The Lancet Publishes Editorial, Perspective Piece On New Global Fund Director Peter Sands

The Lancet: The Global Fund under Peter Sands
Editorial Board

“…[Peter Sands, executive director of the Global Fund,] accepts that the broader global health community is skeptical of the value of partnerships with businesses such as Heineken. He is willing to listen to critics. But he is also unapologetic about engaging with the private sector. Partnerships with business will be his signature raison d’être. Sands is pursuing a strategy of constructive disruption at the Global Fund. A shake-up is welcome. The Global Fund needs new energy and thinking. But alienating large parts of the global health community, with whom the Global Fund should be forging productive alliances, is an error. Sands needs to take a remedial course on global health diplomacy and balance his passion for the private sector with respect for the pluralism of the global health community. The diversity of global health is a strength for the Global Fund. Draw on it, don’t dismiss it” (3/10).

The Lancet: Peter Sands: charting a new course for The Global Fund
Pamela Das, senior executive editor of The Lancet

“…Unusually for this position, Sands is neither a physician nor a scientist. Instead, he worked as a banker and was Group Chief Executive of Standard Chartered until 2015 before focusing on his long-standing interest and involvement in infectious diseases and global health. … Sands believes the Global Fund’s objectives should not only be framed around saving millions more lives but also on how to win. … A major challenge for Sands is the turbulent global political environment in which populism and nationalism threaten global cooperation, and the subsequent decline in global health funding. … Sands makes clear he will focus on ‘the internal effectiveness of the organization, and will look for partnerships to strengthen existing capabilities, such as helping to address logistics and supply challenges to reach key populations and to reduce new infections’…” (3/10).