Category: COVID-19 Vaccine

  • MIL-OSI Africa: World Health Organization (WHO) and UK Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO) standby partners strengthen cholera response in South Sudan

    Source: APO


    .

    Amidst the ongoing cholera outbreak in South Sudan, the World Health Organization (WHO) expressed gratitude for the critical support provided by the UK Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO) and WHO’s Standby Partners (SBPs). Their timely and coordinated assistance has significantly enhanced WHO’s capacity to support the government of South Sudan’s efforts to contain the outbreak.

    South Sudan declared a cholera outbreak in October 2024, since then, the Ministry of Health with support from World Health Organization (WHO) and other partners, has mounted a comprehensive response, designating the outbreak as a highest-priority emergency. This designation has enabled deployment of rapid response teams, prepositioning medical supplies and coordination efforts across all levels to protect communities and safe lives. This is the longest cholera outbreak in the country’s history since independence in September 2011.

    With funding from the UK FCDO, five technical experts were deployed between January and February 2025 through WHO’s Standby Partners, – CANADEM, RedR Australia and UK-Med for six months. This multidisciplinary surge team brought together expertise across key response pillars: case management, epidemiology, water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH), health logistics, and coordination. This coordinated deployment formed a dedicated surge team, enabling WHO to support the government of South Sudan respond swiftly and comprehensively across all key pillars of the cholera response.

    The deployment of these five technical experts played a pivotal role in strengthening the response. Each position was strategically selected to enhance the speed, reach, and effectiveness of WHO’s operations. This integrated, multi-disciplinary deployment model serves as a best-practice example of how surge capacity can be optimized to deliver high-impact results during public health emergencies.

    Together, this team bolstered WHO’s operational capacity, accelerated outbreak containment, and supported broader emergency health systems in South Sudan. Their unified presence and complementary expertise underscore the strategic value of well-coordinated international surge deployments in complex public health emergencies. All efforts were carried out in close coordination with national counterparts and in direct support of the Government of South Sudan’s leadership in managing the outbreak.

    “This team, supported by FCDO, came at a very critical time and has provided a significant boost to our response efforts to contain the cholera outbreak,” said Dr Humphrey Karamagi, WHO Representative for South Sudan, “WHO South Sudan expresses its sincere gratitude to the UK FCDO and our Standby Partners for making this level of response possible. Their extraordinary commitment has directly contributed to saving lives and strengthening resilience in some of the country’s most vulnerable communities.”

    • Mr. Mukasa Kabiri, Cholera Response Coordination Officer, led the successful rollout of oral cholera vaccination (OCV) campaigns, ensuring timely and targeted vaccination coverage where in high- risk areas.

    • Dr. Brendan Patrick Dineen, Epidemiologist, supported the strengthening of real-time surveillance and outbreak mapping, enabling evidence-based decision making in the Upper Nile State and other hard-to-reach areas.

    • Dr. Fuad Said Abdulrahman, Case Management Specialist, provided clinical guidance and training for frontline health workers, improving treatment outcomes and response readiness in affected facilities.

    • Mr. Tai Ring Teh, WASH Officer, supported water quality assessments and hygiene practices at cholera treatment centers in affected communities.

    • Mr. Navjuvon Mazabshoev, Health Logistics Officer, supported logistics operations including the establishing a new treatment center in Tharqueng and improved supply chain management at Juba Teaching Hospital

    Distributed by APO Group on behalf of World Health Organization (WHO) – South Sudan.

    MIL OSI Africa

  • MIL-OSI Africa: Parents urged to ensure children are vaccinated against measles

    Source: Government of South Africa

    Friday, July 4, 2025

    The Free State Health Department has issued an alert regarding a measles outbreak in the Lejweleputswa Nala (Bothaville) region of the province.

    This comes after the confirmation of 64 cases of the viral infection in the areas of Nala, Masilonyana, Matjhabeng and Tswelopele.

    Individuals primarily currently affected by the outbreak are children between the ages of 5 and 9.

    “Measles is a highly contagious viral infection that can lead to serious health complications. It is crucial for parents and guardians to be vigilant and aware of the symptoms associated with measles,” spokesperson Mondli Mvambi said.

    The following symptoms are associated with the viral infection:
    •    Runny Nose
    •    Red Rash
    •    Feeling Tired
    •    Cough
    •    Fever
    •    Conjunctivitis (Red Eyes)

    “We urge all parents to ensure that their children are vaccinated against measles. The measles vaccine is safe and effective and is the best way to protect your child and the community from this disease,” he added.

    Actions you can take:
    •    Keep an eye on your child for any symptoms mentioned above.
    •    If symptoms develop, visit your healthcare provider as soon as possible.
    •    Ensure your child is up-to-date with their measles vaccinations. If you have questions about vaccination status, consult your clinic or healthcare provider.
    •    Share this information with other parents and caregivers in your community.

    “Your health and the health of our community are our top priorities. Together, we can prevent the spread of measles and protect our children. For more information or if you have any questions, please contact your local clinic,” Mvambi concluded. – SAnews.gov.za

    MIL OSI Africa

  • MIL-OSI Africa: Foot and mouth disease contained in Eastern Cape, Limpopo

    Source: Government of South Africa

    Minister of Agriculture, John Steenhuisen, has decided to lift the disease management areas (DMA) in Eastern Cape and Limpopo after intensified efforts by veterinary services were successful in containing the spread of foot and mouth disease (FMD) in the two provinces. 

    In the Kouga and Kou-Kamma municipalities in Eastern Cape, a DMA has been in place since 26 July 2024 to support the control of the FMD outbreaks. Vaccination was implemented as a control measure and 144 424 vaccinations were done. 

    The last cases were reported in September 2024. 

    “Extensive serological surveillance was done in the DMA to confirm that there are no undetected pockets of the disease. The Minister can now confirm the lifting of the movement restrictions in the Eastern Cape DMA,” said the department.

    In Limpopo, the DMA has been in place since September 2022 to control an FMD outbreak in diptanks in the Vhembe Municipality. Cattle at 34 diptanks were vaccinated in two rounds of vaccination, with a total of 23, 024 vaccinations done. 

    Following extensive serological surveillance conducted at the end of 2024, the department is satisfied that there is no evidence of FMD virus in the DMA. 

    “All restrictions on the DMA can, therefore, be lifted. The lifting of the DMA restrictions comes into effect today as it is published in the Government Gazette,” said the department.

    Minister Steenhuisen again emphasised that biosecurity is everybody’s responsibility. 

    “Biosecurity is not just a farming concern, but a shared responsibility of every individual in South Africa. We call on all citizens, especially those interacting with livestock or moving between rural areas, to consistently adhere to all biosecurity measures. 

    “Only through our collective efforts can we safeguard our agricultural sector, make sure livelihoods are protected and ensure we keep our areas FMD-free,” he said.

    Eastern Cape 

    A total of 76 farms in the Eastern Cape province, which were infected and/or vaccinated, remain under quarantine. Movement restrictions will remain in place on these farms until testing has confirmed the absence of viral circulation. 

    Testing will commence 12 months after the farms have been vaccinated. 

    The department said it has decided to allow milk from quarantined farms to be released into the local market following single pasteurisation, instead of double pasteurisation, which was required when the disease was still active in the area. 

    KwaZulu-Natal 

    The DMA in KwaZulu-Natal will remain in place as there are still signs of active virus circulation in the area. 

    Some outbreaks were detected outside of the DMA. 

    “An abattoir in the Vryheid area in the DMA was designated to slaughter animals from premises under FMD restrictions. A system has been put in place to assess the level of biosecurity on individual farms, with the intention of aligning the control measures to the biosecurity risks,” said the department. – SAnews.gov.za

    MIL OSI Africa

  • PM Modi’s Trinidad & Tobago visit highlights deepening trade, development and cultural relations

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Trinidad and Tobago this week highlights India’s efforts to deepen ties with the Caribbean nation. The partnership, built on historical connections dating back nearly two centuries, now spans development cooperation, trade, digital payments, and cultural exchange.

    Trade and Investment: Unlocking New Opportunities

    The Trade Agreement signed between India and Trinidad and Tobago in January 1997, which grants Most Favoured Nation (MFN) status to each other, has laid a strong foundation for expanding economic ties. Trinidad and Tobago’s strategic economic role in the Caribbean, supported by bilateral and regional trade agreements, offers Indian exporters a gateway to the wider Caribbean market and beyond.

    Bilateral trade between the two nations has shown encouraging resilience and steady growth, rising from $264 million in 2020–21 to $341 million in 2024–25. India’s major exports to Trinidad and Tobago include vehicles and parts, iron and steel, pharmaceutical products, and plastic goods. In return, India imports mineral fuels and oils, bituminous substances, mineral waxes, iron and steel, ores and ash, and aluminium from Trinidad and Tobago.

    A notable milestone came in 2024 when Trinidad and Tobago became the first Caribbean nation to adopt India’s Unified Payments Interface (UPI). This step is set to enhance digital payments infrastructure and promote greater financial inclusion.

    In recent years, India’s active participation in trade and investment conventions in Trinidad and Tobago has underlined the shared commitment to explore new opportunities. Sectors such as tourism, pharmaceuticals, information technology, renewable energy, and education are emerging as key areas for collaboration, signalling the growing potential of this bilateral economic partnership.

    Strengthening Institutional Frameworks and Development Cooperation

    The bilateral partnership between India and Trinidad and Tobago is anchored in institutional mechanisms such as the Joint Commission Meeting (JCM) and Foreign Office Consultations (FOC). The first JCM was held in 2011 in New Delhi, while the latest round of FOC took place in Port of Spain in August 2021, enabling both sides to chart the way forward for expanding collaboration.

    India’s development partnership with Trinidad and Tobago has grown steadily in recent years. During the COVID-19 pandemic, India extended critical medical support by supplying 40,000 doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine under the Vaccine Maitri initiative, along with essential medical equipment and aid.

    Beyond healthcare, India’s assistance has strengthened other priority areas as well. A $1 million India-UNDP project supported the deployment of telemedicine and mobile healthcare robots in Trinidad and Tobago. An additional $1 million was allocated for agro-processing machinery to boost food processing capacity. In line with its commitment to regional food security, Indian cooperatives have also supplied rice and edible oil to the Caribbean nation.

    Cultural Bonds: A Living Heritage

    Cultural connections between the two countries remain vibrant, anchored by the Indian diaspora’s enduring ties to its ancestral roots. Hindi language education continues to flourish, with the support of Hindi teachers and local institutions. Nearly 300 students enrolled

  • MIL-Evening Report: Lyssavirus is rare, but deadly. What should you do if a bat bites you?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Vinod Balasubramaniam, Associate Professor (Molecular Virology), Monash University

    Ken Griffiths/Getty Images

    A man in his 50s has died from lyssavirus in New South Wales after being bitten by a bat several months ago.

    This is Australia’s fourth human case of bat lyssavirus and the first confirmed case in NSW since the virus was first identified in 1996 in a black flying fox in Queensland.

    So what is lyssavirus? And how can you protect yourself if you come into contact with a bat?

    A close relative of rabies

    Australian bat lyssavirus belongs to the Rhabdoviridae family, the same group of viruses that causes rabies.

    It primarily infects bats. Active monitoring suggests fewer than 1% of healthy bats carry the virus, though prevalence rises to 5–10% in sick or injured bats.

    In bats, the virus often causes no obvious symptoms, though some show neurological signs such as disorientation, aggression, muscle spasms and paralysis. Some will die.

    The virus has been confirmed in all four mainland flying fox species (Pteropus alecto, P. poliocephalus, P. scapulatus and P. conspicillatus) as well as the yellow-bellied sheathtail bat (Saccolaimus flaviventris), a species of microbat.

    However, serological evidence – where scientists test for antibodies in bats’ blood – suggests other microbats could be susceptible too. So we should be cautious with all Australian bat species when it comes to lyssavirus.

    Rare, but potentially deadly

    Unlike rabies, which causes roughly 59,000 human deaths annually, predominantly in Africa and Asia, human infection with bat lyssavirus is extremely rare.

    Australian bat lyssavirus, as the name suggests, is unique to Australia. But other bat lyssaviruses, such as European bat lyssavirus, have similarly caused rare human infections.

    Human infection with bat lyssavirus occurs through direct contact with infected bat saliva via bites, scratches or open skin. It can also occur if our mucous membranes (eyes, nose, mouth) are exposed to bat saliva.

    There’s no risk associated with bat faeces, urine, blood, or casual proximity to roosts.

    If someone has been exposed, there’s an incubation period which can range from weeks to more than two years. During this time the virus slowly moves through the body’s nerves to the brain, staying hidden and symptom-free.

    Treating the virus during the incubation period can prevent the illness. But if it’s not treated, symptoms are serious and it’s invariably fatal.

    The nature of the illness in humans mirrors rabies, beginning with flu-like symptoms (fever, headache, fatigue), then quickly progressing to severe neurological disease, including paralysis, delirium, convulsions, and loss of consciousness. Death generally occurs within 1–2 weeks of symptom onset.

    All four recorded human cases in Australia – three in Queensland (in 1996, 1998 and 2013) and the recent NSW case – have been fatal.

    There’s no effective treatment once symptoms develop

    If someone is potentially exposed to bat lyssavirus and seeks medical attention, they can be treated with post-exposure prophylaxis, consisting of rabies antibodies and the rabies vaccine.

    This intervention is highly effective if initiated promptly – preferably within 48 hours, and no later than seven days post-exposure – before the virus enters the central nervous system.

    But no effective treatment exists for Australian bat lyssavirus once symptoms develop. Emerging research on monoclonal antibodies offers potential future therapies, however these are not yet available.

    So what’s the best protection? And what if a bat bites you?

    Pre-exposure rabies vaccination, involving three doses over one month, is recommended for high-risk groups. This includes veterinarians, animal handlers, wildlife rehabilitators, and laboratory workers handling lyssaviruses.

    It’s important for members of the public to avoid all direct contact with bats. Only vaccinated, trained professionals, such as wildlife carers or veterinarians, should handle bats.

    Public education campaigns are essential to reduce risky interactions, especially in bat-populated areas.

    If you get bitten or scratched by a bat, it’s vital to act immediately. Wash the wound thoroughly with soap and water for at least 15 minutes, apply an antiseptic (such as betadine), and seek urgent medical attention.

    This tragic case in NSW underscores that while extremely rare, bat lyssavirus is an important public health threat. We need to see enhanced public awareness and ensure vaccination for high-risk groups, alongside ongoing bat monitoring and research into new treatments.

    Vinod Balasubramaniam does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    ref. Lyssavirus is rare, but deadly. What should you do if a bat bites you? – https://theconversation.com/lyssavirus-is-rare-but-deadly-what-should-you-do-if-a-bat-bites-you-260495

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • Trinidad & Tobago PM praises Narendra Modi, to confer nation’s highest civilian honour

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Trinidad and Tobago Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar on Thursday praised Indian PM Narendra Modi’s leadership and announced that the country’s highest civilian honour, “The Order of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago,” will be conferred upon him on Friday.

    The award is being bestowed in recognition of PM Modi’s global leadership, his deep engagement with the Indian diaspora, and his humanitarian efforts during the Covid-19 pandemic.

    In her address, Prime Minister Persad-Bissessar described PM Modi’s visit as a moment of shared pride and historical connection.

    “We are graced by the presence of someone who is near and dear to us,” she said. “We are honoured by a leader whose visit is not just a matter of protocol but a profound gesture of friendship. I am deeply privileged to welcome one of the world’s most respected and visionary leaders – Prime Minister Narendra Modi of India.”

    Calling him a transformational force, she added, “You have refined governance in India and positioned your country as a dominant global power.”

    She further lauded his visionary leadership, “Through your futuristic initiatives, you have modernised the Indian economy, empowered over a billion citizens, and instilled pride in the hearts of Indians across the globe.”

    Recalling PM Modi’s earlier visit to Trinidad and Tobago in 2002, she said, “Back then, you visited not as a Prime Minister but as a cultural ambassador. Today, you return as the elected leader of more than 1.4 billion people—a distinguished statesman whose influence transcends borders. We bow to you, Sir.”

    Persad-Bissessar also highlighted Modi’s unwavering support for the Indian diaspora and his efforts to preserve shared heritage and cultural bonds. She expressed deep gratitude for India’s support during the Covid-19 pandemic, particularly through its global vaccine initiative.

    “Under your leadership, India extended its hand to the world – never more so than during the pandemic. Through your compassion and benevolence, vaccines and medical supplies reached even the smallest nations, including Trinidad and Tobago. You brought hope and calm where there was fear. This was more than diplomacy; it was an act of kinship, of shared humanity, and of love,” she said.

    “This is one of the many reasons we are proud to confer upon you the Order of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago,” she added.

    The honour adds to a growing list of accolades awarded to Prime Minister Modi during his current Caribbean tour. Earlier, Barbados, Guyana, and Dominica also conferred their highest national awards on him.

