The Conversation (Global)
중도 성향
기타
Hidden in plain sight: the race to discover new species before they’re gone
Even now, in an age of satellites and genome sequencing, the Earth still holds secrets.
"SEQUENCING" · 총 10건
필터 보기현재 지수
50.3
0 = 부정 우세
50 = 중립
100 = 긍정 우세
최근 7일 기준 81,270건을 분석한 결과, 뉴스 심리지수는 50.2(균형)입니다. 긍정 3,976건(4.9%)·중립 75,379건(92.8%)·부정 1,915건(2.4%)이며, 중립 비중이 뚜렷하게 높습니다. 성향 지수는 종합 14.6(중도 균형)입니다.
Even now, in an age of satellites and genome sequencing, the Earth still holds secrets.
Country: World Source: International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies Please refer to the attached file. Message from the IFRC Secretary General Small and medium-sized disasters may not dominate global headlines, but for communities affected they are just as devastating. The IFRC’s Disaster Response Emergency Fund (IFRC-DREF) ensures that these crises are met with speed, dignity and locally-led action. Money is made available fast, without the need to wait for a specific appeal. The DREF 2026 Plan is firmly anchored in the IFRC’s Renewal. In the context of significant global funding constraints, humanitarians must be more focused, disciplined and accountable than ever. The IFRC-DREF is central to this shift - enabling early, flexible financing while reinforcing strong stewardship and clear evidence of results. It is also innovative both in the way it is financed (our world-first indemnity insurance policy was triggered for the first time in 2024) and in how its funds are allocated; funding anticipatory action, before hazards hit, is a growing priority. Our 2026–2030 DREF Ambition involves strengthening not only what we fund, but how we deliver. In 2026, we will continue to streamline processes, improve sequencing between DREF grants and Emergency Appeals and reinforce compliance and operational quality. This ensures that speed is matched by sound decision-making, transparency and impact. Localization remains at the heart of IFRC-DREF. By channeling resources directly to National Societies, we enable action that is timely, context-driven and sustainable. At a time when humanitarian needs are rising and financing is under pressure, this agile and principled mechanism is more essential than ever. The DREF 2026 Plan reflects our commitment to work smarter, better demonstrate impact and ensure that no community facing disaster is ignored. I urge you to read it. Jagan Chapagain Context and rationale for the 2026 plan What is the IFRC-DREF? The International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies’ Disaster Response Emergency Fund (IFRC-DREF) is an efficient, fast, transparent, and localized way of getting funding directly to local humanitarian actors – both before and after a crisis. It enables National Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies to respond rapidly to emergencies and act ahead of predictable hazards through two complementary pillars: • Response • Anticipatory Action The fund combines speed, flexibility, transparency and localization to support community-led humanitarian action. Context and rationale for the 2026 plan The IFRC’s Disaster Response Emergency Fund (IFRC-DREF) enters 2026 at a pivotal moment, marking the conclusion of its Strategic Ambition 2020–2025 and the release of the IFRC-DREF Strategic Ambition 2026–2030, with 2026 serving as the first year of its operationalization. This transition builds on a period of significant reform, as the revision of procedures introduced in 2025 strengthened accountability, clarified operational and financial rules, and reinforced minimum readiness requirements, including for anticipatory action, while safeguarding IFRC-DREF’s core strengths of speed, flexibility, and reliability. These developments take place within the broader context of the IFRC Renewal, which seeks to strengthen a collective approach by reinforcing localization, quality, accountability, and proximity to communities across the IFRC network (the IFRC secretariat and its 191 member National Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies). At the same time, National Societies continue to operate in increasingly complex environments shaped by: · climate-related disasters, · epidemics, · displacement, · economic pressures, · and shrinking humanitarian funding. These realities reinforce the importance of a fast, agile and locally led humanitarian financing mechanism. Global operational realities In 2025, IFRC-DREF allocated CHF 77.4 million across 170 operations in 83 National Societies, supporting 14.5 million people affected by crises worldwide. While most allocations remained under the Response Pillar (CHF 64.9 million), anticipatory action reached a record CHF 12.7 million, representing 16% of total funding. This growth was supported by the approval of 11 new simplified EAPs and 21 new EAPs. Despite a decline from 2024, allocations in 2025 remained 75% higher than in 2021, while operations increased by 27% over the same period. At the same time, the number of countries supported remained relatively stable, reflecting growing concentration of IFRC-DREF usage in highly crisis-affected contexts. Anticipatory action expanded significantly faster than the overall fund between 2021 and 2025, increasing by approximately 150%. This trend is expected to continue in 2026 through simplified procedures and expanded early action mechanisms. Despite growing pressure on humanitarian financing systems, IFRC-DREF allocations in 2025 remained 75% higher than in 2021.
