World Mosquito Day: Raising Global Awareness of the Importance of Mosquito Elimination Program
Accra-Ghana, - In honor of World Mosquito Day, observed annually on August 20, but ignored in most African countries including Ghana, Volunteer Partnerships for West Africa (VPWA) and its partners in Sub Saharan Africa are working to increase awareness of the importance of efficient technology to kill mosquitoes and therefore eliminate mosquito borne diseases including Malaria.
World Mosquito Day originated in 1897 by Dr. Ronald Ross of the Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine. After dissecting mosquitoes known to have fed on a patient with malaria, Ross discovered the malaria parasite in the stomach wall of the mosquito. Through further research using malarious birds, Ross was able to ascertain the entire life cycle of the malarial parasite, including its presence in the mosquito's salivary glands. Ross confirmed that malaria is transmitted from infected birds to healthy ones by the bite of a mosquito, a finding that suggested the disease's mode of transmission to humans. For his findings, Ross is credited with the discovery of the transmission of malaria by the mosquito, and was honored with a Nobel Prize for Medicine in 1902.
Presently, the World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that 350-500 million cases of malaria occur worldwide each year, and more than one million people die, most of them young children in sub-Saharan Africa. Mosquitoes cause more human suffering than any other organism, and afflict not only humans, but animals as well.
VPWA is using this year’s Mosquito Day to point out the flaws in current African policies and recommending to committed leaders on the continent to rethink Malaria strategies. Leaders should take the bold initiative of implementing a result oriented initiative that could eradicate Malaria in 3 years, probably within first term of some African leaders.
First, the bed net: Research finds that bed nets are only 25% effective in preventing Malaria. This means that, in the unlikely event of every person within a given geographical area (for example: Ghana) sleeping under bed nets from 5pm-7am, Malaria cases are likely to be drop by 25%. Despite these research findings, we still we have NGOs raising money all around the globe in pursuit of ‘blanketing’ Africa with nets. It should be noted that, mosquitoes do not bite only when you are in bed.
Second, Indoor Residual Spraying (IRS): Indoor Residual Spraying is the dispensing of insecticides on walls made from porous materials such as mud or wood. The idea is that, after the mosquito has taken the blood meal, it will land on the wall and die. In some African countries where DDT is used, this repels the mosquito from even entering the house. Less effective insecticides like permethrin are also used for this purpose. This method has proven to be about as effective as bed nets achieving only around a 25% reduction in transmission rates and is not designed for plaster city dwellings. Studies on biting rates done in Mali, indicate that about 38% of all biting occurs outdoors. As a consequence this is why bed nets, and Indoor Residual Spraying, will never break the malaria transmission cycle.
Third, truck mounted "fogger" units: These units are only capable of reducing mosquito populations by about 30% in the US, where they are in common use. However this is under better circumstances than are available in Sub-Saharan Africa, where there is a general lack of a good road grid pattern, typical of American Suburbs.
It must be understood that a 30% reduction in mosquito population does not translate into a 30% reduction in malaria transmission. The Centre for Disease Control did a study some time ago in Sub-Saharan Africa and managed to get a 90% reduction in mosquito populations, however only a 25% decrease in transmission rates was achieved.
This having been said, one must realize the reduction levels achieved with these experiments were given on the basis of a controlled research protocol. A real world situation would not be controlled. Not everyone would sleep under a bed net, not every house would be treated with Indoor Residual Spraying, and the truck mounted fogger units are a bigger joke than either bed nets or IRS treatment, when it comes to reducing the transmission of the malaria parasite. These considerations are however not applicable in a program involving the treatment of an entire region with an aircraft equipped with insecticide aerosol generators.
In the unlikely circumstance the whole of Ghana is blanketed with nets, meaning, all inhabitants of homes, hotels etc. sleeps under nets, and IRS enabled in every home, and truck mounted fogger units dispensing insecticides in our neighborhoods, Ghana will see a reduction of only 50% in Malaria transmission. However for Ghana to even implement this multi faceted approach and be successful, the nation will spend a huge chunk of its GDP annually to maintain it. Failure to maintain the exercise will also lead to a catastrophic rise in human death due to Malaria.
What are we proposing?
VPWA is proposing Aerial Spraying or what the Americans call “space spraying.” This technology consists of an aircraft equipped with a high pressure aerosol generator, treating the entire environment the mosquito lives in, effectively eliminating the mosquito.
