(A future subcommittee print will, it might be noted, spell out in detail other international activities of the American pharmaceutical industry.)

2. Relationships with the academic world

WHO is in constant touch with deans and other academic leaders on problems of medical education and research. Many of them are on the WHO Expert advisory panels and auxiliary personnel, and from time to time are selected to be members of Expert committees. They are also asked on occasion to act as consultants for WHO to schools of public health and medical schools in many parts of the world. WHO has, in turn, aided medical and related schools throughout the world.

Study arrangements for fellows in the United States of America involve consultations, and cooperation with all types of organizations and institutions for service, teaching, and research. This includes cooperation in the modification of existing courses or the establishment of new ones to meet more fully the needs of foreign students (e.g., discussion of WHO staffs with faculties of schools of public health; consultations with a university concerning the establishment of a course for teachers of preventive medicine, etc.). Cooperation sometimes encompasses joint projects of assistance; e.g., cooperation with the Rockefeller Foundation for the School of Public Health, University of the Philippines.

Review of the earlier subsection relating to cooperation of individuals and laboratories will indicate the scope of collaboration with WHO by university teachers and scientists.

A brief recapitulation of some of the cooperative relationships with academic research in the field of communicable diseases will serve to reemphasize this point:

(1) Investigators at the Universities of Pennsylvania, Tulane, Minnesota, California, and many others have collaborated on veterinary public health research.

(2) In a number of endemoepidemic diseases there has been extensive collaboration with many universities and hospitals through members of expert panels:

Universities of Harvard, North Carolina, Tulane, California, Texas.

U.S. panel members: Dr. J. A. Doull, Dr. F. A. Johansen, and Dr. H. W. Wade (leprosy). Several professionals from other countries have received WHO fellowships to visit the laboratories of the National Leprosarium, Carville, La.

U.S. panel members, interested in onchocerciasis (Parasitic Diseases Panel): Professor E. C. Faust, Dr. H. K. Beye, and Prof. D. L. Augustine. Several experts of American universities and hospitals, schools of public health or health officers are members of the Expert Advisory Panel on Parasitic Diseases, and collaborate particularly in the field of filariasis, especially in that of the infections produced by Wucheria parasites. Prof. J. Kessel, School of Medicine, University of California, who is also in charge, as technical adviser of a joint France-American filariasis control project in Tahiti, participated as a WHO expert at the first meeting of the study group on filariasis.

(3) In the field of tuberculosis, Dr. Walsh McDermott, Livingston Farrand professor of public health and preventive medicine, Cornell University Medical College, is a member of the WHO Expert Panel on Tuberculosis. He is directing research, including research on tuberculosis in Navaho Indians, in which study problems concerning domiciliary chemotherapy and chemoprophylaxis on a community basis are being investigated. The exchange of information between Cornell University and WHO at all stages of the studies which they are conducting is proving to be of great importance.

(4) In the study of the biology of the treponematoses, immunological and other relationships of treponemes, there is a joint research program between WHO and the International Treponematoses Laboratory Center, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, U.S.A. The director of this center, Professor T. Turner, dean of faculty and medicine, Johns Hopkins University, is a periodic consultant for WHO.

3. Relationships with foundations and associations

WHO and private foundations interested in health have worked closely together since the establishment of the organization.

The most extensive collaborative relationships have been with the Rockefeller Foundation because of its long tradition and extensive programs relating to medical research and medical education. (A future committee print in this series will report in detail on the outstanding work of the Rockefeller Foundation.) The participation of the foundation in programs in which WHO is also interested can be best explained by reference to protein malnutrition in part IV. One way to combat protein malnutrition in children is by finding new sources of proteins (besides milk which may be expensive). Considerable research is needed before a food can be accepted as suitable for infant feeding. Several centers throughout the world are carrying out special research. To help this research, the Rockefeller Foundation has recently given $250,000, as previously noted, to further investigations which will assist in the development of proteinrich foods. This money is being used for grants to various workers throughout the world. These grants are made by a committee of the National Research Council of the United States of America, with the advice of WHO and FAO. Various members of this committee are also members of the WHO Protein Advisory Group. Sixteen grants to support the work of 20 research groups in 12 countries had been approved by March 1958. These countries are: Mexico, Guatemala, French West Africa, Nigeria, Belgian Congo, Uganda, Union of South Africa, India, Japan, United States of America, United Kingdom, and France.