Despite the crisis, the conditions for a diplomatic breakthrough may be emerging beneath the surface – if Washington is willing to rethink the sequencing and political assumptions behind its strategy
• Diplomats see high chances of final agreement despite hiccups • Insist both sides want to avoid open-ended conflict • Nuclear issues likely to be handled in later negotiations • Ex-envoy Munir Akram says gaps are more about narrative than substance WASHINGTON: Islamabad remains a leading contender to host the formal signing ceremony of a possible US-Iran peace agreement if negotiators succeed in finalising a deal, diplomatic sources said. Diplomatic sources at the United Nations and in Washington told Dawn that prospects for a final agreement remained high despite delays in completing the draft. “Nine out of 10,” a senior diplomat said when asked to assess the likelihood of a final agreement being signed. “But I cannot say when it will happen.” Another senior diplomat said Islamabad’s role in facilitating the initial contacts between Washington and Tehran had strengthened its credentials as a possible host. “Iranians cannot come to Washington, and Americans cannot go to Tehran because the two countries do not have diplomatic relations,” the diplomat said. “If the signing takes place in a third capital, Islamabad would be a natural choice because it hosted the first round of talks.” The assessment comes as reports in major US media outlets suggest Washington and Tehran have converged on several key elements of a potential settlement, including reopening the Strait of Hormuz and extending the current ceasefire while negotiations continue on more contentious issues. Recent reports in The Washington Post and Reuters indicate that negotiators have developed a framework for a broader agreement, although significant differences remain over implementation and sequencing. Diplomatic sources said both sides had increasingly concluded that prolonging the conflict would impose unacceptable costs. According to officials familiar with the negotiations, the Trump administration determined early in the conflict that air power alone would not achieve all of Washington’s objectives and that a prolonged military campaign risked becoming politically costly at home. The sources said Tehran had reached a similar conclusion. While Iranian officials view their ability to withstand months of military pressure as a strategic achievement, they also recognise that a prolonged conflict would further damage an economy already weakened by war and sanctions while accelerating the destruction of critical infrastructure. “Neither side wants an open-ended conflict,” one source said. “Both recognise that the current stalemate carries growing political, economic and strategic costs.” Diplomats said this shared assessment had created momentum for a negotiated settlement. Although details of the proposal have not been made public, diplomatic sources familiar with the discussions described several of its key elements to Dawn. According to these sources, the agreement would effectively end the US-Israeli military campaign against Iran in exchange for Tehran reopening the Strait of Hormuz, the strategic waterway it has kept closed since the early stages of the conflict, disrupting global energy supplies and trade. The sources said Iran would also provide assurances that it would not seek to develop nuclear weapons, while some of the most contentious issues, including the future structure of its nuclear programme and the disposition of its enriched uranium stockpile, would be addressed in subsequent rounds of negotiations. Several of these elements broadly correspond with details reported by Reuters and The Washington Post, which said negotiators were working on a framework that would reopen the Strait of Hormuz while deferring some nuclear issues to later stages of the process. Former Pakistani ambassador to the UN Munir Akram said many of the demands publicly outlined by President Donald Trump appeared to overlap with provisions already under discussion. “The differences are largely about narrative rather than substance,” Mr Akram said during a television interview on Saturday. “Both sides want an agreement they can present as a victory.” He predicted that negotiators would eventually narrow the remaining gaps and reach a settlement. Diplomats cautioned, however, that important obstacles remained. Several pointed to Israeli military operations in southern Lebanon as a major concern for Tehran, which is seeking an immediate halt to those operations as part of a regional settlement. Mr Akram argued that continued delays in reaching an agreement were hurting Iran’s allies in Lebanon by giving Israel additional time to consolidate its position in the south. “This issue alone has the potential to complicate the peace process,” one diplomatic source said. Sources also said Washington remained concerned about the security of its Gulf allies. While the conflict exposed some of Iran’s vulnerabilities, diplomats noted that Tehran’s ability to withstand sustained military pressure had also heightened anxiety among Arab states in the region. According to the sources, some Gulf governments have begun exploring closer ties with Iran as a hedge against future instability, prompting Washington to reaffirm its long-term military commitment to the region. “The United States wants to strengthen, not reduce, its military presence in the Gulf,” a diplomatic source said. “That is not an issue on which Washington is prepared to compromise.” Diplomats monitoring the negotiations said that while disagreements remained over sequencing, security guarantees and political messaging, there was growing confidence that both Washington and Tehran now viewed a negotiated settlement as preferable to a prolonged conflict whose costs continued to mount for all sides. If an agreement is reached, Pakistan remains among the most likely venues for a formal signing ceremony, they added. Published in Dawn, May 31st, 2026
