European Journal of Public Health, Vol. 25, No. 3, 547–550 ß The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Public Health Association. All rights reserved. doi:10.1093/eurpub/ckv084
European Public Health News n this main European public health (EPH) news, is a clear call for the public health community to unite (Andriukaitis), combine efforts (McKee, Zeegers Paget) and to work intersectoral (Jakab). We need all of this to make the voice of the public health community visible and loud.
Ithere
Dineke Zeegers Paget EUPHA Executive Director
President’s Column ne of the most important roles of the public
visible. Frequently we find ourselves giving voice to the unheard, the many marginalized and often vulnerable groups whose needs remain unseen by our political leaders. We use our epidemiological skills to detect otherwise invisible associations, shedding light on previously unknown risk factors for disease and detecting patterns in complex data. However, increasingly we find ourselves shedding light on those powerful vested interests that threaten population health. The work of tobacco-control researchers exemplifies this, dredging through thousands of industry documents to reveal behaviour that is almost always immoral and sometimes illegal. More recently, researchers seeking to understand policy on food and alcohol have had to resort to the same tactics to understand how those industries operate, showing that they have frequently adopted the same methods as the tobacco industry. This body of work has led to the increasing use of the term ‘commercial determinants of health’, with its focus on how large corporations frame the prevailing narrative, defining what is considered possible and what is not, capture the regulators and in some cases, write the laws in ways that will advantage them. In recent months, EUPHA has sought to make two of these processes more visible. Attracting little public attention, the European Commission has been promoting a Trade Secrets Directive that would give large corporations an exceptional degree of protection from public scrutiny.1 Along with many other organizations concerned about health, the environment and transparency, we have been making our concerns known to the European Parliament committee scrutinizing this draft legislation. If enacted as currently worded, it risks undoing the so far limited progress that has been made in promoting transparency for medicines evaluation, it would undermine the protection for investigative journalists exposing food safety scandals and would generally make it much more difficult for the public health community to expose wrongdoing. The second area where we have been active relates to international trade. The European Union is currently negotiating a Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, commonly known as the TTIP. The idea behind this measure is that by removing barriers to trade, both Europe and the United States will benefit from economic growth. Unfortunately, many of the so-called non-
Martin McKee EUPHA President
EUPHA office column s was stated by our president, Prof. Martin
A McKee, one of our most important roles is to
make ourselves be heard. We need to voice the public health community and we should not do this alone nor should we limit this within the public health community. Not doing this alone means working together. Not only with our members but also with international partners. As EUPHA, we have a role to unite and strengthen the public health community and we are taking up this role in different manners. First, by showcasing our members’ activities, by encouraging the ‘learning from each other’ possibilities and by supporting members in their efforts to voice public health concerns. The most recent example, as described by our president, is the joining up with the UK Faculty of public health on TTIP. Second, by strengthening the European voice of public health. For instance, we just co-signed the letter of support—together with a large number of other NGOs working in the field of public health—to World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe (WHO Euro) for their initiative to develop a nutrient profile model for the purpose of restricting food marketing to children. The strengthening is also directed at the public health field itself. For instance, our EUPHA sections are working on a unified approach to the variety of health assessments (of status, needs, impact, etc.), which aim to foster sound policy making both within the health arena and beyond. This internal working group is led by Prof. Rainer Fehr, past president of the EUPHA section on health impact assessment, and results are expected by the end of this year. The voice of the public health should also be aimed at intersectoral collaboration, at working with other sectors and with the health sector. EUPHA is also active in this area. For instance, with the theme of the 2016 Vienna EPH Conference ‘Health for All – All for Health’, we aim to actively include other sectors in the programme. In a recent discussion with a representative from the Law enforcement and public health conferences, the need for intersectoral collaboration became very clear. As a public health professional, it may be difficult to see what role law enforcers could play in public health. On the other hand, law enforcers are disappointed that the public health community shows little interest in their activities, which are or can be very often linked to public health. A lot of work still needs to be done. We need to unite, we need to work together, we need to be strong and effective. To achieve this, we need to keep an open mind and continuously look for opportunities to collaborate both within public health and with other sectors.
