Government

WASHINGTON POST  by Ashoka Mukpo *                                         Aug. 7,  2015                      

“If it bleeds, it leads.” That’s the cliché in journalism that describes why a certain kind of tragedy tends to dominate the news cycle. One year ago today, the World Health Organization declared Ebola an “international health emergency.” But today, coverage of West Africa is beginning its drift into media disinterest as Ebola cases wane. International attention has now largely disappeared along with the sight of biohazard suits and ambulances.....

But it would be a mistake to celebrate victory over Ebola and return to the pre-outbreak status quo. The lessons of Ebola reach beyond the preparedness of West African health systems to confront crises, touching on issues that have been critical for the region in recent years: peace, security and how responsive governments are to society’s most vulnerable members. These lessons must be understood before a post-outbreak aid and development agenda is designed....

The U.S. Government announces it intends to invest more than $1 billion in resources to expand the Global Health Security Agenda to prevent, detect, and respond to future infectious disease outbreaks overseas.

THE WHITE HOUSE PRESS OFFICE                       July 28, 2015

The Ebola epidemic in West Africa continues to galvanize global attention and resources as the international community strives to eliminate active cases and help the affected countries recover.  African leaders and African Union officials have shown extraordinary leadership in addressing the outbreak. The epidemic highlighted the urgent need to establish global capacity to prevent, detect, and respond to biological threats – to prevent future outbreaks from becoming epidemics. 

Beginning with the release of the National Strategy for Countering Biological Threats in 2009, and outlined in his 2011 speech at the United Nations General Assembly, President Obama has called upon all countries to come together to prevent, detect, and respond to infectious disease threats, whether naturally occurring, accidental or deliberately spread.  Today, the President underscored the unwavering U.S. commitment to partnering with Africans, their governments, and all who will join the effort to improve health security across the continent and for all people.

Commentary on U.S. legal and policy issues raised by the Ebola outbreak

WASHINGTON LAWYER by Sarah Kellog       April, 2015 edition

...Despite knowing that Ebola would likely find its way here (to the U.S.), the public health system was ill-prepared to fight the disease. It was caught napping, unable to swiftly formulate an effective national plan to contain the virus, address the concerns of medical professionals, and calm the public’s mushrooming fears....

The same lack of preparation seemed evident in how government authorities responded and applied public health statutes and regulations, especially at the state and local levels. Legal experts say U.S. public health law is robust enough to address any disease crisis, even one as deadly as Ebola, but the people who administer the law showed a profound ignorance about disease prevention and mitigation, as well as of basic civil rights, in dealing with the Ebola threat.

“Legally, we’re in excellent shape,” says James Hodge, a professor of public health law and ethics at Arizona State University Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law and a national expert on infectious diseases and the law. “Politically, we’re severely challenged.”

Read complete article.

....To the extent there is discussion of improving the international response to epidemics, the focus has been on the need to reform the World Health Organization. Such reforms are badly needed, but even a fully effective WHO will not close the most gaping holes in the world’s epidemic response system. Even if the WHO did a better job of recognizing outbreaks that pose a risk of epidemic and alerting the world that action is needed, it does not have the substantial response function needed to combat such an epidemic. Recent discussions about creating a WHO response function — assuming that the agency could be trusted to manage it — rely largely on overburdened and underfunded nongovernmental organizations to staff a response. Thus, any new WHO response capacity will lack military-style mobile hospitals ready to be deployed; battalions of medical personnel with accompanying security support to isolate and treat the infectious and the ill; or a medical airlift capacity to move patients to places where they can get help...