
Hoping that viruses will go away is not enough – what is needed is continuous vigilance
In the public debate about pandemics, there is a belief as persistent as it is dangerous: the idea that epidemics end, that viruses – once contained – will disappear like a summer storm.
But virology and epidemiology teach us that viruses do not disappear. Viruses adapt and mutate. They lurk in the folds of health inequalities and gaps in global surveillance.
The latest alarm comes from Sierra Leone, which, after reporting its first two cases of mpox (formerly known as monkeypox) in January and declaring a public health emergency, is now facing a significant expansion of the epidemic.
According to official sources, the country has reported over 3,000 confirmed cases and at least 15 deaths, with infections concentrated particularly in Western Area Urban, Western Area Rural, and Bombali.
National health authorities, assisted by the WHO, Unicef, Africa CDC, and Gavi, have implemented a comprehensive emergency plan: strengthening surveillance, isolating cases, contact tracing, and launching awareness campaigns in schools and rural communities.
As a result, 61,300 doses of the MVA-BN vaccine are expected to arrive in the coming weeks, and hundreds of health workers are being trained on diagnostic, treatment, and prevention protocols.
This outbreak is becoming particularly worrisome due to the high vulnerability of children, who face a mortality risk up to four times higher than adults, especially in conditions of malnutrition or poor hygiene.
On a continental scale, Africa is witnessing a rise in cases, with over 50,000 reported since the beginning of the year and more than 1,700 deaths. A critical factor is the viral clade involved.
While full genomic mapping is still underway, the Africa CDC has reported that clade IIb, which has been associated with faster human-to-human transmission and potentially exponential spread, is likely the dominant strain in Sierra Leone.
Despite Sierra Leone's improved emergency response capacity, gained during the 2014-2016 Ebola outbreak, healthcare infrastructure remains under strain.
Patients often share beds, and clinical recognition delays persist, reflecting systemic pressures that could hamper containment efforts.
Viruses return when the world 'moves on'
Recent history, from Covid-19 to polio, shows that viruses do not 'die out' with a decree or a short-lived vaccination campaign.
Zoonotic viruses, in particular, have an inherent ability to remain in circulation between animal and human hosts, often with different symptomatologies, and to re-emerge under favourable conditions.
When surveillance loosens, when public health is underfunded, when the world 'moves on,' viruses return.
Mpox is emblematic in this regard. For decades considered a virus confined to parts of central Africa, it has found new vectors, new susceptible populations, and new routes of transmission.
Its recent mutations – linked to clade IIb – suggest adaptations to human infection that could make it endemic even in hitherto unaffected areas. Its apparent disappearance in high-income countries after the 2022-2023 wave is illusory: it was not a biological defeat, but a logistical suspension.
Yet there are examples of good health behaviour from which the whole world should draw inspiration.
In Tanzania in 2023, a small outbreak of Marburg virus – one of the world's deadliest pathogens, belonging to the same family as Ebola – was contained through a timely, transparent and coordinated response.
The Tanzanian Ministry of Health quickly put in place measures for contact tracing, case isolation, effective public communication and cooperation with WHO.
Similar efficiency was demonstrated in Rwanda, where preparedness for potential Marburg cases became a pillar of public health strategy, despite the fact that no outbreaks had occurred.
Both countries invested in decentralised surveillance systems, widespread health training, and integration of human and veterinary medicine-embodying the concept of 'One Health'.
These examples show that prevention is not a luxury of rich countries, but a strategic choice that is possible everywhere if supported by political will and real, non-paternalistic international cooperation.
The new mpox outbreak in Sierra Leone must be interpreted in light of a fundamental fact: the transmissibility of viruses knows no geopolitical boundaries.
Emerging diseases are now more than ever a global health security issue. A delay in diagnosis in Freetown can trigger an infection in Paris, London or Toronto within days.
Yet funding for surveillance and diagnostic laboratories remains concentrated in a few areas. Large regions of Africa, Asia, and Latin America lack sentinel systems capable of detecting new threats in real time. Where the first patient is not identified, the virus has already won the first round.
Continuing to hope that 'it won't happen here,' or that 'this time it is just a small outbreak,' is a mistake we have already paid dearly for.
The mpox emergency in Sierra Leone is not yet a pandemic, but it is already an opportunity: to invest, to coordinate, to train.
Epidemiological surveillance must become a structural and continuous investment, not an emergency response. We need a global network that not only responds, but predicts. One that recognises the global potential in seemingly minor outbreaks, and that funds local health systems not just to treat, but to monitor and to anticipate.
Hoping that viruses will disappear is an understandable but naive wish. The only scientifically sound response is permanent, equitable, multilevel surveillance. We can no longer afford to ignore weak signals. Every contained outbreak is a shared victory; every ignored outbreak is a global defeat waiting to happen.