    The governments of Guyana and Dominica cited PM Modi’s exceptional leadership during the pandemic, his contribution to the global community, and his efforts to strengthen bilateral ties with the Caribbean nations.

  • Trinidad & Tobago PM praises Narendra Modi, to confer nation’s highest civilian honour

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Trinidad and Tobago Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar on Thursday praised Indian PM Narendra Modi’s leadership and announced that the country’s highest civilian honour, “The Order of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago,” will be conferred upon him on Friday.

    The award is being bestowed in recognition of PM Modi’s global leadership, his deep engagement with the Indian diaspora, and his humanitarian efforts during the Covid-19 pandemic.

    In her address, Prime Minister Persad-Bissessar described PM Modi’s visit as a moment of shared pride and historical connection.

    “We are graced by the presence of someone who is near and dear to us,” she said. “We are honoured by a leader whose visit is not just a matter of protocol but a profound gesture of friendship. I am deeply privileged to welcome one of the world’s most respected and visionary leaders – Prime Minister Narendra Modi of India.”

    Calling him a transformational force, she added, “You have refined governance in India and positioned your country as a dominant global power.”

    She further lauded his visionary leadership, “Through your futuristic initiatives, you have modernised the Indian economy, empowered over a billion citizens, and instilled pride in the hearts of Indians across the globe.”

    Recalling PM Modi’s earlier visit to Trinidad and Tobago in 2002, she said, “Back then, you visited not as a Prime Minister but as a cultural ambassador. Today, you return as the elected leader of more than 1.4 billion people—a distinguished statesman whose influence transcends borders. We bow to you, Sir.”

    Persad-Bissessar also highlighted Modi’s unwavering support for the Indian diaspora and his efforts to preserve shared heritage and cultural bonds. She expressed deep gratitude for India’s support during the Covid-19 pandemic, particularly through its global vaccine initiative.

    “Under your leadership, India extended its hand to the world – never more so than during the pandemic. Through your compassion and benevolence, vaccines and medical supplies reached even the smallest nations, including Trinidad and Tobago. You brought hope and calm where there was fear. This was more than diplomacy; it was an act of kinship, of shared humanity, and of love,” she said.

    “This is one of the many reasons we are proud to confer upon you the Order of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago,” she added.

    The honour adds to a growing list of accolades awarded to Prime Minister Modi during his current Caribbean tour. Earlier, Barbados, Guyana, and Dominica also conferred their highest national awards on him.

    The governments of Guyana and Dominica cited PM Modi’s exceptional leadership during the pandemic, his contribution to the global community, and his efforts to strengthen bilateral ties with the Caribbean nations.

  • Trinidad & Tobago PM praises Narendra Modi, to confer nation’s highest civilian honour

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Trinidad and Tobago Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar on Thursday praised Indian PM Narendra Modi’s leadership and announced that the country’s highest civilian honour, “The Order of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago,” will be conferred upon him on Friday.

    The award is being bestowed in recognition of PM Modi’s global leadership, his deep engagement with the Indian diaspora, and his humanitarian efforts during the Covid-19 pandemic.

    In her address, Prime Minister Persad-Bissessar described PM Modi’s visit as a moment of shared pride and historical connection.

    “We are graced by the presence of someone who is near and dear to us,” she said. “We are honoured by a leader whose visit is not just a matter of protocol but a profound gesture of friendship. I am deeply privileged to welcome one of the world’s most respected and visionary leaders – Prime Minister Narendra Modi of India.”

    Calling him a transformational force, she added, “You have refined governance in India and positioned your country as a dominant global power.”

    She further lauded his visionary leadership, “Through your futuristic initiatives, you have modernised the Indian economy, empowered over a billion citizens, and instilled pride in the hearts of Indians across the globe.”

    Recalling PM Modi’s earlier visit to Trinidad and Tobago in 2002, she said, “Back then, you visited not as a Prime Minister but as a cultural ambassador. Today, you return as the elected leader of more than 1.4 billion people—a distinguished statesman whose influence transcends borders. We bow to you, Sir.”

    Persad-Bissessar also highlighted Modi’s unwavering support for the Indian diaspora and his efforts to preserve shared heritage and cultural bonds. She expressed deep gratitude for India’s support during the Covid-19 pandemic, particularly through its global vaccine initiative.

    “Under your leadership, India extended its hand to the world – never more so than during the pandemic. Through your compassion and benevolence, vaccines and medical supplies reached even the smallest nations, including Trinidad and Tobago. You brought hope and calm where there was fear. This was more than diplomacy; it was an act of kinship, of shared humanity, and of love,” she said.

    “This is one of the many reasons we are proud to confer upon you the Order of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago,” she added.

    The honour adds to a growing list of accolades awarded to Prime Minister Modi during his current Caribbean tour. Earlier, Barbados, Guyana, and Dominica also conferred their highest national awards on him.

    The governments of Guyana and Dominica cited PM Modi’s exceptional leadership during the pandemic, his contribution to the global community, and his efforts to strengthen bilateral ties with the Caribbean nations.

  • Trinidad & Tobago PM praises Narendra Modi, to confer nation’s highest civilian honour

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Trinidad and Tobago Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar on Thursday praised Indian PM Narendra Modi’s leadership and announced that the country’s highest civilian honour, “The Order of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago,” will be conferred upon him on Friday.

    The award is being bestowed in recognition of PM Modi’s global leadership, his deep engagement with the Indian diaspora, and his humanitarian efforts during the Covid-19 pandemic.

    In her address, Prime Minister Persad-Bissessar described PM Modi’s visit as a moment of shared pride and historical connection.

    “We are graced by the presence of someone who is near and dear to us,” she said. “We are honoured by a leader whose visit is not just a matter of protocol but a profound gesture of friendship. I am deeply privileged to welcome one of the world’s most respected and visionary leaders – Prime Minister Narendra Modi of India.”

    Calling him a transformational force, she added, “You have refined governance in India and positioned your country as a dominant global power.”

    She further lauded his visionary leadership, “Through your futuristic initiatives, you have modernised the Indian economy, empowered over a billion citizens, and instilled pride in the hearts of Indians across the globe.”

    Recalling PM Modi’s earlier visit to Trinidad and Tobago in 2002, she said, “Back then, you visited not as a Prime Minister but as a cultural ambassador. Today, you return as the elected leader of more than 1.4 billion people—a distinguished statesman whose influence transcends borders. We bow to you, Sir.”

    Persad-Bissessar also highlighted Modi’s unwavering support for the Indian diaspora and his efforts to preserve shared heritage and cultural bonds. She expressed deep gratitude for India’s support during the Covid-19 pandemic, particularly through its global vaccine initiative.

    “Under your leadership, India extended its hand to the world – never more so than during the pandemic. Through your compassion and benevolence, vaccines and medical supplies reached even the smallest nations, including Trinidad and Tobago. You brought hope and calm where there was fear. This was more than diplomacy; it was an act of kinship, of shared humanity, and of love,” she said.

    “This is one of the many reasons we are proud to confer upon you the Order of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago,” she added.

    The honour adds to a growing list of accolades awarded to Prime Minister Modi during his current Caribbean tour. Earlier, Barbados, Guyana, and Dominica also conferred their highest national awards on him.

    The governments of Guyana and Dominica cited PM Modi’s exceptional leadership during the pandemic, his contribution to the global community, and his efforts to strengthen bilateral ties with the Caribbean nations.

  • Trinidad & Tobago PM praises Narendra Modi, to confer nation’s highest civilian honour

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Trinidad and Tobago Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar on Thursday praised Indian PM Narendra Modi’s leadership and announced that the country’s highest civilian honour, “The Order of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago,” will be conferred upon him on Friday.

    The award is being bestowed in recognition of PM Modi’s global leadership, his deep engagement with the Indian diaspora, and his humanitarian efforts during the Covid-19 pandemic.

    In her address, Prime Minister Persad-Bissessar described PM Modi’s visit as a moment of shared pride and historical connection.

    “We are graced by the presence of someone who is near and dear to us,” she said. “We are honoured by a leader whose visit is not just a matter of protocol but a profound gesture of friendship. I am deeply privileged to welcome one of the world’s most respected and visionary leaders – Prime Minister Narendra Modi of India.”

    Calling him a transformational force, she added, “You have refined governance in India and positioned your country as a dominant global power.”

    She further lauded his visionary leadership, “Through your futuristic initiatives, you have modernised the Indian economy, empowered over a billion citizens, and instilled pride in the hearts of Indians across the globe.”

    Recalling PM Modi’s earlier visit to Trinidad and Tobago in 2002, she said, “Back then, you visited not as a Prime Minister but as a cultural ambassador. Today, you return as the elected leader of more than 1.4 billion people—a distinguished statesman whose influence transcends borders. We bow to you, Sir.”

    Persad-Bissessar also highlighted Modi’s unwavering support for the Indian diaspora and his efforts to preserve shared heritage and cultural bonds. She expressed deep gratitude for India’s support during the Covid-19 pandemic, particularly through its global vaccine initiative.

    “Under your leadership, India extended its hand to the world – never more so than during the pandemic. Through your compassion and benevolence, vaccines and medical supplies reached even the smallest nations, including Trinidad and Tobago. You brought hope and calm where there was fear. This was more than diplomacy; it was an act of kinship, of shared humanity, and of love,” she said.

    “This is one of the many reasons we are proud to confer upon you the Order of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago,” she added.

    The honour adds to a growing list of accolades awarded to Prime Minister Modi during his current Caribbean tour. Earlier, Barbados, Guyana, and Dominica also conferred their highest national awards on him.

    The governments of Guyana and Dominica cited PM Modi’s exceptional leadership during the pandemic, his contribution to the global community, and his efforts to strengthen bilateral ties with the Caribbean nations.

  • MIL-Evening Report: Australia’s new lung cancer screening program has chosen simplicity over equity, and we’re concerned

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lisa J. Whop, Associate Director of Research and Senior Fellow, Yardhura Walani, National Centre for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Wellbeing Research, Australian National University

    Thurtell/Getty Images

    Australia’s lung cancer screening program launched on July 1, and marks real progress and opportunity.

    It aims to reduce the number of people dying from lung cancer by offering regular low-dose CT scans to people who smoke, and those who have quit. The aim is to detect and treat cancer early before it has spread.

    But the program’s design may further disadvantage Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, who are disproportionately affected by lung cancer.

    So Australia’s first new cancer screening program in almost 20 years risks entrenching health inequities rather than addressing them.

    Lung cancer is a particular burden

    Lung cancer is the most common cancer and the leading cause of cancer death for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.

    Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are 2.1 times more likely to be diagnosed with lung cancer, and 1.8 times likely to die from it, compared with non-Indigenous Australians.

    Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are also more likely to be diagnosed with lung cancer at a younger age than non-Indigenous Australians.

    Understanding the broader context of lung cancer risk among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples is crucial.

    Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples have been paid in tobacco rations rather than wages up until the 1960s, excluded from economic and health systems, and targeted by tobacco industry marketing.

    Indigenous-led tobacco control and quit-smoking programs, such as the Tackling Indigenous Smoking program, have made significant progress in reducing smoking rates. Indigenous communities are leading the resistance against tobacco industry harms.

    However, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples face major barriers to lung cancer screening. This is particularly in rural and remote areas where access to GPs, radiology services and culturally safe care is limited.

    Lung cancer screening should account for this

    Initially, the lung cancer screening program was designed with a lower screening age for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples – 50 years compared with 55 years for non-Indigenous Australians. This made sense in the face of the earlier and higher risk of lung cancer.

    However, the Medical Services Advisory Committee, the body responsible for assessing applications for public funding, removed this risk-based distinction. Now there’s a general age eligibility of 50-70 years.

    This is a shift from equity (fairness) to equality (sameness). In health, treating everyone equally deepens inequities.

    By contrast, many public health programs strive for equity and reflect the differing needs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. For instance, heart health checks and many vaccines are offered to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples at a younger age.

    There are also possible consequences of lowering the screening age for non-Indigenous Australians from 55 (as originally intended) to 50. Cancer Australia’s report warned this would not provide a favourable balance of benefits and harms, nor would it be cost-effective.

    In this lower-risk population, this could increase the likelihood of detecting slow-growing lung nodules unlikely to cause harm. This can lead to unnecessary tests and procedures, anxiety, psychological distress, overtreatment and even harm.

    While Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples can also experience these potential harms, the higher risk of lung cancer earlier means the potential benefit from early detection outweighs these risks.

    Let’s call it for what it is – structural racism

    So current eligibility criteria expands the eligibility for lower risk groups. Yet it ignores Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples’ higher risk and cumulative impacts of remoteness, limited access to health services and other health conditions.

    This decision significantly increases the number of people accessing the program. While this may appear equal on the surface, it risks a misallocation of limited health system resources, particularly in an already overstretched health system.

    That’s a clear example of structural racism – when policies that seem neutral actually uphold longstanding inequities, and reinforce disadvantages.

    This has parallels with concerns raised in the United States. Screening guidelines there have been criticised for failing to account for higher rates of lung cancer in African Americans.

    What should we do next?

    If we’re serious about a commitment to equity in cancer outcomes – as outlined in the Australian Cancer Plan and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Cancer Plan – we must ensure screening policies do not inadvertently widen inequities.

    We must revisit who’s eligible for screening and how eligibility is determined. This may mean not only considering age and smoking history, but other factors such as a family history of cancer.

    It might also mean predicting lung cancer risk using models such as the PLCOm2012 risk prediction model. However, this particular model has not been validated in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, which needs to be a priority.

    Instead, the Medical Services Advisory Committee has prioritised the same screening age for all – administrative simplicity over this more sensitive way of assessing risk.

    We must prioritise Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples on screening waitlists and follow-up, and strengthen the cultural safety of services.

    We must ensure robust data collection and reporting to evaluate the screening program. Evaluation needs to assess if the program delivers equitable access and outcomes, as well as delivering on effectiveness, safety and cost.

    All these actions are essential to address the higher burden of lung cancer among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and uphold equity and the right to health over administrative simplicity.


    This is the final article in our ‘Finding lung cancer’ series, which explores Australia’s first new cancer screening program in almost 20 years. Read other articles in the series.

    More information about the program is available, including for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. If you need support to quit smoking, see your doctor or call Quitline on 13 78 48.

    Lisa J. Whop has received funding from Australian government National Health and Medical Research Council, Cancer Australia, and the Department of Health, Disability and Ageing. Whop is the Chair of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Leadership Group of Cancer Australia and has been an investigator on lung cancer screening consultation projects funded by Cancer Australia. The views in this article are their own.

    Alison Brown has been a co-investigator on lung cancer screening consultation projects funded by Cancer Australia.

    Raglan Maddox has received funding from Australian government National Health and Medical Research Council, Cancer Australia, and the Department of Health, Disability and Ageing. Maddox has been an investigator on lung cancer screening consultation projects funded by Cancer Australia. The views in this article are their own.

    ref. Australia’s new lung cancer screening program has chosen simplicity over equity, and we’re concerned – https://theconversation.com/australias-new-lung-cancer-screening-program-has-chosen-simplicity-over-equity-and-were-concerned-253614

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-Evening Report: Australia’s new lung cancer screening program has chosen simplicity over equity, and we’re concerned

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lisa J. Whop, Associate Director of Research and Senior Fellow, Yardhura Walani, National Centre for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Wellbeing Research, Australian National University

    Thurtell/Getty Images

    Australia’s lung cancer screening program launched on July 1, and marks real progress and opportunity.

    It aims to reduce the number of people dying from lung cancer by offering regular low-dose CT scans to people who smoke, and those who have quit. The aim is to detect and treat cancer early before it has spread.

    But the program’s design may further disadvantage Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, who are disproportionately affected by lung cancer.

    So Australia’s first new cancer screening program in almost 20 years risks entrenching health inequities rather than addressing them.

    Lung cancer is a particular burden

    Lung cancer is the most common cancer and the leading cause of cancer death for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.

    Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are 2.1 times more likely to be diagnosed with lung cancer, and 1.8 times likely to die from it, compared with non-Indigenous Australians.

    Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are also more likely to be diagnosed with lung cancer at a younger age than non-Indigenous Australians.

    Understanding the broader context of lung cancer risk among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples is crucial.

    Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples have been paid in tobacco rations rather than wages up until the 1960s, excluded from economic and health systems, and targeted by tobacco industry marketing.

    Indigenous-led tobacco control and quit-smoking programs, such as the Tackling Indigenous Smoking program, have made significant progress in reducing smoking rates. Indigenous communities are leading the resistance against tobacco industry harms.

    However, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples face major barriers to lung cancer screening. This is particularly in rural and remote areas where access to GPs, radiology services and culturally safe care is limited.

    Lung cancer screening should account for this

    Initially, the lung cancer screening program was designed with a lower screening age for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples – 50 years compared with 55 years for non-Indigenous Australians. This made sense in the face of the earlier and higher risk of lung cancer.

    However, the Medical Services Advisory Committee, the body responsible for assessing applications for public funding, removed this risk-based distinction. Now there’s a general age eligibility of 50-70 years.

