Ebola response hobbled by UЅ withdrawal from global health
Posted by polymute@reddit | anime_titties | View on Reddit | 44 comments
Posted by polymute@reddit | anime_titties | View on Reddit | 44 comments
Orange-skittles@reddit
Probably also hobbled by the fact the locals are idiots that are actively trying to spread the virus. I mean burning down a Ebola clinic during a Ebola outbreak? You can’t make this up
Rovcore001@reddit
There are idiot locals everywhere. Americans were consuming veterinary worm medicine and rejecting a proven covid vaccine.
GrahminRadarin@reddit
I put less blame on them and more blame on the people that have been spreading lies about Ebola being fake.
HypnotizedCow@reddit
It is entirely fair to point out that having a strong cultural tradition around burials and touching the deceased is going to cause significant problems with a contagious disease that spikes in infectiousness when the patient dies.
GrahminRadarin@reddit
Yeah, that is genuinely going to cause problems. However, from accounts I have read, the specific incident that happened recently was partially caused by the family of the victim believing that he died of typhoid fever because they don't think Ebola is real. So they thought the hospital was holding their son's body for no reason. The medical misinformation is a bigger contributor than the traditional burial practices in this case, I think.
OsgrobioPrubeta@reddit
Yeah, one could think they might have been watching RFK Jr.
Bright_Captain7320@reddit
Welcome to Africa, the land of savages and the dimwitted.
Quick-Exit-5601@reddit
No, no you can't expect any level of personal responsibility because they are poor and from unprivileged background. It's clearly our fault (as in, global west) that we didn't fortify these clinics well enough
Quick-Exit-5601@reddit
Alternative title: ebola response hobbled by nations that were subsidised for decades and chose not to invest in their own systems, protocols and equipment knowing that Ebola outbreak in the region wasn't a matter of "if" but 'when".
CupcakeSeaShanty@reddit
These places are extremely poor and anyone skilled to handle this has already left the country.
Also, we all get fucked over if things go bad so saying 'it's their problem' is...a take.
mileslefttogo@reddit
Exactly, so many people don't realize these programs funded by international support isn't just some liberal, altruistic social program.
We funded these programs more to reduce the risk of diseases spreading out of the country than we do for the benefit of that country.
Literally another America First program cut by the America First party.
Loose_Spray1678@reddit
why would Ebola only spread to America and completely bypass every single other country in the world? the issue, from the America First perspective, is that only America is expected to take care of the entire world, including countries that are richer than us per capita. If it is so important, the rest of the world can pitch in a little bit.
mileslefttogo@reddit
The WHO is funded by it's member countries. My simple example was one main reason why the US contributed. Other reasons are building soft power and goodwill with these countries, which helps us in many economical, political, and military ways.
Pulling funding, pissing off allies, and allowing countries like China and Russia to fill in the gaps we leave are the opposite of supporting American interests.
Especially when the funding being pulled is a fraction of what we spend on bombing Iran for little gain.
Loose_Spray1678@reddit
the majority of funding to contain ebola in Africa came from the US lol. In 2019, the US contributed $252 million while the WHO only contributed $73M. the next largest donor was the UK, not Russia or China. China contributed significantly less than Denmark.
https://www.kff.org/global-health-policy/data-note-donor-funding-for-the-current-ebola-response-in-the-drc/
mileslefttogo@reddit
China is now the largest state donor of the WHO.
The Iran war has cost the US $29 billion so far.
But sure, we're saving money on not helping prevent disease. Winning!
Ruby2312@reddit
The math is just bad rn. No countries have literal money printing and abilities to control vast amount if proxies to make it worth while like US did, yet. But since China starting to overtake US over there maybe they will be running and funding instead?
JustChillin3456@reddit
If all the people with disease die out then there’s nothing to worry about
Big_Red_Machine_1917@reddit
Yes, I'm sure these nations just chose not to invest in medical system and weren't limited by things like poverty, armed conflict, underdevelopment.
lannisterloan@reddit
The African continent is the most subsidized continent in the world since the 1950s. Billions upon billions have been given away to African nations with nothing to show for except their leaders gets to cruise around in brand new Mercedes.
From what I see, they have gained their independence for over 50 years, have been least impacted by the ravages of second world war, rich in resources, been padded with multibillion-dollar aid and whatever happened is entirely their fault.
HalayChekenKovboy@reddit
And why do you think they are the most subsidised continent since the 1950s? Did everyone wake up one day and decide it was their responsibility to take care of them for no reason at all? What was happening before the 1950s (and actually into the 1960s) that made them require such subsidies in the first place?
Now, is it on the locals that they keep destroying the clinics? Yes. Their behaviour is fuelled by ignorance due to insufficient education, which is also a systemic issue, and due to certain religious beliefs. And yes, they have a lot of corruption in their countries. That is because decolonisation was a very, very messy and sometimes even bloody process, and it is difficult to put everything back on track after being exploited for more than a century. That is without even mentioning the fact that a lot of former colonial powers still extract resources from their former colonies and interfere in their politics. They still exploit the people of and benefit from the resources of former colonies, especially because they are still so disenfranchised.