Sequencing 10,000 Indian human genomes under the centre-backed project would mean that therapies could be customized for identified genetic variants among the Indian population
The United States and Iran have reached an agreement to extend a ceasefire, allow shipping through the Strait of Hormuz and lift a US blockade and some sanctions on Iran, sources have said, but the deal has not been finalised. US President Donald Trump’s approval is still pending. An agreement would represent a big step towards ending a war that has pushed the world towards an energy crisis, though the underlying dispute over Iran’s nuclear programme would only be thrashed out in talks over subsequent weeks. Where have the discussions got to? Following a ceasefire in early April, the two sides have remained at odds on issues including Iran’s nuclear ambitions, Israel’s war in Lebanon with Hezbollah, and Tehran’s demands for the lifting of sanctions and the release of frozen assets. After weeks of mainly indirect talks, four sources familiar with the matter told Reuters on Thursday that the US and Iran had agreed to a memorandum of understanding that would halt the war and give negotiators 60 days to reach a final deal. However, both sides have said several times before that they believed an agreement was close but without ever concluding an agreement. The position of Israel, which launched the air war on Iran on February 28 alongside the United States, is central to any deal but its role in the agreement is unclear. US President Donald Trump has not yet approved the deal, according to the sources. Vice President JD Vance said on Thursday: “We’re not there, but we’re very close and we’re going to keep working on it”. Iran has not yet formally commented, but the semi-official Tasnim news agency cited a source close to the negotiating team as saying the text of the agreement had not yet been finalised or confirmed. Iranian sources have previously said a framework deal is only about ending the war on all fronts, establishing a 30-day framework for international and Iranian movement through the Strait of Hormuz and possibly providing some financial relief. There would then be negotiations on the more difficult issues, such as the status of Iran’s highly enriched uranium and details concerning the strait and the sequencing of the many points in the preliminary deal such as sanctions relief and security. The last deal over the nuclear programme — struck in 2015 and torn up by Trump in 2018 — took years of negotiations between large teams of technical experts. What are the main issues? Hormuz and Gulf blockade Iran’s closure of the Strait of Hormuz, the conduit for a fifth of global supplies of oil and liquefied natural gas, has pushed up oil prices. Reopening the strait is the US priority and Iran’s main point of leverage, but it could take time. The US blockade on Iranian ports is hitting Iran’s own exports and state revenue. Lifting this is one of Tehran’s main goals. A sensitive issue could be how far US forces withdraw. Nuclear The US alleges Iran wants to build a nuclear bomb. Iran has always denied this, saying its atomic programme is for peaceful purposes only. The focus is on its enrichment of uranium, which generates fuel for nuclear power but can also make material for a warhead. Ballistic missiles A prominent US demand before the war was that Iran limit the range of its ballistic missiles so that they could not reach Israel. Iran has always said its right to conventional weapons is non-negotiable and that it still has a large arsenal. Sanctions and frozen assets Iran’s economy has been hurt by sanctions for years, contributing to the nationwide unrest in January. Tehran badly needs them to be lifted and tens of billions of dollars of Iranian oil revenues frozen in foreign banks to be released. It also wants reparations for war damage. The United States has resisted this, with Trump having lambasted former president Barack Obama for having returned some frozen assets to Iran under the 2015 nuclear deal. Some media have reported that the latest draft agreement would include an investment programme for Iran. Lebanon Iran has repeatedly said that Israel’s war against Hezbollah in Lebanon must be included in any deal. Israel and Lebanon agreed to a ceasefire last month but both Israel and Hezbollah accuse each other of repeated violations and Israel’s military is ramping up its campaign in southern Lebanon. Israel would oppose any US-Iran agreement that limits its ability to act in Lebanon.