    This is a shift from equity (fairness) to equality (sameness). In health, treating everyone equally deepens inequities.

    By contrast, many public health programs strive for equity and reflect the differing needs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. For instance, heart health checks and many vaccines are offered to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples at a younger age.

    There are also possible consequences of lowering the screening age for non-Indigenous Australians from 55 (as originally intended) to 50. Cancer Australia’s report warned this would not provide a favourable balance of benefits and harms, nor would it be cost-effective.

    In this lower-risk population, this could increase the likelihood of detecting slow-growing lung nodules unlikely to cause harm. This can lead to unnecessary tests and procedures, anxiety, psychological distress, overtreatment and even harm.

    While Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples can also experience these potential harms, the higher risk of lung cancer earlier means the potential benefit from early detection outweighs these risks.

    Let’s call it for what it is – structural racism

    So current eligibility criteria expands the eligibility for lower risk groups. Yet it ignores Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples’ higher risk and cumulative impacts of remoteness, limited access to health services and other health conditions.

    This decision significantly increases the number of people accessing the program. While this may appear equal on the surface, it risks a misallocation of limited health system resources, particularly in an already overstretched health system.

    That’s a clear example of structural racism – when policies that seem neutral actually uphold longstanding inequities, and reinforce disadvantages.

    This has parallels with concerns raised in the United States. Screening guidelines there have been criticised for failing to account for higher rates of lung cancer in African Americans.

    What should we do next?

    If we’re serious about a commitment to equity in cancer outcomes – as outlined in the Australian Cancer Plan and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Cancer Plan – we must ensure screening policies do not inadvertently widen inequities.

    We must revisit who’s eligible for screening and how eligibility is determined. This may mean not only considering age and smoking history, but other factors such as a family history of cancer.

    It might also mean predicting lung cancer risk using models such as the PLCOm2012 risk prediction model. However, this particular model has not been validated in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, which needs to be a priority.

    Instead, the Medical Services Advisory Committee has prioritised the same screening age for all – administrative simplicity over this more sensitive way of assessing risk.

    We must prioritise Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples on screening waitlists and follow-up, and strengthen the cultural safety of services.

    We must ensure robust data collection and reporting to evaluate the screening program. Evaluation needs to assess if the program delivers equitable access and outcomes, as well as delivering on effectiveness, safety and cost.

    All these actions are essential to address the higher burden of lung cancer among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and uphold equity and the right to health over administrative simplicity.


    This is the final article in our ‘Finding lung cancer’ series, which explores Australia’s first new cancer screening program in almost 20 years. Read other articles in the series.

    More information about the program is available, including for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. If you need support to quit smoking, see your doctor or call Quitline on 13 78 48.

    Lisa J. Whop has received funding from Australian government National Health and Medical Research Council, Cancer Australia, and the Department of Health, Disability and Ageing. Whop is the Chair of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Leadership Group of Cancer Australia and has been an investigator on lung cancer screening consultation projects funded by Cancer Australia. The views in this article are their own.

    Alison Brown has been a co-investigator on lung cancer screening consultation projects funded by Cancer Australia.

    Raglan Maddox has received funding from Australian government National Health and Medical Research Council, Cancer Australia, and the Department of Health, Disability and Ageing. Maddox has been an investigator on lung cancer screening consultation projects funded by Cancer Australia. The views in this article are their own.

    ref. Australia’s new lung cancer screening program has chosen simplicity over equity, and we’re concerned – https://theconversation.com/australias-new-lung-cancer-screening-program-has-chosen-simplicity-over-equity-and-were-concerned-253614

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-OSI USA: We Have Only Just Begun

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Wisconsin Ron Johnson

    On July 1, after the longest vote-a-rama in Senate history, the Senate passed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act by a vote of 51-50. Here is why I voted yes. 

    With President Biden in the White House and majorities in both chambers of Congress, Democrats had every opportunity to repeal the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act and increase taxes on “the rich.” They did not do so. Instead of returning to a reasonable pre-pandemic level of spending and deficits, once the economy recovered, they incurred deficits averaging $1.9 trillion over four years. If that wasn’t bad enough, President Biden also left office with open borders and raging wars.  

    By passing the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, we have avoided a $4 trillion automatic tax increase and a default on our debt. Due to the enormous messes Biden and congressional Democrats left us, we are also providing additional funding for border security and defense.   

    While the bill is a step forward, we have only just begun the difficult task of reducing spending, and there is still a long way to go. A rigorous effort will soon be announced to review every program and every line of the federal budget, looking for ways to reduce spending to a reasonable pre-pandemic level. I look forward to being fully involved in that effort to put America on a path to fiscal sustainability.

    As a follow up to my May 21 Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations’ hearing entitled, The Corruption of Science and Federal Health Agencies: How Health Officials Downplayed and Hid Myocarditis and Other Adverse Events Associated with the COVID-19 Vaccines, I asked witnesses to “send me the science” to back up their hearing testimony. 

    We kept the record open until June 5, during which time Majority’s witnesses submitted hundreds of documents — including peer-reviewed studies — and thousands of citations about COVID-19 vaccine adverse events to accompany their testimonies. These records provide substantial support for the witnesses’ claims regarding the serious health risks associated with the COVID-19 vaccines. 

    At the hearing we released a Majority staff interim report and over 2,400 pages of records detailing the failure of Biden health officials to properly warn the public of the risks of myocarditis and related heart inflammation conditions following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination. The hearing featured testimony from Dr. Peter McCullough, Dr. Jordan Vaughn, Dr. James Thorp, Dr. Joel Wallskog, and Mr. Aaron Siri, all of whom were invited  to speak about COVID-19 vaccine adverse events.

    Hawaii Governor Josh Green, the Minority’s witness at the hearing, submitted 33 pages of testimony in his written statement for the hearing. He then submitted 19 links to studies and articles to support his claims about the safety and efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccines one week after the hearing record officially closed.   

    I allowed Governor Green’s late submission to be included in the official record so that the public can compare the evidence that the governor presented in support of the COVID-19 vaccines to the multitude of documentation indicating the clear health risks associated with the injections.

    Documents and citations that the Majority’s witnesses entered into the record can be viewed here. 

    Governor Green’s submission to the record can be viewed here.

    Congratulations to Class 171 of the Joseph Project. These seven participants spent the week learning how to prepare for opportunities to put them on a successful path in the job market.

    We connect graduates with employers who are ready to hire and help with the job application and interview process. Once employment is secured, the Joseph Project provides transportation (free for one month) to participants to help establish good work habits. 

    While the U.S. Coast Guard Academy is the only service academy that does not require a congressional nomination, my staff stays abreast of the academic and service opportunities provided by this institution for young people in Wisconsin. 

    The other service academies — U.S. Military Academy (West Point), U.S. Naval Academy, U.S. Air Force Academy, and U.S. Merchant Marine Academy — require a congressional nomination in addition to your application.

    Wisconsin students should be aware the deadline for nomination applications is September 19, 2025. Visit my website for more information. 

    The Senate passed a resolution I introduced designating July as National Sarcoma Awareness Month. The resolution raises awareness of sarcoma, a form of cancer, and honors the life of Hartford’s Melissa Locke and the many other Americans that this disease affects.

    I am pleased that my resolution passed the Senate in honor of Melissa Locke and the countless other Americans who have struggled with this life-threatening disease. I hope we can continue to increase awareness of this complex form of cancer that is diagnosed thousands of times each year.

    My staff is part of the Capitol Brew Crew softball team which plays against other Congressional offices. They are 4-2 overall and the last game of the season is against the team from the Office of Sen. Tammy Baldwin on July 17. Stay tuned!

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: MOTION OF CENSURE ON THE COMMISSION – B10-0319/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    pursuant to Rule 131 of the Rules of Procedure

    Gheorghe Piperea, Adrian‑George Axinia, Claudiu‑Richard Târziu, Georgiana Teodorescu, Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza, Fidias Panayiotou, Daniel Obajtek, Ivan David, Patryk Jaki, Zsuzsanna Borvendég, Fernand Kartheiser, Nikolaos Anadiotis, Volker Schnurrbusch, Katarína Roth Neveďalová, Irmhild Boßdorf, Virginie Joron, Ondřej Dostál, Cristian Terheş, Christine Anderson, António Tânger Corrêa, Emmanouil Fragkos, Milan Mazurek, Alexander Jungbluth, Siegbert Frank Droese, Petar Volgin, Rada Laykova, Stanislav Stoyanov, Arno Bausemer, Arkadiusz Mularczyk, Bogdan Rzońca, Milan Uhrík, Mary Khan, Tomasz Froelich, Hans Neuhoff, Alexander Sell, René Aust, Petr Bystron, Jacek Ozdoba, Galato Alexandraki, Kosma Złotowski, Waldemar Buda, Tobiasz Bocheński, Małgorzata Gosiewska, Marlena Maląg, Mariusz Kamiński, Dominik Tarczyński, Anna Zalewska, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Maciej Wąsik, Michał Dworczyk, Alvise Pérez, Luis‑Vicențiu Lazarus, Erik Kaliňák, Judita Laššáková, Waldemar Tomaszewski, Ewa Zajączkowska‑Hernik, Jaak Madison, Anja Arndt, Marcin Sypniewski, Markus Buchheit, Filip Turek, Friedrich Pürner, Kateřina Konečná, Ľuboš Blaha, Thierry Mariani, Jan‑Peter Warnke, Thomas Geisel, Branislav Ondruš, Diana Iovanovici Şoşoacă, Monika Beňová, Marc Jongen, Nikola Bartůšek, Grzegorz Braun, Sarah Knafo, Petras Gražulis, Piotr Müller, Gerald Hauser

    B10‑0319/2025

    Motion of censure on the Commission by the European Parliament

    (2025/2140(RSP))

    The European Parliament,

     having regard to Article 17(8) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), Article 234 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) and Article 106a of the Euratom Treaty,

     having regard to the request submitted under Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents[1] by Matina Stevi, a journalist employed by The New York Times, seeking access to all text messages exchanged between President Ursula von der Leyen and Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla between 1 January 2021 and 11 May 2022,

     having regard to the Commission’s refusal of this request on the grounds that it does not possess the requested documents,

     having regard to the judgment of the General Court of 14 May 2025, in Case T-36/23 Stevi – The New York Times / Commission[2], which found that the Commission has not given a plausible explanation to justify the non- possession of the requested documents concerning its dealings with Pfizer/BioNTech in the procurement of COVID-19 vaccines and which clarified that the Commission’s duty of transparency is fundamental and that refusal to disclose documents must be strictly justified with compelling reasons,

     having regard to Article 10(3) TEU, which guarantees the right of citizens to participate in the democratic life of the Union and calls for decisions to be taken openly and as closely as possible to the citizen,

     having regard to Rule 131 of its Rules of Procedure,

    A. whereas the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) opened an investigation in 2022 into the European Commission’s conduct in the negotiation and conclusion of COVID-19 vaccine procurement contracts with Pfizer, which remains ongoing as of 2025 and raises credible concerns regarding potential legal and ethical breaches, as well as potential irregularities in the management of Union financial resources;

    B. whereas the General Court of the European Union, in its order of 5 October 2023 in Case T- 36/23, Stevi – The New York Times/ Commission, ruled that the Commission had failed to provide legally sufficient justification for its refusal to disclose the requested documents related to the Pfizer vaccine negotiations;

    C. whereas the Commission contravened its obligations under Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 on public access to documents and violated the principles of transparency, good administration, and institutional accountability stipulated in the Treaties;

    D. whereas the Commission allocated EUR 35 billion in public funds for COVID-19 vaccines, yet failed to ensure transparency and accountability, especially as EUR 4 billion worth of doses remained unused, raising serious concerns over financial oversight and administrative failure;

    E. whereas the General Court, in its judgment of 14 May 2025, annulled the European Commission’s decision to deny access to text messages between Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla, exchanged between 1 January 2021 and 11 May 2022, concerning the procurement of COVID-19 vaccines;

    F. whereas the Court of Auditors, in its Special Report No. 22/2024 adopted on 26 September 2024, identified serious shortcomings in the implementation of the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF), including insufficient linkages between disbursed funds and actual costs, weak verification mechanisms, risks of double funding, and delays in achieving investment targets, raising significant concerns over the Commission’s oversight of one of the largest post-COVID financial instruments;

    G. whereas the Court of Auditors has pointed out that the lack of robust controls and the reliance on self-reporting by Member States increase the risk of double funding’, a situation in which the same actions may be financed multiple times, leading to inefficiencies and potential misuse of funds;

    H. whereas, transparency and accountability are fundamental principles of the Union’s democratic legitimacy, as per Article 10(3) of the TEU, ensuring public trust in the institutions of the European Union, particularly in contexts involving major public health challenges and substantial financial commitments;

    I. whereas, its Committee on Legal Affairs, on 23 April 2025, unanimously adopted a non-binding opinion rejecting the European Commission’s use of Article 122 TFEU as the legal basis for the proposal for a Regulation establishing the Security Action for Europe (SAFE), a EUR 150 billion defence financing initiative;

    J. whereas the opinion of the Committee on Legal Affairs asserts that the Commission’s invocation of Article 122 TFEU lacks a valid emergency justification, in view of the fact that the provision is intended for short-term measures addressing immediate crises, not for long-term defence investments;

    K. whereas serious concerns have been raised regarding the Commission’s unlawful interference in elections in Member States such as Romania and Germany through a distorted application of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 October 2022 on a Single Market For Digital Services and amending Directive 2000/31/EC (Digital Services Act)[3], which is intended to protect consumers but has been misused to justify vote restrictions and election annulments;

    1. Concludes that the Commission led by President Ursula von der Leyen no longer commands the confidence of Parliament to uphold the principles of transparency, accountability, and good governance essential to a democratic Union;

    2. Concludes that the Commission’s unlawful interference in Member States’ elections, via a misapplication of the Digital Services Act, represents a serious breach of its mandate to uphold democratic principles and respect national sovereignty;

    3. Notes that the Commission’s abusive use of Article 122 TFEU as the legal basis for the SAFE Regulation, a EUR 150 billion defence financing initiative, constitutes a serious breach of competence and a distortion of the article’s intended purpose, which is reserved for economic emergency situations;

    4. Considers that this procedural abuse undermines trust in the Union’s institutions and threatens the integrity of the Union’s legal framework;

    5. Calls on the Commission to resign due to repeated failures to ensure transparency and to its persistent disregard for democratic oversight and the rule of law within the Union;

    6. Instructs its President to forward this motion of censure to the President of the Council and the President of the Commission and to notify them of the result of the vote on it in plenary.

