$10M in US-funded contraceptives sit in limbo in Europe
The stash is reported to include more than 50,000 intrauterine devices, nearly two million doses of injectable contraceptives, and more than two million packets of oral birth control, and is being kept in the small city of Geel near Antwerp.
The contraceptive products were originally intended for distribution to lower-income countries by the now dismantled United States Agency for International Development (USAID).
Following the dissolution of USAID - whose aim was to improve health, reduce poverty, and promote human rights and democracy in low-income nations - many international projects and partnerships have been abandoned.
The US government's current plan for the contraceptives left in limbo in Geel is to incinerate them—despite their expiration date being between 2027 and 2031.
This isn't the first time the American government has opted for such a drastic solution. After budget cuts, food rations capable of feeding 3.5 million people for a month were reportedly left to rot in warehouses around the world, as documented by Reuters.
The decision to destroy the contraceptive supplies has drawn sharp criticism from civil society groups.
'It's the height of hypocrisy for a government to preach efficiency and cutting waste, only to turn around and recklessly destroy life-saving supplies when the need has never been greater. This isn't just inefficient — it's unconscionable,' said Micah Grzywnowicz, regional director of International Planned Parenthood Federation's European network.
IPPF publicly offered to collect the supplies from Geel, repackage them in its warehouse in the Netherlands, and distribute them to women in need across the globe, 'all at no cost to the US government', according to Grzywnowicz.
Several other organisations, including the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) and the global charity MSI Reproductive Choices, have also expressed willingness to purchase or redistribute the stockpiles. All offers have reportedly been rejected by the Trump administration.
The Belgian government also confirmed to Euronews it is in contact with the US embassy in Brussels.
'The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is exploring all possible avenues to prevent the destruction of these stocks, including their temporary relocation,' a spokesperson told Euronews.
As the supplies are reportedly set to be removed to France for destruction, politicians from the French Green Party, Les Écologistes, have appealed to President Emmanuel Macron to intervene.
'We cannot allow Donald Trump's anti-choice agenda to unfold on our territory. And so today, France must mediate with the Commission,' MEP Mélissa Camara (France/The Greens), one of the signatories of the letter, told Euronews.
She added that the destruction of these contraceptives would endanger women around the world, especially in Africa, the original destination of the supplies.
Camara has also addressed a separate letter to European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and other members of the Commission, including Commissioner Hadja Lahbib, whose portfolio includes sexual and reproductive health and rights.
A spokesperson told Euronews that the European Commission had 'taken note of the letters and acknowledge the concerns raised'.
They added that the EU remains strongly committed to promoting sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR), including family planning, and that investment in SRHR is a key contributor to social and economic development.
'We continue to monitor the situation closely to explore the most effective solutions,' the spokesperson said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Euronews
10 hours ago
- Euronews
How do mineral and chemical sunscreens affect our health?
Mineral sunscreens have gained in popularity in recent years, fueled by claims that they're gentler or safer than their chemical counterparts. But the real differences between the two types of sun protection are more technical than many consumers realise, making it easy to misunderstand what scientists know about their health effects. The differences between these sunscreens mainly come down to their active ingredients and how they block ultraviolet (UV) rays. Chemical sunscreens absorb UV radiation, converting it into heat and releasing it from the skin. Mineral sunscreens, sometimes called physical sunscreens, create a thin barrier that primarily reflects or scatters UV rays away from the skin. Even the terms 'mineral' and 'chemical' can be misleading, though, given all sunscreens use chemicals. Many mineral-based formulas also use other substances, called 'boosters,' to help the active ingredients work better. More accurate descriptors could be 'soluble' sunscreen filters – those that could permeate the skin – and 'insoluble' filters that could not do so, said Christian Surber, a dermatopharmacologist (someone who studies how drugs affect the skin) at the University of Zurich and the University of Basel. 'It's just the mechanism of action [of the filters] that is different,' he told Euronews Health. 'It can be absorption, and it can be scattering'. Euronews Health has chosen to use the terms that consumers are most likely to see when they shop for sunscreens. Sunscreen and health Concerns around how sunscreens affect our health are nothing new, prompting the European Commission Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (SCCS) to assess the safety of three non-mineral UV filters – oxybenzone, homosalate, and octocrylene – in 2021 over concerns that they may have endocrine-disrupting properties. The SCCS determined that homosalate and oxybenzone were not safe at the concentrations commonly used at the time, and that octocrylene was safe at a concentration up to 10 per cent – though it cautioned that the data was inconclusive. One analysis, for example, estimated that a person would have to apply sunscreen daily for 277 years to experience the same hormone-disrupting effects observed in rats that were fed oxybenzone in a lab. Even so, the European Commission issued new restrictions in 2022 to lower the amount of these filters allowed in sunscreens. 