Arizona health expert says U.S. withdrawal from WHO would limit RJK Jr.'s influence on world

After nearly 80 years, the United States has withdrawn from the World Health Organization, marking a major shift in public health.

The move comes exactly one year after President Donald Trump signed an executive order, which signaled the country would cut ties with the organization.

Experts are concerned the withdrawal will hamper the WHO’s response to new outbreaks, citing the United States’ significant financial backing.

“We’re talking about safeguarding the health of the world, even Americans. And when we leave Americans suffer,” University of Maryland School of Medicine professor Dr. Omer Awan said in an interview with ABC News. “Our health is at stake here.”

The United States had historically been the biggest contributor to the WHO’s annual budget, supplying roughly 18%. This translates to billions of dollars over the course of the last eight decades, which has been a key funding source for vaccines and health support in low income countries.

Fears about the sudden funding gap have somewhat subsided as other countries step in. Since the announcement, China has contributed $500 billion and other nations have pledged to pitch in as long as the United States is estranged.

Awan said the U.S. isn’t completely off the hook and still owes over $278 million to the WHO.

Executive director of the Arizona Public Health Association Will Humble said the organization could also be better off without the United States.

“We do have a responsibility to the rest of the world. I don’t think this administration shares my viewpoint. And I, for one, am glad to see us gone for the next three years,” Humble said.

Humble said he believes the country's influence could do more harm than good, especially with Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.’s stance on vaccines.

“Had the United States stayed in the World Health Organization, [Kennedy] would be able to use his authority to influence the WHO,” Humble said.