     

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: MOTION OF CENSURE ON THE COMMISSION MOTION OF CENSURE ON THE COMMISSION – B10-0319/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    pursuant to Rule 131 of the Rules of Procedure

    Gheorghe Piperea, Adrian‑George Axinia, Claudiu‑Richard Târziu, Georgiana Teodorescu, Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza, Fidias Panayiotou, Daniel Obajtek, Ivan David, Patryk Jaki, Zsuzsanna Borvendég, Fernand Kartheiser, Nikolaos Anadiotis, Volker Schnurrbusch, Katarína Roth Neveďalová, Irmhild Boßdorf, Virginie Joron, Ondřej Dostál, Cristian Terheş, Christine Anderson, António Tânger Corrêa, Emmanouil Fragkos, Milan Mazurek, Alexander Jungbluth, Siegbert Frank Droese, Petar Volgin, Rada Laykova, Stanislav Stoyanov, Arno Bausemer, Arkadiusz Mularczyk, Bogdan Rzońca, Milan Uhrík, Mary Khan, Tomasz Froelich, Hans Neuhoff, Alexander Sell, René Aust, Petr Bystron, Jacek Ozdoba, Galato Alexandraki, Kosma Złotowski, Waldemar Buda, Tobiasz Bocheński, Małgorzata Gosiewska, Marlena Maląg, Mariusz Kamiński, Dominik Tarczyński, Anna Zalewska, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Maciej Wąsik, Michał Dworczyk, Alvise Pérez, Luis‑Vicențiu Lazarus, Erik Kaliňák, Judita Laššáková, Waldemar Tomaszewski, Ewa Zajączkowska‑Hernik, Jaak Madison, Anja Arndt, Marcin Sypniewski, Markus Buchheit, Filip Turek, Friedrich Pürner, Kateřina Konečná, Ľuboš Blaha, Thierry Mariani, Jan‑Peter Warnke, Thomas Geisel, Branislav Ondruš, Diana Iovanovici Şoşoacă, Monika Beňová, Marc Jongen, Nikola Bartůšek, Grzegorz Braun, Sarah Knafo, Petras Gražulis, Piotr Müller, Gerald Hauser

    B10‑0319/2025

    Motion of censure on the Commission by the European Parliament

    (2025/2140(RSP))

    The European Parliament,

     having regard to Article 17(8) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), Article 234 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) and Article 106a of the Euratom Treaty,

     having regard to the request submitted under Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents[1] by Matina Stevi, a journalist employed by The New York Times, seeking access to all text messages exchanged between President Ursula von der Leyen and Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla between 1 January 2021 and 11 May 2022,

     having regard to the Commission’s refusal of this request on the grounds that it does not possess the requested documents,

     having regard to the judgment of the General Court of 14 May 2025, in Case T-36/23 Stevi – The New York Times / Commission[2], which found that the Commission has not given a plausible explanation to justify the non- possession of the requested documents concerning its dealings with Pfizer/BioNTech in the procurement of COVID-19 vaccines and which clarified that the Commission’s duty of transparency is fundamental and that refusal to disclose documents must be strictly justified with compelling reasons,

     having regard to Article 10(3) TEU, which guarantees the right of citizens to participate in the democratic life of the Union and calls for decisions to be taken openly and as closely as possible to the citizen,

     having regard to Rule 131 of its Rules of Procedure,

    A. whereas the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) opened an investigation in 2022 into the European Commission’s conduct in the negotiation and conclusion of COVID-19 vaccine procurement contracts with Pfizer, which remains ongoing as of 2025 and raises credible concerns regarding potential legal and ethical breaches, as well as potential irregularities in the management of Union financial resources;

    B. whereas the General Court of the European Union, in its order of 5 October 2023 in Case T- 36/23, Stevi – The New York Times/ Commission, ruled that the Commission had failed to provide legally sufficient justification for its refusal to disclose the requested documents related to the Pfizer vaccine negotiations;

    C. whereas the Commission contravened its obligations under Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 on public access to documents and violated the principles of transparency, good administration, and institutional accountability stipulated in the Treaties;

    D. whereas the Commission allocated EUR 35 billion in public funds for COVID-19 vaccines, yet failed to ensure transparency and accountability, especially as EUR 4 billion worth of doses remained unused, raising serious concerns over financial oversight and administrative failure;

    E. whereas the General Court, in its judgment of 14 May 2025, annulled the European Commission’s decision to deny access to text messages between Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla, exchanged between 1 January 2021 and 11 May 2022, concerning the procurement of COVID-19 vaccines;

    F. whereas the Court of Auditors, in its Special Report No. 22/2024 adopted on 26 September 2024, identified serious shortcomings in the implementation of the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF), including insufficient linkages between disbursed funds and actual costs, weak verification mechanisms, risks of double funding, and delays in achieving investment targets, raising significant concerns over the Commission’s oversight of one of the largest post-COVID financial instruments;

    G. whereas the Court of Auditors has pointed out that the lack of robust controls and the reliance on self-reporting by Member States increase the risk of double funding’, a situation in which the same actions may be financed multiple times, leading to inefficiencies and potential misuse of funds;

    H. whereas, transparency and accountability are fundamental principles of the Union’s democratic legitimacy, as per Article 10(3) of the TEU, ensuring public trust in the institutions of the European Union, particularly in contexts involving major public health challenges and substantial financial commitments;

    I. whereas, its Committee on Legal Affairs, on 23 April 2025, unanimously adopted a non-binding opinion rejecting the European Commission’s use of Article 122 TFEU as the legal basis for the proposal for a Regulation establishing the Security Action for Europe (SAFE), a EUR 150 billion defence financing initiative;

    J. whereas the opinion of the Committee on Legal Affairs asserts that the Commission’s invocation of Article 122 TFEU lacks a valid emergency justification, in view of the fact that the provision is intended for short-term measures addressing immediate crises, not for long-term defence investments;

    K. whereas serious concerns have been raised regarding the Commission’s unlawful interference in elections in Member States such as Romania and Germany through a distorted application of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 October 2022 on a Single Market For Digital Services and amending Directive 2000/31/EC (Digital Services Act)[3], which is intended to protect consumers but has been misused to justify vote restrictions and election annulments;

    1. Concludes that the Commission led by President Ursula von der Leyen no longer commands the confidence of Parliament to uphold the principles of transparency, accountability, and good governance essential to a democratic Union;

    2. Concludes that the Commission’s unlawful interference in Member States’ elections, via a misapplication of the Digital Services Act, represents a serious breach of its mandate to uphold democratic principles and respect national sovereignty;

    3. Notes that the Commission’s abusive use of Article 122 TFEU as the legal basis for the SAFE Regulation, a EUR 150 billion defence financing initiative, constitutes a serious breach of competence and a distortion of the article’s intended purpose, which is reserved for economic emergency situations;

    4. Considers that this procedural abuse undermines trust in the Union’s institutions and threatens the integrity of the Union’s legal framework;

    5. Calls on the Commission to resign due to repeated failures to ensure transparency and to its persistent disregard for democratic oversight and the rule of law within the Union;

    6. Instructs its President to forward this motion of censure to the President of the Council and the President of the Commission and to notify them of the result of the vote on it in plenary.

     

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – COVID-19 vaccines: French contribution to financing doses for Spain (EUR 400 million?) – E-002574/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-002574/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Virginie Joron (PfE)

    The Commission has refused to specify how many COVID-19 vaccine doses were purchased only to be destroyed[1]. ‘[T]he Commission secured a maximum amount of up to 4.6 billion doses of COVID-19 vaccines in agreement with and on behalf of the Member States, without requiring them to commit to purchasing this maximum amount.’ Yet less than a billion doses were actually administered.

    According to the European Commission, the European Regional Development Fund was mobilised by different Spanish regions (around EUR 2 billion), as well as Lisbon (EUR 238 million) and Estonia (EUR 52 million) to finance the purchase of vaccine doses up until the end of December 2023 and carry out communication campaigns[2]. EU funds did not directly finance these doses, but the EU partners contributed 100 % in each case.

    Considering that no similar information has been found for France or other countries on the European Commission’s website:

    • 1.Which other EU countries financed their purchases of COVID-19 vaccines with European regional funds or other EU instruments?
    • 2.How many doses were financed by European regional funds in 2023, when the pandemic officially ended in spring 2022?
    • 3.Has the Commission checked whether the doses paid for with EU funds but not delivered were produced by Pfizer?

    Submitted: 25.6.2025

    • [1] https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-9-2023-003364_EN.html
    • [2] https://kohesio.ec.europa.eu/en/projects?sort=Total-Budget-(descending)&keywords=vaccine&page=3;https:%2F%2Fkohesio.ec.europa.eu%2Ffr%2Fprojets%2FQ4687090; https://kohesio.ec.europa.eu/en/projects/Q4485013; https://kohesio.ec.europa.eu/en/projects/Q4485013; https://kohesio.ec.europa.eu/en/projects/Q4687136; https://kohesio.ec.europa.eu/en/projects/Q4687099; https://kohesio.ec.europa.eu/en/projects/Q6860901; Andalusia (EUR 322 228 930 and EUR 44 731 652), Barcelona (EUR 293 927 550 and EUR 40 802 868), Madrid (EUR 255 179 120 and EUR 35 423 830)[2], Lisbon (EUR 238 684 490) and Estonia (EUR 52 767 804)
    Last updated: 3 July 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Africa: Minister Blade Nzimande receives Cuban Ambassador to South Africa for a courtesy visit

    Source: APO


    .

    Yesterday, 2 July, the Minister of Science, Technology and Innovation, Prof. Blade Nzimande, received Her Excellency, Mrs. Esther Armenteros, Cuban Ambassador to South Africa for a courtesy visit.

    Over the past three decades, South Africa’s collaboration with Cuba evolved significantly in critical areas of human development such as public health, water resource management, and education.

    Last year, South Africa and Cuba celebrated 30 years of Diplomatic relations. In the area of science, South Africa-Cuba co-operation goes back to 2001, when the first science, technology and innovation agreement was signed.

    Flowing from this, between 2005 and 2007, South Africa invested more than 44 million rands in joint biotechnology and nanotechnology projects with Cuba, focusing on critical areas such as the development of cholera vaccines, monoclonal antibodies, and pre-clinical drug development, which included interventions against the Human Papilloma Virus.

    These early joint projects brought together South African research facilities such as Mintek, iThemba Labs, and the South African Nuclear Energy Corporation, laying the groundwork for future cooperation in nuclear medicine and diagnostic technology.

    Further to this, in 2015, a technical delegation from South Africa visited Cuba to study Cuba’s world-class biotechnology ecosystem.

    In April this year, Minister Nzimande undertook a comprehensive visit to Cuba, whose key outcome was the signing of a Statement of Intent to renew the existing science, technology, and innovation agreement between Cuba and South Africa and to expand the areas of cooperation.

    A further commitment was made by Minister Nzimande and his counterpart, Cuba’s Minister of Science, Technology and Environment, Mr. Armando Rodríguez Batista to ensure that the revival of the existing STI agreement is concluded by the end of this year.

    Emphasising the importance of SA-Cuba STI cooperation, Minister Nzimande stated that “South Africa and Cuba share a commitment to use scientific knowledge to resolve their development challenges and to respond to the grand challenges of energy security, climate change and the urgent need to diversify our economies.”

    “Cuba has unparalleled expertise in such areas as healthcare, biotechnology, and education with South Africa’s strengths in mining, renewable energy, astronomy and space sciences research and innovation. This provides a firm basis for continued cooperation and the development of sustainable solutions for both countries,” added the Minister.

    Cooperation between South Africa and Cuba is also driven by a shared commitment to such values as peace, justice, multi-lateralism, the equitable development of all nations and a commitment to building a more just and humane world, through science.

    Distributed by APO Group on behalf of Department of Science, Technology and Innovation, Republic of South Africa.

    MIL OSI Africa

  • PM Modi calls India-Ghana friendship “sweeter than sugarloaf pineapple” in Accra address

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Prime Minister Narendra Modi addressed the Parliament of Ghana on Thursday and highlighted the “sweetness” of the relationship between the two countries, which he said was rooted in shared struggles.

    “The histories of India and Ghana bear the scars of colonial rule, but our spirits have always remained free and fearless. We draw strength and inspiration from our rich heritage. We take pride in our social, cultural and linguistic diversities. We built nations rooted in freedom, unity and dignity. Our relationship knows no bounds,” PM Modi said.

    “And with your permission, may I say, our friendship is sweeter than your famous Sugarloaf Pineapple,” he added.

    PM Modi highlighted India’s democratic system, noting that the country has more than 2,500 political parties, 22 official languages and thousands of dialects. The Prime Minister repeated the figure after seeing the reaction from members of Ghana’s Parliament.

    “I repeat, 2,500 political parties. Twenty different parties governing different states. Twenty-two official languages, thousands of dialects. This is also the reason that people who come to India have always been welcomed with an open heart. The same spirit helps Indians integrate easily wherever they go. Even in Ghana, they have blended into society, just like sugar in tea,” PM Modi said.

    Praising the African nation, the Prime Minister said, “Ghana is known as the land of gold, not just for what lies under your soil but as much for the warmth and strength in your heart.”

    “When we look at Ghana, we see a nation that shines with courage, that rises above history, that meets every challenge with dignity and grace. Your commitment to democratic ideals and inclusive progress has truly made Ghana a beacon of inspiration for the entire African continent,” he added.

    PM Modi highlighted that with President John Mahama, India and Ghana have decided to elevate ties to a Comprehensive Partnership.

    “The world order created after the Second World War is changing fast. The revolution in technology, the rise of the Global South and shifting demographics are contributing to its pace and scale. The challenges such as colonial rule that humanity has faced in earlier centuries still persist in different forms,” he said.

    Listing new and complex crises such as climate change, pandemics, terrorism and cybersecurity, PM Modi said that institutions created in the last century are struggling to respond.

    The Prime Minister reiterated India’s vision during its 2023 G20 Presidency — One Earth, One Family, One Future — and underscored how India highlighted Africa’s place at the global high table, with the African Union becoming a permanent member of the G20 during India’s presidency.

    “The changing circumstances demand credible and effective reforms in global governance. Progress cannot come without giving voice to the Global South. We need more than slogans; we need action. That is why during India’s G20 presidency, we worked with the vision ‘One Earth, One Family, One Future’,” PM Modi said.

    Stressing India’s commitment to ensuring Africa’s rightful place in global decision-making, the Prime Minister said, “We are proud that the African Union became a permanent member of the G20 during our presidency. For India, our philosophy is humanity first,” he said, quoting a Sanskrit verse that he translated as: “May all be happy; may all be free from illness; may no one suffer in any way.”

    This philosophy, PM Modi said, has shaped India’s approach to the world. “It guided our actions during the COVID pandemic. We shared vaccines and medicines with over 150 countries, including our friends in Ghana,” he highlighted.

    The PM added that “India carries Africa in its heart” and called for building a stronger partnership.

    On being conferred with Ghana’s highest civilian award, the Officer of the Order of the Star of Ghana, the PM said, “It is a matter of great pride and honour for me to be conferred with Ghana’s national award, The Officer of the Order of the Star of Ghana, by the President. I express my heartfelt gratitude to President Mahama ji, the Government of Ghana and the people of Ghana. I humbly accept this honour on behalf of 1.4 billion Indians.”

    The Prime Minister dedicated the award to the youth of both countries. “I dedicate this award to the aspirations of our youth, their bright future, our rich cultural diversity and traditions, and the historic ties between India and Ghana,” he said.

    The award was presented during PM Modi’s visit to Ghana, the first by an Indian Prime Minister in more than 30 years.

    PM Modi also paid tribute at the Kwame Nkrumah Memorial Park in Accra, honouring Dr Kwame Nkrumah, Ghana’s founding President and a revered leader of the African independence movement.

    ANI

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Managing healthcare easy as online banking with revamped NHS App

    Source: United Kingdom – Government Statements

    Press release

    Managing healthcare easy as online banking with revamped NHS App

    NHS App to become complete digital front door to NHS, where patients book appointments, manage medicines, and view data

    • PM sets out how 10 Year Health Plan will bring NHS into 21st century to meet the needs of patients around the country
    • Patients to make self-referrals via App, connect with a clinician, link-up wearable tech, and gain free access to health apps
    • Plan for Change will rebuild NHS and see ground-breaking Single Patient Record finally in one place – viewable on App from 2028

    Patients will be able to access a range of healthcare services and advice at the touch of a button, Prime Minister Keir Starmer has set out today, as the Government’s Plan for Change drives forward fundamental reform to the NHS to make it easier and fairer for everyone to access the care they need.

    Launching the 10 Year Health Plan today – the government’s roadmap to rebuilding the health service to make it fit for the future – the PM set out how the App will act as a digital front door to the health service, overhauling how people get advice, manage appointments and interact with services to make their healthcare more convenient and more personalised.

    For the first time, patients will be able to book, move and cancel all their appointments on the App – ending the 8am scramble for a GP – and the App will use artificial intelligence to provide instant advice for patients who need non-urgent care, available 24/7.

    Through the plan, which has been published in Parliament today, patients will have quicker, better access to the right care. They will be able to self-refer on the App to mental health talking therapies, musculoskeletal services, podiatry, and audiology – freeing up GPs and new Neighbourhood Health Services to focus on providing direct care while dramatically slashing waiting lists for these services – delivering on the government’s Plan for Change promise to cut waiting lists.

    Accessing healthcare will be quicker than ever thanks to expanded features on the app. People will be able to manage their medicines and book vaccines from their phone, connect with a clinician for a remote consultation, and even leave a question for a specialist to answer without making an appointment. Patients simply being able to book an appointment digitally rather than today’s convoluted process will save the NHS £200 million over 3 years.

    For parents, the new App will deliver a 21st century alternative to the ‘red book’, ensuring that their children’s medical records are available to them in their pocket, so they do not have to carry their red books to every appointment. It will also provide advice and support throughout childhood, offering guidance on weaning and healthy habits. Over time, it will record feeding times, monitor sleep, and use AI analytics to understand the best way to care for children when they are unwell.

    The changes will build on the progress Government has already made to increase the number of hospitals allowing patients to view appointment information on the app. Almost 12 million fewer paper letters have been sent by hospitals since July 2024. Forecasts for this year show the use of in-app notifications for planned care will prevent the need for 15.7 million SMS messages.

    Prime Minister Keir Starmer said:

    For far too long, the NHS has been stuck in the past, reliant on letters, lengthy phone queues and even fax machines.

    But that doesn’t match the reality of our daily lives, where everything from shopping and banking to entertainment and travel can be sorted with the touch of a button from our phones.

    To rebuild our NHS, we have to make sure it reflects the society it serves. That’s why our 10 Year Health Plan will bring it into the digital age by opening up fairer and more convenient access to healthcare. Through our new App – a digital front door for your care – parents will be able to keep track of their children’s health through an online ‘red book’ fit for the 21st century, and we will put a stop to patients having to endlessly repeat their medical history thanks to a single patient record.

    Our Plan for Change promised to make our NHS fit for the future and that’s what we are getting on with delivering – fixing the foundations of our health service and making sure it will be there to look after us for decades to come.

    This is one major arm of the technological innovation at the heart of the 10 Year Health Plan launched today, which also includes introducing the single patient record, rolling out AI scribes to take notes for clinicians, using Generative AI to create the first draft of care plans, and introducing single sign-on for NHS software.

