This piece misses the point entirely. It shows very limited understanding of @WHO, how it in fact operates, and what aspects need reform (there are many!).
Most telling are the repeated assertions that WHO lacks a quick response emergency function. Utterly, demonstrably wrong.
Most telling are the repeated assertions that WHO lacks a quick response emergency function. Utterly, demonstrably wrong.
Article shows zero awareness of the post-Ebola overhaul of the organization, nor of the emergency response capacity that was built as a result of that, nor of the mass deployment of hundreds of WHO staff to Congo to (successfully!) fight Ebola over the past 2yrs.
I wonder how the writer got WHO so badly wrong? 
What's frustrating is that there ARE many aspects of WHO that need reform. I've spent a large chunk of my time for the last 5 years working to advance them - to make the org more responsive, more nimble, more operational. And the current assaults on WHO make all that harder.
A plea: if you want to join the WHO reform bandwagon, welcome! But please do some basic due diligence first. Educate yourself on how the org actually works and what's been done to reform it. Don't just google a few job adverts and write some lazy tropes about conferences.
