There were more people than I expected. Although with
Dr. Paul Farmer involved
there were bound to be a lot of people. The first time I saw him speak was in
graduate school, my first semester of graduate school, the seats were filled
early, the aisles shortly after, and the final surge was relegated to the
overflow- their ears straining to hear what he had to say. That was before I knew
he was the golden boy of international public health. An MD PHD. Medical doctor
slash anthropologist who also started an international nonprofit (in Haiti) while
getting those degrees.
Yeah. That guy.
Most famous for his work in Haiti, his
presence is all over the developing world. Working to make antiretrovirals
available in their generic form so that low-income countries can afford to provide
them for their citizens. That isn’t the half of it.
I wasn’t sure how he factored into the Ebola discussion he was slated
for, but as soon as I saw the advertisement I bought a ticket. His finger is on
the public health pulse the world over…he’d have something of note to say.
Settled in my seat an hour before his start time, an
attempt to avoid the lines and craze I anticipated, I stared at the chairs on
stage and wondered who would be joining him.
We started the evening with humor. One of the five men
on stage, seated at a jaunty angle, introduced himself as the host, “not the parasitic
kind,” he assured us. And the Nourse theater giggled in public health geekery. Drs.
Paul Farmer, Dan Kelly, Raj Panjabi, and Ambassador Eric Goosby, a
collection of men with impressive letters behind their names and decades of
experience in Africa and beyond under their belts, began a very elegant, if abstract
conversation about the Ebola outbreak
epidemic pandemic.
Of course there were the basics. How it spreads,
where it started, a brief mention of treatment. There was a glossing over of
what the situation looks like on the ground. At least two of the doctors were
freshly from Liberia and Sierra Leone and they fluttered briefly over what
care, treatment, and patients look like. What it feels like to be there.
The bulk of the discussion was big picture thinking.
What are the implications for America? What is necessary to get Ebola under
control? How do we evade the current worst case scenario of 1.4
million infected by January?
There was assurances that we are safe here. Not because
Ebola has preferences or because it isn’t mobile –our first case
in Dallas proves how untrue that is- but because we have a public health
and medical infrastructure – hell, a social and political infrastructure, that offers
protection (or at least a very convincing idea of protection).
Controlling it is something else. Controlling it is
complicated and full of questions and “if, then” uncertainties.
How extensive is the under-reporting?
How reliable is airport screening?
How feasible is it that people will employ basic
universal precautions while working with the sick?
If we deploy 3000 troops now then…what?
If we have beds but no clinicians then…what?
If all the promises of resources and staff from
other countries doesn’t come until next week, or next month, or next year then…what?
And we can’t really know. We can speculate and hypothesize.
We can create contingency plans for all of the foreseeable possibilities but we
are ultimately at the mercy of time and reality.
There are, of course, other things to consider. The public
health professional in me is screaming out how crucial it is that we use this
as an opportunity not to respond to Ebola – as everyone is imploring – but that
we respond to the yawning gap in public health services and infrastructure that
are inherent in developing nations.
When the first case of Ebola appeared in Nigeria I was
fearful. Lagos, population 21 million, with slums flanking the sprawling city,
could have been a teeming petri dish of infections raging out of control.
It wasn’t.
And while comparing it to Liberia is Apples to moon
rocks, it is the most logical place to push an agenda of infrastructure
building.
Nigeria had one initial case (that led to 20 total
cases) but its handling of that one
case was admirable. Some of the success was luck (no one on the flight got
infected), but it would be shortsighted to attribute luck to its success ta
holding Ebola at bay. Nigeria has infrastructure. It has doctors and nurses and
community health workers. It had a polio Emergency Command Center the Bill and
Melinda Gates foundation provided in 2012 and transformed it into an Ebola
Operations Center. Nigeria had recently cross-trained 100 doctors on basic epidemiology
and they deployed 40 of that cohort to oversee the 18,500 contact follow-ups of
900 people.