    The government’s 10 Year Health Plan sets out the fundamental reforms we will deliver to address the challenges facing the health service in the face of inherited underinvestment and neglect and the evolving needs of a modern society.

    Speaking at the launch of the plan today, the PM set out how the plan will deliver three key shifts to make the NHS fit for the future: hospital to community; analogue to digital; and sickness to prevention. Through fundamental reforms to rewire the NHS around these shifts, the plan will deliver the government’s pledge to cut waiting lists, improve healthcare for everyone wherever they live, and ensure the NHS is equipped to look after us for decades to come.

    This historic transformation will fundamentally change the future of healthcare, and it will be underpinned by a new Single Patient Record. This will finally bring together all of a patient’s medical records into one place, so patients do not have to repeat their medical history to each clinician they see. The Single Patient Record will make sure patients get seamless care no matter who they are being treated by in the NHS.

    Two-thirds of outpatient appointments – which currently cost in total £14 billion a year – will be replaced by automated information, digital advice, direct input from specialists and patient-initiated follow ups via the NHS App.

    Health and Social Care Secretary Wes Streeting said:

    The NHS App will become a doctor in your pocket, bringing our health service into the 21st century.

    Patients who can afford to pay for private healthcare can get instant advice, remote consultations with a doctor, and choose where and when their appointments will be. Our reforms will bring those services to every patient, regardless of their ability to pay.

    The 10 Year Health Plan will keep every patient fully informed of their healthcare and make using the NHS as easy and convenient as doing your banking or shopping online. It will deliver a fundamental shift in the way people access their care – from analogue to digital.

    A new Single Patient Record will bring an end to the frustration of repeating your medical history to different doctors. Instead, health and care professionals will have your record in one, handy place, so they can give you the best possible care.

    Through our Plan for Change, this Government is shifting care to digital and delivering an NHS which is truly fit for the future.

    The Government will make the Single Patient Record possible through new legislation that places a duty on every health and care provider to make the information they record about a patient, available in the Single Patient Record. 

    We will also legislate to give patients access to their record by default. From 2028, patients will be able to view it, securely, on the NHS App. Over time, that data will include not only medical records, but a personalised account of health risk, drawing from lifestyle, demographic and genomic data – helping catch problems early before they develop, and prevent people from poor health.

    The Single Patient Record is designed as National Critical Infrastructure. This means it will be built and maintained to meet the highest levels of security, equivalent to those used for the UK’s most vital systems, such as energy and transport networks. Health and care professionals treating and caring for a patient will have secure access to their record; patients can control who else they share it with and will have a robust audit trail of who has accessed their record.

    Sir Jim Mackey, Chief Executive at NHS England, said:

    The NHS App will be at the heart of the tech transformation we’re planning for the NHS to give people much more ownership of their healthcare – all from wherever they are at the tap of a screen. 

    Millions of us already have the app downloaded on our phones and the improvements we’re introducing as part of the 10 Year Health Plan, from booking appointments and speaking to clinicians online to seeing all your medical records in one place, will make the NHS App the digital front door to the NHS.

    A My Health tool will include real-time data from wearables, biometric sensors, or smart devices and will connect to relevant NHS data too – whether that is the results of recent tests at home or in a neighbourhood health centre. Wearables will be able to feed vital data into the App such as step count, heart rate and sleep quality, to provide tailored, personal health advice. The single patient record will have robust security controls.

    And a new My NHS GP tool will harness AI to direct people to the most appropriate and timely care they need. In some cases, it will advise on self-care – and help direct patients to well-evidenced consumer healthcare products. In others, it might direct to a community pharmacy, a neighbourhood health centre or to emergency care.

    Over the course of the plan, the features set to be developed through the NHS App will include the ability to:

    • My NHS GP – book a remote or face-to-face appointment, and receive personalised health advice using new AI tool
    • My Specialist – self-refer when clinically appropriate and leave a question for a specialist to answer
    • My Consult – connect with a clinician for a remote consultation
    • My Medicines – manage repeat prescriptions for delivery/collection and receive reminders
    • My Care – book and manage appointments, enrol in a clinical trial and access Single Patient Record
    • My Companion – get information about a health condition or procedure, and ask AI or a clinician a question
    • My Choices – find nearest pharmacy, the best providers, and leave feedback on services
    • My Vaccines – see when vaccines are up-to-date and book appointments to get them organised, and find travel vaccine info
    • My Health – bring data like blood pressure, heart rate, glucose levels together, and include real-time date from wearables or smart devices
    • My Children – a digitised red book, where parents can get advice and support for parents throughout childhood
    • My Carer – securely prove you are a carer, book appointments and talk to your loved one’s care team

    Caroline Abrahams, Charity Director at Age UK said: 

    It’s clear that technology is set to transform many aspects of our lives for the better over the next decade, including the delivery of healthcare and how we interact with the NHS.  

    The potential of the NHS App for example, is truly exciting, but we must also ensure that no one is left behind, including the many millions of older people who are not online and who often want and need to use more traditional means of communication, such as telephone and face to face.  

    The Government’s commitment to a digitally inclusive approach is really important in building public trust. It is also essential for the NHS’s promise of being equally accessible to continue to hold true in our increasingly digital world. The voluntary sector can certainly help by supporting people who are not digital natives and at Age UK we look forward to playing our part in this way.

    Julian David, CEO, techUK said: 

    We welcome today’s announcement as a landmark moment in the digital transformation of the NHS. The enhanced NHS App marks a bold step forward in putting citizens at the centre of their care, empowering patients with the same ease, accessibility, and control we expect from modern digital services. 

    Ongoing and meaningful engagement with the tech sector will be essential to delivering this transformation at scale. techUK will continue to work with government, NHS bodies, and our members to ensure this transformation is inclusive, secure, and future-ready.

    Boosting the App will not only benefit those managing their healthcare digitally but will also free up capacity in traditional healthcare routes and provide more access to care and appointments – freeing up phone lines so calls are answered on time and freeing up GPs’ capacity to offer face-to-face appointments.

    The government will aim to empower and upskill everyone to feel confident using the NHS App so that they can benefit from the additional access to services and the greater convenience the App will bring.

    The government will continue a partnership with libraries and other community organisations to set people up on the App, with show-and-tells to teach them how to use it and reap the benefits – this will be alongside ongoing work across government to improve access to technology and boost confidence among groups that have previously struggled.

    Children’s Commissioner Dame Rachel de Souza said: 

    The foundations for a healthy life are laid in childhood, so an ambition of creating the healthiest generation of children yet is an important step towards tackling the deep inequalities in their healthcare. 

    I have long called for a child’s ‘red book’ to be digitised, so this is a really welcome move. Taken with plans currently going through Parliament to develop a unique childhood identifier, will vastly improve how we protect and care for the most vulnerable children, with fewer in danger of falling through gaps in services. 

    Children tell me that when they need additional support, they want it in one place, so creating neighbourhood services that bring different professionals under one roof will make a practical difference in their lives, as will increasing access to GPs and dentists.

    Andrew Davies, Executive Director of Digital Health, Association of British HealthTech Industries (ABHI), said:  

    This transformation of the NHS App is an important milestone for healthcare delivery. A single, secure platform to access a range of services, digital tools and therapeutics, and connect devices will enable patients to more effectively engage with their care.  

    This plan showcases how HealthTech can drive a more efficient, personalised and accessible NHS, which in turn will free up time for clinicians to focus on care where it is needed most. Our members look forward to working with the NHS and Government to ensure these digital tools are implemented successfully and deliver meaningful benefits for patients across the country.

    Rachel Power, Chief Executive, the Patients Association said: 

    We welcome the government’s ambition to expand the NHS App as a central part of the 10 Year Health Plan. It could deliver the fundamental change patients have asked for in their interactions with the NHS, including the ability to manage their appointments, self-refer to vital services, and, in three years’ time, be able to view their health records through the Single Patient Record.  

    Our work with patients shows that those using the app often feel more in control and more satisfied with their care. But with nearly one in four still facing barriers to digital access, we must ensure that innovation doesn’t come at the cost of inclusion. If the NHS App is to become the digital front door, there must always be a real-world, accessible front door as well, with face-to-face or telephone options in place for those who need or want them. True progress means making the system work for everyone.

    Professor Habib Naqvi, chief executive of the NHS Race and Health Observatory, said: 

    We need a more focused and systematic approach to tackling health inequalities and addressing unacceptable variation in healthcare amongst our communities. A key enabler for this endeavour is digital tools. The transformation of the NHS App has the potential to lead to a more efficient, agile, and technologically enabled NHS – an NHS that will deliver care quicker and closer to where people live. The App will empower people and transform the way the public receives healthcare and engages with NHS services. The Observatory will help ensure this shift, in the way healthcare is provided, benefits all communities equitable.

    Jacob Lant, Chief Executive of National Voices said: 

    Technology is moving at a blistering pace, and quite simply the NHS has failed to keep up. So, the increased emphasis on the App and other digital services is welcome, especially where it can help the NHS meet expectations that have become common place in other sectors.  

    Critically the Plan recognises there will always be patients with more complex needs and commits to using the resource freed up by digital innovations to continue offering more traditional forms of access to those who need it.” 

    Richard Stubbs, Chair of the Health Innovation Network said:  

    It is right that the 10 Year Health Plan will establish the digital and data foundations of the NHS to realise the potential of health innovation in empowering patients, better supporting the NHS workforce and driving economic growth in every community.  

    The Health Innovation welcomes the focus on AI, expansion of the NHS App and the commitment to a single patient record, all of which will involve innovation partnerships to deliver change to local services, that will have a national impact. 

    The 15 health innovation networks across England, look ahead to operationalising these plans and working with our partners to find, test and implement at scale innovations that improve patient outcomes, increased NHS productivity and reduce waiting lists, while delivering economic growth. If we get this right we will not only greatly increase outcomes and satisfaction for our patients, but we will also boost our essential life sciences sector and, as our Defining the Size of the Health Innovation Prize report found, add up to £278bn a year to the UK economy.

    Updates to this page

    Published 3 July 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: PM speech at the launch of the 10 Year Health Plan: 3 July 2025

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Speech

    PM speech at the launch of the 10 Year Health Plan: 3 July 2025

    Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s speech at the launch of the 10 Year Health Plan.

    Thank you Rachel, thank you Wes. And thank you Denyse. Come and sit down with us. Denyse’s story is fantastic. Because she works here. She lives in this borough and she uses the services here. 

    What a great testament that is. And Denyse, thank you for your introduction and thank you for your words. 

    It’s a privilege to be here with you in Stratford. I’ve seen the work that you have been doing this morning. And I’m sorry for interrupting your work.  

    I do understand how hard it is. My mum worked in the NHS. She was a nurse, a proud nurse. My sister worked in the NHS and my wife still works in the NHS in one of the big London hospitals. So I do understand what you do, how you do it, what you put in and why you do it. 

    So let me start by saying a big thank you to all of you for what you do, and if I may, through you, to say thank you to all NHS staff right across the country who do what they do as public servants by treating and caring for other people.

    Thank you also for welcoming us here. To your Neighbourhood Health Centre. Because it’s buildings like this here that represent the future of the NHS.

    As I’ve just had the chance to go around and see some of the work that’s going on here. The 24 teams that you have got working on dentistry. I’m really pleased to see that you don’t need an appointment, you can walk in. You have got children and families up there on the next floor having their teeth done. That’s hugely important. 

    And that’s what a Neighbourhood Health Service can do working in partnership with the people it serves. And Denyse you are the embodiment of that.  

    Power and control in their hands. Care closer to their community. Services organised around their lives.   

    But look – before I say a bit more about the future in a minute. But it is important that we go back a year to the NHS left by the last government. With record waiting lists. The lowest ever satisfaction. I know the toll that takes on staff who work so hard. 

    100,000 children waiting more than six hours in A&E. 

    Now – I’m not going to stand here and say that everything is perfect now. We have so much work to do and we will do it. 

    But let’s be under absolutely no illusions. Because of the fair choices we made, the tough [political content redacted] decisions we made the future already looks better for our NHS. 

    That’s the story of this Government in a nutshell. With breakfast clubs, hugely important for children coming into schools so they are ready to learn.

    Potholes across the country – filled. Fuel duty – frozen. Four interest rate cuts, hugely important for mortgage holders.

    Setting up Great British energy, levelling up workers’ rights, record investment in affordable housing, infrastructure the length and breadth of our country. 

    It’s all down to the foundation we laid this year. All down to the path of renewal that we chose. 

    The decisions made by the Chancellor, by Rachel Reeves which mean we can invest record amounts in the NHS.  

    Already over 6000 mental health workers recruited.  

    1700 new GPs. 

    170 Community Diagnostic Centres, really important, already open. 

    New surgical hubs, new mental health units, new ambulance sites. Record investment – right across the system. 

    And because of all that the results are crystal clear. 

    At the last election a year ago, we promised two million extra appointments in the NHS in the first year of [political content redacted] government. 

    We have now delivered four million extra appointments and that’s thanks to your hard work and that of your colleagues. 

    4 million. That’s a record amount for a single year ever. And I want to thank you for the part that you have played in that. 

    That is what change looks like.

    A promise made and a promised delivered. 

    And turning those statistics into the human is really important. So let me tell you about Jane. 

    At Christmas, she was taken to hospital with back pain. 

    And the diagnosis was not good. She needed her gallbladder removed. Jane asked as you can imagine “how long will I have to wait”. 

    And they said – “I’m sorry, but at the moment it could take up to ten months.” 

    Yet – because we have speeded up electives, because we have speeded up appointments, by May – she was offered a private appointment, paid for by the NHS, as part of our plan. 

    And now Jane is pain free. 

    Five months – not ten. 

    She’s got five months back – free from pain, free from anxiety and in a sense her life is no longer on hold. 

    That’s what change looks like in human terms. [Political content redacted.] 

    But we have to keep going. 

    We are fixing the foundations. We made choices no other government would have made and we are starting to repair the damage done to the NHS and public health, through Covid and austerity. 

    But reform isn’t just about fixing problems. It’s also about seizing opportunities. 

    And the way I see it – there is an opportunity here. 

    Because the NHS is at a turning point in its history. 

    We’re an older society now. Disease has changed. 

    Conditions are chronic, they are long-term, they need to be managed. And that means we need to reform the NHS to make it fit for the future. 

    With the technology that is available to us now, we have an unprecedented chance to do that to make care better. 

    To transform the relationship between people and the state. To give patients more power and control. And this is about fairness. 

    Millions of people across Britain no longer feel they get a fair deal. 

    And it’s starting to affect the pride, the hope, the optimism they have in this great country. 

    Our job is to change that. And the NHS is a huge part of it. I mean – for 77 years this weekend the NHS has been an embodiment if you like of British pride, hope, that basic sense of fairness and decency. 

    77 years – of everyone paying in, working hard, doing the right thing, secure in the knowledge, that if they or their family needs it, the NHS will be there for them. 

    In ten years’ time – when this plan has run its course, I want people to say this was the moment, this was the government that secured those values for the future. 

    And look – when people are uncertain about the deal they are getting from this country, what fairer way is there to respond to that than by giving them more control. 

    By partnering with them, to build an NHS that is fit to face the future. 

    That’s what this plan that we are launching today will do. 

    And it will do so in three ways. 

    Three shifts that will transform healthcare in this country. 

    First – we will shift the NHS away from being only a sickness service to a health service that is genuinely preventative in the first place, prevents disease in the first place.  

    That means a stronger focus on vaccination, on screening, early diagnosis.  

    Things like innovative weight loss services – available in pharmacies. 

    Working with major food businesses – to make their products healthier.

    Better mental health support, particularly for our young people. And starting with children aged sixteen this year we will raise the first entirely smoke-free generation. 

    Second – we will shift the NHS away from being a hospital-dominated service to being a community, neighbourhood health service. 

    You can see why we chose to come here. Places like this are the future of our NHS. You don’t have to book an appointment. You can just walk in. There are families here and people who use the services live in this area. 

    Now of course hospitals will always be important – for acute services especially.  

    But I say it again – disease has changed. And we must change with it. 

    And not only can we do that. We can do it in a way that improves care and convenience for millions of people. 

    So just imagining nurses, doctors, pharmacists, dentists, carers, health visitors all under one roof.  

    But also, services like debt advice, employment support, smoking cessation: preventative services which we know are so crucial for a healthy life. 

    Now that is an exciting prospect.  

    You know – the idea that the future of healthcare is no longer defined by top-down citadels of the central state.

    But is instead here – in your home, in your community, in your hands, that’s an inspiring vision of change. 

    It will bring the state and the people it serves into a partnership on something we all care deeply about. 

    But more importantly. It means a future where we have better GP access, no more 8am scrambles, more dental care for your children, better care on your doorstep and a Neighbourhood Health Centres like this in our coastal towns, in rural counties, in every community across the country. Every community across the country. 

    Finally – the third shift from the analogue NHS we have at the moment to a truly digital health service.

    A health service capable of seizing the enormous opportunities before us in science and technology.  

