Emerging Zoonotic Infections, Social Processes and Their Measurement and Enhanced Surveillance to Improve Zoonotic Epidemic Responses: A "Big Events" Perspective

Merging socioecological variables to predict risk of Chagas disease

How far are we from predicting the occurrence of zoonotic diseases? In this paper we have made use of both socioecological and ecological variables to predict Chagas disease occurrence. Chagas disease involves, Trypanosoma cruzi, a complex life-cycle parasite which requires two hosts: blood-feeding triatomine insects and vertebrate hosts including humans. We have used a common risk assessment method combined with datasets that imply critical environmental and socioeconomic drivers of Chagas dynamics to predict the occurrence of this disease. We also carried out a network analysis to assess the interactions among triatomines and mammal host species given their human contact via whether hunted, domesticated or associated with anthropogenic landscapes in Mexico. We found that social backwardness variation, lack of health services and altitude had the largest relative influence Chagas events. Triatoma pallidipennis made use of the largest host diversity. Host species shared by the highest number of different triatomines were a woodrat, the highly appreciated bushmeat, and racoon. These results indicate both the predominance of socio-economic factors over ecological ones, and how close we are from predicting zoonotic diseases.

Will the Russian war in Ukraine unleash larger epidemics of HIV, TB and associated conditions and diseases in Ukraine?

The Russian war in Ukraine poses many risks for the spread of HIV, TB and associated conditions, including possible increases in the numbers of people who inject drugs or engage in sex work in the years ahead. Ukrainian civil society and volunteer efforts have been able to maintain and at times expand services for HIV Key Populations. The extent of mutual-aid and volunteer efforts as well as the continued strength and vitality of harm reduction organizations such as the Alliance for Public Health and the rest of civil society will be crucial resources for postwar efforts to assist Key Populations and prevent the spread of HIV, TB and other diseases. The postwar period will pose great economic and political difficulties for Ukrainians, including large populations of people physically and/or psychically damaged and in pain who might become people who inject drugs. Local and international support for public health and for harm reduction will be needed to prevent potentially large-scale increases in infectious disease and related mortality.

Sociopolitical Diagnostic Tools to Understand National and Local Response Capabilities and Vulnerabilities to Epidemics and Guide Research into How to Improve the Global Response to Pathogens

The AIDS and COVID-19 pandemics demonstrated that nations at similar economic development levels varied widely in their capacity to protect the health of their residents. For AIDS, Britain and Australia brought gay representatives into official counsels and adopted harm reduction far more rapidly than the United States or Spain, and East African countries responded more effectively than South Africa or the Democratic Republic of the Congo. National responses to COVID-19 varied widely, with New Zealand, China, and Vietnam more effective than Italy, Brazil, or the United States. Further, as phylogenetic research has demonstrated, these pandemics spread from one country to another, with those that responded poorly acting as sources for mutations and potentially sources of transmission to countries with more effective responses. Many observers expressed surprise at the poor responses of the United States to COVID-19, but in retrospect the cutbacks in public health funding at state and national levels made it clear that this was a predictable weakness even in addition to the political vacillations that crippled the US and Brazilian responses. In a time of global sociopolitical and climate instability, it is important to measure and conduct research into spatial and time variations in 1. public health and medical funding, 2. social influence networks, social cohesion and trust, and stigmatization, 3. income inequality, 4. social conflict, and 5. other factors that affect responsiveness to pandemics.

An updated review of the scientific literature on the origin of SARS-CoV-2

More than two and a half years have already passed since the first case of COVID-19 was officially reported (December 2019), as well as more than two years since the WHO declared the current pandemic (March 2020). During these months, the advances on the knowledge of the COVID-19 and SARS-CoV-2, the coronavirus responsible of the infection, have been very significant. However, there are still some weak points on that knowledge, being the origin of SARS-CoV-2 one of the most notorious. One year ago, I published a review focused on what we knew and what we need to know about the origin of that coronavirus, a key point for the prevention of potential future pandemics of a similar nature. The analysis of the available publications until July 2021 did not allow drawing definitive conclusions on the origin of SARS-CoV-2. Given the great importance of that issue, the present review was aimed at updating the scientific information on that origin. Unfortunately, there have not been significant advances on that topic, remaining basically the same two hypotheses on it. One of them is the zoonotic origin of SARS-CoV-2, while the second one is the possible leak of this coronavirus from a laboratory. Most recent papers do not include observational or experimental studies, being discussions and positions on these two main hypotheses. Based on the information here reviewed, there is not yet a definitive and well demonstrated conclusion on the origin of SARS-CoV-2.