The United States and Iran have reached an agreement to extend a ceasefire, allow shipping through the Strait of Hormuz and lift a US blockade and some sanctions on Iran, sources have said, but the deal has not been finalised. US President Donald Trump’s approval is still pending. An agreement would represent a big step towards ending a war that has pushed the world towards an energy crisis, though the underlying dispute over Iran’s nuclear programme would only be thrashed out in talks over subsequent weeks. Where have the discussions got to? Following a ceasefire in early April, the two sides have remained at odds on issues including Iran’s nuclear ambitions, Israel’s war in Lebanon with Hezbollah, and Tehran’s demands for the lifting of sanctions and the release of frozen assets. After weeks of mainly indirect talks, four sources familiar with the matter told Reuters on Thursday that the US and Iran had agreed to a memorandum of understanding that would halt the war and give negotiators 60 days to reach a final deal. However, both sides have said several times before that they believed an agreement was close but without ever concluding an agreement. The position of Israel, which launched the air war on Iran on February 28 alongside the United States, is central to any deal but its role in the agreement is unclear. US President Donald Trump has not yet approved the deal, according to the sources. Vice President JD Vance said on Thursday: “We’re not there, but we’re very close and we’re going to keep working on it”. Iran has not yet formally commented, but the semi-official Tasnim news agency cited a source close to the negotiating team as saying the text of the agreement had not yet been finalised or confirmed. Iranian sources have previously said a framework deal is only about ending the war on all fronts, establishing a 30-day framework for international and Iranian movement through the Strait of Hormuz and possibly providing some financial relief. There would then be negotiations on the more difficult issues, such as the status of Iran’s highly enriched uranium and details concerning the strait and the sequencing of the many points in the preliminary deal such as sanctions relief and security. The last deal over the nuclear programme — struck in 2015 and torn up by Trump in 2018 — took years of negotiations between large teams of technical experts. What are the main issues? Hormuz and Gulf blockade Iran’s closure of the Strait of Hormuz, the conduit for a fifth of global supplies of oil and liquefied natural gas, has pushed up oil prices. Reopening the strait is the US priority and Iran’s main point of leverage, but it could take time. The US blockade on Iranian ports is hitting Iran’s own exports and state revenue. Lifting this is one of Tehran’s main goals. A sensitive issue could be how far US forces withdraw. Nuclear The US alleges Iran wants to build a nuclear bomb. Iran has always denied this, saying its atomic programme is for peaceful purposes only. The focus is on its enrichment of uranium, which generates fuel for nuclear power but can also make material for a warhead. Ballistic missiles A prominent US demand before the war was that Iran limit the range of its ballistic missiles so that they could not reach Israel. Iran has always said its right to conventional weapons is non-negotiable and that it still has a large arsenal. Sanctions and frozen assets Iran’s economy has been hurt by sanctions for years, contributing to the nationwide unrest in January. Tehran badly needs them to be lifted and tens of billions of dollars of Iranian oil revenues frozen in foreign banks to be released. It also wants reparations for war damage. The United States has resisted this, with Trump having lambasted former president Barack Obama for having returned some frozen assets to Iran under the 2015 nuclear deal. Some media have reported that the latest draft agreement would include an investment programme for Iran. Lebanon Iran has repeatedly said that Israel’s war against Hezbollah in Lebanon must be included in any deal. Israel and Lebanon agreed to a ceasefire last month but both Israel and Hezbollah accuse each other of repeated violations and Israel’s military is ramping up its campaign in southern Lebanon. Israel would oppose any US-Iran agreement that limits its ability to act in Lebanon.