    In genomics, in artificial intelligence, advanced robotics. 

    Look – I have seen in your everyday lives what this can do.

    I’ve spoken to stroke patients who have had their lives saved by technology and AI because it could find the blood clot in their brain in milliseconds, giving them just enough time to be operated on and saving their lives. 

    So this plan – backs technology to deliver. Because it can and will save thousands of lives. But it’s not just about saving lives.

    AI and technology is an opportunity to make services more human. 

    That always sounds counterintuitive, but it does because what it gives all of you and all of your colleagues is more time to care, more time to do the things that only human beings can do which is that care that is needed, the professional skills that you have. So this will make it a more human service as well. 

    It gives you more time to care, to do all the things that brought you into the NHS in the first place.  

    And it’s not just cutting-edge technology either. 

    Technology like the phones in the pockets of everyone in this room we can use that too. 

    Now, you won’t hear this often in a speech – but look at your phones. But look at your apps! Seriously! Because what you see on that screen is that entire industries have reorganised around apps. 

    Retail, transport, finance, weather – you name it. 

    Why can’t we do that with health? 

    Why not the NHS app on your phone? 

    Making use of the same dynamic force to cut waiting lists at your hospital. 

    To make it easier for you to get a GP appointment, to give you more control over our health. 

    There’s no good reason why we can’t. So I can announce today, as part of this plan, that we can, and we will transform the NHS App so that it becomes an indispensable part of life for everyone. 

    It will become – as technology develops – like having a doctor in your pocket. 

    Providing you with 24 hours advice, seven days a week.

    An NHS that really is always there when you need it. 

    Booking appointments at your convenience, ordering your prescriptions, guiding you to local charities or businesses that can improve your wellbeing.  

    And perhaps most importantly, holding all healthcare data in an easily accessible, single patient record.

    Don’t underestimate how important that is. 

    I’ve been up to Alder Hey hospital in Liverpool many times, it’s a children’s hospital, it’s a brilliant hospital. 

    One of the times I was there I was on the ward, particularly young children were having heart surgery. 

    I have to tell you it was really humbling both seeing what the children were going through but also what the professional staff were doing. 

    When I went into a particular ward, I saw a two year old boy who had just had major heart surgery, it’s an incredible thing to see. 

    And I spoke to his parents who were at his bedside throughout. 

    One of the things they raised with me was the distress they felt that they had to go through every single condition that he had over and over again, whether they went to Blackpool, in Liverpool, at Alder Hey. 

    They were actually welling up telling me it’s a really difficult story for us, this is really hard. And we don’t want to keep having to repeat it, why can’t it be recorded the first time around? 

    I will remember their faces and the story they told me for a very long time. 

    But we can fix that. We can make it more accessible. We can bring this together in one place. 

    And there are other examples as well. That red book that every child gets. Why can’t that be digital? There’s no good reason. 

    And so that’s exactly what we’ll do. 

    We will turn this app into a new front door for the entire NHS. 

    A reformed, modernised and renewed – Neighbourhood Health Service. 

    That is the plan we launch today.    

    That is the change we will deliver. 

    [Political content redacted.] 

    The NHS on its feet. Facing the future. Delivering fairness and security for working people. 

    Thank you.

    Updates to this page

    Published 3 July 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Moon mining is getting closer to reality: Why we need global rules for extracting space resources

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Martina Elia Vitoloni, DCL Candidate Air and Space Law, McGill University

    Mountains on the moon as seen by NASA Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter. (NASA/GSFC/Arizona State University)

    In science-fiction stories, companies often mine the moon or asteroids. While this may seem far-fetched, this idea is edging closer to becoming reality.

    Celestial bodies like the moon contain valuable resources, such as lunar regolith — also known as moon dust — and helium-3. These resources could serve a range of applications, including making rocket propellant and generating energy to sustaining long missions, bringing benefits in space and on Earth.

    The first objective on this journey is being able to collect lunar regolith. One company taking up this challenge is ispace, a Japanese space exploration company ispace that signed a contract with NASA in 2020 for the collection and transfer of ownership of lunar regolith.

    The company recently attempted to land its RESILIENCE lunar lander, but the mission was ultimately unsuccessful. Still, this endeavour marked a significant move toward the commercialization of space resources.

    These circumstances give rise to a fundamental question: what are the legal rules governing the exploitation of space resources? The answer is both simple and complex, as there is a mix of international agreements and evolving regulations to consider.

    What does the international legal system say?

    The cornerstone legal instrument for space activity is the Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies, more commonly referred to as the Outer Space Treaty.

    While space law is often considered a novel legal field, the Outer Space Treaty dates back to 1967, making it more than half a century old.




    Read more:
    Space exploration should aim for peace, collaboration and co-operation, not war and competition


    Space activities have exponentially evolved since the treaty’s adoption. In the 60 years following the launch of Sputnik 1 — the first satellite placed in orbit — less than 500 space objects were launched annually. But since 2018, this number has risen into the thousands, with nearly 3,000 launched in 2024.

    Because of this, the treaty is often judged as inadequate to address the current complexities of space activities, particularly resource exploitation.

    A longstanding debate centres on whether Article II of the treaty, which prohibits the appropriation of outer space — including the moon and other celestial bodies — also prohibits space mining.

    The prevailing position is that Article II solely bans the appropriation of territory, not the extraction of resources themselves.

    We are now at a crucial moment in the development of space law. Arguing over whether extraction is legal serves no purpose. Instead, the focus must shift to ensuring resource extraction is carried out in accordance with principles that ensure the safe and responsible use of outer space.

    International and national space laws

    A significant development in the governance of space resources has been the adoption Artemis Accords, which — as of June 2025 — has 55 signatory nations. The accords reflect a growing international consensus concerning the exploitation of space resources.

    Notably, Section 10 of the accords indicates that the exploitation of space resources does not constitute appropriation, and therefore doesn’t violate the Outer Space Treaty.

    Considering the typically slow pace of multilateral negotiations, a handful of nations introduced national legislation. These laws govern the legality of space resource exploitation, allowing private companies to request licenses to conduct this type of activity.

    To date, six nations have enacted this type of legislation: the United States in 2015, Luxembourg in 2017, the United Arab Emirates in 2019, Japan in 2021, Brazil in 2024 and most recently, Italy, which passed its law on June 11, 2025.

    Among these, Luxembourg’s legal framework is the most complete. It provides a series of requirements to provide authorization for the exploitation of space resources. In fact, ispace’s licence to collect lunar regolith was obtained under this regime.

    This first high-resolution image taken on the first day of the Artemis I mission by a camera on the tip of one of Orion’s solar arrays. The spacecraft was 57,000 miles from Earth when the image was captured.
    (NASA)

    The rest of the regulations usually tend to limit themselves to proclaiming the legality of this activity without entering into too much detail and deferring the specifics of implementation to future regulations.

    While these initiatives served to put space resources at the forefront of international forums, they also risk regulatory fragmentation, as different countries adopt varying standards and approaches.

    What does the future hold?

    Recognizing the need for a co-ordinated global approach, the United Nations Committee on Peaceful Uses of Outer Space created a Working Group on Legal Aspects of Space Resource Activities. Its mandate is to develop a set of general principles to guide the development of the activity.

    In May 2025, the chair of the working group, Steven Freeland, presented a draft of recommended principles based on input from member states.

    These principles reaffirm the freedom of use and exploration of outer space for peaceful purposes, while introducing rules pertaining to the safety of the activities and their sustainability, as well as the protection of the environment, both of Earth and outer space.

    The development of a legal framework for space resources is still in its early stages. The working group is expected to submit its final report by 2027, but the non-binding nature of the principles raises concerns about their enforcement and application.

    As humanity moves closer to extracting and using space resources, the need for a cohesive and responsible governance system has never been greater.

    Martina Elia Vitoloni does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    ref. Moon mining is getting closer to reality: Why we need global rules for extracting space resources – https://theconversation.com/moon-mining-is-getting-closer-to-reality-why-we-need-global-rules-for-extracting-space-resources-259343

    MIL OSI

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: How far is your closest hospital or clinic? Public health researchers explain why Africa needs up-to-date health facility databases

    Source: The Conversation – Africa (2) – By Peter M Macharia, Senior postdoctoral research fellow, Institute of Tropical Medicine Antwerp

    The lack of reliable information about health facilities across sub-Saharan Africa became very clear during the COVID-19 pandemic. Amid a surge in emergency care needs, information was lacking about the location of facilities, bed capacity and oxygen availability, and even where to find medical specialists. This data could have enabled precise assessments of hospital surge capacity and geographic access to critical care. Peter Macharia and Emelda Okiro, whose research focuses on public health and equity of health service access in low resource settings, share the findings of their recent study, co-authored with colleagues.

    What are open health facility databases?

    A health facility is a service delivery point where healthcare services are provided. The facilities can range from small clinics and doctor’s offices to large teaching and referral hospitals.

    A health facility database is a list of all health facilities in a country or geographic area, such as a district. A typical database should assign each health facility a unique code, name, size, type (from primary to tertiary), ownership (public or private), operational status (working or closed), location and subnational unit (county or district). It should also record services (emergency obstetric care, for example), capacity (number of beds, for example), infrastructure (electricity availability, for example), contact information (address and email), and when this information was last updated.

    The ideal method of compiling this list is to conduct a census, as Kenya did in 2023. But this takes resources. Some countries have compiled lists from existing incomplete ones. Senegal did this and so did Kenya in 2003 and 2008.

    This list should be open to stakeholders, including government agencies, development partners and researchers. Health facility lists must be shared through a governance framework that balances data sharing with protections for data subjects and creators. In some countries, such as Kenya and Malawi, these listings are accessible through web portals without additional permission. In others, such facility lists do not exist or require extra permission.

    Why are they useful to have?

    Facility listings can serve the needs of individuals and communities. They also serve sub-national, national and continental health objectives.

    At the individual level, a facility list offers a choice of alternatives to health seekers. At the community level, the data can guide decisions like where to place community health workers, as seen in Mali and Sierra Leone.

    Health lists are useful when distributing commodities such as bed nets and allocating resources based on the health needs of the areas they serve. They help in planning for vaccination campaigns by creating detailed immunisation microplans.

    By taking account of the disease burden, social dynamics and environmental factors, health services can be tailored to specific needs.

    Detailed maps of healthcare resources enable quicker emergency responses by pinpointing facilities equipped for specific crises. Disease surveillance systems depend on continuously collecting data from healthcare facilities.

    At the continental level, lists are crucial for a coordinated health system response during pandemics and outbreaks. They can facilitate cross-border planning, pandemic preparedness and collaboration.

    During the COVID-19 pandemic, these lists informed where to put additional resources such as makeshift hospitals or transport programmes for adults over  60 years of age.

    The lists are used to identify vulnerable populations at risk of emerging pathogens and populations that can benefit from new health facilities.

    They are important when it comes to making emergency obstetric and newborn care accessible.

    What goes wrong if you don’t have them?

    Many problems arise if we don’t know where health facilities are or what they offer. Healthcare planning becomes inefficient. This can result in duplicate facility lists and the misallocation of resources, which leads to waste and inequities.

    We can’t identify populations that lack services. Emergency responses weaken due to uncertainty about where best to move patients with specific conditions.

    Resources are wasted when there are duplicate facility lists. For example, between 2010 and 2016, six government departments partnered with development organisations, resulting in ten lists of health facilities in Nigeria.

    In Tanzania, over 10 different health facility lists existed in 2009. Maintained by donors and government agencies, the function-specific lists didn’t work together to share information easily and accurately. This prompted the need for a national master facility list.

    What needs to happen to build one?

    A comprehensive list of health facilities can be compiled through mapping exercises or from existing lists. The health ministry should take responsibility for setting up, developing and updating this list.

    Partnerships are crucial for developing facility lists. Stakeholders include donors, implementing and humanitarian partners, technical advisors and research institutions. Many of these have their own project-based lists, which should integrate into a centralised facility list managed by the ministry. The health ministry must foster a transparent environment, encouraging citizens and stakeholders to contribute to enhancing health facility data.

    Political and financial commitment from governments is essential. Creating and maintaining a proper list requires significant investment. Expertise and resources are necessary to keep it updated.

    A commitment to open data is a necessary step. Open access to these lists makes them more complete, reliable and useful.

    Peter Macharia is funded by Fonds voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek- Belgium (FWO, number 1201925N) for his Senior Postdoctoral Fellowship.

    Emelda Okiro receives funding for her research from the Wellcome Trust through a Wellcome Trust Senior Fellowship (#224272).

    ref. How far is your closest hospital or clinic? Public health researchers explain why Africa needs up-to-date health facility databases – https://theconversation.com/how-far-is-your-closest-hospital-or-clinic-public-health-researchers-explain-why-africa-needs-up-to-date-health-facility-databases-259190

    MIL OSI

  • MIL-OSI NGOs: Russia/Azerbaijan: Authorities must investigate alleged abuses against detainees amid tit for tat policing operations  

    Source: Amnesty International –

    Reacting to reports of mass detentions, torture and other ill-treatment of dozens of members of the Azerbaijani diaspora in Russia and Russian nationals in Azerbaijan, which led to the deaths of two ethnic Azeris in Russia’s Yekaterinburg, Marie Struthers, Amnesty International’s Director for Eastern Europe and Central Asia, said:

    “The authorities in both Russia and Azerbaijan have shown complete disregard for human dignity and open contempt for their human rights obligations. Torture and other ill-treatment are absolutely prohibited under international law and there is no justification for it. This appears to be nothing more than tit for tat policing operations targeting people based on their ethnicity and nationality.”

    “Due process and respect for human rights of people in detention must prevail over political tensions between states. Russian and Azerbaijani authorities must promptly, thoroughly, independently and impartially investigate allegations of unlawful killings and torture and other ill-treatment and bring those responsible to justice.”

    The authorities in both Russia and Azerbaijan have shown complete disregard for human dignity and open contempt for their human rights obligations

    Marie Struthers, Amnesty International’s Director for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

    Background

    On 27 June, Russian law enforcement carried out mass detentions of around 50 ethnic Azeris in Yekaterinburg, among them Russian and Azerbaijani nationals, reportedly in connection with an investigation into a killing committed in 2001 and other past crimes. Six individuals were charged and placed in pre-trial detention, while others were released after questioning.

    According to one of the survivors, all those detained were beaten: slammed to the floor, hit with chairs and tortured with electric shocks for about an hour. Several people were hospitalized and two individuals, brothers Ziyaddin and Guseyn Safarov, died in custody. Azerbaijani authorities claim that the brothers, who both held Russian passports, died from torture and multiple injuries caused while in Russian custody. The Russian authorities have cited heart failure as the cause of death of one of the brothers and stated that they are clarifying the other’s cause of death. Heart failure is often given by authorities as the cause of death in Russian custody in cases where torture and other ill-treatment has been alleged.

    In what appears to be retaliatory action, the Azerbaijani authorities detained at least eight Russian nationals in Baku between 30 June and 1 July, under accusations ranging from espionage to drug trafficking to computer hacking. These include two journalists – Igor Kartavykh and Evgeny Belousov – detained during a raid on the office of Sputnik Azerbaijan, a state-run Russian media outlet which the Azerbaijani authorities had earlier deprived of accreditation. Others included IT specialists who had left Russia after the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, and at least one person who was reportedly visiting Azerbaijan as a tourist. Videos and photos of the arrests distributed by Azerbaijani law enforcement channels and photos taken in court during the remand hearing show Russian detainees with visible facial bruising and head injuries.

    MIL OSI NGO

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: Our memories are unreliable, limited and suggestible – and it’s a good thing too

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Nick Haslam, Professor of Psychology, The University of Melbourne

    Shutterstock

    Milan Kundera opens his novel The Book of Laughter and Forgetting with a scene from the winter of 1948. Klement Gottwald, leader of the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia, is giving a speech to the masses from a palace balcony, surrounded by fellow party members. Comrade Vladimir Clementis thoughtfully places his fur hat on Gottwald’s bare head; the hat then features in an iconic photograph.

    Four years later, Clementis is found guilty of being a bourgeois nationalist and hanged. His ashes are strewn on a Prague street. The propaganda section of the party removes him from written history and erases him from the photograph.

    “Nothing remains of Clementis,” writes Kundera, “but the fur hat on Gottwald’s head.”


    Review: Memory Lane: The Perfectly Imperfect Ways We Remember – Ciara Greene & Gillian Murphy (Princeton University Press)


    Efforts to enforce political forgetting are often associated with totalitarian regimes. The state endeavours to control not only its citizens, but also the past. To create a narrative that glorifies the present and idealises the future, history must be rewritten or even completely obliterated.

    In a famous article on “the totalitarian ego”, the social psychologist Anthony Greenwald argued that individual selves operate in the same way. We deploy an array of cognitive biases to maintain a sense of control, and to shape and reshape our personal history. We distort the present and fabricate the past to ensure we remain the heroes of our life narratives.

