From COVID-19 to mpox vaccine hoarding - Has the Global North learned its global health lessons?

IF 0.9 3区 哲学 Q3 ETHICS Developing World Bioethics Pub Date : 2024-10-24 DOI:10.1111/dewb.12468
Udo Schuklenk
{"title":"From COVID-19 to mpox vaccine hoarding - Has the Global North learned its global health lessons?","authors":"Udo Schuklenk","doi":"10.1111/dewb.12468","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>During the COVID-19 pandemic many writers decried the global north's hoarding of COVID-19 vaccines. The response ranged from authors calling said hoarding tamely ‘unethical’1 or, more aggressively, labeling this conduct as ‘Vaccine Apartheid.’2 Now that we have established that at a certain point in time in a WHO declared ‘public health emergency of international concern’3 vaccine hoarding becomes ethically problematic, how are things playing out in the currently ongoing mpox outbreak on the African continent? After all, in August this year the WHO declared just that. The Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention declared the mpox outbreak ‘a public health emergency of continental security’.4 This clearly constitutes a call to arms, both directed at partners in the global north, as well as to African governments, to take this outbreak seriously, and to commit the resources required to address it efficiently.</p><p>Mpox was first described in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) in 1970. At the time of writing this editorial, it is spreading rapidly in a number of African countries, including Burundi, Kenya, and Uganda, countries where mpox had never been reported before. Since then, it has also spread to South Africa and caused disease and death there, as well as to Sweden and Thailand. Such is the nature of global travel that an illness that is often sexually transmitted moves around quickly. At greatest risk of death are seemingly young children and people living with compromised immune systems, which undoubtedly will include many in sub-Saharan Africa who don't have reliable access to HIV medication.</p><p>At this point in time the DRC ‘remains the epicentre of disease, accounting for 96% of new cases and deaths.’ It is estimated that the currently affected African countries require about 10 million vaccine doses to get the mpox outbreak under control. Only around 2.6-3.6 million doses are available, and countries of the global north haven't donated what is needed, despite having uncontroversial ethical obligations to do so.5<sup>,</sup>6</p><p>Of course, there will be much talk about the need for transparency, but African countries’ governments will recall what happened after they reported truthfully the discovery of the COVID-19 Omicron variant. Racist, punitive travel bans were issued, and the harms they did to African people was much worse than anything caused by Omicron. None of that travel ban grandstanding implemented in many nation states, partly in order to avoid inflaming already existing xenophobic sentiments, prevented the rapid spread of the variant across the globe. One would hope Western governments have learned relevant lessons from this.</p><p>As a result of the failure of the global north to provide COVID-19 vaccines to people in the global south in a timely fashion, the WHO's legally binding International Health Regulations (IHR) were updated to include equitable access to lifesaving countermeasures. The IHR also explicitly requires nations to abstain from unnecessary travel bans. It will be interesting to see what this will mean in Realpolitik.</p><p>Mpox is oftentimes transmitted sexually, including by men who have sex with other men. A fair number of African countries have recently introduced legislation that criminalises such sexual activities. Leaving other human rights considerations aside, such measures are counterproductive, because they will make it less likely that those at risk will consider getting vaccinated when the vaccines become available.</p><p>As Larry Gostin and colleagues noted in a recent Editorial, countries of the global north have access to large quantities of mpox vaccines, however, in response to the WHO declaration the USA donated a paltry 50,000 doses and the EU provided another 200,000 doses.7 The vaccine hoarding on display here may well turn out to be counterproductive, when the outbreaks on the African continent can't be brought under control and eventually spread across the globe. While such spread would not be anything like the COVID-19 virus, it might still affect larger numbers of people due to its sexual transmissibility. Both in North America as well as in Europe population level immunity to mpox is low, leaving people in these countries vulnerable to a global outbreak. The best solution would be to prevent a global outbreak, but currently too little is done to achieve that.</p><p>It does look as if governments of the global north have learned very little from their global health failures during the COVID-19 pandemic.</p>","PeriodicalId":50590,"journal":{"name":"Developing World Bioethics","volume":"24 4","pages":"265-266"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/dewb.12468","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Developing World Bioethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/dewb.12468","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