Dineke Zeegers Paget EUPHA Executive Director
Downloaded from http://eurpub.oxfordjournals.org/ by guest on November 14, 2015
Ohealth community is to make the invisible
tariff barriers to trade are what we would consider essential tools to protect public health. The TTIP is modelled on other regional trade agreements, such as that used by Philip Morris to challenge the decision by the Uruguayan government to implement pictorial warnings on cigarette packs. The most worrying element is the inclusion of an investor state dispute resolution process. Large corporations know that, when they try to challenge in the courts’ decisions, the governments make to protect public health, they usually lose. Consequently, they have designed an alternative mechanism, outside the court system, involving arbitration by trained negotiators and held in secret. In this case, there is no need to take account of public health arguments. Quite simply, the most powerful negotiating team wins. Even when countries do win, they may have to spend many millions of euros that could otherwise be spent on promoting health. The UK Faculty of Public Health has produced an excellent analysis of the health implications of TTIP,2 which EUPHA has endorsed in a letter to the Guardian newspaper signed by the UK Faculty president and myself. I urge you to read the report and ensure that your public health colleagues and political representatives are fully aware of the consequences if this measure is adopted without amendment. As the TTIP shows, effective action on public health increasingly requires global coordination. In recent months, we have been strengthening our links with the World Federation of Public health Associations. I, along with representatives of a number of our member organizations, attended their3 annual conference in Kolkata in India in February. We had a very useful meeting of the European associations who were there, exploring ways in which we can engage more effectively with our partners in other parts of the world. One of the areas that we are exploring is the potential for concerted action on counterfeit drugs. We are also developing links with other international organizations, such as the World Heart Federation, which has asked me to take the lead in organizing a stream on health systems at their 2016 conference in Mexico City. Our Epidemiology Section will also be working with them and the European Society for Hypertension to review the evidence on salt consumption in the light of newly published research. Finally, 2015 has seen two European countries legislate for standardized packaging of cigarettes, with others actively considering it. This is something that we in EUPHA have been campaigning for actively. We may now be at a tipping point, just as we were some years ago with bans on smoking in enclosed public spaces. We have a real opportunity to ensure that this policy spreads across Europe. The evidence from Australia of policies that work is now overwhelming.4 I urge you to do what you can to translate this evidence into legislation in your own countries.
548
European Journal of Public Health
MESSAGE FROM THE WHO REGIONAL DIRECTOR FOR EUROPE
The full-length version of this article is available online.
Intersectoral action is a precondition for achieving our health and well-being goals and is relevant across all countries of the WHO European Region. The strong evidence on the economic, social, environmental, and behavioural determinants of health, as well as our increasing understanding of the political and commercial determinants of health, and the interconnectedness of these factors, gives us both the legitimacy and the mandate to further strengthen how we govern for health with and across sectors. Only such a wholeof-government approach can address today’s growing systemic health challenges and opportunities, as is clearly demonstrated in the European review of social determinants of health and the health divide5 and governance for health
Health is a political choice The social determinants of health are the conditions in which people are born, grow, live, work
and age. The political choice and joint policy decisions for health are therefore relevant and have implications for many sectors. For this reason, we have embarked on a series of related activities to inform the WHO Regional Committee for Europe discussions in Vilnius later this year. The main activities include thematic policy dialogues on health in foreign policy and on lessons from intersectoral policy implementation in priority areas such as education and social policy; the production of a set of policy briefs on intersectoral work to support exploration and dialogue on joint agendas for action with sectors and a regional mapping of the current trends and innovations in intersectoral action in the European Region. Now is the time to transform the evidence into action, strengthening intersectoral governance for health and well-being and implementing the Health 2020 vision.
Zsuzsanna Jakab WHO Regional Director WHO Regional Office for Europe
Downloaded from http://eurpub.oxfordjournals.org/ by guest on November 14, 2015
Promoting intersectoral governance for health and well-being in the WHO European region
studies6–8 that informed Health 2020—the new European policy for health and well-being. Health 2020 promotes intersectoral governance for health, with special emphasis on whole-ofgovernment, whole-of-society and health in all policies approaches. This will be the theme of the 65th session of the WHO Regional Committee for Europe. My team is working to develop an action framework, through which the WHO Regional Office for Europe, with its Member States, can accelerate and support the active engagement of various sectors, across the whole of government and including all levels of government, in working together for health and well-being. Given the strong legacy of intersectoral action in the European Region, this framework will build on existing good practice and is in line with Health 2020 and the evidence and recommendations of the European review of social determinants of health and the health divide and governance for health studies.
