Also available in: Español
Source: http://lacfondomundial.org/mirta-roses-embajadora-covid-19/
WHO (World Health Organization) Director-General, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, appointed the alternate Global Fund’s Board member as one of the six “ambassadors” of this international body for COVID-19.
This is the note published by Perfil on March 8th, 2020.
As PAHO (Pan American Health Organization) Director, the Argentinian medical doctor Mirta Roses was in the frontline of decision-making for containing the influenza A pandemic (H1N1). Today, 11 years afterwards, WHO Director-General, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, has appointed her as one of the six “ambassadors” of this international organization for COVID-19, the disease caused by the new coronavirus strain that erupted in China in late 2019 and that has already infected more than 100,000 people (80,000 only in China) in 89 countries and has caused more than 3,400 deaths.
As she is about to say farewell to the highlands of her hometown Cordoba, where she stayed during the summer, Roses agreed to an exclusive interview with PERFIL via Skype about the virus, which has landed in Argentina this week.
—What does it mean for the country that the first COVID-19 cases have been confirmed?
—These cases are an indicator that the system was able to detect them, confirm them and isolate them. Each suspect case and, even more, each confirmed case are crucial proof of its capacity for action. We just need to see what happened in Seattle, USA, which has the most severe outbreak of the new virus in that country, where authorities had to admit that the virus had been circulating for at least two weeks before detecting it. Those are imported cases; people who got the virus outside the country. The landscape changes when local transmission begins.
—What is your assessment of what has happened so far with the coronavirus?
—Based on lessons learned from AH1N1 (in 2009), changes were made to the International Health Regulations, the most important instrument for managing global public health emergencies. And in the Americas a preparedness and response capacity assessment exercise was developed, country by country. This puts the region in a quite advanced situation. But there is a mismatch between what authorities are doing and the state of health services, on the one hand, and the landscape shown by the media—sometimes with a scaremongering tone—and the information circulating freely and rapidly through social media—which generates a lot of confusion among people,— on the other hand.
—In what sense?
—Conversations on social media revolve around authorities not acting as they should. People complain that the airport did not do anything, but the first person to be affected was given instructions, arrived home, felt the symptoms and did what the piece of paper they made him sign said. The patient, the clinic and the laboratory acted as they had to, both timely and in an appropriate manner. The airline even provided data of the other passengers, who were contacted and warned. Nevertheless, there is still this “they are not doing anything” feeling.
—And why do you think that is happening?
—I think it has to do with behavioral and communication sciences. It is as though our capacity to listen and internalize information is very low because we are constantly bombarded with news. There is no educational or transformative process with what you read or listen to. There is a sort of saturation effect due to this rapid system, which is not reading and reflecting. People tend to believe outrageous things that are false, but not what authorities say. We are in world where people are a little distrustful of the establishment. There is always some truth in all that doubt, but everything is very twisted nowadays…
—What are the characteristics of the new coronavirus?
—It seems–studies are still being conducted–that it is not that aggressive. It causes high fever, does not produce mucus and tends to go to the base of the lungs and affect the bronqui. That is why it causes dry cough and breathing difficulty. Swallowing can also be difficult. It is supposed to be less efficient than influenza to spread: it shows little dispersion through coughing or sneezing, and it does not stay suspended in the air. It drops and is deposited on the surface, where it would not last long. But this movie is still under development before our very eyes, and we do not know what the next scene will be.
—And what about the fatality rate?
—Based on what we have seen, humans are able to defend themselves a lot from the virus, unless their immune system is somehow weak. Around 60% of cases do not required hospitalization, 20% to 25% of them do and 5% to 8% of them are serious. People in this last group are older than 80 and have some weakness due to diabetes, chemotherapy or heart or lung conditions. The fatality rate in this group would be 4%, but some studies already indicate a smaller percentage. It is still difficult to know how many of those who get sick die.
—Why is it that children are not affected?
—There are several assumptions: on the one hand, children under 1 have a great immune system and it seems that the virus does not cause any damage to them, it does not settle in them. On the other hand, children have several defense barriers in their upper airways: mucus, so characteristic in children, helps stop the virus “at the front door” of the body, and that is why it does not reach the base of the lung. Besides, children are less exposed to environmental pollutants. A person who has already lived for 70 or 80 years has a weaker upper immune system.
—That would also explain why the elderly are the most affected…
—Exactly. And, in that sense, we have to protect the elderly a lot. Argentina has a significant proportion of elderly population. Visits to them should be reduced, mainly from relatives and friends who have traveled to the circulation areas or are in contact with travelers who have been in those countries. Individual restriction is essential. People bear the primary responsibility for avoiding the spread of the virus.
Closing borders, a “xenophobic” measure
“For diseases with a short incubation period–14 days in this case–, closing borders does not work. It is a xenophobic and ineffective decision. What we need is good coordination and acting the way Argentina did. There is a protocol on what aircrew members and employees have to do. That and signs in airports are educational, awareness-raising measures, so that people know what to do if symptoms appear. The International Health Regulations establish that measures in a health emergency must serve to protect the population, with the minimal possible impact on social life and the economy. I believe the panic created can cause more damage to people because of its impact on their social life and the economy than the virus itself,” claimed Mirta Roses. As for the use of nose-mouth masks, she said: “Our recommendation is that healthy people do not buy them because they are important for health workers and infected people. Unfortunately, they are now out of stock, and this creates chaos with providers. WHO has had to invest money to try to solve this supply problem.”
(Source: www.perfil.com).