Industry leaders highlight how evidence-based decision-making remains central as World Health Day 2026 emphasizes the theme of standing with science.
World Health Day 2026’s theme of “Together for health, Stand with science,” arrives at a moment when scientific evidence is being tested across public health policy and drug development.
Emerging Pharma Leaders nominations are now open!
Do you know someone who can make tough decisions that continue to face manufacturers? Are they destined to change the future of pharma?
Nominate a colleague with impressive leadership and career intentions – even yourself! – for the Pharmaceutical Executive 2026 Emerging Pharma Leaders Awards.
In recent conversations with Pharmaceutical Executive, leaders across infectious disease, market access, and biotech innovation underscore a shared message: science remains the most reliable foundation for decision-making, but its impact depends on how consistently it is applied, communicated, and supported.
For Jeanne Marrazzo, MD, CEO of the Infectious Disease Society of America, the resurgence of measles in the United States illustrates what happens when scientific consensus is undermined.
In Dr. Marrazzo’s
At the core of the issue is a breakdown in trust. In her conversation, Marrazzo highlighted the growing challenge of conflicting narratives, including misinformation that contradicts decades of scientific validation. “Maybe they actually are tied to conditions like autism, which has never been proven and clearly is not true and not accepted by the scientific establishment,” she said.
Dr. Marrazzo argues that rebuilding confidence requires a unified front from credible, science-driven institutions. “We can say with one voice…we are in it to give you the information you need, and we are in it to make sure you and your family stay healthy.”
Transparency and infrastructure are equally critical. “You need trusted people…trying to give the facts really not colored by any judgment…just saying, look, this is the situation,” Marrazzo said, reinforcing that standing with science means clearly communicating both risks and evidence.
Beyond infectious disease, the principle of grounding decisions in evidence extends to policy.
In a
While aiming at addressing cost concerns,Bealor Greenleaf cautioned that policy design must carefully consider downstream effects. “We’re very concerned about the innovation impact that would occur if those two policies are finalized,” she said, referring to Medicare proposals that could alter incentives for future drug development.
Evidence-based projections play a central role in that debate, as Bealor Greenleaf cited analyses suggesting that pricing constraints could reduce the number of new therapies reaching patients. “There was…a projection…that said just focusing on Part B with MFN pricing would result in 60 fewer drugs to launch over the next decade,” she noted, underscoring how data-driven forecasting informs policy risk assessment.
In drug discovery, standing with science also means rethinking long-held assumptions.
Yerem Yeghiazarians, MD, co-founder and CEO of Soley Therapeutics
“Most complex diseases do not reduce neatly to a single target or pathway,” Yeghiazarians said, pointing to high failure rates as evidence of the limitations of traditional models.
Soley’s platform instead focuses on how cells process environmental stress signals to determine survival or death. “We wanted to figure out a scientific question: how do cells determine their fate?” he explained. By leveraging cells as “the most powerful sensor,” the approach aims to decode complex biological responses and identify more effective therapeutic strategies.
Across all three conversations a common thread emerges: science is not static, but a process that requires rigorous evidence, open communication, and sustained investment.