The United States and Iran have reached an agreement to extend a ceasefire, allow shipping through the Strait of Hormuz and lift a U.S. blockade and some sanctions on Iran, sources told Reuters, but the deal has not been finalised.An agreement would represent a big step towards ending a war that has pushed the world towards an energy crisis, though the underlying dispute over Iran's nuclear programme would only be thrashed out in talks over subsequent weeks.Where Have The Discussions Got To?Following a ceasefire in early April, the two sides have remained at odds on issues including Iran's nuclear ambitions, Israel's war in Lebanon with the Iranian-backed Hezbollah militia, and Tehran's demands for the lifting of sanctions and the release of frozen assets.After weeks of mainly indirect talks, four sources familiar with the matter said on Thursday that the U.S. and Iran had agreed a memorandum of understanding that would halt the war and give negotiators 60 days to reach a final deal.Read More: Bigger proportion of non-Iran ships crossing Hormuz strait: DataHowever, both sides have said several times before that they believed an agreement was close but without ever concluding an agreement. The position of Israel, which launched the air war on Iran on February 28 alongside the United States, is central to any deal but its role in the agreement is unclear.U.S. President Donald Trump has not yet approved the deal, according to the sources. Vice President JD Vance said on Thursday: "We're not there, but we're very close and we're going to keep working on it".Iran has not yet formally commented, but the semi-official Tasnim news agency cited a source close to the negotiating team as saying the text of the agreement had not yet been finalised or confirmed.Iranian sources have previously said a framework deal is only about ending the war on all fronts, establishing a 30-day framework for international and Iranian movement through the Strait of Hormuz and possibly providing some financial relief.There would then be negotiations on the more difficult issues, such as the status of Iran's highly enriched uranium and details concerning the strait, and the sequencing of the many points in the preliminary deal such as sanctions relief and security.The last deal over the nuclear programme - struck in 2015 and torn up by Trump in 2018 - took years of negotiations between large teams of technical experts.What Are The Main Issues?Hormuz And Gulf BlockadeIran's closure of the Strait of Hormuz, the conduit for a fifth of global supplies of oil and liquefied natural gas, has pushed up oil prices. Reopening the strait is the U.S. priority and Iran's main point of leverage, but it could take time.Many vessels are stuck in the Gulf and Iran says it has laid some sea mines that could be difficult to locate.The U.S. blockade on Iranian ports is hitting Iran's own exports and state revenue. Lifting this is one of Tehran's main goals. A sensitive issue could be how far U.S. forces withdraw.NuclearThe U.S. says it believes Iran wants to build a nuclear bomb. Iran has always denied this, saying its atomic programme is for peaceful purposes only. The focus is on its enrichment of uranium, which generates fuel for nuclear power but can also make material for a warhead.The nuclear question is extremely complicated. Iran might eventually agree to dilute part of its highly enriched uranium in a friendly country into uranium enriched to 5% purity and then have it returned, Iranian sources said.Read more: US inflation hits three-year high in April as Iran war fuels energy price surgeBut many other issues would still need to be addressed: how long the nuclear program would be halted, whether nuclear sites would be dismantled, what happens to stockpiles of uranium enriched to 20% and 5%, the future of Iran's advanced centrifuges and research and development programs and the rules governing an inspections regime, among others.Ballistic MissilesA prominent U.S. demand before the war was that Iran limit the range of its ballistic missiles so that they could not reach Israel. Iran has always said its right to conventional weapons is non-negotiable and that it still has a large arsenal.Sanctions And Frozen AssetsIran's economy has been hurt by sanctions for years, contributing to the nationwide unrest in January. Tehran badly needs them to be lifted and tens of billions of dollars of Iranian oil revenues frozen in foreign banks to be released. It also wants reparations for war damage.The United States has resisted this, with Trump having lambasted former president Barack Obama for having returned some frozen assets to Iran under the 2015 nuclear deal. Some media have reported that the latest draft agreement would include an investment programme for Iran.LebanonIran has repeatedly said that Israel's war against its main ally Hezbollah in Lebanon must be included in any deal. Israel and Lebanon agreed a ceasefire last month but both Israel and Hezbollah accuse each other of repeated violations and Israel's military is ramping up its campaign in southern Lebanon. Israel would oppose any U.S.-Iran agreement that limits its ability to act in Lebanon.
