Over 14 Million People Could Die From US Foreign Aid Cuts: Study
The study in the prestigious Lancet journal was published as world and business leaders gather for a UN conference in Spain this week hoping to bolster the reeling aid sector.
The US Agency for International Development (USAID) had provided over 40 percent of global humanitarian funding until Donald Trump returned to the White House in January.
Two weeks later, Trump's then-close advisor -- and world's richest man -- Elon Musk boasted of having put the agency "through the woodchipper".
The funding cuts "risk abruptly halting -- and even reversing -- two decades of progress in health among vulnerable populations," warned study co-author Davide Rasella, a researcher at the Barcelona Institute for Global Health (ISGlobal).
"For many low- and middle-income countries, the resulting shock would be comparable in scale to a global pandemic or a major armed conflict," he said in a statement.
Looking back over data from 133 nations, the international team of researchers estimated that USAID funding had prevented 91 million deaths in developing countries between 2001 and 2021.
They also used modelling to project how funding being slashed by 83 percent -- the figure announced by the US government earlier this year -- could affect death rates.
The cuts could lead to more than 14 million avoidable deaths by 2030, the projections found. That number included over 4.5 million children under the age of five -- or around 700,000 child deaths a year.
For comparison, around 10 million soldiers are estimated to have been killed during World War I.
Programmes supported by USAID were linked to a 15-percent decrease in deaths from all causes, the researchers found. For children under five, the drop in deaths was twice as steep at 32 percent.
USAID funding was found to be particularly effective at staving off preventable deaths from disease.
There were 65 percent fewer deaths from HIV/AIDS in countries receiving a high level of support compared to those with little or no USAID funding, the study found. Deaths from malaria and neglected tropical diseases were similarly cut in half.
After USAID was gutted, several other major donors including Germany, the UK and France followed suit in announcing plans to slash their foreign aid budgets.
These aid reductions, particularly in the European Union, could lead to "even more additional deaths in the coming years," study co-author Caterina Monti of ISGlobal said.
But the grim projections for deaths were based on the current amount of pledged aid, so could rapidly come down if the situation changes, the researchers emphasised.
Dozens of world leaders are meeting in the Spanish city of Seville this week for the biggest aid conference in a decade. The US, however, will not attend.
"Now is the time to scale up, not scale back," Rasella said.
Before its funding was slashed, USAID represented 0.3 percent of all US federal spending.
"I think most people would support continued USAID funding if they knew just how effective such a small contribution can be to saving millions of lives." UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has urged the world to 'rev up the engine of development' AFP HIV patients wait for medication in Haiti, where hospitals fear the impact of the USAID funding cuts AFP Before its funding was slashed, USAID represented 0.3 percent of all US federal spending AFP
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Int'l Business Times
2 days ago
- Int'l Business Times
Rural Nebraska Hospital Shuts Down Over 'Anticipated Cuts to Medicaid' Hours Before 'Big, Beautiful Bill' Passes
A small town clinic in southwest Nebraska will close its doors after more than three decades, citing financial strain and looming federal cuts to Medicaid. Community Hospital in McCook announced Wednesday that it will be shutting down the Curtis Medical Center in Curtis — a community of roughly 900 residents. The announcement, reported by KLKN-TV, came just before Congress passed President Donald Trump's sweeping "Big Beautiful Bill" on Thursday. "Unfortunately, the current financial environment, driven by anticipated federal budget cuts to Medicaid, has made it impossible for us to continue operating all of our services, many of which have faced significant financial challenges for years," Community Hospital CEO Troy Bruntz said in a statement obtained by the outlet. The clinic, whose motto is, "Advanced care. Always there," will phase out operations over the coming months. Vince McMahon, the chairman of WWE, is willing to spend big to ensure top stars do not leave for rival companies. In this picture, McMahon attends a press conference to announce that WWE Wrestlemania 29 will be held at MetLife Stadium in 2013 at MetLife Stadium in East Rutherford, New Jersey, Feb. 16, 2012. Michael N. Todaro/Getty Images Despite representing Vermont, Sen. Bernie Sanders spoke out about the hospital's closure, warning that it will likely be "the first of many" due to the estimated Medicaid cuts included in the tax and spending bill. "While Republicans celebrate the passage of the largest Medicaid cut in history, the Curtis Medical Center in Nebraska announced it will shut down as a result of these horrific cuts — the first of many hospitals to close," Sanders said. "This is a dark day for rural America and for our country," he continued. The Nebraska Hospital Association and other rural health advocates have sounded alarms about the bill's potential impact, warning it could force more clinics and hospitals in underserved areas to cut services or close. Originally published on Latin Times
Int'l Business Times
3 days ago
- Int'l Business Times
Democrats Publicly Shame Republicans by Name Whose Voters Would Lose Healthcare Under Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill'