European Public Health News
549
THE EBOLA OUTBREAK: 1 YEAR ON
ommissioner Andriukaitis shares his thoughts
Con the response to Ebola outbreak in West
For my part, I think that the EU has a lot to be proud of in the way it organized assistance to the affected countries and the way it prepared for and responded to the cases of Ebola, which arrived in Europe. To protect our citizens, the Commission and EU countries worked hard to mobilize resources, share information and to coordinate preparedness activities. The EU Health Security Committee was instrumental to this exchange of information, as well as ECDC and WHO. An analysis of available capacities in the EU for managing cases of Ebola, such as high security laboratories, specialized hospital units and medical evacuation equipment, was drawn up and shared. Countries which were lacking facilities made arrangements to secure these in other Member States if required. Furthermore, information for travellers in all EU languages was produced, and procedures for people travelling to Europe from affected countries were carefully reviewed to support decisions by EU countries on entry screening and surveillance. Also, an on-line ‘Ebola Communication Platform for Clinicians’ was launched for the rapid exchange of information on the treatment and prevention of Ebola. Though such EU activities certainly contributed to effective handling of Ebola in the EU, we must not rest on our laurels. The next serious crossborder health crisis could be around the corner. It could be of an entirely different nature and with challenges that we have not previously had to deal with. The upcoming lessons learned exercises can therefore help us fill gaps and improve our response in such an eventuality.
Vytenis Andriukaitis EU Commissioner for Health and Food Safety
8TH EPH CONFERENCE—‘HEALTH IN EUROPE—FROM GLOBAL TO LOCAL POLICIES, METHODS AND PRACTICES’
he 8th EPH Conference will be held from 14 to
T17 October at the Milano Congressi (MiCo), Milan, Italy. This year, we have received an absolute record of abstracts and workshops, in total 1277 from over 60 countries. This meant an extra challenging task for our International Scientific Committee (ISC) scoring the abstracts.
The ISC consists of 67 experts from all over Europe. The chair of the ISC 2015 is Professor Walter Ricciardi. The ISC members scored between 80 and 175 abstracts following clear guidelines. We are—as always—highly appreciative of the excellent work of the ISC. Without the good work of the ISC members, the high
scientific quality of the EPH Conference cannot be guaranteed. A decisional meeting early-June will set the programme for Milan 2015, which consists of more than 75 oral sessions, 25 pitch session (short oral communication sessions), poster walks and pre-conferences.
Downloaded from http://eurpub.oxfordjournals.org/ by guest on November 14, 2015
Africa 12 months on March 2015 marked the first anniversary of the Ebola epidemic in West Africa coming to public attention. Since then, the WHO has reported around 25 000 cases and more than 10 000 deaths—including the deaths of nearly 500 health workers from Ebola. In October 2014, when I took up office as European Health Commissioner, the Ebola outbreak was at its peak with over a thousand cases being reported in some weeks. By the end of 2014, the number of new Ebola cases per week had fallen sharply. But so far in 2015, the numbers have fluctuated around 70–150 cases per week. Bringing this figure down to zero will still take a significant effort. The European Union (EU), with its political, diplomatic, humanitarian and financial tools, is part of the solution. We stand shoulder to shoulder with our West African partners to end Ebola and alleviate its impact. The epidemic has touched me deeply. In midNovember, a few weeks into our mandate, Commissioner Stylianides and myself, visited the affected region. We saw great suffering and enormous needs. As a medical doctor, I was shocked by the conditions the healthcare workers had to work in. I was struck by their dedication and ‘can-do’ attitude, despite insufficient resources and the grief and despair all around. This visit was tremendously helpful to me to inform my views on priorities. My first action after my return was to talk to all EU Health Ministers individually, to share my findings and encourage them in their efforts to provide additional staff and resources for the affected countries. At the time of this visit to West Africa, the EU had collectively mobilized more than E 900 million in response to the crisis. Since then, the EU’s total financial contribution (from Member
States and the Commission) to fight the epidemic has been over E1.3 billion. This EU aid has contributed to epidemic surveillance, diagnostics, treatment and medical supplies, deployment of doctors and nurses, training of health workers and awareness raising, e.g. on safe burials, assistance for development and early recovery and research into potential treatments and vaccines. The Commission’s support has gone far beyond funding. We have facilitated the delivery of material support from EU countries and provided expertise for all facets of the emergency. One example is the deployment by the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) of five teams of epidemiologists to Guinea to work closely with the WHO in areas of the country affected by Ebola. Medevac, an EU system supporting the international assistance operation is another example. It has ensured medical evacuation to an appropriately equipped hospital in Europe for international healthcare workers of any nationality who have experienced a high risk exposure or who are suffering from Ebola. So far, 13 people with confirmed Ebola have been medically evacuated to Europe for treatment including six nationals from third countries. At the 1-year mark of the most serious Ebola outbreak in history, it is natural to ask ourselves what we could have done better and to try to identify the lessons learned. Such a reflection is important for the EU, as Ebola has given us the opportunity to take stock of how well we are prepared to face serious cross-border health threats and can help us improve our response to such threats in future. Lessons are being drawn and discussed by the main actors: the WHO at the World Health Assembly in May and the Commission and the Luxembourgish Presidency in October at a conference at European level.