Francesco Branda is an Adjunct professor at the Faculty of Medicine and Surgery at Campus Bio-Medico University of Rome
Protect yourself and your family by learning more about Global Health Security

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Guardian
4 hours ago
- The Guardian
RFK Jr will be ‘personally responsible' for children's deaths by halting vaccine alliance funding, experts say
Robert F Kennedy Jr will be 'personally responsible' for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of children after he refused to renew US funding for a global vaccines body, public health experts said. The US health secretary said Wednesday that the United States would halt funding for Gavi, the vaccine alliance that has immunised more than one billion children since 2000, in a statement that has also been criticised for spreading disinformation on vaccine safety. Gavi is a partnership between public bodies and the private sector that works to provide vaccines in many of the world's poorest countries. It has prevented an estimated 18.8 million deaths, and hosts global emergency stockpiles against Ebola, yellow fever, meningitis and cholera. The US has long been one of its major funders, and provided around 13% of its budget. Gavi announced after a pledging event on Wednesday that it had secured more than $9bn in donations for the next five years, and would continue to chase the $11.9bn total it required. But in a video played at the event, Kennedy said the US would no longer contribute to the organisation until it had worked to 're-earn the public trust'. He criticised Gavi's actions during the Covid-19 pandemic, suggested it should not recommend Covid-19 vaccines for pregnant women, and said it had 'neglected the key issue of vaccine safety'. Gavi set out a detailed rebuttal to Kennedy's claims, stressing that its 'utmost concern is the health and safety of children'. Atul Gawande, a former senior official at USAID, wrote online: 'This pull out will cost 100s of thousands of children's lives a year – and RFK Jr will be personally responsible.' Gavi's own estimates, reported by the New York Times, suggest the loss of US support may mean 75 million children miss out on routine vaccinations over the next five years and 1.2 million die as a result. The UK government has also been criticised for lowering its funding for Gavi, although its £1.25bn ($1.7bn) pledge still made it Gavi's top donor country. Other major donors include the Gates Foundation, which committed $1.6bn, and the European Union a combined €2 billion ($2.3bn). In his video, Kennedy particularly criticised 'whole cell' DTP vaccines provided by Gavi, which protect against diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis (whooping cough). The US and many richer countries, including the UK, have switched to a newer version that causes fewer short-term reactions but does not remain effective for as long, requiring more boosters. The World Health Organization says both types have 'excellent safety records'. Dr Tom Frieden, president and CEO of Resolve to Save Lives and a former CDC director, said: 'Many countries choose to continue the whole cell vaccine. They may have decided this because their populations have a greater risk of serious illness, they have healthcare systems less able to deal with serious pertussis infections, or may simply have made the opposite decision – more short-term adverse reactions, better protection against pertussis. 'Calling this choice not 'taking vaccine safety seriously' is misinformation, plain and simple.' Seth Berkley, former chief executive of Gavi, said in a post on LinkedIn that Kennedy's claims were 'a mix of misinformation and some disinformation' and 'disingenuous', adding: 'It is irresponsible to provide disinformation from a position of political power.' A major study partly funded by Gavi and published in the Lancet this week found vaccine coverage had stalled or reversed globally, driven by persistent health inequalities and rising levels of misinformation and hesitancy.


The Independent
9 hours ago
- The Independent
Idaho doctor, patients sue over new law halting public benefits to immigrants in US unlawfully
An Idaho doctor and four residents are challenging a new state law that halts some of the few public benefits available to people living in the U.S. unlawfully, including a program that provides access to life-saving HIV and AIDS medication for low income patients. The ACLU of Idaho filed the federal lawsuit Thursday night on behalf of Dr. Abby Davids and four people with HIV who are not named because they are immigrants without lawful permanent residency. The complaint says the new law is vague, contradicts federal law and makes it impossible for health care providers to determine exactly what kind of immigration status is excluded and how to verify that status for patients. They want a judge to grant them class-action status, expanding any ruling to other impacted people. Dozens of patients treated by one Boise-area clinic stand to lose access to HIV and AIDS medication under the law, according to the complaint, including several cared for by Davids. 'Withdrawing HIV treatment from her patients will not only have devastating consequences on their health, it raises the public health risk of increased HIV transmission,' the ACLU wrote in the lawsuit. 