Democratic lawmakers began naming Republican legislators who voted in favor of the Trump-backed "one big, beautiful" tax and spending bill, shaming particularly the ones whose constituents would lose healthcare as a result of the legislation. House Minority Leader Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) and House Minority Whip Rep. Katherine Clark (D-MA) listed the names of Republican representatives in swing districts who they claimed effectively voted for their constituents to lose access to healthcare and other types of assistance during a press conference held by House Democratic Leaders Wednesday morning. "Why would anyone vote for this dangerous and extreme bill? Why would Rob Bresnahan vote for this bill? More than 30,000 people would lose access to their healthcare in his community in Pennsylvania. Almost 60,000 households could lose access to food assistance in his community. At the risk of going hungry, why would Rob Bresnahan vote for this bill?" Jeffries questioned. "Why would Scott Perry vote for this bill? Almost 25,000 people in his community would lose access to healthcare. In his community in Pennsylvania, almost 40,000 households would lose access to nutritional assistance. They're at risk of going hungry. Why would Scott Perry vote for this bill?" he continued. "You see? The difference between them and us, they work for the special interests, for the rich and the shameless, for the wealthy, the well-off and the well-connected. House Democrats work for the people," he added. Clark also took to the podium to continue Jeffries' shaming, calling out other Republican legislators that voted in favor of the bill. "Why would David Valadao vote for this bill? Over 65,000 people in his [California] district will lose access to healthcare if this passes. 60,000 households will lose access to their food assistance, and over 3,600 energy jobs will be lost," she said. "Why would Young Kim in California's 40th district vote for this bill either? Over 31,000 people in her communities will lose their healthcare, and 15,000 households could lose access to food assistance. Why indeed," she continued. "Well we've been told exactly where we stand. The vice president said these cuts are 'immaterial.' Mitch McConnell said people will get over it. Joni Ernst reminded us we're all going to die anyway. So at a time when most households are struggling to afford the basics, Republicans have a clear message for American families. You don't matter," she added. The spending bill ended in a tie Tuesday, leading Vice President JD Vance gave the tie-breaking vote, allowing the Senate to pass the bill with razor thin margins. The bill now heads back to the House where lawmakers will review the changes made by the Senate. Originally published on Latin Times
Int'l Business Times
5 days ago
- Int'l Business Times
Over 14 Million People Could Die From US Foreign Aid Cuts: Study
More than 14 million of the world's most vulnerable people, a third of them small children, could die because of the Trump administration's dismantling of US foreign aid, research projected on Tuesday. The study in the prestigious Lancet journal was published as world and business leaders gather for a UN conference in Spain this week hoping to bolster the reeling aid sector. The US Agency for International Development (USAID) had provided over 40 percent of global humanitarian funding until Donald Trump returned to the White House in January. Two weeks later, Trump's then-close advisor -- and world's richest man -- Elon Musk boasted of having put the agency "through the woodchipper". The funding cuts "risk abruptly halting -- and even reversing -- two decades of progress in health among vulnerable populations," warned study co-author Davide Rasella, a researcher at the Barcelona Institute for Global Health (ISGlobal). "For many low- and middle-income countries, the resulting shock would be comparable in scale to a global pandemic or a major armed conflict," he said in a statement. Looking back over data from 133 nations, the international team of researchers estimated that USAID funding had prevented 91 million deaths in developing countries between 2001 and 2021. They also used modelling to project how funding being slashed by 83 percent -- the figure announced by the US government earlier this year -- could affect death rates. The cuts could lead to more than 14 million avoidable deaths by 2030, the projections found. That number included over 4.5 million children under the age of five -- or around 700,000 child deaths a year. For comparison, around 10 million soldiers are estimated to have been killed during World War I. Programmes supported by USAID were linked to a 15-percent decrease in deaths from all causes, the researchers found. For children under five, the drop in deaths was twice as steep at 32 percent. USAID funding was found to be particularly effective at staving off preventable deaths from disease. There were 65 percent fewer deaths from HIV/AIDS in countries receiving a high level of support compared to those with little or no USAID funding, the study found. Deaths from malaria and neglected tropical diseases were similarly cut in half. After USAID was gutted, several other major donors including Germany, the UK and France followed suit in announcing plans to slash their foreign aid budgets. These aid reductions, particularly in the European Union, could lead to "even more additional deaths in the coming years," study co-author Caterina Monti of ISGlobal said. But the grim projections for deaths were based on the current amount of pledged aid, so could rapidly come down if the situation changes, the researchers emphasised. Dozens of world leaders are meeting in the Spanish city of Seville this week for the biggest aid conference in a decade. The US, however, will not attend. "Now is the time to scale up, not scale back," Rasella said. Before its funding was slashed, USAID represented 0.3 percent of all US federal spending. "I think most people would support continued USAID funding if they knew just how effective such a small contribution can be to saving millions of lives." UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has urged the world to 'rev up the engine of development' AFP HIV patients wait for medication in Haiti, where hospitals fear the impact of the USAID funding cuts AFP Before its funding was slashed, USAID represented 0.3 percent of all US federal spending AFP