550
European Journal of Public Health
The plenary programme now stands as well with renowned speakers including Sir Andy Haines, Ilona Kickbusch, Mengistu Asnake, Tim Lang, Suzanne Havale Hobbs and others. The full programme will be available soon on the conference website at www.ephconference.eu.
Floris Barnhoorn Deputy Director, EPH Conference Office
References 1
McKee M, Labonte R. European Commission proposals on trade secrets risk undermining public health. BMJ 2015;350:h1369.
2
Available at: http://www.fph.org.uk/ttip_‘threat_to_people’s_health_in_uk_and_across_europe’.
3
O’Donnell M, Mente A, Rangarajan S, et al. Urinary sodium and potassium excretion, mortality, and cardiovascular events. N Engl J Med 2014;371:612–23.
4
McKee M, Daube M. Europe’s governments must implement standardised tobacco packaging now. Eur J Publ Health (in press).
5
Review of Social Determinants and the Health Divide in the WHO European Region: Final Report. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe, 2012.
6
Kickbusch I, Behrendt T. Implementing a Health 2020 Vision: Governance for Health in the 21st Century. Making it Happen. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe, 2013.
7
Kickbusch I, Gleicher D. Governance for Health in the 21st Century. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe, 2012.
8
McQueen DV, Wismar M, Lin V, et al. (editors) Intersectoral Governance for Health in All Policies: Structures, Actions and Experiences. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe, on behalf of the European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies, 2012.
Downloaded from http://eurpub.oxfordjournals.org/ by guest on November 14, 2015
European Public Health News n this main European public health (EPH) news, is a clear call for the public health community to unite (Andriukaitis), combine efforts (McKee, Zeegers Paget) and to work intersectoral (Jakab). We need all of this to make the voice of the public health community visible and loud.
Ithere
Dineke Zeegers Paget EUPHA Executive Director
President’s Column ne of the most important roles of the public
visible. Frequently we find ourselves giving voice to the unheard, the many marginalized and often vulnerable groups whose needs remain unseen by our political leaders. We use our epidemiological skills to detect otherwise invisible associations, shedding light on previously unknown risk factors for disease and detecting patterns in complex data. However, increasingly we find ourselves shedding light on those powerful vested interests that threaten population health. The work of tobacco-control researchers exemplifies this, dredging through thousands of industry documents to reveal behaviour that is almost always immoral and sometimes illegal. More recently, researchers seeking to understand policy on food and alcohol have had to resort to the same tactics to understand how those industries operate, showing that they have frequently adopted the same methods as the tobacco industry. This body of work has led to the increasing use of the term ‘commercial determinants of health’, with its focus on how large corporations frame the prevailing narrative, defining what is considered possible and what is not, capture the regulators and in some cases, write the laws in ways that will advantage them. In recent months, EUPHA has sought to make two of these processes more visible. Attracting little public attention, the European Commission has been promoting a Trade Secrets Directive that would give large corporations an exceptional degree of protection from public scrutiny.1 Along with many other organizations concerned about health, the environment and transparency, we have been making our concerns known to the European Parliament committee scrutinizing this draft legislation. If enacted as currently worded, it risks undoing the so far limited progress that has been made in promoting transparency for medicines evaluation, it would undermine the protection for investigative journalists exposing food safety scandals and would generally make it much more difficult for the public health community to expose wrongdoing. The second area where we have been active relates to international trade. The European Union is currently negotiating a Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, commonly known as the TTIP. The idea behind this measure is that by removing barriers to trade, both Europe and the United States will benefit from economic growth. Unfortunately, many of the so-called non-
Martin McKee EUPHA President
EUPHA office column s was stated by our president, Prof. Martin
A McKee, one of our most important roles is to
