On January 20, 2025, President Donald Trump signed an executive order to withdraw from the World Health Organization (WHO). While this announcement was not a surprise, it was shocking to much of the public health community. This executive order is the president’s second attempt to pull the U.S. out of the organization, as his first plan was reversed by former President Joe Biden.
The WHO is an organization shaped by its members — 194 countries set health priorities and make agreements about how critical data, treatments, and vaccines should be shared during international emergencies. The agency, which is part of the United Nations, was founded in 1948 and is the cornerstone of health efforts, with a multinational staff that works against communicable and chronic diseases.
In the official executive order, it was cited that the U.S. had already begun to notice a withdrawal from the WHO in 2020 due to the organization’s mishandling of COVID-19, its failure to adopt urgent measures, its inability to demonstrate independence from inappropriate political influence, and for unfair demands of payments from the U.S.
For decades, the United States has been one of the most influential players in global health policy, shaping WHO initiatives and funding critical programs. The U.S. is one of the WHO’s largest financial contributors, having provided $1.1 billion in 2022 and 2024 combined, accounting for roughly one-fifth of the WHO’s budget. The decision to withdraw raises serious concerns about how global health initiatives will be funded and implemented, particularly in low-income countries that rely on WHO programs for disease control, vaccinations, and emergency response.
Additionally, the withdrawal could isolate the U.S. from key health collaborations, affecting federal agencies such as the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). These agencies have historically worked closely with the WHO to set global health standards, share research, and combat infectious diseases. Without these partnerships, the U.S. may lose access to critical international data on emerging health threats, slowing responses to pandemics and public health crises.
Beyond public health policy, the U.S.’s exit from the WHO could severely impact scientific research and innovation. The WHO facilitates global clinical trials, coordinates vaccine development, and provides funding for disease surveillance programs. U.S. scientists, public health officials, and medical researchers rely on WHO databases, guidelines, and research networks to track outbreaks, study emerging diseases, and develop new treatments. For example, many U.S.-based researchers participate in WHO-led clinical trials for diseases like malaria, tuberculosis, and HIV/AIDS. Without WHO partnerships, U.S. scientists may face funding challenges and delays in accessing new treatments. The U.S. has historically shaped international health regulations and influenced WHO priorities. Without a seat at the table, the U.S. will have less say in how global health crises are managed, potentially leading to weaker global disease preparedness.
Lawrence Gostin, an expert in national and global health law at Georgetown University, notes that things are still up in the air, as Congress could block the withdrawal of the U.S. or that the Trump administration could use the threat of departure as a way to force significant reform in the WHO. He states, “If he does a deal to make the WHO more resilient, robust, and accountable, he would be doing the U.S. a favor and the world a favor.” Remaining a member would enable Trump to push for a candidate he likes as successor to Tedros, whose term ends in 2027. If Trump goes through with the plan to withdraw, Gostin says, “it would be catastrophic for U.S. national interests and security.”
The coming months will determine the fate of global health and whether the U.S. chooses to be a part of the conversation. Either way, experts agree that the decision will have a lasting impact on research, policy, and global cooperation.
