Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Obama/Biden vs Trump Response to Ebola Outbreaks - Coronavirus Lessons
While Trump does his best to distract from the ineptitude and policy choices that helped lead to the current health crisis, it helpful to see the difference in approach taken by President Obama/VP Biden to Ebola while it was still raging in African in 2014 versus Trump's approach of closing the borders, ignoring the crisis, and hoping it goes away. Can you imagine if Trump was President during the original Ebola outbreak when a vaccine had yet to be developed? He would probably just close the border, call it the Africa virus, then accuse anyone for asking him to do more, as trying to impeach him again.
In 2014-15, an outbreak of Ebola hit West Africa. President Obama and VP Biden led an aggressive U.S. response on the ground in Africa, rather than simply closing the borders. The U.S. lead the development of vaccine. A new Ebola crisis has hit Africa, but Trump is taking a far more hands off approach.
https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2016/p0707-history-ebola-response.html
The 2014-2016 Ebola epidemic was the first and largest epidemic of its kind, with widespread urban transmission and a massive death count of more than 11,300 people in Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone. The epidemic took a devastating toll on the people of West Africa. Ending it took an extraordinary international effort in which the U.S. government played a major role.
CDC’s response was directed simultaneously at controlling the epidemic in West Africa and strengthening preparedness for Ebola in the United States. The new MMWR Ebola special supplement primarily focuses on the agency’s work during the first year and a half of the response. CDC activated its Emergency Operations Center (EOC) for the Ebola response on July 9, 2014. On August 5, 2014, CDC elevated the EOC to a Level 1 activation, its highest level. On March 31, 2016, CDC officially deactivated the EOC for the 2014-2016 Ebola response.
“The world came together in an unprecedented way—nations, organizations, and individuals—to respond to this horrible epidemic,” said Inger Damon, M.D., Ph.D., who served as incident manager for the CDC Ebola response during its first eight months. “CDC staff performed heroically and were an integral part of the U.S. all-government response, which involved many other agencies and branches of government.”
By the end of the CDC 2014-2016 Ebola response on March 31, 2016, more than 3,700 CDC staff, including all 158 Epidemic Intelligence Service Officers, had participated in international or domestic response efforts. There were 2,292 total deployments to Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone and 3,544 total deployments overall (domestic and international) to support the response. Approximately 1,558 CDC responders have deployed to Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone since the start of the response in July 2014 to the close of the response at the end of March 2016 – including 454 responders with repeat deployments. Even after the deactivation of the CDC 2014-2016 Ebola response, CDC continues its work to better understand and combat the Ebola virus and to assist Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone in the aftermath of the 2014-2016 Ebola epidemic; currently, CDC staff remain in CDC country offices in Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone to help support the Global Health Security Agenda.
CDC’s response was directed simultaneously at controlling the epidemic in West Africa and strengthening preparedness for Ebola in the United States. The new MMWR Ebola special supplement primarily focuses on the agency’s work during the first year and a half of the response. CDC activated its Emergency Operations Center (EOC) for the Ebola response on July 9, 2014. On August 5, 2014, CDC elevated the EOC to a Level 1 activation, its highest level. On March 31, 2016, CDC officially deactivated the EOC for the 2014-2016 Ebola response.
“The world came together in an unprecedented way—nations, organizations, and individuals—to respond to this horrible epidemic,” said Inger Damon, M.D., Ph.D., who served as incident manager for the CDC Ebola response during its first eight months. “CDC staff performed heroically and were an integral part of the U.S. all-government response, which involved many other agencies and branches of government.”
By the end of the CDC 2014-2016 Ebola response on March 31, 2016, more than 3,700 CDC staff, including all 158 Epidemic Intelligence Service Officers, had participated in international or domestic response efforts. There were 2,292 total deployments to Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone and 3,544 total deployments overall (domestic and international) to support the response. Approximately 1,558 CDC responders have deployed to Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone since the start of the response in July 2014 to the close of the response at the end of March 2016 – including 454 responders with repeat deployments. Even after the deactivation of the CDC 2014-2016 Ebola response, CDC continues its work to better understand and combat the Ebola virus and to assist Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone in the aftermath of the 2014-2016 Ebola epidemic; currently, CDC staff remain in CDC country offices in Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone to help support the Global Health Security Agenda.