make ourselves be heard. We need to voice the public health community and we should not do this alone nor should we limit this within the public health community. Not doing this alone means working together. Not only with our members but also with international partners. As EUPHA, we have a role to unite and strengthen the public health community and we are taking up this role in different manners. First, by showcasing our members’ activities, by encouraging the ‘learning from each other’ possibilities and by supporting members in their efforts to voice public health concerns. The most recent example, as described by our president, is the joining up with the UK Faculty of public health on TTIP. Second, by strengthening the European voice of public health. For instance, we just co-signed the letter of support—together with a large number of other NGOs working in the field of public health—to World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe (WHO Euro) for their initiative to develop a nutrient profile model for the purpose of restricting food marketing to children. The strengthening is also directed at the public health field itself. For instance, our EUPHA sections are working on a unified approach to the variety of health assessments (of status, needs, impact, etc.), which aim to foster sound policy making both within the health arena and beyond. This internal working group is led by Prof. Rainer Fehr, past president of the EUPHA section on health impact assessment, and results are expected by the end of this year. The voice of the public health should also be aimed at intersectoral collaboration, at working with other sectors and with the health sector. EUPHA is also active in this area. For instance, with the theme of the 2016 Vienna EPH Conference ‘Health for All – All for Health’, we aim to actively include other sectors in the programme. In a recent discussion with a representative from the Law enforcement and public health conferences, the need for intersectoral collaboration became very clear. As a public health professional, it may be difficult to see what role law enforcers could play in public health. On the other hand, law enforcers are disappointed that the public health community shows little interest in their activities, which are or can be very often linked to public health. A lot of work still needs to be done. We need to unite, we need to work together, we need to be strong and effective. To achieve this, we need to keep an open mind and continuously look for opportunities to collaborate both within public health and with other sectors.
Dineke Zeegers Paget EUPHA Executive Director
Downloaded from http://eurpub.oxfordjournals.org/ by guest on November 14, 2015
Ohealth community is to make the invisible
tariff barriers to trade are what we would consider essential tools to protect public health. The TTIP is modelled on other regional trade agreements, such as that used by Philip Morris to challenge the decision by the Uruguayan government to implement pictorial warnings on cigarette packs. The most worrying element is the inclusion of an investor state dispute resolution process. Large corporations know that, when they try to challenge in the courts’ decisions, the governments make to protect public health, they usually lose. Consequently, they have designed an alternative mechanism, outside the court system, involving arbitration by trained negotiators and held in secret. In this case, there is no need to take account of public health arguments. Quite simply, the most powerful negotiating team wins. Even when countries do win, they may have to spend many millions of euros that could otherwise be spent on promoting health. The UK Faculty of Public Health has produced an excellent analysis of the health implications of TTIP,2 which EUPHA has endorsed in a letter to the Guardian newspaper signed by the UK Faculty president and myself. I urge you to read the report and ensure that your public health colleagues and political representatives are fully aware of the consequences if this measure is adopted without amendment. As the TTIP shows, effective action on public health increasingly requires global coordination. In recent months, we have been strengthening our links with the World Federation of Public health Associations. I, along with representatives of a number of our member organizations, attended their3 annual conference in Kolkata in India in February. We had a very useful meeting of the European associations who were there, exploring ways in which we can engage more effectively with our partners in other parts of the world. One of the areas that we are exploring is the potential for concerted action on counterfeit drugs. We are also developing links with other international organizations, such as the World Heart Federation, which has asked me to take the lead in organizing a stream on health systems at their 2016 conference in Mexico City. Our Epidemiology Section will also be working with them and the European Society for Hypertension to review the evidence on salt consumption in the light of newly published research. Finally, 2015 has seen two European countries legislate for standardized packaging of cigarettes, with others actively considering it. This is something that we in EUPHA have been campaigning for actively. We may now be at a tipping point, just as we were some years ago with bans on smoking in enclosed public spaces. We have a real opportunity to ensure that this policy spreads across Europe. The evidence from Australia of policies that work is now overwhelming.4 I urge you to do what you can to translate this evidence into legislation in your own countries.
548
European Journal of Public Health
MESSAGE FROM THE WHO REGIONAL DIRECTOR FOR EUROPE
The full-length version of this article is available online.
