Investigators accessed longitudinal human data from ebola virus vaccination for signals of efficacy against the Bundibugyo species now surging in the Democratic Republic of Congo.
|Articles|March 21, 2018
US Investment in Global Health Security—A Good Return
Author(s)Saskia v. Popescu
In the dollars and cents of health security, funding towards the Global Health Security Agenda is a smart investment.
Advertisement
Last summer, I wrote about
Beth Cameron, PhD, vice president of Global Biological Policy and Programs at the Nuclear Threat Initiative noted in a recent article that, “without sufficient funding of $208.2 million a year for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and $172.5 million a year at the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), we [will] weaken the global network of protection, increase risk to American lives, and threaten investments from other governments and the private sector.”
Like many components of public health and infectious disease, the importance of prevention is often forgotten until an outbreak occurs. Hospital preparedness and infection prevention were not necessarily “big ticket” items in the United States until we had Ebola in Dallas, Texas, but it only takes 1 laboratory incident to remind us of the importance of biosecurity and biosafety.
Currently, there are 60 countries that participate in the GHSA, and the United States either leads or significantly contributes to several of its action packages. It can be hard to truly understand the scope of the GHSA and what US participation really means, though. You could argue the answer is readily apparent: “An outbreak anywhere means an outbreak everywhere,” and “disease knows no borders,” but, what’s going on behind the scenes?
Recently, USAID released their
Some of the examples of programs that have benefited from US GHSA assistance are apparent across all Action Packages (Prevent, Detect, and Respond). Within the Antimicrobial Resistance Action Package (Prevent), for example, they note that in India, hospital staff have been able to strengthen their ability to detect and prevent the spread of multidrug-resistant organisms and infections through outbreak investigations, isolation and transmission-based precautions, and laboratory-based efforts. Furthermore, in biosecurity efforts, senior lab technicians in Liberia have been trained on biosecurity and biosafety measures, as well as internal auditing.
Within the Detect Action Packages, US GHSA assistance has helped strengthen national laboratory systems and real-time surveillance in areas such as Vietnam, where they launched a pilot of an event-based surveillance program with community engagement that resulted in the reporting of over 100 local outbreaks within the first 6 months.
In addition, in the Workforce Development Action Package (Detect), 79 universities in Africa and Asia have facilitated One Health training for more than 11,500 professionals.
Lastly, Emergency Operations Centers were created within the Respond Action Packages, which facilitated Cameroon’s development of stronger emergency management capabilities. The US also supported the Medical Countermeasures and Personnel Deployment Action Package (Respond) through the provision of 2000 personal protective equipment (PPE) kits to the Democratic Republic of Congo, 300 PPE kits to Uganda, and 100 PPE kits to Guinea, in response to outbreaks that ranged from Ebola to avian influenza and anthrax.
These are but a handful of the contributions that the GHSA has made across the world with US investments. It is a remarkable thing when investment is made in global health security efforts, but without the United States leading and encouraging such efforts, the future of global health security and American biodefense is at stake.
Advertisement
Related to this article
In the first episode of our news series looking at the food safety network, Lynette Johnston, PhD, offers insights into how the federal government surveillance infrastructure operates, and how epidemiologists serve as food detectives in determining bacterial pathogens and potential foodborne outbreaks.
In mid-May, as the world was still grappling with an unexpected hantavirus outbreak aboard a tourism vessel, news broke of an Ebola outbreak in the Ituri Province of the Democratic Republic of the Congo spanning at least 3 health zones, including Bunia, Rwampara, and Mongbwalu.
In this week's top infectious disease stories, a Pennsylvania teen became the state's fourth measles death in weeks, the CDC reported a 17% summer surge in rabies exposure calls, new research revisited whether cefepime raises mortality risk, a multihospital review examined ceftriaxone's safety after state alerts, and examining Legionella pneumonia diagnostics.
The latest CDC numbers show a 5.37% increase of measles cases from week-to-week. In Pennsylvania, the fourth measles-related death was reported in 2026. Additionally, the CDC has made a change in the way it will report deaths.
A "Clinician Outreach" from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in April anticipated an increase in rabies exposures, and the striking surge in case reports this summer prompted a recent health advisory alert from the federal agency.
Reported cases of Legionnaires’ disease have been on the rise for the past decade, and identifying Legionella bacteria requires specialized testing in the microbiology lab. Here is a clinical overview of Legionella bacteria, including required testing, treatment, and reporting to public health officials.
A retrospective multihospital study found that severe adverse events occurred at similarly low rates with ceftriaxone and other IV cephalosporins suggesting there is no evidence to support avoiding ceftriaxone despite recent health department safety alerts.