During the COVID-19 pandemic many writers decried the global north's hoarding of COVID-19 vaccines. The response ranged from authors calling said hoarding tamely ‘unethical’1 or, more aggressively, labeling this conduct as ‘Vaccine Apartheid.’2 Now that we have established that at a certain point in time in a WHO declared ‘public health emergency of international concern’3 vaccine hoarding becomes ethically problematic, how are things playing out in the currently ongoing mpox outbreak on the African continent? After all, in August this year the WHO declared just that. The Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention declared the mpox outbreak ‘a public health emergency of continental security’.4 This clearly constitutes a call to arms, both directed at partners in the global north, as well as to African governments, to take this outbreak seriously, and to commit the resources required to address it efficiently.

Mpox was first described in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) in 1970. At the time of writing this editorial, it is spreading rapidly in a number of African countries, including Burundi, Kenya, and Uganda, countries where mpox had never been reported before. Since then, it has also spread to South Africa and caused disease and death there, as well as to Sweden and Thailand. Such is the nature of global travel that an illness that is often sexually transmitted moves around quickly. At greatest risk of death are seemingly young children and people living with compromised immune systems, which undoubtedly will include many in sub-Saharan Africa who don't have reliable access to HIV medication.

At this point in time the DRC ‘remains the epicentre of disease, accounting for 96% of new cases and deaths.’ It is estimated that the currently affected African countries require about 10 million vaccine doses to get the mpox outbreak under control. Only around 2.6-3.6 million doses are available, and countries of the global north haven't donated what is needed, despite having uncontroversial ethical obligations to do so.5,6

Of course, there will be much talk about the need for transparency, but African countries’ governments will recall what happened after they reported truthfully the discovery of the COVID-19 Omicron variant. Racist, punitive travel bans were issued, and the harms they did to African people was much worse than anything caused by Omicron. None of that travel ban grandstanding implemented in many nation states, partly in order to avoid inflaming already existing xenophobic sentiments, prevented the rapid spread of the variant across the globe. One would hope Western governments have learned relevant lessons from this.

As a result of the failure of the global north to provide COVID-19 vaccines to people in the global south in a timely fashion, the WHO's legally binding International Health Regulations (IHR) were updated to include equitable access to lifesaving countermeasures. The IHR also explicitly requires nations to abstain from unnecessary travel bans. It will be interesting to see what this will mean in Realpolitik.

Mpox is oftentimes transmitted sexually, including by men who have sex with other men. A fair number of African countries have recently introduced legislation that criminalises such sexual activities. Leaving other human rights considerations aside, such measures are counterproductive, because they will make it less likely that those at risk will consider getting vaccinated when the vaccines become available.

As Larry Gostin and colleagues noted in a recent Editorial, countries of the global north have access to large quantities of mpox vaccines, however, in response to the WHO declaration the USA donated a paltry 50,000 doses and the EU provided another 200,000 doses.7 The vaccine hoarding on display here may well turn out to be counterproductive, when the outbreaks on the African continent can't be brought under control and eventually spread across the globe. While such spread would not be anything like the COVID-19 virus, it might still affect larger numbers of people due to its sexual transmissibility. Both in North America as well as in Europe population level immunity to mpox is low, leaving people in these countries vulnerable to a global outbreak. The best solution would be to prevent a global outbreak, but currently too little is done to achieve that.