'We pretty much don't see them anymore on the market, because producers know that [they may] cause problems or will not be allowed anymore on the European market in a few years,' Laura Clays from Euroconsumers and the Belgian consumer protection group Test-Achats told Euronews Health. Beyond these potential risks, some people with sensitive skin prefer mineral sunscreens, which use ingredients like zinc oxide and titanium dioxide, because they are less likely to cause skin irritation, Clays said. However, when her group ran consumer tests, several mineral-only formulas offered weaker SPF protection than their labels claimed, meaning 'the ones that contain only mineral filters do not protect you enough,' she said. Because the sunscreen does not absorb into the skin, people should make sure they are fully covered. That could be another challenge, according to Clays' tests: people tended to reapply mineral sunscreens less often, partly because they disliked the thin layer of white residue it left on their skin. But when used correctly, both chemical and mineral sunscreens are widely considered safe and effective by dermatologists and health authorities. 'In principle, all sunscreen filters have a safety profile that has been regulatory-wise assessed and deemed safe,' Surber said. Ultimately, skin experts agree: the best sunscreen is the one you will actually use on a regular basis. 'There's really no big difference, health-wise, between the two,' Clays said.
Euronews
12 hours ago
- Euronews
At least 10 people near two aid distribution sites in Gaza
At least 10 people were killed after Israeli forces opened fire near two aid distribution sites where crowds of hungry Palestinians again sought food, witnesses and health workers said Saturday. The violence came a day after US officials visited the Israeli-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation GHF site, and the US ambassador Steve Witkoff described the troubled system as 'an incredible feat.' The latest deaths come nearly a week after Israel, under international pressure amid growing scenes of starving children, announced limited humanitarian pauses and airdrops meant to get more food to Gaza's over 2 million people. They now largely rely on aid after almost 22 months of war. But the United Nations, partners and Palestinians say far too little aid is coming in, with months of supplies piled up outside Gaza waiting for Israeli approval. And although the UN estimates that 500 to 600 trucks of aid are needed daily, the trucks entering are mostly stripped of supplies by desperate people and criminal groups before reaching warehouses for distribution. On Saturday, Gaza's health ministry said seven Palestinians had died of malnutrition-related causes over the past 24 hours, including a child. More deaths near US-supported GHF sites Near the northernmost GHF distribution site near the Netzarim corridor, Yahia Youssef, who had come to seek aid, described a grimly familiar scene. After helping carry three people wounded by gunshots, he said he saw others on the ground, bleeding. 'It's the same daily episode,' Youssef said. Health workers said at least eight people were killed. Israel's military said it fired warning shots at a gathering approaching its forces. At least two people were killed in the Shakoush area, hundreds of meters (yards) from where the GHF operates in the southernmost city of Rafah, witnesses said. Nasser Hospital in Khan Younis received two bodies and many injured. Witness Mohamed Abu Taha said Israeli troops opened fire on the crowds. He saw three people — two men and a woman — shot as he fled. Israel's military said it was not aware of any fire by its forces in the area. The GHF said nothing happened near its sites. GHF says its armed contractors have only used pepper spray or fired warning shots to prevent deadly crowding. On Friday, Israel's military said it was working to make the routes under its control safer. The GHF — backed by millions of dollars in US support — launched in May as Israel sought an alternative to the U.N.-run system, which had safely delivered aid for much of the war but was accused by Israel of allowing Hamas to siphon off supplies. Israel has not provided evidence to support that claim, and the U.N. has denied it. From May 27 to July 31, 859 people were killed near GHF sites, according to a UN report Thursday. Hundreds more have been killed along the routes of UN-led food convoys. Hamas-led police once guarded those convoys, but Israeli fire targeted the officers. Israel and GHF have claimed the toll has been exaggerated. Hostage families push Israel to cut deal Meanwhile, US President Donald Trump's special envoy, Steve Witkoff, met with hostages' families on Saturday, a week after quitting ceasefire talks, blaming Hamas' intransigence. Witkoff accompanied US ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee to the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation's (GHF) assistance delivery station in the southern city of Rafah, one of only three such sites in the blockaded region. According to The Washington Post, Witkoff declared that the country had developed a plan to free all of the remaining hostages. Trump "now believes that everybody should come home at once, no piecemeal deals," Witkoff stated during the discussion, which was captured on tape and broadcast on Israeli television. "He didn't say anything new to me. The father of Israeli hostage Guy Illouz, Michel Illouz, stated, "We didn't hear anything practical, but I heard that the Americans were pressuring us to stop this operation." He claimed to have received "no answers" when he requested Witkoff to establish a deadline. Protesters from families at the plaza known as the hostages' square in Tel Aviv, Israel, on Saturday called on Israel's government to make a deal to end the war, imploring them to 'stop this nightmare and bring them out of the tunnels.' According to Witkoff, US authorities want half of the remaining 20 hostages to be freed on the first day of a cease-fire, with the remaining hostages to follow shortly after. Twenty of the 50 hostages are said to be dead.