We are proposing this project be funded by the grant money currently being wasted on marginally effective interventions and wish to introduce this method to Ghana as a model for the elimination of malaria in Africa. We estimate that for only about 2% of the total direct and indirect costs presently associated with Malaria in Ghana, the disease could be eradicated within 3 years. Within 30 days the transmission cycle could be broken within a given treatment area.
That having been said, defeating malaria in Sub-Saharan Africa is the challenge of all challenges, and certainly not a task for amateurs. Sadly however in this case, amateurs are in charge of this effort. The irony is it would cost much less to succeed, in this endeavor, than pursue the present failed strategy.
Hayford Siaw
Executive Director
Volunteer Partnerships for West Africa
info@vpwa.org
+233 21 928245, +233 24 3340112
Friday, August 21, 2009
Wednesday, August 5, 2009
Controlling the Vector
Mosquitoes are the vectors that transport protozoan parasites of the genus Plasmodium. It is this parasite that induces malaria. In order to control the spread of malaria, the behavior of the vector that causes the disease must be understood.
Although there are 3,500 species of mosquito, only one species (and only females of that species) has the ability to spread malaria: the Anopheles mosquito. Only the females of this species feed on the blood of humans, and are therefore the main focus of concern.
All mosquitoes, no matter the species, require water in order to breed. Mosquitoes lay their eggs wherever there is standing water: a salt marsh, a lake, a puddle, a natural reservoir, or in something as simple as a bucket filled with water. The average female mosquito only lives for around 3 weeks and therefore the lifecycle of the mosquito is very rapid.
Most mosquitoes that transmit malaria pick up the parasite after feeding on an infected human. That is why swift isolation and treatment of an infected individual is important. Walking around as a carrier of the disease is actually potentially contributing to the spread of the problem.
There are several ideas on how to control the malaria epidemic in sub-Saharan Africa. I believe that one of the best ways to get the problem under control would be to focus on the standing water sources of the region. Organic items such as garlic oil act as mosquito repellants. If large amounts of something like garlic oil were added to standing water sources, female mosquitoes would avoid laying their eggs and eventually die after the end of their 2-3 week life cycle. Organic materials such as garlic oil would not pose a threat to contaminating the land with toxicity or, as in the case of pesticides, contaminating humans. Treatments like this would be effective, and because the garlic oil loses potency after 4 weeks, would be a solution affordable enough to maintain until the issue had greatly subsided.
Controlling mosquitoes would not just help with the malaria crisis. Mosquitoes spread other problematic diseases such as West Nile Virus, dengue fever and yellow fever. Controlling these populations could drastically reduce the number of cases reported for many of these diseases each year, as well as help to save millions of lives.
For more information on vector control, you can visit www.cdc.gov
Although there are 3,500 species of mosquito, only one species (and only females of that species) has the ability to spread malaria: the Anopheles mosquito. Only the females of this species feed on the blood of humans, and are therefore the main focus of concern.
All mosquitoes, no matter the species, require water in order to breed. Mosquitoes lay their eggs wherever there is standing water: a salt marsh, a lake, a puddle, a natural reservoir, or in something as simple as a bucket filled with water. The average female mosquito only lives for around 3 weeks and therefore the lifecycle of the mosquito is very rapid.
Most mosquitoes that transmit malaria pick up the parasite after feeding on an infected human. That is why swift isolation and treatment of an infected individual is important. Walking around as a carrier of the disease is actually potentially contributing to the spread of the problem.
There are several ideas on how to control the malaria epidemic in sub-Saharan Africa. I believe that one of the best ways to get the problem under control would be to focus on the standing water sources of the region. Organic items such as garlic oil act as mosquito repellants. If large amounts of something like garlic oil were added to standing water sources, female mosquitoes would avoid laying their eggs and eventually die after the end of their 2-3 week life cycle. Organic materials such as garlic oil would not pose a threat to contaminating the land with toxicity or, as in the case of pesticides, contaminating humans. Treatments like this would be effective, and because the garlic oil loses potency after 4 weeks, would be a solution affordable enough to maintain until the issue had greatly subsided.
Controlling mosquitoes would not just help with the malaria crisis. Mosquitoes spread other problematic diseases such as West Nile Virus, dengue fever and yellow fever. Controlling these populations could drastically reduce the number of cases reported for many of these diseases each year, as well as help to save millions of lives.