-DKK3-CKAP4 신호전달 경로 기반 신규 탈모 치료 타깃 제시 에피바이오텍(대표 성종혁)은 서울대학교 약학대학 노민수 교수 연구팀과의 공동연구를 통해 안드로겐성 탈모(Androgenetic Alopecia, AGA)를 유발하는 핵심 병리 기전으로 '섬유화(fibrosis) 및 염증 반응(fibroinflammation)'을 매개하는 단백질 DKK3와 CKAP4를 규명했다고 29일 밝혔다. 해당 연구 결과는 국제 저명 학술지 '테라노스틱스(Theranostics, Impact Factor 13.3)'에 게재됐다.이번 연구는 최근 탈모 연구 분야에서 주목받고 있는 단일세포 RNA 시퀀싱(single-cell RNA sequencing, scRNA-seq) 기술을 활용해 진행됐으며, 기존의 단순 남성호르몬 중심 탈모 기전에서 나아가 모낭 주변 미세환경의 섬유화와 면역 반응이 탈모 진행에 핵심 역할을 한다는 점을 규명했다....
Countries: Uganda, Democratic Republic of the Congo Source: World Health Organization OMMUNIQUÉ Kampala, Republic of Uganda - WE, the Ministers of Health of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), the Republic of Uganda, and the Republic of South Sudan, together with Heads of Delegations, representatives of the Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (Africa CDC), the World Health Organization (WHO), UNICEF, and development and technical partners, convened at the High-Level Ministerial Meeting on Cross-Border Coordination on the Ebola Disease Outbreak caused by Bundibugyo virus held in Kampala, Uganda, from 22–23 May 2026 under the theme: "Regional Solidarity, Preparedness and Coordinated Response. PREAMBLE MINDFUL that Ebola disease remains a high-consequence public health threat with severe health, humanitarian, social, and economic implications for affected countries and the region; CONCERNED by the evolving Bundibugyo virus disease (BVD) outbreak declared by the Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo on 15 May 2026, following laboratory confirmation of the Bundibugyo species in Ituri province; NOTING with concern the epidemiological situation as of 20 May 2026, including confirmed transmission in Ituri and Nord-Kivu provinces, increasing numbers of suspected and confirmed cases, ongoing chains of transmission, and documented cross-border population movement signals involving Uganda and the broader region; NOTING that the current outbreak affecting and Kivu provinces constitutes both a Public Emergency of International Concern and a Public Health Emergency of Continental Security, requiring strengthened regional coordination and solidarity to urgently contain the outbreak and prevent further cross-border spread; RECOGNISING the heightened regional risk associated with porous borders, active trade and mining corridors, humanitarian crises, population displacement, insecurity, and limitations in surveillance and preparedness capacities at points of entry and border communities; ACKNOWLEDGING the efforts of the Governments of the DRC, Uganda and South Sudan, frontline health workers, rapid response teams, laboratory personnel, humanitarian actors, communities, and partners supporting the ongoing preparedness and response efforts; RECALLING the obligations of Member States under the International Health Regulations (2005), the Africa CDC framework for regional collaboration and health security, and continental commitments toward strengthening epidemic preparedness, surveillance, and coordinated emergency response systems; WELCOMING the leadership of Africa CDC and WHO in convening this High-Level Ministerial Meeting to strengthen regional solidarity, technical coordination, and operational preparedness and response to the Bundibugyo virus disease outbreak; WE HEREBY agree on the following actions and commitments: 1. Strengthen Cross-Border Surveillance and Early Warning Systems Commit to strengthening coordinated cross-border disease surveillance systems, event-based surveillance, joint contact tracing, active case finding, and real-time information sharing among the DRC, Uganda, and South Sudan, including routine cross-border coordination meetings and harmonised reporting mechanisms. 2. Harmonise Points of Entry Preparedness and Population Mobility Monitoring Commit to strengthening and harmonising public health measures at official and unofficial points of entry, including traveller screening, alert management, referral pathways, population mobility mapping, and monitoring along high-risk mobility corridors and border communities. 