It is interesting to note that another leading private foundation in the United States, the Josiah Macy, Jr., Foundation, is also collaborating with WHO on nutritional research. Two conferences on protein malnutrition (1953 and 1955) have been sponsored by WHO and FAO with the assistance of the Josiah Macy, Jr., Foundation. The first one was on the clinical aspects of kwashiorkor. The second one emphasized practical methods of dealing with protein deficiency in the diet of young children.

Similar relationships have existed in the field of public health and hospital administration in conjunction with the Kellogg Foundation and others with interests in these activities.

As is true of the private foundations, the private health associations, particularly those interested in infectious diseases, collaborate with WHO.

Close contact exists, for example, between the National Tuberculosis Association of the United States and WHO concerning tuberculosis problems in all parts of the world. This association is a most active member of the International Union Against Tuberculosis, which is in official relationship with WHO.

In the field of leprosy, Dr. James A. Doull and Dr. H. W. Wade, medical director and codirector, respectively, of the Leonard Wood Memorial are members of the WHO Expert Advisory Panel on Leprosy. They have on several occasions acted as WHO Experts at different types of meetings or been consulted on various matters.

F. RELATIONSHIPS WITH THE U.S.S.R. AND COUNTRIES OF EASTERN EUROPE

If improvement of the health of the world is to be truly a worldwide effort, the U.S.S.R. and the United States must both participate fully in public health and medical research programs planned and conducted on a truly international basis by WHO. For this reason, I looked with special care at the extent not only of U.S. collaboration, outlined in the preceding subsection, but also of collaboration by the U.S.S.R. and countries of Eastern Europe.

There follows a statement of these relationships as they existed prior to the time I visited Geneva and Moscow. There is every reason to hope that the participation of the U.S.S.R. in WHO activities, which is already extensive, will broaden substantially in the near futureparticularly as concerns medical research. Here is common ground on which all nations may collaborate, irrespective of ideological and other obstacles. Thereby, the cause of world understanding and peace may be significantly served.

Eastern states membership

The nine states of Eastern Europe (Albania, Czechoslovakia, U.S.S.R., Ukraine, Byelorussia, Poland, Rumania, Bulgaria, Hungary) had all accepted the constitution of WHO without reservation before the first World Health Assembly. Their acceptances were received in the order in which these countries are given in the present paragraph. Some of these were among the first 26 acceptances which were necessary in order for the constitution to come into force.

However, these nine countries informed the Director General, in 1949 and 1950, that they no longer considered themselves members of the Organization. The first notification for this purpose was received from U.S.S.R. in February 1949, and the last from Poland in August 1950.

In 1955, during the summer session of ECOSOC, the Soviet delegate, speaking on the social situation in the world, and more especially of the international aspects of public health, declared that WHO was performing a useful work and that, in order to collaborate more effectively in international health work, the U.S.S.R. would henceforth participate in the activities of WHO.

Three inactive members

The ninth World Health Assembly, in 1956, adopted a resolution laying down the conditions for the resumption by inactive members

The original suggestion for such a year came from the former Governor of Illinois, the Honorable Adlai Stevenson, in an address delivered June 8, 1958, at the Michigan State University.

On June 9, 1958, the distinguished majority leader of the U.S. Senate, the Honorable Lyndon B. Johnson of Texas, printed the text of Governor Stevenson's address in the Congressional Record.

That same day, I publicly commended the address for its farsighted leadership.

