Thursday, 30 April 2009


From the BBC News website following the authorities in Mexico saying they think they have pinpointed where the swine flu virus began. The video features ABC News' Jeffrey Kofman speaking to a boy who is believed to be the first sufferer, in La Gloria, Mexico.

Read more

Tuesday, 28 April 2009


By IAN SCOONES, STEPS Centre Co-Director

More than 150 deaths in Mexico, a public emergency declared in the US, China banning imports of pigs from the USA and Mexico, health authorities across Asia and the Pacific on red alert, stock market prices for agriculture and travel industries down, while pharmaceutical stocks rise. These are just some of the symptoms of a rising wave of swine flu panic sweeping its way around the world.

As flu experts attempt to make sense of the emerging information about the threat from a new A/H1N1 influenza strain, the response from the top is unequivocally hard-hitting. US President Barack Obama has ordered a "very active, aggressive, and coordinated response,” according to White House homeland security advisor John Brennan. Meanwhile, with 20 confirmed cases of swine flu in the US, the country has procured seven million treatment courses of Tamiflu.

But will an “active, aggressive, and coordinated response” work? Recent disease events and threats, including swine flu, SARS, avian and human influenza and haemorrhagic fevers, have brought epidemics to global attention as never before. But how to address them has become a major challenge for twenty-first century health policy.

The increasing risk from newly-emerging diseases, and particularly those with the potential to become pandemic, is the result of a complex combination of social, ecological, environmental and economic factors. These include shifts in land use and migration, changes in livelihoods and food systems, climate change and increasing global travel and urbanisation. Most experts agree that a pandemic is almost inevitable at some point – and this will most likely be the result of transmission from animals. A global influenza pandemic could, under worst case scenarios, result in massive mortalities and huge economic disruption.

Following the avian influenza outbreaks of the past few years, much effort has been expended on devising pandemic preparedness and contingency plans, as well as improving surveillance and response systems and, in some places, stockpiling drugs and vaccines. But is the world prepared for a pandemic? Do we have effective global disease surveillance and control systems that can prevent a disaster?

The organisational landscape of global health has become increasingly complex. Debates continue over which organisations are in control of global health policy. Issues of national security and sovereignty, coordination, integration and harmonisation have accordingly come to the fore. The World Health Organisation’s revised International Health Regulations provide a global framework, but they rely on effective surveillance, timely reporting and the capacity to respond at all levels.

As the unfolding swine flu story is showing, once an outbreak is declared, international and national responses can swing into action quickly and effectively. So far the spread has been limited and mortality levels variable, although worryingly showing signs of a pandemic pattern. But what happens if the virus spreads? In pandemic situations, difficult trade-offs are presented between, for example, public health concerns, trade revenues, tourist movements and wider economic activity. These inevitably present major challenges for politicians and policymakers. Should the borders be closed? Should the army be called in to prevent movement? And who should decide? Such questions challenge global health governance arrangements to the full.

Identifying any new diseases early must of course be at the centre of any response to emerging infectious diseases. With most new human diseases emerging from animals, getting to grips with the social, economic and ecological drivers of disease emergence, before a deadly outbreak is essential. With increasingly intensified farming techniques and with humans and animals living in close proximity in dense urban settlements, for example, the potential for the emergence of new diseases is ever present.

No-one yet knows the back-story of the current swine flu outbreak. Mexican health officials do not seem to know how the virus emerged, when and from where. Genetic analysis shows an unusual mix of genes from North American and Eurasian pigs, birds and humans. A deeper analysis of the socio-ecological conditions for disease emergence and transmission is therefore essential, if lessons are to be learned. For the longer term, disease surveillance systems that move beyond disease-specific programmes towards integrated disease control systems are needed that look at human and animal diseases in tandem.

To understand the complex dynamic drivers of disease emergence and transmission thus requires solid epidemiological and medical information, but also insights from ecology, land use studies, socio-cultural and economic studies – and perhaps above all local knowledge and insights on changing disease environments. Perhaps pig farmers, meat processors and traders in Mexico know a lot about what has happened over the past months as the disease evolved and spread without detection and reporting. But we don’t know – indeed the virus has never even been isolated in pigs, so the origins remain obscure. Because of the slow reporting and confusion about the early spread in Mexico, the world has been taken by surprise as the virus quickly spread beyond any possibility of localised containment.

Right now, of course, the spotlight is focused on the international public health response. Margaret Chan, the director general of the WHO, has declared the swine flu outbreak a public health emergency of international concern, and governments around the world are gearing up for a full pandemic response – something which hopefully will not be needed. Keiji Fukuda, influenza chief at the WHO, argues that the world is now more prepared for a flu pandemic than it was when the last one struck. He is right, but in the complex, dynamic world of viral disease ecology, uncertainty and surprise are inevitable. Preparing for a pandemic means preparing for surprises – and being ready to respond rapidly and flexibly under conditions of uncertainty. As the experience with avian influenza has shown, this may require more than simply the top-down, “active and aggressive” technocratic response so often urged.