Yes, Nigeria was lucky. But Nigeria was also quick
thinking and prepared.
Last night Paul Farmer repeated on several occasions
West Africa’s dearth of Ses: stuff, staff, space, and systems.
|
Gloves drying in the sun in Bong County Liberia |
Stuff- the material resources necessary to provide
service. Basic right? So easy to take for granted that a clinic or hospital
will have gloves or medication, but when I was working in Liberia (years before
Ebola) the clinics I had were so desperate for gloves they washed them and left
them to dry on the grass or on bushes. Sun and latex is not a great mix and
either is reusing single use latex anything.
Staff- trained individuals who understand what care
needs to be given and the proper way to protect themselves from infection. Health
care workers are dying too. Exposed through imprecise precautions or the
possible mistake (inadvertent needle prick or contact with contaminated materials).
Not to mention the sheer number needed. In resource poor areas like Guinea and
Liberia, trained professionals can be hard to come by and poorly paid. Tack on
the short intervals that care can be offered while donning an impermeable PPE
(personal protection equipment) in the sweltering almost-equatorial sun and
things are even more complicated.
Finally, the most complex issue of all. Systems. This
circles back to at least one of the reasons Nigeria was able to get out in
front of the spread of Ebola on its soil.
Of course all of this conversation dangles its feet
in the pool of health disparities. Who has access to what? Why did American
doctors get access to the blood serum of recovered patients (an old technique
for fighting diseases with no known cure) and experimental medicines while
African doctors and patients were left to die?
A West African friend of mine had a much more America forgiving point of
view.
“There is popular saying that
'charity begins at home'. Why is the west being blamed for not taking the lives
being lost in West Africa seriously...when over the many years and many wars
and many bad governments and many deaths past...Africans have not demonstrated
that we value our own lives? And I get that we live in a 'resource constrained'
part of the world and it is morally reprehensible for richer countries not to
act...but for how long will we our lives continue to be at the mercy of aid?
Charity
begins at home can be interpreted to mean 'others will value us and quickly
jump to our aid to the extent that we value ourselves and add more value than
burden to other countries of the world.
I am just
tired of belonging to the part of world that is so helpless problematic and
looked down upon.”
But I disagree – not to the notion of
Nigeria or, on a macro level, Africa, developing agency and self-sufficiency,
but that it somehow makes it ok for America, Americans, to only appreciate the
need that threatens us personally. Where is our humanity if we only care about
a sprawling scourge on the world because someone we can relate to is impacted…because
we might be?
One of the last questions of the night came from a
woman who works with MSF (Doctors Without Borders). Freshly back from working
in West Africa, she was passionate about how big the need and how understated
our civil discourse on it had been. We
were talking in abstractions and meanwhile MSF was at its limit. She wanted to
know where the discussion about the reality on the ground was…where was the
worry that we are still uncertain about leadership, next steps, and timelines.
I would have liked to see her on the panel. I would
have liked to see a less abstract perspective on what it looks like and feels
like. A closer examination of the naked need to temper the theoretical macro
thinking that I realize is also essential. If you haven’t seen what hospitals
in resource poor areas look like on a good day, how can you truly understand
what they look like in crisis…what is needed in crisis?
When I worked in rural South Africa I would write
and talk to my parents about my schools, how poor they were, how much they
needed. My dad was a new teacher and working in a poor school in Texas and he
would emphatically share that he knew exactly what I meant. I assured him that
he did not and with all of the certainty in the world he would end the conversation
with the affirmative. He knew.
When my family came to visit me I took them out to
one of my schools. My dad walked in through the gaping hole in the side of the
building that the kids also used instead of the door. He saw the 20 or so
rickety desks that seated three kids at a time, and looked at the rotting
chalkboard (that was only useful when we actually had chalk). He didn’t assure
me that he understood anymore.
We need to visit the classroom. Not to rally pity or
fear but so that we have a realistic understanding of the fight we are in for
and where we are starting.