The World Health Organization says that at least 5 new experimental vaccines for Ebola will be available by 2015 and millions of doses of two exisiting vaccines will be available in 2015. I categorize this announcement as good news. You can read a brief piece about the WHO announcement here.
I have to date, not strayed into the discourse on Ebola and stopping the spread of Ebola. My silence is not a lack of interest. I have personal friends in Nigeria, acquaintances who live and work in Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone. For me the stakes here are personal, for my friends and acquaintances the stakes are even more personal. I believe in dealing witht he pandemic we must ask a few questions. My questions are not medical questions, as the exact causes, forms, treatments of diseases is outside of my expertise.
One, why is Ebola so deadly now compared to other know outbreaks? From 1976 (when it was first identified) through 2013, the World Health Organization reported a total of 1,716 cases. This year over 9,000 cases have been identified. In answer to this question I think of demographics thanks to Malthus. Malthus warned about pandemic sweeping away the population of the earth as a result of overpopulation. I do not hold to Malthus' bleak view of the growth of population as the cause of natural and unnatural disaster. I do, however, believe that simply the fact of having more people around meant that the virus had a chance to spread to more people. I also think about modernization, namely infrastructure improvement. In the last 10 years more miles of road have been constructed and/or paved than in the preceding 100 years in Sub-Saharan Africa, making travel much easier than ever (by the way, disease travels with humans).
Two, given the answers to question one, what should people do to combat the spread of Ebola? My simplest answer is isolation. I realize that isolation will cause disruption of economic life for a period of time. Not allowing free travel in an era when commerce requires travel will definitely have costs. I ask you to consider, however, that dead people do not engage in any commerce, that societies tending to thousands of ill people are losing commerce already. Nigerian officials point tot he contribution of strict isolation rules for those exposed or potentially exposed to Ebola as a major reason why Ebola did not spread in that country.
My two cents is probably not worth that much when it comes to the science of epidemiology. I do, however, believe that I understand as well as anyone that not being in contact with a disease will keep you from getting a disease. I think it is also readily noticeable that not allowing those with the disease or exposed to the disease to travel will help stop the spread of the disease.
I have to date, not strayed into the discourse on Ebola and stopping the spread of Ebola. My silence is not a lack of interest. I have personal friends in Nigeria, acquaintances who live and work in Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone. For me the stakes here are personal, for my friends and acquaintances the stakes are even more personal. I believe in dealing witht he pandemic we must ask a few questions. My questions are not medical questions, as the exact causes, forms, treatments of diseases is outside of my expertise.
One, why is Ebola so deadly now compared to other know outbreaks? From 1976 (when it was first identified) through 2013, the World Health Organization reported a total of 1,716 cases. This year over 9,000 cases have been identified. In answer to this question I think of demographics thanks to Malthus. Malthus warned about pandemic sweeping away the population of the earth as a result of overpopulation. I do not hold to Malthus' bleak view of the growth of population as the cause of natural and unnatural disaster. I do, however, believe that simply the fact of having more people around meant that the virus had a chance to spread to more people. I also think about modernization, namely infrastructure improvement. In the last 10 years more miles of road have been constructed and/or paved than in the preceding 100 years in Sub-Saharan Africa, making travel much easier than ever (by the way, disease travels with humans).
Two, given the answers to question one, what should people do to combat the spread of Ebola? My simplest answer is isolation. I realize that isolation will cause disruption of economic life for a period of time. Not allowing free travel in an era when commerce requires travel will definitely have costs. I ask you to consider, however, that dead people do not engage in any commerce, that societies tending to thousands of ill people are losing commerce already. Nigerian officials point tot he contribution of strict isolation rules for those exposed or potentially exposed to Ebola as a major reason why Ebola did not spread in that country.
My two cents is probably not worth that much when it comes to the science of epidemiology. I do, however, believe that I understand as well as anyone that not being in contact with a disease will keep you from getting a disease. I think it is also readily noticeable that not allowing those with the disease or exposed to the disease to travel will help stop the spread of the disease.
No comments:
Post a Comment