| Submit your comments on this article |
| International-UN-NGOs |
| Flu Pandemic threatens stability; need Manhattan Project-type vaccine effort |
| 2005-05-05 |
| The wealthy countries of the G-8 need to mount a Manhattan Project-style program to expand global influenza vaccine production in order to avert massive economic losses and political instability when the next pandemic hits, the author of a commentary in Thursday's issue of the New England Journal of Medicine says. Countries like the United States and Canada cannot afford to focus only on protecting the health of their own citizens, given a flu pandemic's enormous potential to claim lives, drain the global economy and trigger panic and chaos around the globe, argued author Dr. Michael Osterholm, a leading infectious disease and bioterrorism expert. "(Pandemic) influenza has the ability to literally bring this world to a screeching halt," Osterholm said Wednesday in an interview from Minneapolis, where he is director of the University of Minnesota's Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy. "Anyone who's handling this at just a country level is missing . . . the point that even if you can vaccinate your population, the collateral damage of a world in pandemic state will be so significant that they still will have tremendous, tremendous disruption and loss." Influenza experts insist sporadic pandemics are biological certainties, triggered when a strain to which humans have no immunity arises from nature to sweep the globe. Science currently has no way of predicting when a pandemic will occur or which strain will cause the next one. However, many flu experts fear the H5N1 strain rampaging through Asia may be poised to ignite the first pandemic of the 21st century. Spurred by this fear, a number of developed countries have drafted pandemic response plans with provisions to make special vaccines and stockpile antiviral drugs that experts hope will reduce the number of fatalities in a pandemic. But these measures are costly and out of the reach of most countries around the globe. Canada's Health Minister, Ujjal Dosanjh, proposed an international meeting of about 15 leading developed and developing countries to address global pandemic preparedness needs when he met with U.S. No mention of the UN. They are clearly interested in getting things done. Health Secretary Mike Leavitt in March. But those plans are currently on hold because of the Liberal government's precarious hold on power. "These are all issues sort of up in the air as a result of the current environment in Ottawa," Dosanjh admitted Wednesday. Osterholm's commentary, commissioned by the prestigious journal, calls for a massive, multinational initiative to modernize and vastly expand global flu vaccine production capacity, which currently can only produce about 330 million flu shots a year. Thats less than 5% of the worlds population. "This has to be a G-8 priority. And they have to do it for the rest of the world for their own security," he insisted. "The kind of chaos and disorder that can occur with a disease that causes this kind of impact could easily be the tipping point for the instability of a number of governments around the world, particularly as their economies implode." I've speculated before on the places that will ride out the chaos relatively unaffected if an epidemic starts to kill millions. Its a short list. The USA is at risk becuase of its dependence on imported energy and insecure borders. Otherwise the article ignores the moot issue of whether the vaccine can be produced quickly enough. More at the link. |
| Posted by:phil_b |
| #11 Xbalanke, my sympathies. I take care of a couple of folks with post-polio syndrome, and it's very difficult on them. |
| Posted by: Steve White 2005-05-05 13:42 |
| #10 Sadly, the price paid by non-functioning societies will continue to be poverty, disease, and unnecessary death, avoided by the rulers for now, but unavoidable for even them should a pandemic occur. Wonderfully stated trailingwife. Well put. |
| Posted by: Yosemite Sam 2005-05-05 12:51 |
| #9 These requirements are over and above the 7%, you know. It's all there in my plan, somewhere. We will let you know Regards the 7% thingy, cough it up, heh. |
| Posted by: .Koffee 2005-05-05 11:46 |
| #8 teh responsibility of government-supported research is to advance national interests first, all other considerations should be secondary. Our history of caring for the rest of the world entitles us to say STFU until we've taken care of our own. We have always done our best to carry the world's ills on our back, and I'm sure as well here, but.... |
| Posted by: Frank G 2005-05-05 11:30 |
| #7 too true: Two of my siblings, now in their 50s, both got polio in 1953. My sister got a very mild case and only had some damage to her diapragm, resulting in a paunchy look. My brother, however, nearly died. When it had run its course he was left with one thoroughly useless arm and other muscle damage in his upper body. Since reaching his fifties, he has shown some of the latent symptoms associated with childhood polio (extreme fatigue, weakness), and had to have a heart valve replaced. And he is one of the lucky ones. Truly a horrible disease. I just don't get these anti-vaccine nutballs. |
| Posted by: Xbalanke 2005-05-05 11:30 |
| #6 TW, I don't know where you got the notion of a semi-pandemic from, but I can assure you that once a virulent flu outbreak exceeds our capacity to control it then it will be a full blown pandemic. The only exceptions will be places that can exclude it at their borders. I am not confident that anywhere can do this but a few places have a chance, notably Australia. |
| Posted by: phil_b 2005-05-05 11:27 |
| #5 Long technical post on the topic. |
| Posted by: phil_b 2005-05-05 11:19 |
| #4 OTOH polio vaccinations - including updates - are starting to look like a very important priority. I have a friend who had it as a kid. She has been unable to do more than walk slowly with a cane ever since. Nasty stuff. |
| Posted by: too true 2005-05-05 11:04 |
| #3 To be absolutely heartless about this, the countries that will be ravaged by the semi-pandemic will be those least involved in the world economy, just as those currently ravaged by AIDs, etc are. It quite breaks my heart to even acknowlege this fact, and I hope that the pandemic predictions will continue to be as accurate as they have been since the 1970s, but I see no way around it. The G-8 countries simply cannot produce and store world-population amounts of vaccines for each candidate strain of influenza, not to mention all the other pathogens with potential for epidemic. Nor, in a pandemic situation, should we even send in medical teams to immunize such unprotected populations until the team members and all their contacts (including flight crews and airport staff at both ends of the flights) have been rendered safe, lest a team bring the pathogen home with them. Sadly, the price paid by non-functioning societies will continue to be poverty, disease, and unnecessary death, avoided by the rulers for now, but unavoidable for even them should a pandemic occur. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2005-05-05 11:03 |
| #2 The Moose is right. I think the chances of producing enough vaccine quickly enough to have any material effect outside the developed countries is close to zero. Antiviral agents like Tamiflu are a much better option since they are effective with all strains. |
| Posted by: phil_b 2005-05-05 11:01 |
| #1 This article belies a basic ignorance of the properties of the virus, how it mutates, and how it is propagated. First of all, vaccine only works on a given strain, one slight change and your vaccine is useless. Second, vaccine cannot be produced instantly, it has to *grow* at a given pace. Third, it can only be distributed and delivered at a given pace: getting the needle into the person is very hard and time consuming. Fourth, the vaccine is only at best effective for 2-3 months, less for people with weak immune systems, so secondary 'waves' of a flu that lasts six to nine months get many people previously innoculated. Fifth, the influenza varies unpredictably in its target population; it might hit healthy young men more than infants or the elderly. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2005-05-05 10:49 |