    Likening the individual to a destructive political system might sound extreme, but it has an element of truth. Memory Lane, a new book by Irish psychology researchers Ciara Greene and Gillian Murphy, shows how autobiographical memory has a capacity to rewrite history that is almost Stalinesque.

    There is no shortage of books on memory, from self-help guides for the anxiously ageing to scholarly works of history. Memory Lane is distinctive for taking the standpoint of applied cognitive psychology. Emphasising how memory functions in everyday life, Greene and Murphy explore the processes of memory and the influences that shape them.

    What memory is not

    The key message of the book is that the memory system is not a recording device. We may be tempted to see memory as a vault where past experience is faithfully preserved, but in fact it is fundamentally reconstructive.

    Memories are constantly revised in acts of recollection. They change in predictable ways over time, moulded by new information, our prior beliefs and current emotions, other people’s versions of events, or an interviewer’s leading questions.


    According to Greene and Murphy’s preferred analogy, memory is like a Lego tower. A memory is initially constructed from a set of elements, but over time some will be lost as the structure simplifies to preserve the gist of the event. Elements may also be added as new information is incorporated and the memory is refashioned to align with the person’s beliefs and expectations.

    The malleability of memory might look like a weakness, especially by comparison to digital records. Memory Lane presents it as a strength. Humans did not evolve to log objective truths for posterity, but to operate flexibly in a complex and changing world.

    From an adaptive standpoint, the past only matters insofar as it helps us function in the present. Our knowledge should be updated by new information. We should assimilate experiences to already learned patterns. And we should be tuned to our social environment, rather than insulated from it.

    “If all our memories existed in some kind of mental quarantine, separate from the rest of our knowledge and experiences,” the authors write, “it would be like using a slow, inefficient computer program that could only show you one file at a time, never drawing connections or updating incorrect impressions.”

    Simplifying and discarding memories is also beneficial because our cognitive capacity is limited. It is better to filter out what matters from the deluge of past experiences than to be overwhelmed with irrelevancies. Greene and Murphy present the case of a woman with exceptional autobiographical memory, who is plagued by the triggering of obsolete memories.

    Forgetting doesn’t merely de-clutter memory; it also serves emotional ends. Selectively deleting unpleasant memories increases happiness. Sanding off out-of-character experiences fosters a clear and stable sense of self.

    “Hindsight bias” boosts this feeling of personal continuity by bringing our recollections into line with our current beliefs. Revisionist history it may be, but it is carried out in the service of personal identity.

    ‘Forgetting doesn’t merely de-clutter memory; it also serves emotional ends.’
    Shutterstock

    Eyewitness memories and misinformation

    Memory Lane pays special attention to situations in which memory errors have serious consequences, such as eyewitness testimony. Innocent people can be convicted on the basis of inaccurate eyewitness identifications. An array of biases make these more likely and they are especially common in interracial contexts.

    Recollections can also be influenced by the testimony of other witnesses, and even by the language used during questioning. In a classic study, participants who viewed videos of car accidents estimated the car’s speed as substantially faster when the cars were described as having “smashed” rather than “contacted”. These distortions are not temporary: new information overwrites and overrides the original memory.

    Misinformation works in a similar way and with equally dire consequences, such as vaccination avoidance. False information not only modifies existing memories but can even produce false memories, especially when it aligns with our preexisting beliefs and ideologies.

    Greene and Murphy present intriguing experimental evidence that false memories are prevalent and easy to implant. Children and older adults seem especially susceptible to misinformation, but no one is immune, regardless of education or intelligence.

    Reassuringly, perhaps, digital image manipulation and deepfake videos are no more likely to induce false memories than good old-fashioned verbiage. A doctored picture may not be worth a thousand words when it comes to warping memory.

    Memory Lane devotes some time to the “memory wars” of the 1980s and 1990s, when debate raged over the existence of repressed memories. Greene and Murphy argue the now mainstream view that many traumatic memories supposedly recovered in therapy were false memories induced by therapists. Memories for traumatic events are not repressed, they argue, and traumatic memories are neither qualitatively different from other memories, nor stored separately from them.

    Here the science of memory runs contrary to the wildly popular claims of writers such as psychiatrist Bessel van der Kolk, author of the bestseller The Body Keeps the Score.




    Read more:
    The Body Keeps the Score: how a bestselling book helps us understand trauma – but inflates the definition of it


    Psychology researchers Ciara Greene (left) and Gillian Murphy (right) want us to be humbler about our fallible memories.
    Princeton University Press

    Misunderstanding memory

    The authors of Memory Lane contend that we hold memory to unrealistic standards of accuracy, completeness and stability. When people misremember the past or change their recollections, we query their honesty or mental health. When our own memories are hazy, we worry about cognitive decline.

    Greene and Murphy argue that it is in the very nature of memory to be fallible, malleable and limited. This message is heartening, but it does not clarify why we would expect memory to be more capacious, coherent and durable in the first place. Nor does it explain why we persist with this wrongheaded expectation, despite so much evidence to the contrary.

    The authors hint that our mistake might have its roots in dominant metaphors of memory. If we now understand the mind as computer-like, we will see memories as digital traces that sit, silent and unchanging, in a vast storage system.

    “Many of the catastrophic consequences of memory distortion arise not because our individual memories are terrible,” they argue, “but because we have unrealistic expectations about how memory works, treating it as a video camera rather than a reconstruction.”

    In earlier times, when memory was likened to a telephone switchboard or to books or, for the ancient Greeks, to wax tablets, memory errors and erasures may have seemed less surprising and more tolerable.

    These shifting technological analogies, explored historically in Douwe Draaisma’s Metaphors of Memory, may partly account for our extravagant expectations for memory. Expecting silicon chip performance from carbon-based organisms, who evolved to care more about adaptation than truth, would be foolish.

    But there is surely more to this than metaphor. All aspects of our lives are increasingly recorded and datafied, a process that demands objectivity, accuracy and consistency. The recorded facts of the matter determine who should be rewarded, punished and regulated. The bounded and mutable nature of human memory presents a challenge to this digital regime.

    Human memory is also increasingly taxed by the overwhelming and accelerating volume of information that assails us. Our frustration with its limitations reflects the desperate mismatch we feel between human nature and the impersonal systems of data in which we live.

    Greene and Murphy urge us to relax. We should be humbler about our memory, and more realistic and forgiving about the memories of others. We should not be judgemental about the errors and inconsistencies of friends, or overconfident about our own recollections. And we should remember that, although memory is fallible, it is fallible in beneficial ways.

    A person whose memory system always kept an accurate record of our lives would be profoundly impaired, Greene and Murphy argue. Such a person “would struggle to plan for the future, learn from the past, or respond flexibly to unexpected events”. Brimming with insights such as these, Memory Lane offers an informative and readable account of how the apparent weaknesses of human memory may be strengths in disguise.

    Nick Haslam receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

    ref. Our memories are unreliable, limited and suggestible – and it’s a good thing too – https://theconversation.com/our-memories-are-unreliable-limited-and-suggestible-and-its-a-good-thing-too-258682

    MIL OSI Analysis

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: How far is your closest hospital or clinic? Public health researchers explain why Africa needs up-to-date health facility databases

    Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Peter M Macharia, Senior postdoctoral research fellow, Institute of Tropical Medicine Antwerp

    The lack of reliable information about health facilities across sub-Saharan Africa became very clear during the COVID-19 pandemic. Amid a surge in emergency care needs, information was lacking about the location of facilities, bed capacity and oxygen availability, and even where to find medical specialists. This data could have enabled precise assessments of hospital surge capacity and geographic access to critical care. Peter Macharia and Emelda Okiro, whose research focuses on public health and equity of health service access in low resource settings, share the findings of their recent study, co-authored with colleagues.

    What are open health facility databases?

    A health facility is a service delivery point where healthcare services are provided. The facilities can range from small clinics and doctor’s offices to large teaching and referral hospitals.

    A health facility database is a list of all health facilities in a country or geographic area, such as a district. A typical database should assign each health facility a unique code, name, size, type (from primary to tertiary), ownership (public or private), operational status (working or closed), location and subnational unit (county or district). It should also record services (emergency obstetric care, for example), capacity (number of beds, for example), infrastructure (electricity availability, for example), contact information (address and email), and when this information was last updated.

    The ideal method of compiling this list is to conduct a census, as Kenya did in 2023. But this takes resources. Some countries have compiled lists from existing incomplete ones. Senegal did this and so did Kenya in 2003 and 2008.

    This list should be open to stakeholders, including government agencies, development partners and researchers. Health facility lists must be shared through a governance framework that balances data sharing with protections for data subjects and creators. In some countries, such as Kenya and Malawi, these listings are accessible through web portals without additional permission. In others, such facility lists do not exist or require extra permission.

    Why are they useful to have?

    Facility listings can serve the needs of individuals and communities. They also serve sub-national, national and continental health objectives.

    At the individual level, a facility list offers a choice of alternatives to health seekers. At the community level, the data can guide decisions like where to place community health workers, as seen in Mali and Sierra Leone.

    Health lists are useful when distributing commodities such as bed nets and allocating resources based on the health needs of the areas they serve. They help in planning for vaccination campaigns by creating detailed immunisation microplans.

    By taking account of the disease burden, social dynamics and environmental factors, health services can be tailored to specific needs.

    Detailed maps of healthcare resources enable quicker emergency responses by pinpointing facilities equipped for specific crises. Disease surveillance systems depend on continuously collecting data from healthcare facilities.

    At the continental level, lists are crucial for a coordinated health system response during pandemics and outbreaks. They can facilitate cross-border planning, pandemic preparedness and collaboration.

    During the COVID-19 pandemic, these lists informed where to put additional resources such as makeshift hospitals or transport programmes for adults over  60 years of age.

    The lists are used to identify vulnerable populations at risk of emerging pathogens and populations that can benefit from new health facilities.

    They are important when it comes to making emergency obstetric and newborn care accessible.

    What goes wrong if you don’t have them?

    Many problems arise if we don’t know where health facilities are or what they offer. Healthcare planning becomes inefficient. This can result in duplicate facility lists and the misallocation of resources, which leads to waste and inequities.

    We can’t identify populations that lack services. Emergency responses weaken due to uncertainty about where best to move patients with specific conditions.

    Resources are wasted when there are duplicate facility lists. For example, between 2010 and 2016, six government departments partnered with development organisations, resulting in ten lists of health facilities in Nigeria.

    In Tanzania, over 10 different health facility lists existed in 2009. Maintained by donors and government agencies, the function-specific lists didn’t work together to share information easily and accurately. This prompted the need for a national master facility list.

    What needs to happen to build one?

    A comprehensive list of health facilities can be compiled through mapping exercises or from existing lists. The health ministry should take responsibility for setting up, developing and updating this list.

    Partnerships are crucial for developing facility lists. Stakeholders include donors, implementing and humanitarian partners, technical advisors and research institutions. Many of these have their own project-based lists, which should integrate into a centralised facility list managed by the ministry. The health ministry must foster a transparent environment, encouraging citizens and stakeholders to contribute to enhancing health facility data.

    Political and financial commitment from governments is essential. Creating and maintaining a proper list requires significant investment. Expertise and resources are necessary to keep it updated.

    A commitment to open data is a necessary step. Open access to these lists makes them more complete, reliable and useful.

    Peter Macharia is funded by Fonds voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek- Belgium (FWO, number 1201925N) for his Senior Postdoctoral Fellowship.

    Emelda Okiro receives funding for her research from the Wellcome Trust through a Wellcome Trust Senior Fellowship (#224272).

    ref. How far is your closest hospital or clinic? Public health researchers explain why Africa needs up-to-date health facility databases – https://theconversation.com/how-far-is-your-closest-hospital-or-clinic-public-health-researchers-explain-why-africa-needs-up-to-date-health-facility-databases-259190

    MIL OSI Analysis

  • MIL-OSI Global: Moon mining is getting closer to reality: Why we need global rules for extracting space resources

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Martina Elia Vitoloni, DCL Candidate Air and Space Law, McGill University

    Mountains on the moon as seen by NASA Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter. (NASA/GSFC/Arizona State University)

    In science-fiction stories, companies often mine the moon or asteroids. While this may seem far-fetched, this idea is edging closer to becoming reality.

    Celestial bodies like the moon contain valuable resources, such as lunar regolith — also known as moon dust — and helium-3. These resources could serve a range of applications, including making rocket propellant and generating energy to sustaining long missions, bringing benefits in space and on Earth.

    The first objective on this journey is being able to collect lunar regolith. One company taking up this challenge is ispace, a Japanese space exploration company ispace that signed a contract with NASA in 2020 for the collection and transfer of ownership of lunar regolith.

    The company recently attempted to land its RESILIENCE lunar lander, but the mission was ultimately unsuccessful. Still, this endeavour marked a significant move toward the commercialization of space resources.

    These circumstances give rise to a fundamental question: what are the legal rules governing the exploitation of space resources? The answer is both simple and complex, as there is a mix of international agreements and evolving regulations to consider.

    What does the international legal system say?

    The cornerstone legal instrument for space activity is the Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies, more commonly referred to as the Outer Space Treaty.

    While space law is often considered a novel legal field, the Outer Space Treaty dates back to 1967, making it more than half a century old.




    Read more:
    Space exploration should aim for peace, collaboration and co-operation, not war and competition


    Space activities have exponentially evolved since the treaty’s adoption. In the 60 years following the launch of Sputnik 1 — the first satellite placed in orbit — less than 500 space objects were launched annually. But since 2018, this number has risen into the thousands, with nearly 3,000 launched in 2024.

    Because of this, the treaty is often judged as inadequate to address the current complexities of space activities, particularly resource exploitation.

    A longstanding debate centres on whether Article II of the treaty, which prohibits the appropriation of outer space — including the moon and other celestial bodies — also prohibits space mining.

    The prevailing position is that Article II solely bans the appropriation of territory, not the extraction of resources themselves.

    We are now at a crucial moment in the development of space law. Arguing over whether extraction is legal serves no purpose. Instead, the focus must shift to ensuring resource extraction is carried out in accordance with principles that ensure the safe and responsible use of outer space.

    International and national space laws

    A significant development in the governance of space resources has been the adoption Artemis Accords, which — as of June 2025 — has 55 signatory nations. The accords reflect a growing international consensus concerning the exploitation of space resources.

    Notably, Section 10 of the accords indicates that the exploitation of space resources does not constitute appropriation, and therefore doesn’t violate the Outer Space Treaty.

    Considering the typically slow pace of multilateral negotiations, a handful of nations introduced national legislation. These laws govern the legality of space resource exploitation, allowing private companies to request licenses to conduct this type of activity.

    To date, six nations have enacted this type of legislation: the United States in 2015, Luxembourg in 2017, the United Arab Emirates in 2019, Japan in 2021, Brazil in 2024 and most recently, Italy, which passed its law on June 11, 2025.

    Among these, Luxembourg’s legal framework is the most complete. It provides a series of requirements to provide authorization for the exploitation of space resources. In fact, ispace’s licence to collect lunar regolith was obtained under this regime.

    This first high-resolution image taken on the first day of the Artemis I mission by a camera on the tip of one of Orion’s solar arrays. The spacecraft was 57,000 miles from Earth when the image was captured.
    (NASA)

    The rest of the regulations usually tend to limit themselves to proclaiming the legality of this activity without entering into too much detail and deferring the specifics of implementation to future regulations.

    While these initiatives served to put space resources at the forefront of international forums, they also risk regulatory fragmentation, as different countries adopt varying standards and approaches.

    What does the future hold?

    Recognizing the need for a co-ordinated global approach, the United Nations Committee on Peaceful Uses of Outer Space created a Working Group on Legal Aspects of Space Resource Activities. Its mandate is to develop a set of general principles to guide the development of the activity.

    In May 2025, the chair of the working group, Steven Freeland, presented a draft of recommended principles based on input from member states.

    These principles reaffirm the freedom of use and exploration of outer space for peaceful purposes, while introducing rules pertaining to the safety of the activities and their sustainability, as well as the protection of the environment, both of Earth and outer space.

    The development of a legal framework for space resources is still in its early stages. The working group is expected to submit its final report by 2027, but the non-binding nature of the principles raises concerns about their enforcement and application.

    As humanity moves closer to extracting and using space resources, the need for a cohesive and responsible governance system has never been greater.

    Martina Elia Vitoloni does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    ref. Moon mining is getting closer to reality: Why we need global rules for extracting space resources – https://theconversation.com/moon-mining-is-getting-closer-to-reality-why-we-need-global-rules-for-extracting-space-resources-259343

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI Global: The Supreme Court upholds free preventive care, but its future now rests in RFK Jr.’s hands

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Paul Shafer, Associate Professor of Health Law, Policy and Management, Boston University

    The Affordable Care Act has survived its fourth Supreme Court challenge. Ted Eytan via Wikimedia Commons, CC BY

    On June 26, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down a 6-3 ruling that preserves free preventive care under the Affordable Care Act, a popular benefit that helps approximately 150 million Americans stay healthy.