It does look as if governments of the global north have learned very little from their global health failures during the COVID-19 pandemic.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
从 COVID-19 到囤积麻风腮疫苗--全球北方是否吸取了全球卫生方面的教训?
在COVID-19大流行期间,许多作家谴责全球北方囤积COVID-19疫苗。作者们的反应不一,有的称这种囤积是“不道德的”,有的则更为激进地将这种行为称为“疫苗种族隔离”。现在我们已经确定,在世卫组织宣布的“国际关注的突发公共卫生事件”的某个时间点,囤积疫苗在道德上存在问题,那么目前正在非洲大陆爆发的麻疹疫情的情况如何呢?毕竟,今年8月世界卫生组织就这样宣布了。非洲疾病控制和预防中心宣布麻疹的爆发是“大陆安全的突发公共卫生事件”这显然是对全球北方伙伴和非洲各国政府发出的战斗呼吁,要求它们认真对待这一疫情,并承诺提供有效应对这一疫情所需的资源。麻疹于1970年在刚果民主共和国首次被发现。在撰写这篇社论时,麻疹正在包括布隆迪、肯尼亚和乌干达在内的一些非洲国家迅速传播,这些国家以前从未报告过麻疹。从那时起,它也蔓延到南非,并在那里以及瑞典和泰国造成疾病和死亡。这就是全球旅行的本质,一种通常通过性传播的疾病传播得很快。死亡风险最大的是看似年幼的儿童和免疫系统受损的人,这无疑包括撒哈拉以南非洲的许多人,他们无法可靠地获得艾滋病毒药物。目前,刚果民主共和国仍然是疾病中心,占新发病例和死亡病例的96%。据估计,目前受影响的非洲国家需要大约1000万剂疫苗才能控制麻疹疫情。只有大约260万至360万剂疫苗可供使用,而全球北方国家还没有捐赠所需的疫苗,尽管它们有这样做的无可争议的伦理义务。5,6当然,关于透明度的必要性会有很多讨论,但非洲国家政府会回忆起他们如实报告发现新冠病毒欧米克隆变异后发生的事情。种族主义的、惩罚性的旅行禁令被颁布,它们对非洲人民造成的伤害比欧米克隆造成的任何伤害都要严重得多。在许多民族国家实施的旅行禁令,部分是为了避免激起已经存在的仇外情绪,并没有阻止这种变体在全球的迅速传播。人们希望西方政府能从中吸取相关的教训。由于全球北方未能及时向全球南方人民提供COVID-19疫苗,世卫组织更新了具有法律约束力的《国际卫生条例》,以包括公平获得挽救生命的对策。《国际卫生条例》还明确要求各国避免实施不必要的旅行禁令。看看这在现实政治中意味着什么将会很有趣。麻疹通常是通过性行为传播的,包括男性与其他男性发生性行为。相当多的非洲国家最近已立法将此类性活动定为犯罪。撇开其他人权考虑不提,这些措施会适得其反,因为它们将使那些有风险的人在疫苗可用时不太可能考虑接种疫苗。正如Larry Gostin及其同事在最近的一篇社论中指出的那样,全球北方国家可以获得大量的mpox疫苗,然而,作为对世卫组织声明的回应,美国只捐赠了区区5万剂,欧盟又提供了20万剂当非洲大陆的疫情无法得到控制并最终蔓延到全球时,这里展示的囤积疫苗很可能适得其反。虽然这种传播与COVID-19病毒完全不同,但由于其性传播性,它仍可能影响更多的人。在北美和欧洲,人群对麻疹的免疫力都很低,使这些国家的人们容易受到全球疫情的影响。最好的解决办法是防止全球爆发,但目前做得太少,无法做到这一点。看起来,全球北方的政府似乎没有从2019冠状病毒病大流行期间的全球卫生失败中吸取多少教训。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Developing World Bioethics
Developing World Bioethics 医学-医学:伦理
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
4.50%
发文量
48
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Developing World Bioethics provides long needed case studies, teaching materials, news in brief, and legal backgrounds to bioethics scholars and students in developing and developed countries alike. This companion journal to Bioethics also features high-quality peer reviewed original articles. It is edited by well-known bioethicists who are working in developing countries, yet it will also be open to contributions and commentary from developed countries'' authors. Developing World Bioethics is the only journal in the field dedicated exclusively to developing countries'' bioethics issues. The journal is an essential resource for all those concerned about bioethical issues in the developing world. Members of Ethics Committees in developing countries will highly value a special section dedicated to their work.
期刊最新文献
Medical ethics on research-related organ donation and transplantation in China. Dual-use research assessment in emerging medical biotechnology: An ethical perspective from China. Issue Information THANK YOU TO DEVELOPING WORLD BIOETHICS REVIEWERS Feasibility of implementing the elective oocyte cryopreservation in China: A case study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1