constitution

Titile

Origin of Writ In common law, Writ is a formal written order issued by a body with administrati...

Lawyers Registration
Lawyers Membership - Get Clients Online


File caveat In Supreme Court Instantly