Cargando…

The Epidemic Failure Cycle hypothesis: Towards understanding the global community’s recent failures in responding to an epidemic

BACKGROUND: Within a few years, the global community has failed twice in responding to large viral infection outbreaks: the Ebola epidemic in 2014 and the SARS-Cov-2 pandemic in 2020. There is, however, no systematic approach or research available that analyses the repeated failures with regard to a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Richter, Dirk, Zuercher, Simeon
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of King Saud Bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8423663/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34624716
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jiph.2021.09.003
_version_ 1783749512537309184
author Richter, Dirk
Zuercher, Simeon
author_facet Richter, Dirk
Zuercher, Simeon
author_sort Richter, Dirk
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Within a few years, the global community has failed twice in responding to large viral infection outbreaks: the Ebola epidemic in 2014 and the SARS-Cov-2 pandemic in 2020. There is, however, no systematic approach or research available that analyses the repeated failures with regard to an adequate response to an epidemic. METHODS: For a better understanding of failing societal responses, we have analysed the available research literature on societal responses to epidemics and we propose a framework called the ‘Epidemic Failure Cycle’ (EFC). RESULTS: The EFC consists of four phases: Negligence, Arrogance/Denial, Panic and Analysis/Self-criticism. These phases fit largely with the current World Health Organization pandemic influenza phases: Interpandemic, Alert, Pandemic, Transition. By utilizing the Ebola epidemic and the SARS-Cov-2 pandemic as case studies, we show striking similarities in the response to these outbreaks during both crises. Finally, we suggest three major areas to be of utmost importance for triggering and maintaining the EFC. In terms of ecology, zoonoses, supposed to be the main biological origin for virus epidemics, have been largely neglected by politicians, the media and the scientific community. Socioeconomic and cultural conditions such as harsh living and working conditions as well as conspiracy theories hinder effective preventive and counter measures against epidemics. Lastly, in terms of epistemology, the reliance on knowledge about previous outbreaks has led to slow and inadequate decisions. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that any current society has to be aware of the risks of repeating responses to epidemics that will fail. Being aware of the societal mechanisms that trigger inadequate responses may help to get to more appropriate decisions in the face of an epidemic.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8423663
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of King Saud Bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-84236632021-09-08 The Epidemic Failure Cycle hypothesis: Towards understanding the global community’s recent failures in responding to an epidemic Richter, Dirk Zuercher, Simeon J Infect Public Health Original Article BACKGROUND: Within a few years, the global community has failed twice in responding to large viral infection outbreaks: the Ebola epidemic in 2014 and the SARS-Cov-2 pandemic in 2020. There is, however, no systematic approach or research available that analyses the repeated failures with regard to an adequate response to an epidemic. METHODS: For a better understanding of failing societal responses, we have analysed the available research literature on societal responses to epidemics and we propose a framework called the ‘Epidemic Failure Cycle’ (EFC). RESULTS: The EFC consists of four phases: Negligence, Arrogance/Denial, Panic and Analysis/Self-criticism. These phases fit largely with the current World Health Organization pandemic influenza phases: Interpandemic, Alert, Pandemic, Transition. By utilizing the Ebola epidemic and the SARS-Cov-2 pandemic as case studies, we show striking similarities in the response to these outbreaks during both crises. Finally, we suggest three major areas to be of utmost importance for triggering and maintaining the EFC. In terms of ecology, zoonoses, supposed to be the main biological origin for virus epidemics, have been largely neglected by politicians, the media and the scientific community. Socioeconomic and cultural conditions such as harsh living and working conditions as well as conspiracy theories hinder effective preventive and counter measures against epidemics. Lastly, in terms of epistemology, the reliance on knowledge about previous outbreaks has led to slow and inadequate decisions. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that any current society has to be aware of the risks of repeating responses to epidemics that will fail. Being aware of the societal mechanisms that trigger inadequate responses may help to get to more appropriate decisions in the face of an epidemic. The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of King Saud Bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences. 2021-11 2021-09-08 /pmc/articles/PMC8423663/ /pubmed/34624716 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jiph.2021.09.003 Text en © 2021 The Author(s) Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.
spellingShingle Original Article
Richter, Dirk
Zuercher, Simeon
The Epidemic Failure Cycle hypothesis: Towards understanding the global community’s recent failures in responding to an epidemic
title The Epidemic Failure Cycle hypothesis: Towards understanding the global community’s recent failures in responding to an epidemic
title_full The Epidemic Failure Cycle hypothesis: Towards understanding the global community’s recent failures in responding to an epidemic
title_fullStr The Epidemic Failure Cycle hypothesis: Towards understanding the global community’s recent failures in responding to an epidemic
title_full_unstemmed The Epidemic Failure Cycle hypothesis: Towards understanding the global community’s recent failures in responding to an epidemic
title_short The Epidemic Failure Cycle hypothesis: Towards understanding the global community’s recent failures in responding to an epidemic
title_sort epidemic failure cycle hypothesis: towards understanding the global community’s recent failures in responding to an epidemic
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8423663/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34624716
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jiph.2021.09.003
work_keys_str_mv AT richterdirk theepidemicfailurecyclehypothesistowardsunderstandingtheglobalcommunitysrecentfailuresinrespondingtoanepidemic
AT zuerchersimeon theepidemicfailurecyclehypothesistowardsunderstandingtheglobalcommunitysrecentfailuresinrespondingtoanepidemic
AT richterdirk epidemicfailurecyclehypothesistowardsunderstandingtheglobalcommunitysrecentfailuresinrespondingtoanepidemic
AT zuerchersimeon epidemicfailurecyclehypothesistowardsunderstandingtheglobalcommunitysrecentfailuresinrespondingtoanepidemic