Other Resources:

STEPS Centre work on epidemics

STEPS Centre research on avian influenza and pandemic preparedness

STEPS Working Paper, Health in a Dynamic World


What you need to know about swine flu from New Scientist

Read more

Tuesday, 7 April 2009


By JULIA DAY, STEPS Centre member

Genetically-modified (GM) crops are sometimes trumpeted as the solution to the global food crisis, and the route to transforming developing agriculture and reducing poverty for millions. For others they spell doom and disaster, bringing with them unacceptable environmental and safety risks. But what is the reality?

Over the past ten years, GM crops – particularly transgenic insect-resistant crop varieties – have been used widely by farmers in different parts of the developing world. What has been the impact on agricultural production and poverty? What institutional, regulatory and wider policy issues arise?

In the heart of London's political world, at the Palace of Westminster on June 10, the STEPS Centre is holding an event to explore these issues, drawing on more than a decade of research from Africa, Asia, Latin America and Europe. The speakers will be Dominic Glover, Wageningen University; Erik Millstone, SPRU Science and Technology Policy Research, University of Sussex and the STEPS Centre; and Peter Newell, University of East Anglia.

As the world faces a major challenge to feed a growing population, the speakers will examine whether and to what degree GM crops really can make a substantive contribution to increasing food production and strengthening livelihood security. Should European governments and aid agencies back a GM-led push towards boosting agricultural production across the world? What governance measures are required in order to ensure that new technologies work for the poor?

Where and when? June 10, 18.00-20.00, Committee Room 17, Palace of Westminster, London. To reserve a place RSVP to Charlie Matthews:
Read more

Monday, 6 April 2009


By MELISSA LEACH, STEPS Centre director

Last week I visited Sierra Leone catching up on happenings in its eastern rainforests following a long absence and a decade of civil war, and exploring collaboration possibilities for the STEPS Centre's work on epidemics and the ecology of infectious disease. It was fantastic to be back there, and to feel this wonderful country peaceful and bustling again after such a difficult time. But life and livelihoods are incredibly hard - not least for the communities in the relatively isolated, heavily forested eastern regions.

I lived in one such forest-edge village just before the war and re-visiting now is extraordinary, both in an upbeat way - about half the people I knew have come back, and are rebuilding their lives - but many others have died or scattered, and all have harrowing stories to tell.

As people here struggle to rebuild their houses and re-establish their farming amidst a political economy of diamond mining and timber extraction that continues to rip off their resources, so they are also struggling with a host of diseases and their vectors - some of them inextricably linked to the dynamic environmental situation in which they live.

Malaria and schistosomiasis are associated with the region's streams and inland valley swamps and the re-establishment of swamp rice farming is creating renewed opportnities for infection. Onchocerciasis, or river blindness, is associated with the black flies found in many of the area's faster-moving streams, with farming and the gathering of forest foods and medicines creating vulnerability to infection.

Lassa fever, a serious haemorrhagic fever endemic in eastern Sierra Leone, Guinea and Liberia, is carried by the rat Mastomys natalensis which inhabits forest and domestic buildings. The poor house and rice store construction associated with extreme poverty, together with the crowded conditions of mining encampments, provide ideal conditions for this disease vector to nest, while hunger - and the need to eat rats - and difficulties in dealing with waste provide ideal transmission conditions. In short, the dynamics of infectious disease, and those of agro-ecology, livelihoods and poverty, are inextricably intertwined.

Yet many questions remain about exactly how these dynamics are playing out, and how the Mende women and men of this region understand them. Greater attention to local knowledge and categories, and a fuller understanding of the ecological dynamics of disease from the scale of houses to communities to regions, might inform pathways towards more effective surveillance and response, for instance through strategies for participatory surveillance and integrated vector management.

At least, these are the ideas that Sierra Leonean researchers and I have been discussing at the Mano River Union lassa fever research network based at the government hospital in Kenema, and at the nascent research institute on tropical diseases at the School of Community Health sciences, part of the new Njala University. Both these institutions are struggling to re-establish following the war, and are eager for international collaboration which can work with and complement the tremendous skills here in vector ecology, lab diagnosis and clinical treatment (which in the case of lassa, has recently been strengthened by focused collaboration with Tulane University in the US), and community-based public health.

In the context of the STEPS Centre's ongoing Epidemics project, which has highlighted the need for engaged research on the political and cultural ecology of infectious disease dynamics to offset and complement current short-term, outbreak-focused narratives and responses, I really hope we can build such collaboration. The need is clearly there, and so is the interest. It has been a fascinating and worthwhile - if emotional and disturbing - trip.
Read more