1. Is the concept of a right to health a sufficient basis for a duty to intervene in the case presented? Can this concept be applied in the same way in other contexts, for example, to public health programs in developed countries?
2. What should the eligibility criteria be for proposals submitted to the fund? What should the evaluation mechanisms be for these criteria?
3. Economic conditions could reduce the intensity of the fight against malaria (for example, by altering priorities, or by making funding unavailable, or by resulting in delays that cause intervention methods to become less effective). What ethical issues might arise under these circumstances?
4.What lessons learned should be transferred to other world-health interventions, particularly in the Zika virus situation?