A "Social Vaccine" against Influenza

By EO Editorial Board
Published: 2009-05-19

Cover Editorial - EO print edition no. 419
Translated by Paul Pennay
Original article: [Chinese]

The appearance in quick succession of two cases of A/H1N1 influenza on the mainland is not at all surprising. This is not to criticize the measures the government has taken to guard against the spread of the flu, but rather to admit that in this age of globalization, it's impossible to avoid infection by attempting to cut yourself off from the outside world. When facing the outbreak of A/H1N1 influenza and the possibility of a second wave of the epidemic, we should listen to the words of US President Obama "This is obviously a cause for concern and requires a heightened state of alert. But it is not a cause for alarm” and approach the issue with a similar attitude.

The images of Mexicans wearing face masks that we've seen on the news, stir up memories of SARS from six years ago. That epidemic spread to 24 of China's provinces, autonomous regions and municipalites, and in the end caused the death of 349 people. Looking back on the experience, Gao Zhizong, the former Party Secretary of the Ministry of Health, drew four main lessons for the country in respect to our handling of the initial outbreak of SARS.

The first was due to poor judgement and improper handling of the crisis, no decisive control measures were taken to quickly cut-off the source of infection. Secondly, information was inaccurate and not well distributed, some of the epidemic reports from local areas were not complete, others didn't arrive on time and still others were false. Thirdly, a leadership mechanism was not set up quickly enough and the general population was not called upon to fight the epidemic together. Finally, there was a lack of effective cooperation with the rest of the world. There was not enough communication with international organizations and international media. There was also no system set up to handle cooperation and information sharing with other governments.

After SARS, China began to gradually develop the world's largest epidemic notification and disease monitoring system and passed regulations relating to public health emergenices including the creation of a mechanism to increase the level of transparency in government reports related to public health incidents. All of these are now the measures we're currently using to resist the spread of A/H1N1 influenza today. At the same time, China's experience can also be used as a source of reference to other countries around the world in their fight against A/H1N1 influenza.

The risks associated with Swine Flu are much lower than those of SARS, it's easier both to prevent and treat, the rate of death from A/H1N1 influenza at aroud 1%, is much lower than the 4-6% for SARS. America's North West University conducted a compurter simulation experimnet which showed that even if no measures were taken to reduce the speed at which the disease is spreading, by the end of May, America would still only have seen 1,700 cases of A/H1N1. This means that there is no need for the public to be alarmed, and that panic will only make the situation worse. But it also doesn't mean that we should lower our guard and the government should be well prepared in its fight against the epidemic.

From the way the government has handled these latest two cases of influenza on the mainland, we can see the large effect that establishig an epidemic protection system in the the wake of SARS has had: to effectively guarantee the isolated treatment of any patients, and to take necessary measures with all those people who came into close contact with the patient as quickly as possible; at the first possible moment report to the public news about the epidemic and what measures they can take to avoid infection; use all possible means to persuade all those who have had close contact with any sufferer of the influenza to come forward and receive a medical examination as qucikly as possible. All these measures are enought to instill the public's trust in the governments ability to respond to the situation.

But we have to realise, no-one can guarantee that in the future another case won't emerge. It's very importnat that we all remain vigilant. Especially in regard to the transparency of reporting on the epidemic locally, we can't afford false reports on the basis of maintaining "local reputation" or "investment environment" or similar excuses, this was the biggest lesson from the early outbreak of SARS. Also on show to a small degree in the non-standard and lax reporting of the recent foot and mouth outbreak in some localities. This should make us all alert to the possibility of this happening again.

To guard against suddent public health incidents, the most importnat thing is that a sense of friendly cooperation exists between the government and the people, that the government cares about the health of citizens and that citizens both understand and assist with the government's work. The necissity of isolated treatment may cause some temporary disadvantage or trouble for the individual, but it is advantageous to society as a whole. As a citizen, we must have a sense of socail responsibility. Of course, the government should be more humane when carrying out quarantine measures, and this will help to set the public at ease.

A modern, mature society should be completetly prepared to deal with sudden incidents. Aside from preparing measures to deal with such incidents, governments, individuals, the media and social organizations should all consciously undertake to manage their own responsibilities. If this can be realized, then it can be said that this really is a public response to an emergency, and this is just the kind of effective "social vaccine" that we hope can be used against all kinds of epidemics.