Does this mean the average African is an angel who can do no wrong or is incapable of coming to the realisation of how stupid it is to destroy Ebola aid on their own? No. However, western countries DO have a responsibility to help African countries, especially since they still benefit from the effects of colonialism and a lot of people currently alive were still alive back before decolonisation, the vast majority of world presidents and rulers included.
gotwrongclue@reddit
Those billions are nothing in comparison to the pillage of the resources. FFS the people were sold into slavery. Ever considered how much value has been robbed by the "developed" world. Check out how Salt March, in india! This situation is a inevitable result of the exploitation of Africa.
Exostrike@reddit
The problem is the Resource curse.
Resource extraction doesn't require that high levels of infrastructure and it will be dedicated solely to said resource extraction.
If the resource is foreign owned all of the profit exits the country and doesn't feed back the national economy. Sure the government will get tax revenue but that's stuck at the top, a prime recipe for the corruption you mention.
We also insist these countries are part of the capitalist economy, so not only are their resources often own by international companies but their economies must be open to global free market and not have any big state industries. The result is local industry cannot compete with foreign imports and don't develop.
The result is a trucks from a mine rumbling past farmers stuck selling low value raw materials and buying imports.
Relative-Chain73@reddit
The African continent is the most looted continent in the world where the global north mines mines mines and mines while leaving africans in poverty because apparently the mines in africa is own by owners in global north
JustChillin3456@reddit
Trillions *
m3_my23lf_and_1@reddit
Oh definitely but there is an undeniable amount of enabling by having foreign assistance be almost their entire system. The lack from any side to create permanent and effect structure for an eventual removal of support underlys alot of global aid systems.
CupcakeSeaShanty@reddit
Where are you going to find enough folks skilled (and trained overseas) with the knowledge and equipment to tackle this? They'd have to call WHO or the CDC or what not regardless
edwwsw@reddit
It's in the US interest that Ebola be contained. If this disease were ever to become global, millions maybe billions of lives could be lost. The only thing this disease has going for it to make it to make less likely is that it is so quick and fatal.
Loose_Spray1678@reddit
If this is such a risk, then other countries can contribute as well instead of just expecting the US to save the world
Quick-Exit-5601@reddit
Bullshit. However, if that were the case, then the only sensible option would be to create a containment zone and lock any outgoing arrivals from that entire continent.
edwwsw@reddit
The disease has an incredible high mortality rate - anywhere between 25 to 90% depending on strain. It's not air borne nor likely to become air. It is transmitted though bodily fluids including sweat unlike AIDS. So it's more contagious than AIDS which has killed over 40 million people worldwide but not as contagious as the flu or COVID. Your death from this disease is also incredibly brutal as you bleed out though all your orifices.
So yes, if this ever becomes worldwide it will be a nightmare easily killing millions.
I feel like the attitude ' it's not our problem' is just like the attitude around AIDS. You know, AIDS is a disease of the immoral. Disease does not care about morality nor geography.
JustChillin3456@reddit
“Billions could die! You think it’s not your problem !?”
Why doesn’t the rest of the world do something then 🤔
mfb-@reddit
It is. But having the US on board would be better. It also takes time to replace what US just decided to stop doing randomly one day.
JustChillin3456@reddit
America has literally been carrying the team on our backs for decades (like usual)
20% of global aid to Africa was from the USA alone
mfb-@reddit
In other words, 80% was from elsewhere.
The US has 25% of the global GDP, so 20% is below average.
JustChillin3456@reddit
Gotcha so if it’s not that much money then you don’t need us right ?
Isn’t that both your and the users argument above ? That the aid given to Africa Isn’t given out of charity but rather to enrich ourselves, and I agree we shouldn’t give the money if it’s done out of the kindness of our hearts
Quick-Exit-5601@reddit
It has absolutely no potential to become a pandemic. Epidemic, sure, pandemic? Not so much.
Because if what you are saying is true and it has any potential to go global, we should quarantine entire continent.
JustChillin3456@reddit
Billions ? 😳
kolitics@reddit
Even better: A lack of other significant contributors hobbles ebola response despite despite billions spent by US since 2014
Jazzlike-Equipment45@reddit
Biggest one is cultural. Funerary practices of the region includes kissing, washing and generally being in close contact with the dead. The vector is body fluids so kissing the guy who just died bleeding out of every hole in their body is a great way to get infected. Throwing money at a problem won't solve cultural problems.
kimana1651@reddit
Everyone loves to hate on the US until the money dries up, then they get to hate the US for letting the money dry up.
Quick-Exit-5601@reddit
I hate US for many reasons but pulling the plug on USAid ain't one of them that's for sure. I don't think it was a good choice in the long term - for the US, but we will see
kimana1651@reddit
Yeah same here. It's not even close to the top of my list of problem projects, but if it had to die to clean up the mess then I would not mind one bit.
eternity_ender@reddit
You have no idea what you’re talking about. But because you’re behind a screen, you feel like it’s safe to say stupid crap so confidently.
L_viathan@reddit
I generally have a pretty negative view of the US and their global policy. But they can't be the protector of global health all the time. At some point either someone else has to step in or countries need to look after themselves. It's just not reasonable to assume that one entity will take care of it forever.