{"id":26803,"date":"2025-09-29T10:34:56","date_gmt":"2025-09-29T10:34:56","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/clearingtheair.eu\/?p=26803"},"modified":"2025-09-29T10:35:01","modified_gmt":"2025-09-29T10:35:01","slug":"dark-money-at-who-raises-fresh-concerns-for-vaping-policy","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/clearingtheair.eu\/en\/post\/dark-money-at-who-raises-fresh-concerns-for-vaping-policy\/","title":{"rendered":"Dark money at WHO raises fresh concerns for vaping policy"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"<\/a><\/div>\n

The World Health Organisation (WHO) is facing renewed scrutiny after a new report revealed its foundation has taken tens of millions in undisclosed corporate donations.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Experts say the rise of \u201cdark money\u201d raises questions about conflicts of interest – and what this could mean for areas of policy such as tobacco harm reduction and vaping.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

New report highlights surge in undisclosed donations<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

The study<\/a> by the University of Edinburgh found that the WHO Foundation, established in 2020 to raise funds for the UN health agency, had accepted about $83m (\u20ac70.75m) in donations by the end of 2023.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Around 60 per cent of that total came from donors whose identities were concealed. By 2023, 80 per cent of the foundation\u2019s funding came from anonymous contributions of at least $100,000 (\u20ac85,000), up from 15 per cent in its first year.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The foundation lists broad \u201cearmarks\u201d for donations such as \u201cCovid,\u201d but the largest earmark is for \u201coperational costs,\u201d which critics describe as vague.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Transparency concerns at WHO<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Observers warn the lack of transparency risks undermining WHO\u2019s credibility. \u201cThe most troubling part of the problem is that the capacity of WHO to do its jobs depends on having the trust of people and public health community, and if they are not disclosing where their money is coming from, then they\u2019re risking their biggest asset,\u201d said Nick Freudenberg, a professor at City University of New York and WHO adviser, in comments to The Guardian.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The WHO is primarily funded by member states and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and the WHO Foundation itself provides about 0.4 per cent of WHO\u2019s total budget. Even so, researchers say the rise in undisclosed contributions exposes the agency to reputational risks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The WHO has stressed it does not accept money from tobacco or firearms companies. But the report noted that it may take donations from industries linked to public health crises, such as ultra-processed food, alcohol, chemicals or fossil fuels. Those industries, the authors said, have used donations to reframe health harms and bolster lobbying against regulation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Implications for harm reduction and vaping<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

For the vaping and harm reduction sector, the findings deepen concerns that WHO policymaking could be disproportionately shaped by corporate donors with other interests. The WHO has long opposed vapes and nicotine alternatives, despite growing evidence they can help smokers quit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cThe important questions are: what influence do the dark-money donors have at the WHO? And what is the foundation trying to hide?\u201d said Gary Ruskin, director of the transparency group US Right To Know. \u201cAre the donors trying to influence the WHO? It wouldn\u2019t be surprising.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Not everyone believes the WHO\u2019s stance on vaping is shaped by undisclosed donations. Some observers argue it is more likely influenced by major philanthropic funders who openly oppose tobacco harm reduction, such as Bloomberg Philanthropies and, to a lesser degree, the Gates Foundation. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Both have provided significant support to anti-vaping initiatives, making their role more transparent – and, some argue, more consequential – than that of hidden donors.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Donors raise conflict questions<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Among companies whose donations have been disclosed are Sanofi, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novo Nordisk, TikTok, Maybelline and Meta. Critics point to conflicts, such as Meta funding WHO communications despite widespread concern about social media\u2019s impact on youth mental health.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

WHO under pressure after US funding withdrawal<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

The revelations come after the United States stopped funding the WHO, leaving the agency more reliant on corporate contributions. While the WHO Foundation insists all donors are vetted and that money is pooled before transfer, critics say the lack of transparency leaves the door open to undue influence.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

WHO Foundation chief executive Anil Soni has previously defended the system, saying all donors are known to the organisation, contributions undergo due diligence, and money only funds WHO programmes approved by member states. He added that some donors prefer anonymity to avoid being targeted for their wealth.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Vaping advocates wary of policy direction<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Vaping advocates fear that if the WHO is swayed by corporate donors from competing industries, its already hard line on tobacco harm reduction could become even harder.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The World Health Organisation (WHO) is facing renewed scrutiny after a new report revealed its foundation has taken tens of millions in undisclosed corporate donations. Experts say the rise of \u201cdark money\u201d raises questions about conflicts of interest – and what this…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":990002,"featured_media":26804,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[257],"tags":[186,339],"slider":[],"class_list":["post-26803","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-news","tag-nicotine","tag-united-states"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/clearingtheair.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/26803","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/clearingtheair.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/clearingtheair.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/clearingtheair.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/990002"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/clearingtheair.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=26803"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/clearingtheair.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/26803\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":26810,"href":"https:\/\/clearingtheair.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/26803\/revisions\/26810"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/clearingtheair.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/26804"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/clearingtheair.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=26803"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/clearingtheair.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=26803"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/clearingtheair.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=26803"},{"taxonomy":"slider","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/clearingtheair.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/slider?post=26803"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}