LeMonde
2 days ago
- LeMonde
France says it cannot save contraceptives US plans to destroy
France said Friday, August 1, it could not seize women's contraception products estimated to be worth $9.7 million that the United States plans to destroy, after media reported the stockpile would be incinerated in the country. The contraceptives – intended for some of the world's poorest countries, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa – were purchased by the US foreign aid agency USAID under former president Joe Biden. But France's health ministry told Agence France-Presse Friday there was no legal way for it to intervene. The administration of Biden's successor Donald Trump, which has slashed USAID and pursued anti-abortion policies, confirmed last month it planned to destroy the contraceptives, which have been stored in a warehouse in the Belgian city of Geel. According to several media reports, the unexpired products were to be incinerated in France at the end of July by a company that specialises in destroying medical waste. France's government has come under pressure to save the contraceptives, with women's rights groups calling the US decision "insane." The health ministry told AFP that the government had "examined the courses of action available to us, but unfortunately there is no legal basis for intervention by a European health authority, let alone the French national drug safety authority, to recover these medical products. Since contraceptives are not drugs of major therapeutic interest, and in this case we are not facing a supply shortage, we have no means to requisition the stocks." The ministry also said it had no information on where the contraceptives would be destroyed. Leaving Belgian warehouse Sarah Durocher, head of the French women's rights group Family Planning, told AFP that some contraceptives had already left the Belgian warehouse. "We were informed 36 hours ago that the removal of these boxes of contraceptives had begun," Durocher said Thursday. "We do not know where these trucks are now – or whether they have arrived in France," she added. "We call on all incineration companies not to destroy the contraceptives and to oppose this insane decision." French company Veolia confirmed to AFP that it had a contract with the US firm Chemonics, USAID's logistics provider. But Veolia emphasized that the contract concerned "only the management of expired products, which is not the case for the stockpile" in Belgium. The products, mostly long-acting contraceptives such as IUDs and birth control implants, are reportedly up to five years away from expiring. Outrage over decision The US decision has provoked an outcry in France, where rights groups and left-wing politicians have called on their government to stop the plan. "France cannot allow itself to become the stage for such actions. A moratorium is necessary," wrote five NGOs in an op-ed in Le Monde, condemning the "absurdity" of the US decision. Among them was MSI Reproductive Choices, one of several organisations that have offered to purchase and repackage the contraceptives at no cost to the US government. All offers have been rejected. Last week, New Hampshire's Democratic Senator Jeanne Shaheen pointed to the Trump administration's stated goal of reducing government waste, saying the contraceptives plan "is the epitome of waste, fraud and abuse." A US State Department spokesperson told AFP earlier this week that the destruction of the products would cost $167,000 and "no HIV medications or condoms are being destroyed." The spokesperson pointed to a policy that prohibits providing aid to non-governmental organisations that perform or promote abortions. The Mexico City Policy, which critics call the "global gag rule," was first introduced by President Ronald Reagan in 1984. It has been reinstated under every Republican president since. Last month, the US also incinerated nearly 500 metric tons of high-nutrition biscuits that had been meant to keep malnourished children in Afghanistan and Pakistan alive.