Intersectoral action is a precondition for achieving our health and well-being goals and is relevant across all countries of the WHO European Region. The strong evidence on the economic, social, environmental, and behavioural determinants of health, as well as our increasing understanding of the political and commercial determinants of health, and the interconnectedness of these factors, gives us both the legitimacy and the mandate to further strengthen how we govern for health with and across sectors. Only such a wholeof-government approach can address today’s growing systemic health challenges and opportunities, as is clearly demonstrated in the European review of social determinants of health and the health divide5 and governance for health
Health is a political choice The social determinants of health are the conditions in which people are born, grow, live, work
and age. The political choice and joint policy decisions for health are therefore relevant and have implications for many sectors. For this reason, we have embarked on a series of related activities to inform the WHO Regional Committee for Europe discussions in Vilnius later this year. The main activities include thematic policy dialogues on health in foreign policy and on lessons from intersectoral policy implementation in priority areas such as education and social policy; the production of a set of policy briefs on intersectoral work to support exploration and dialogue on joint agendas for action with sectors and a regional mapping of the current trends and innovations in intersectoral action in the European Region. Now is the time to transform the evidence into action, strengthening intersectoral governance for health and well-being and implementing the Health 2020 vision.
Zsuzsanna Jakab WHO Regional Director WHO Regional Office for Europe
Downloaded from http://eurpub.oxfordjournals.org/ by guest on November 14, 2015
Promoting intersectoral governance for health and well-being in the WHO European region
studies6–8 that informed Health 2020—the new European policy for health and well-being. Health 2020 promotes intersectoral governance for health, with special emphasis on whole-ofgovernment, whole-of-society and health in all policies approaches. This will be the theme of the 65th session of the WHO Regional Committee for Europe. My team is working to develop an action framework, through which the WHO Regional Office for Europe, with its Member States, can accelerate and support the active engagement of various sectors, across the whole of government and including all levels of government, in working together for health and well-being. Given the strong legacy of intersectoral action in the European Region, this framework will build on existing good practice and is in line with Health 2020 and the evidence and recommendations of the European review of social determinants of health and the health divide and governance for health studies.
European Public Health News
549
THE EBOLA OUTBREAK: 1 YEAR ON
ommissioner Andriukaitis shares his thoughts
Con the response to Ebola outbreak in West
For my part, I think that the EU has a lot to be proud of in the way it organized assistance to the affected countries and the way it prepared for and responded to the cases of Ebola, which arrived in Europe. To protect our citizens, the Commission and EU countries worked hard to mobilize resources, share information and to coordinate preparedness activities. The EU Health Security Committee was instrumental to this exchange of information, as well as ECDC and WHO. An analysis of available capacities in the EU for managing cases of Ebola, such as high security laboratories, specialized hospital units and medical evacuation equipment, was drawn up and shared. Countries which were lacking facilities made arrangements to secure these in other Member States if required. Furthermore, information for travellers in all EU languages was produced, and procedures for people travelling to Europe from affected countries were carefully reviewed to support decisions by EU countries on entry screening and surveillance. Also, an on-line ‘Ebola Communication Platform for Clinicians’ was launched for the rapid exchange of information on the treatment and prevention of Ebola. Though such EU activities certainly contributed to effective handling of Ebola in the EU, we must not rest on our laurels. The next serious crossborder health crisis could be around the corner. It could be of an entirely different nature and with challenges that we have not previously had to deal with. The upcoming lessons learned exercises can therefore help us fill gaps and improve our response in such an eventuality.
Vytenis Andriukaitis EU Commissioner for Health and Food Safety
8TH EPH CONFERENCE—‘HEALTH IN EUROPE—FROM GLOBAL TO LOCAL POLICIES, METHODS AND PRACTICES’
he 8th EPH Conference will be held from 14 to
T17 October at the Milano Congressi (MiCo), Milan, Italy. This year, we have received an absolute record of abstracts and workshops, in total 1277 from over 60 countries. This meant an extra challenging task for our International Scientific Committee (ISC) scoring the abstracts.
The ISC consists of 67 experts from all over Europe. The chair of the ISC 2015 is Professor Walter Ricciardi. The ISC members scored between 80 and 175 abstracts following clear guidelines. We are—as always—highly appreciative of the excellent work of the ISC. Without the good work of the ISC members, the high
scientific quality of the EPH Conference cannot be guaranteed. A decisional meeting early-June will set the programme for Milan 2015, which consists of more than 75 oral sessions, 25 pitch session (short oral communication sessions), poster walks and pre-conferences.