3. Protect Frontline and Vulnerable Communities Commit to prioritising the protection of frontline health workers, displaced populations, mining communities, border communities and other vulnerable populations disproportionately exposed to the risk of transmission. 4. Strengthen Community Engagement Recognise the central role of trusted community leaders, civil society, media and local networks in promoting public awareness, early detection, prevention measures and community trust during outbreak response operations. 5- Strengthen Laboratory Systems and Diagnostic Capacity Commit to strengthening laboratory preparedness through decentralised diagnostic capacity, rapid sample transportation systems, genomic sequencing, surge staffing, and interoperability of laboratory information systems to support timely confirmation and response. 5. Strengthen Clinical Management and Infection Prevention and Control Commit to strengthening case management capacity, triage systems, Infection Prevention and Control (IPC), Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH), isolation capacity, safe and dignified burials, and protection of frontline healthcare workers in affected and at-risk areas. 6. Strengthen Risk Communication and Community Engagement Commit to strengthening Risk Communication and Community Engagement (RCCE) interventions, including community-based disease surveillance, social listening, rumour management, infodemic management, community feedback systems, and engagement of traditional, religious, youth, women, and local leaders to improve trust, acceptance, and adherence to public health measures. 7. Strengthen Operational Coordination and Incident Management Support the operationalisation and strengthening of the Africa CDC Continental Incident Management Support Team (IMST), Emergency Operations Centres (EOCs), and national and sub-national coordination mechanisms to ensure harmonised regional preparedness and response operations. 8. Mobilise Sustainable Financing and Operational Support Call upon Member States, regional institutions, development partners, humanitarian actors, donors, and the private sector to urgently mobilise and align financial, technical, logistical, and operational support behind national preparedness and response plans, including support for surveillance, laboratory systems, RCCE, IPC, and workforce surge capacity. 9. Strengthen Regional Preparedness and Health Security Commit to strengthening preparedness capacities in at-risk countries and border districts, including simulation exercises, workforce development, stockpiling of critical supplies, rapid response readiness, and continuity of essential health services during the outbreak response. 10. Sustain High-Level Political Leadership and Regional Solidarity Reaffirm our commitment to sustained political leadership, transparency, multisectoral collaboration, and regional solidarity to contain the outbreak, prevent regional spread, and protect the health security and socioeconomic stability of the region. 11. Advance Long-term Regional Health Security Underscore the urgency of investing in resilient health systems, regional preparedness capacities, workforce development, laboratory networks and emergency coordination systems to strengthen Africa's collective health security and preparedness for future outbreaks. 12. Ensure the continuity of essential services The critical maintenance of essential services includes healthcare, education, and other critical social services, in the affected provinces and countries throughout the response to the outbreak. We express our appreciation to the Government and people of the Republic of Uganda for hosting this important meeting, and commend the efforts of frontline responders, health workers, communities and partners working tirelessly to contain the outbreak. DONE in Kampala, Republic of Uganda, on 23 May 2026. For Additional Information or to Request Interviews, Please contact: Collins Boakye-Agyemang Communications and marketing officer Tel: + 242 06 520 65 65 (WhatsApp) Email: boakyeagyemangc@who.int