For more information on vector control, you can visit www.cdc.gov
Thursday, July 9, 2009
Bringing Back DDT
In February of this year, Microsoft creator Bill Gates opened a jar of mosquitoes during the Technology, Entertainment and Design Conference. He did this to demonstrate how much of a concern malaria is for several regions of the world.
Bill Gates and many others support the idea of reintroducing DDT as an effected tool to fight against malaria. Him and other scientists believe that spending mere cents on spraying houses would be more cost effective than supplying $10 dollar mosquito nets to everyone in an area impacted by malaria. They also believe that killing the insect using DDT is better than just preventing them from biting by using a net.
The stigma around the use of DDT dates back to the 1950’s. Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethan
During WWII, DDT was used to control the spread of Typhus. In the 1945, it began to be used to fight against the spread of malaria. In 1955, the World Health Organization initiated a program to eradicate malaria worldwide, its main weapon being DDT. The attempt was semi-successful. It eradicated malaria in Taiwan, much of the Caribbean, the Balkans, parts of northern Africa, the northern region of Australia, and a large swath of the South Pacific and dramatically reducing mortality in Sri Lanka and India.
Soon after this program started, scientists began to notice certain side-effects of DDT. Birth defects and cancer-related cases began to steadily rise in the regions of the world where the drug was being heavily used. It was discovered that the pesticide was leaching into water supplies, remaining in the ecosystem for long periods of time.
In the 1970’s DDT was banned from being used in almost every region of the world. In the areas where malaria was suppressed but not successfully eradicated, the mosquito population and impact of the disease has returned with a vengeance.
DDT is without a question the most successful tool used to date in the attempt to eradicate malaria from the planet. Bill Gates and other supporters encourage the return of DDT, because they are convinced that if spraying is done in small amount in and around the home, water supplies will stand low risk of contamination and millions of lives will be saved as a result.
This data was compiled using data found at www.who.org and www.cnn.comFriday, July 3, 2009
Space Spraying: Thermal Fog vs. Cold Fog
Space spraying can be accomplished using one of two forms of fog; thermal fog and cold fog.
Thermal Fog
The insecticide used in thermal fogs is diluted in an oil-based transporting fluid. Hot gas heats this fluid, causing the oil to become vaporized. When the hot vapor exits the machine distributing the pesticide, it hits cooler air, creating a visible, white, dense fog.
There are several advantages to using a thermal fog. The reaction with the cooler air creates a visible cloud, allowing the operator of the machine to ensure thorough placement of the spray. Because the transporting fluid is oil based and not water based, less active ingredient is needed during the treatment, allowing for a lower concentration of exposure for humans dwelling in the region being treated.
However, there are several disadvantages to this treatment. Thermal fog operations are very expensive. An oil-based transporter in very pricey and can also be a fire hazard in the areas in which it is sprayed. Oil can also cause staining and leave heavy odors. It can leave roadways slick and cause possible traffic casualties.
Cold Fog
A cold fog is just another term for a diluted insecticide. There is no transporter fluid used other than the formula used to create the insecticide. There is no heat involved, and spraying is accomplished by using a high pressure nozzle.
The main advantages to cold fogs are that they are cost effective and pose little to know fire hazard. The water-base keeps roadways from becoming slick and is virtually odorless.
There are issues with cold fogs as well. The fact that they are nearly invisible makes them nearly impossible to observe, impacting the homogeny of dispersion. Without an oil-based matrix, the chemical can often evaporate or deactivate before it treats the area thoroughly.
Which to use?
Thermal fogs would be more appropriately used in areas where the pest being treated was a severe endemic. Areas with few roadways would be ideal. It is also a choice to use when the budget for treatment is larger.
Cold fogs are more appropriate in areas where the pest is not an issue that has grown out of control. It is better for areas with high traffic and heavier populations. It is also the better choice when the budget for treatment is small.
Ideally, in areas where there are both rural and urban populations, both treatments should be used together, breaking up the region into a mosaic of treatment types.
This information was collected from data posted by http://www.who.org/.
Thermal Fog
The insecticide used in thermal fogs is diluted in an oil-based transporting fluid. Hot gas heats this fluid, causing the oil to become vaporized. When the hot vapor exits the machine distributing the pesticide, it hits cooler air, creating a visible, white, dense fog.
There are several advantages to using a thermal fog. The reaction with the cooler air creates a visible cloud, allowing the operator of the machine to ensure thorough placement of the spray. Because the transporting fluid is oil based and not water based, less active ingredient is needed during the treatment, allowing for a lower concentration of exposure for humans dwelling in the region being treated.