Downloaded from http://eurpub.oxfordjournals.org/ by guest on November 14, 2015
Africa 12 months on March 2015 marked the first anniversary of the Ebola epidemic in West Africa coming to public attention. Since then, the WHO has reported around 25 000 cases and more than 10 000 deaths—including the deaths of nearly 500 health workers from Ebola. In October 2014, when I took up office as European Health Commissioner, the Ebola outbreak was at its peak with over a thousand cases being reported in some weeks. By the end of 2014, the number of new Ebola cases per week had fallen sharply. But so far in 2015, the numbers have fluctuated around 70–150 cases per week. Bringing this figure down to zero will still take a significant effort. The European Union (EU), with its political, diplomatic, humanitarian and financial tools, is part of the solution. We stand shoulder to shoulder with our West African partners to end Ebola and alleviate its impact. The epidemic has touched me deeply. In midNovember, a few weeks into our mandate, Commissioner Stylianides and myself, visited the affected region. We saw great suffering and enormous needs. As a medical doctor, I was shocked by the conditions the healthcare workers had to work in. I was struck by their dedication and ‘can-do’ attitude, despite insufficient resources and the grief and despair all around. This visit was tremendously helpful to me to inform my views on priorities. My first action after my return was to talk to all EU Health Ministers individually, to share my findings and encourage them in their efforts to provide additional staff and resources for the affected countries. At the time of this visit to West Africa, the EU had collectively mobilized more than E 900 million in response to the crisis. Since then, the EU’s total financial contribution (from Member
States and the Commission) to fight the epidemic has been over E1.3 billion. This EU aid has contributed to epidemic surveillance, diagnostics, treatment and medical supplies, deployment of doctors and nurses, training of health workers and awareness raising, e.g. on safe burials, assistance for development and early recovery and research into potential treatments and vaccines. The Commission’s support has gone far beyond funding. We have facilitated the delivery of material support from EU countries and provided expertise for all facets of the emergency. One example is the deployment by the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) of five teams of epidemiologists to Guinea to work closely with the WHO in areas of the country affected by Ebola. Medevac, an EU system supporting the international assistance operation is another example. It has ensured medical evacuation to an appropriately equipped hospital in Europe for international healthcare workers of any nationality who have experienced a high risk exposure or who are suffering from Ebola. So far, 13 people with confirmed Ebola have been medically evacuated to Europe for treatment including six nationals from third countries. At the 1-year mark of the most serious Ebola outbreak in history, it is natural to ask ourselves what we could have done better and to try to identify the lessons learned. Such a reflection is important for the EU, as Ebola has given us the opportunity to take stock of how well we are prepared to face serious cross-border health threats and can help us improve our response to such threats in future. Lessons are being drawn and discussed by the main actors: the WHO at the World Health Assembly in May and the Commission and the Luxembourgish Presidency in October at a conference at European level.
550
European Journal of Public Health
The plenary programme now stands as well with renowned speakers including Sir Andy Haines, Ilona Kickbusch, Mengistu Asnake, Tim Lang, Suzanne Havale Hobbs and others. The full programme will be available soon on the conference website at www.ephconference.eu.
Floris Barnhoorn Deputy Director, EPH Conference Office
References 1
McKee M, Labonte R. European Commission proposals on trade secrets risk undermining public health. BMJ 2015;350:h1369.
2
Available at: http://www.fph.org.uk/ttip_‘threat_to_people’s_health_in_uk_and_across_europe’.
3
O’Donnell M, Mente A, Rangarajan S, et al. Urinary sodium and potassium excretion, mortality, and cardiovascular events. N Engl J Med 2014;371:612–23.
4
McKee M, Daube M. Europe’s governments must implement standardised tobacco packaging now. Eur J Publ Health (in press).
5
Review of Social Determinants and the Health Divide in the WHO European Region: Final Report. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe, 2012.
6
Kickbusch I, Behrendt T. Implementing a Health 2020 Vision: Governance for Health in the 21st Century. Making it Happen. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe, 2013.
7
Kickbusch I, Gleicher D. Governance for Health in the 21st Century. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe, 2012.
8
McQueen DV, Wismar M, Lin V, et al. (editors) Intersectoral Governance for Health in All Policies: Structures, Actions and Experiences. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe, on behalf of the European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies, 2012.
Downloaded from http://eurpub.oxfordjournals.org/ by guest on November 14, 2015