Now, even though Trump benefits from some of the the infrastructure of President Obama's response such as the vaccine, Trump's inaction is helping a second outbreak grow unabated in Africa, so hopefully those cases don't spill over to the U.S., but at least there is a vaccine. Unfortunately, Trump took the same negligent approach to a disease for which there is no vaccine, the coronavirus, rather than committing U.S. resources to fighting the disease or developing a vaccine before it even hits U.S. shores.
https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/hblog20191001.102538/full/
There are several important differences between the current Ebola outbreak in the DRC and the West African outbreak of 2014. First, unlike the impacted countries in West Africa, the DRC has previous experience with Ebola. Doctors and health officials have handled this before, and they have more established protocols in place for treating infected patients, managing the appropriate services, and educating the public.
Second, WHO’s response is far more effective now than it was in 2014. WHO seems to have learned important lessons – it has been deeply engaged on the front lines, supporting the DRC Ministry of Health, and transparently sharing data and its approach with the global public. WHO recently labeled the outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC), a legal term that allows for a more concerted international response, including bolstering of funds needed to fight the outbreak. There have only been four PHEIC declarations in history, so such a declaration usually signals a particularly dangerous outbreak that requires a global response.
Finally, since the 2014 outbreak, two new vaccines have been developed that have been instrumental to containing the spread of the virus. The Merck vaccine has been widely deployed by WHO in an effort to halt the further spread of Ebola according to a widely used strategy known as “ring vaccination,” which involves vaccinating all those who potentially have had contact with an infected person and all the contacts of those people as well. The Merck vaccine has near 100 percent efficacy, having been tested in a large clinical trial (although it has not yet been licensed). The second vaccine, developed by Johnson and Johnson (J&J), is being tested among those who are not at immediate risk.
* * *
In 2014, President Obama worked closely with Congress to allocate $6 billion in emergency aid – and, just as importantly, engage the full force of the U.S. military to tackle the epidemic. Although the 2014 outbreak was much larger, the Trump Administration’s current response is inadequate for the size of the problem. While the U.S. is sending some health personnel, they are being kept far from the front lines of the outbreak. And there are mixed signals coming from the Administration. While USAID, for instance, just pledged more money to support the response to the current outbreak, the White House continues to propose budget cuts that would weaken funding for infectious diseases and global health systems.
Second, WHO’s response is far more effective now than it was in 2014. WHO seems to have learned important lessons – it has been deeply engaged on the front lines, supporting the DRC Ministry of Health, and transparently sharing data and its approach with the global public. WHO recently labeled the outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC), a legal term that allows for a more concerted international response, including bolstering of funds needed to fight the outbreak. There have only been four PHEIC declarations in history, so such a declaration usually signals a particularly dangerous outbreak that requires a global response.
Finally, since the 2014 outbreak, two new vaccines have been developed that have been instrumental to containing the spread of the virus. The Merck vaccine has been widely deployed by WHO in an effort to halt the further spread of Ebola according to a widely used strategy known as “ring vaccination,” which involves vaccinating all those who potentially have had contact with an infected person and all the contacts of those people as well. The Merck vaccine has near 100 percent efficacy, having been tested in a large clinical trial (although it has not yet been licensed). The second vaccine, developed by Johnson and Johnson (J&J), is being tested among those who are not at immediate risk.
* * *
In 2014, President Obama worked closely with Congress to allocate $6 billion in emergency aid – and, just as importantly, engage the full force of the U.S. military to tackle the epidemic. Although the 2014 outbreak was much larger, the Trump Administration’s current response is inadequate for the size of the problem. While the U.S. is sending some health personnel, they are being kept far from the front lines of the outbreak. And there are mixed signals coming from the Administration. While USAID, for instance, just pledged more money to support the response to the current outbreak, the White House continues to propose budget cuts that would weaken funding for infectious diseases and global health systems.