'When her patients are undetectable, they cannot transmit the virus. Without HIV treatment, however, they cannot maintain an undetectable viral level and therefore are able to transmit the virus to others.' The new Idaho law takes effect July 1, and appears to be the first limiting public health benefits since President Donald Trump ordered federal agencies to enhance eligibility verification and ensure that public benefits aren't going to ineligible immigrants. The law requires people to verify that they are legal U.S. residents to receive public benefits like communicable disease testing, vaccinations, prenatal and postnatal care for women, crisis counseling, some food assistance for children and even access to food banks or soup kitchens that rely on public funding. Federal law generally prohibits immigrants in the U.S. illegally from receiving taxpayer-funded benefits like Medicare, Medicaid, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families and Social Security. But there are some exceptions for things like emergency medical care and other emergency or public health services. Idaho's law still allows for emergency medical services. But in a June 18 letter to health care providers, Idaho Division of Public Health administrator Elke Shaw-Tulloch said HIV is a long-term condition and not an emergency — so people must verify their lawful presence in order to get benefits through the federal Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program. The HIV patients challenging the new law include a married couple from Columbia with pending asylum applications, a man who was brought to the U.S. when he was just 4 years old and has Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals status until next year, and a man from Mexico who has been living and working in Idaho since 2020. One of the patients said she and her husband were diagnosed with HIV in 2019 and immediately started antiretroviral therapy, receiving the medications at no cost through the Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program. The medication has lowered the viral load in her body enough that it is now undetectable, she wrote in a court filing, ensuring that she won't transmit the virus to others. 'My medication protected my daughter while I was pregnant because it prevented me from transmitting HIV to her during pregnancy,' she wrote. The treatment allows her to be with her child, watching her grow, she said. Davids has been trying for weeks to get clarity from the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare about exactly what kind of verification her patients will have to show, and exactly which kinds of immigration status are considered 'lawful.' But the state has yet to provide clear direction, according to the complaint. 'I am really scared about what this means for many of our patients. Their lives will now be in jeopardy,' Davids wrote in a May 30 email to the Department of Health and Welfare.


The Guardian
12 hours ago
- The Guardian
US pediatricians criticize RFK Jr's new vaccine panel: ‘Truly an embarrassment'
Robert F Kennedy Jr's newly appointed vaccine advisory panel is facing criticism from pediatricians after its announcement of plans to reassess the current vaccination schedules for children and adolescents. Experts warn that the move appears designed to undermine public trust in immunization. The chair of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) Committee on Infectious Diseases, Dr Sean O'Leary, said during a Wednesday press briefing that the rest of the world is looking at the US and its new Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) 'in horror'. 'It is truly an embarrassment at this point, what's happening with ACIP,' said O'Leary. While the new ACIP has instigated chaos among vaccine policy infrastructure during their Wednesday meeting, the AAP emphasized a need to continue a commitment to publishing independent, science-based vaccine guidelines. Wednesday marked the first ACIP meeting since health secretary Kennedy dismissed all 17 existing voting members and installed eight new ones, a group that reportedly lost one member before the meeting convened. Some of these new appointees have been associated with the spread of vaccine misinformation. The AAP representatives abstained from participating because they view the new ACIP as 'illegitimate'. The AAP's own meeting was scheduled to immediately follow the ACIP session, giving pediatric experts an opportunity to respond to the new committee's statements and direction. 'What we heard in this meeting was really a false narrative that the current vaccine policies are flawed and that they need fixing. That's completely false,' said O'Leary. 'Vaccine policies have saved millions of lives, trillions of dollars, and our immunization system is a model for the rest of the world.' Among the ACIP's early initiatives is a separate working group that plans to examine vaccines that have not undergone a recent review, specifically those not studied in over seven years. One vaccine that drew immediate attention is the hepatitis B birth dose. O'Leary criticized the focus on reviewing vaccine schedules, which he says 'has been an anti-vaccine trope for many, many years'. A schedule review 'sounds good at first glance, but the fact is, these vaccines are essentially always being reviewed in real time through a number of different mechanisms, safety surveillance mechanisms, as well as disease surveillance mechanisms', O'Leary said. 'The hepatitis B birth dose is one of the cornerstones of our hepatitis B prevention policy here in the US, and it has been highly successful in reducing the rate of perinatally acquired hepatitis B,' he added. An AAP article says that infants infected with hepatitis B at birth face a 90% likelihood of developing chronic infection. Without medical intervention, roughly 25% of those children will die from the disease. Kennedy's decision to overhaul the ACIP has sparked concern among medical professionals. The new panel's review includes vaccines like the MMR shot, which protects against measles, mumps, rubella and varicella (chickenpox), as well as the hepatitis B vaccine given at birth. 'We do still need to maintain higher coverage in the US of MMR, you're seeing the measles outbreaks in real time,' O'Leary said. 'We need to maintain very high measles vaccination coverage. And this ACIP discussion, to me, is designed to sow distrust in measles vaccination.' The US is now enduring the largest measles outbreak in decades. Centered in west Texas, the measles outbreak has killed two unvaccinated children and one adult and spread to neighboring states. Measles had been declared eliminated from the US in 2000, but it has been spreading in undervaccinated communities.