Immediately thereafter I wrote a letter to the Surgeon General of the U.S. Public Health Service, Leroy Burney, who was also serving as chairman of the United States delegation to the 11th World Health Assembly, then meeting in Minneapolis. It was my pleasure to serve as a delegate to the same Assembly, holding sessions in the great community which previously I had the privilege of serving as mayor. General Burney had, it should be noted, been elected president of the Assembly as a whole. I wrote to him, however, in his capacity as chairman of the United States delegation.

The Surgeon General promptly replied, indicating that because my suggestion for such a year arrived at a time late in the session of the Assembly, as such, there was little alternative but to take it up informally with the Executive Board of WHO.

On July 1, 1958, I introduced Senate Concurrent Resolution 99. My purpose was to express the sense of the Senate that "the President of the United States be hereby invited to extend to the other nations of the world, through the World Health Organization and related organizations, an invitation for the designation of an International Health and Medical Research Year at such early date as adequate preparations can be made."

On August 11 the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations unanimously approved the resolution, with minor amendment. Since the time was late in the session and it appeared unlikely that time would be available to clear the concurrent resolution through the House of Representatives, the Committee on Foreign Relations approved the resolution in two forms-first, as a simple resolution, S. Res. 361, which would require no further House action, and secondly, as a concurrent resolution. Thus, if time proved unavailable for the House to take it up, the Senate would have expressed its own formal view for this objective in a conclusive way.

The sequence of events turned out as envisioned. The Senate unanimously approved the simple resolution on August 18. A few days later, however, the Congress adjourned; so it did, indeed, prove impossible to complete House action on the resolution in its concurrent form.

Senate Resolution 361 stands, therefore, as the completed expression of the U.S. Senate. The resolution reads as follows:

[S. Res. 361, 85th Cong., 2d sess.]
RESOLUTION

Whereas the United States has a long and honored tradition of contributing to international scientific research, including our participation, in 1882-1883, in the First Polar Year; and, in 1932-1933, in the Second Polar Year; and

Whereas under the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, approved May 10, 1950 (64 Stat. 149), a National Science Foundation was created "to develop and encourage the pursuit of a national policy for the promotion of basic research

From elsewhere in eastern Europe, scientists have been appointed to the following panels:

Albania: Malaria.

Bulgaria: Rabies.

Czechoslovakia: Health laboratory methods; tuberculosis.
Hungary: Malaria; tuberculosis.

Poland: Nursing; nutrition; rehabilitation; virus diseases;

zoonoses.

Rumania: Malaria; rehabilitation.

From among these panel members, 24 experts, mostly from the U.S.S.R., have attended a wide range of expert committee meetings in Geneva and elsewhere:

Some technical meetings have been held in the countries of eastern Europe:

Moscow, October 1957, study group on public health laboratories.

Warsaw, November/December 1957, seminar on veterinary public health.

Bucharest, June 1958, malaria conference.

Since resumption of active membership, the U.S.S.R. has contributed financially to WHO activities. In 1958, for instance, the U.S.S.R. paid approximately $1,600,000 out of a total WHO budget of $13,500,000. In comparison, the United States paid $4,500,000 and the United Kingdom $1,150,000. The U.S.S.R. is thus the second largest contributor to the WHO regular budget. Further reference to the Soviet Union and WHO finances may be found in table 6-L.

Finally, while I was in Europe studying the operation of WHO, the Director General of WHO announced the appointment of a prominent medical scientist from the U.S.S.R., Dr. Nicolay Ivanovitch Grashchenkov, as an Assistant Director General of the Organization. Dr. Grashchenkov will advise the Director General on major policy questions. He will be responsible for the technical aspects of liaison with regional offices and other agencies. He will deal in particular with the following WHO programs: Biology and pharmacology; health and vital statistics; editorial and reference services.

G. THE PROPOSED INTERNATIONAL PUBLIC HEALTH AND MEDICAL RESEARCH YEAR

The 12th World Health Assembly of the World Health Organization, convening May 12, 1959, will take up the proposal for an International Public Health and Medical Research Year.

The background of this proposal provides an interesting sequence in international collaboration.