    The case, Kennedy v. Braidwood, was the fourth major legal challenge to the Affordable Care Act. The decision, written by Justice Brett Kavanaugh with the support of Justices Amy Coney Barrett, Elena Kagan, Ketanji Brown Jackson and Sonia Sotomayor, ruled that insurers must continue to cover at no cost any preventive care approved by a federal panel called the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.

    Members of the task force are independent scientific experts, appointed for four-year terms. The panel’s role had been purely advisory until the ACA, and the plaintiffs contended that the members lacked the appropriate authority as they had not been appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. The Supreme Court rejected this argument, saying that members simply needed to be appointed by the Health and Human Services Secretary – currently, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. – which they had been, under his predecessor during the Biden administration.

    This ruling seemingly safeguards access to preventive care. But as public health researchers who study health insurance and sexual health, we see another concern: It leaves preventive care vulnerable to how Kennedy and future HHS secretaries will choose to exercise their power over the task force and its recommendations.

    What is the US Preventive Services Task Force?

    The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force was initially created in 1984 to develop recommendations about prevention for primary care doctors. It is modeled after the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care, which was established in 1976.

    Under the ACA, insurers must fully cover all screenings and interventions endorsed by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.
    SDI Productions/E+ via Getty Images

    The task force makes new recommendations and updates existing ones by reviewing clinical and policy evidence on a regular basis and weighing the potential benefits and risks of a wide range of health screenings and interventions. These include mammograms; blood pressure, colon cancer, diabetes and osteoporosis screenings; and HIV prevention. Over 150 million Americans have benefited from free coverage of these recommended services under the ACA, and around 60% of privately insured people use at least one of the covered services each year.

    The task force plays such a crucial role in health care because it is one of three federal groups whose recommendations insurers must abide by. Section 2713 of the Affordable Care Act requires insurers to offer full coverage of preventive services endorsed by three federal groups: the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, and the Health Resources and Services Administration. For example, the coronavirus relief bill, which passed in March 2020 and allocated emergency funding in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, used this provision to ensure COVID-19 vaccines would be free for many Americans.

    The Braidwood case and HIV prevention

    This case, originally filed in Texas in 2020, was brought by Braidwood Management, a Christian for-profit corporation owned by Steven Hotze, a Texas physician and Republican activist who has previously filed multiple lawsuits against the ACA. Braidwood and its co-plaintiffs argued on religious grounds against being forced to offer preexposure prophylaxis, or PrEP, a medicine that prevents HIV infection, in their insurance plans.

    At issue in Braidwood was whether task force members – providers and researchers who provide independent and nonpartisan expertise – were appropriately appointed and supervised under the appointments clause of the Constitution, which specifies how various government positions are appointed. The case called into question free coverage of all recommendations made by the task force since the Affordable Care Act was passed in March 2010.

    In the ruling, Kavanaugh wrote that “the Task Force members’ appointments are fully consistent with the Appointments Clause in Article II of the Constitution.” In laying out his reasoning, he wrote, “The Task Force members were appointed by and are supervised and directed by the Secretary of HHS. And the Secretary of HHS, in turn, answers to the President of the United States.”

    Concerns over political influence

    The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force is meant to operate independently of political influence, and its decisions are technically not directly reviewable. However, the task force is appointed by the HHS secretary, who may remove any of its members at any time for any reason, even if such actions are highly unusual.

    Kennedy recently took the unprecedented step of removing all members of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, which debates vaccine safety but also, crucially, helps decide what immunizations are free to Americans guaranteed by the Affordable Care Act. The newly constituted committee, appointed in weeks rather than years, includes several vaccine skeptics and has already moved to rescind some vaccine recommendations, such as routine COVID-19 vaccines for pregnant women and children.

    Kennedy has also proposed restructuring out of existence the agency that supports the task force, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. That agency has been subject to massive layoffs within the Department of Health and Human Services. For full disclosure, one of the authors is currently funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and previously worked there.

    The decision to safeguard the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force as a body and, by extension, free preventive care under the ACA, doesn’t come without risks and highlights the fragility of long-standing, independent advisory systems in the face of the politicization of health. Kennedy could simply remove the existing task force members and replace them with members who may reshape the types of care recommended to Americans by their doctors and insurance plans based on debunked science and misinformation.

    Partisanship and the politicization of health threaten trust in evidence. Already, signs are emerging that Americans on both side of the political divide are losing confidence in government health agencies. This ruling preserves a crucial part of the Affordable Care Act, yet federal health guidelines and access to lifesaving care could still swing dramatically in Kennedy’s hands – or with each subsequent transition of power.

    Portions of this article originally appeared in previous articles published on Sept. 7, 2021; Dec. 1, 2021; Sept. 13, 2022; April 7, 2023; and April 15, 2025.

    Paul Shafer receives research funding from the National Institutes of Health, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and Department of Veterans Affairs. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position or policy of these agencies or the United States government.

    Kristefer Stojanovski receives funding from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position or policy of these agencies or the United States government.

    ref. The Supreme Court upholds free preventive care, but its future now rests in RFK Jr.’s hands – https://theconversation.com/the-supreme-court-upholds-free-preventive-care-but-its-future-now-rests-in-rfk-jr-s-hands-260072

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI Global: The Supreme Court upholds free preventive care, but its future now rests in RFK Jr.’s hands

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Paul Shafer, Associate Professor of Health Law, Policy and Management, Boston University

    The Affordable Care Act has survived its fourth Supreme Court challenge. Ted Eytan via Wikimedia Commons, CC BY

    On June 26, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down a 6-3 ruling that preserves free preventive care under the Affordable Care Act, a popular benefit that helps approximately 150 million Americans stay healthy.

    The case, Kennedy v. Braidwood, was the fourth major legal challenge to the Affordable Care Act. The decision, written by Justice Brett Kavanaugh with the support of Justices Amy Coney Barrett, Elena Kagan, Ketanji Brown Jackson and Sonia Sotomayor, ruled that insurers must continue to cover at no cost any preventive care approved by a federal panel called the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.

    Members of the task force are independent scientific experts, appointed for four-year terms. The panel’s role had been purely advisory until the ACA, and the plaintiffs contended that the members lacked the appropriate authority as they had not been appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. The Supreme Court rejected this argument, saying that members simply needed to be appointed by the Health and Human Services Secretary – currently, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. – which they had been, under his predecessor during the Biden administration.

    This ruling seemingly safeguards access to preventive care. But as public health researchers who study health insurance and sexual health, we see another concern: It leaves preventive care vulnerable to how Kennedy and future HHS secretaries will choose to exercise their power over the task force and its recommendations.

    What is the US Preventive Services Task Force?

    The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force was initially created in 1984 to develop recommendations about prevention for primary care doctors. It is modeled after the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care, which was established in 1976.

    Under the ACA, insurers must fully cover all screenings and interventions endorsed by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.
    SDI Productions/E+ via Getty Images

    The task force makes new recommendations and updates existing ones by reviewing clinical and policy evidence on a regular basis and weighing the potential benefits and risks of a wide range of health screenings and interventions. These include mammograms; blood pressure, colon cancer, diabetes and osteoporosis screenings; and HIV prevention. Over 150 million Americans have benefited from free coverage of these recommended services under the ACA, and around 60% of privately insured people use at least one of the covered services each year.

    The task force plays such a crucial role in health care because it is one of three federal groups whose recommendations insurers must abide by. Section 2713 of the Affordable Care Act requires insurers to offer full coverage of preventive services endorsed by three federal groups: the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, and the Health Resources and Services Administration. For example, the coronavirus relief bill, which passed in March 2020 and allocated emergency funding in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, used this provision to ensure COVID-19 vaccines would be free for many Americans.

    The Braidwood case and HIV prevention

    This case, originally filed in Texas in 2020, was brought by Braidwood Management, a Christian for-profit corporation owned by Steven Hotze, a Texas physician and Republican activist who has previously filed multiple lawsuits against the ACA. Braidwood and its co-plaintiffs argued on religious grounds against being forced to offer preexposure prophylaxis, or PrEP, a medicine that prevents HIV infection, in their insurance plans.

    At issue in Braidwood was whether task force members – providers and researchers who provide independent and nonpartisan expertise – were appropriately appointed and supervised under the appointments clause of the Constitution, which specifies how various government positions are appointed. The case called into question free coverage of all recommendations made by the task force since the Affordable Care Act was passed in March 2010.

    In the ruling, Kavanaugh wrote that “the Task Force members’ appointments are fully consistent with the Appointments Clause in Article II of the Constitution.” In laying out his reasoning, he wrote, “The Task Force members were appointed by and are supervised and directed by the Secretary of HHS. And the Secretary of HHS, in turn, answers to the President of the United States.”

    Concerns over political influence

    The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force is meant to operate independently of political influence, and its decisions are technically not directly reviewable. However, the task force is appointed by the HHS secretary, who may remove any of its members at any time for any reason, even if such actions are highly unusual.

    Kennedy recently took the unprecedented step of removing all members of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, which debates vaccine safety but also, crucially, helps decide what immunizations are free to Americans guaranteed by the Affordable Care Act. The newly constituted committee, appointed in weeks rather than years, includes several vaccine skeptics and has already moved to rescind some vaccine recommendations, such as routine COVID-19 vaccines for pregnant women and children.

    Kennedy has also proposed restructuring out of existence the agency that supports the task force, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. That agency has been subject to massive layoffs within the Department of Health and Human Services. For full disclosure, one of the authors is currently funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and previously worked there.

    The decision to safeguard the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force as a body and, by extension, free preventive care under the ACA, doesn’t come without risks and highlights the fragility of long-standing, independent advisory systems in the face of the politicization of health. Kennedy could simply remove the existing task force members and replace them with members who may reshape the types of care recommended to Americans by their doctors and insurance plans based on debunked science and misinformation.

    Partisanship and the politicization of health threaten trust in evidence. Already, signs are emerging that Americans on both side of the political divide are losing confidence in government health agencies. This ruling preserves a crucial part of the Affordable Care Act, yet federal health guidelines and access to lifesaving care could still swing dramatically in Kennedy’s hands – or with each subsequent transition of power.

    Portions of this article originally appeared in previous articles published on Sept. 7, 2021; Dec. 1, 2021; Sept. 13, 2022; April 7, 2023; and April 15, 2025.

    Paul Shafer receives research funding from the National Institutes of Health, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and Department of Veterans Affairs. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position or policy of these agencies or the United States government.

    Kristefer Stojanovski receives funding from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position or policy of these agencies or the United States government.

    ref. The Supreme Court upholds free preventive care, but its future now rests in RFK Jr.’s hands – https://theconversation.com/the-supreme-court-upholds-free-preventive-care-but-its-future-now-rests-in-rfk-jr-s-hands-260072

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: The Supreme Court upholds free preventive care, but its future now rests in RFK Jr.’s hands

    Source: The Conversation – USA (3) – By Paul Shafer, Associate Professor of Health Law, Policy and Management, Boston University

    The Affordable Care Act has survived its fourth Supreme Court challenge. Ted Eytan via Wikimedia Commons, CC BY

    On June 26, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down a 6-3 ruling that preserves free preventive care under the Affordable Care Act, a popular benefit that helps approximately 150 million Americans stay healthy.

    The case, Kennedy v. Braidwood, was the fourth major legal challenge to the Affordable Care Act. The decision, written by Justice Brett Kavanaugh with the support of Justices Amy Coney Barrett, Elena Kagan, Ketanji Brown Jackson and Sonia Sotomayor, ruled that insurers must continue to cover at no cost any preventive care approved by a federal panel called the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.

    Members of the task force are independent scientific experts, appointed for four-year terms. The panel’s role had been purely advisory until the ACA, and the plaintiffs contended that the members lacked the appropriate authority as they had not been appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. The Supreme Court rejected this argument, saying that members simply needed to be appointed by the Health and Human Services Secretary – currently, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. – which they had been, under his predecessor during the Biden administration.

    This ruling seemingly safeguards access to preventive care. But as public health researchers who study health insurance and sexual health, we see another concern: It leaves preventive care vulnerable to how Kennedy and future HHS secretaries will choose to exercise their power over the task force and its recommendations.

    What is the US Preventive Services Task Force?

    The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force was initially created in 1984 to develop recommendations about prevention for primary care doctors. It is modeled after the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care, which was established in 1976.

    Under the ACA, insurers must fully cover all screenings and interventions endorsed by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.
    SDI Productions/E+ via Getty Images

    The task force makes new recommendations and updates existing ones by reviewing clinical and policy evidence on a regular basis and weighing the potential benefits and risks of a wide range of health screenings and interventions. These include mammograms; blood pressure, colon cancer, diabetes and osteoporosis screenings; and HIV prevention. Over 150 million Americans have benefited from free coverage of these recommended services under the ACA, and around 60% of privately insured people use at least one of the covered services each year.

    The task force plays such a crucial role in health care because it is one of three federal groups whose recommendations insurers must abide by. Section 2713 of the Affordable Care Act requires insurers to offer full coverage of preventive services endorsed by three federal groups: the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, and the Health Resources and Services Administration. For example, the coronavirus relief bill, which passed in March 2020 and allocated emergency funding in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, used this provision to ensure COVID-19 vaccines would be free for many Americans.

    The Braidwood case and HIV prevention

    This case, originally filed in Texas in 2020, was brought by Braidwood Management, a Christian for-profit corporation owned by Steven Hotze, a Texas physician and Republican activist who has previously filed multiple lawsuits against the ACA. Braidwood and its co-plaintiffs argued on religious grounds against being forced to offer preexposure prophylaxis, or PrEP, a medicine that prevents HIV infection, in their insurance plans.

    At issue in Braidwood was whether task force members – providers and researchers who provide independent and nonpartisan expertise – were appropriately appointed and supervised under the appointments clause of the Constitution, which specifies how various government positions are appointed. The case called into question free coverage of all recommendations made by the task force since the Affordable Care Act was passed in March 2010.

    In the ruling, Kavanaugh wrote that “the Task Force members’ appointments are fully consistent with the Appointments Clause in Article II of the Constitution.” In laying out his reasoning, he wrote, “The Task Force members were appointed by and are supervised and directed by the Secretary of HHS. And the Secretary of HHS, in turn, answers to the President of the United States.”

    Concerns over political influence

    The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force is meant to operate independently of political influence, and its decisions are technically not directly reviewable. However, the task force is appointed by the HHS secretary, who may remove any of its members at any time for any reason, even if such actions are highly unusual.

    Kennedy recently took the unprecedented step of removing all members of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, which debates vaccine safety but also, crucially, helps decide what immunizations are free to Americans guaranteed by the Affordable Care Act. The newly constituted committee, appointed in weeks rather than years, includes several vaccine skeptics and has already moved to rescind some vaccine recommendations, such as routine COVID-19 vaccines for pregnant women and children.

    Kennedy has also proposed restructuring out of existence the agency that supports the task force, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. That agency has been subject to massive layoffs within the Department of Health and Human Services. For full disclosure, one of the authors is currently funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and previously worked there.

    The decision to safeguard the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force as a body and, by extension, free preventive care under the ACA, doesn’t come without risks and highlights the fragility of long-standing, independent advisory systems in the face of the politicization of health. Kennedy could simply remove the existing task force members and replace them with members who may reshape the types of care recommended to Americans by their doctors and insurance plans based on debunked science and misinformation.

    Partisanship and the politicization of health threaten trust in evidence. Already, signs are emerging that Americans on both side of the political divide are losing confidence in government health agencies. This ruling preserves a crucial part of the Affordable Care Act, yet federal health guidelines and access to lifesaving care could still swing dramatically in Kennedy’s hands – or with each subsequent transition of power.

    Portions of this article originally appeared in previous articles published on Sept. 7, 2021; Dec. 1, 2021; Sept. 13, 2022; April 7, 2023; and April 15, 2025.

    Paul Shafer receives research funding from the National Institutes of Health, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and Department of Veterans Affairs. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position or policy of these agencies or the United States government.

    Kristefer Stojanovski receives funding from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position or policy of these agencies or the United States government.

    ref. The Supreme Court upholds free preventive care, but its future now rests in RFK Jr.’s hands – https://theconversation.com/the-supreme-court-upholds-free-preventive-care-but-its-future-now-rests-in-rfk-jr-s-hands-260072

    MIL OSI

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: AFCD to launch dog inoculation campaign against rabies at fishing ports

    Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

    AFCD to launch dog inoculation campaign against rabies at fishing ports 

    Aberdeen     The half-yearly dog inoculation campaign has been held since 1980 with the aim of providing licensing renewal and rabies vaccination services for dogs that are kept by fishermen on board fishing vessels and spend long periods of time there. A fee of $80 will be charged for each dog. To date, over 7 400 vaccinations have been given to dogs on fishing vessels by the AFCD.

    An AFCD spokesman said that the services are part of the Government’s proactive measures to prevent rabies, a fatal disease that is transmitted to humans from animals. Dogs on board vessels that have visited places outside Hong Kong may have come into contact with other animals, making them more susceptible to rabies infection.Issued at HKT 11:00

    NNNN

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News