However, there are several disadvantages to this treatment. Thermal fog operations are very expensive. An oil-based transporter in very pricey and can also be a fire hazard in the areas in which it is sprayed. Oil can also cause staining and leave heavy odors. It can leave roadways slick and cause possible traffic casualties.
Cold Fog
A cold fog is just another term for a diluted insecticide. There is no transporter fluid used other than the formula used to create the insecticide. There is no heat involved, and spraying is accomplished by using a high pressure nozzle.
The main advantages to cold fogs are that they are cost effective and pose little to know fire hazard. The water-base keeps roadways from becoming slick and is virtually odorless.
There are issues with cold fogs as well. The fact that they are nearly invisible makes them nearly impossible to observe, impacting the homogeny of dispersion. Without an oil-based matrix, the chemical can often evaporate or deactivate before it treats the area thoroughly.
Which to use?
Thermal fogs would be more appropriately used in areas where the pest being treated was a severe endemic. Areas with few roadways would be ideal. It is also a choice to use when the budget for treatment is larger.
Cold fogs are more appropriate in areas where the pest is not an issue that has grown out of control. It is better for areas with high traffic and heavier populations. It is also the better choice when the budget for treatment is small.
Ideally, in areas where there are both rural and urban populations, both treatments should be used together, breaking up the region into a mosaic of treatment types.
This information was collected from data posted by http://www.who.org/.
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Space Spraying
Space spraying is a method used to quickly kill a pest population with little to no residual effect. However, this treatment cannot be used in isolation. It is important that the removal of the target population be a collaborative effort between space spraying and other forms of defenses. Populations that can be fought against using this method include houseflies, sand flies and mosquitoes. Space spraying is ideal for use in emergency epidemic situations, and could be a very effective method for helping to eradicate malaria from areas where the disease is endemic such as Ghana, South Africa, and Mexico.
Space spraying is effective at not only killing a disease-transmitting population of insects, but it is also effective at interrupting the transmission cycle of the actual disease. The process consists of a cloud of insecticide droplets that are dispersed over the impacted region. The idea is that the insects will encounter these droplets during flight and die. In order for this method to be effective, the behavior pattern of the specific target insect must be well studied and understood. The right toxins will be needed to shut down the biological system of the insect without posing a great health risk to the human population.
Space spraying is technically a form of fog. The defense is only effective while the droplets are airborne, so it is important that the spray is released during the prime time of flight for the target population. The spray comes in two forms, thermal fog and cold fog. The difference between these two types, the costs, and the effectiveness of each method is what will be addressed in the next report to come.
This information was compiled from data released by the World Health Organization at www.who.org
Sunday, June 7, 2009
AN APOLLO PROGRAM FOR ACCRA
On July 16, 1969 Commander Neil Armstrong was the first man to set foot on the moon. At that time he made the statement "one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind"
On May 25, 1961 President John F. Kennedy of United States announced his support for the Apollo program with the goal of landing men on the moon by the end of 1969. This objective was met with 6 months to spare.
This seemingly impossible feat was accomplished only because the leader of the Country made it a matter of priority, the landing of a man on the moon. At the time it seemed that President Kennedy had taken leave of his senses. In spite of the nay sayers this goal was met within the allotted time frame of eight years.
What I would like to propose at this time is establishing the goal of eliminating malaria in Ghana within 3 years. This is a more achievable objective than sending a man to the moon. The reason, it has already been done in the United States, the Country that sent Commander Neil Armstrong to the moon. Perhaps we should take a page out of their play book on this one. First of all, the Americans did not waste any time or national treasure treating the symptoms. They attacked the cause. The cause of malaria is not the malaria parasite, it is the mosquito. Removing the mosquito from the environment will eliminate malaria. When you break the transmission cycle, the malaria parasite present in the human population will be expelled from the body within about two years. The method used by the Americans to eliminate malaria was a massive aerial application program. This method achieved the objective of dramatically decimating the mosquito population as to destroy its ability to maintain the transmission cycle. It has been some 60 years now since the United States was declared malaria free and it continues to be malaria free until this day.
At present here in Ghana and most African countries, there is a policy of treating the symptoms of malaria, with prophylactic pills, bed nets and indoor residual spraying. The marginal effect of this reactive policy only institutionalizes failure. Meanwhile, our country continues to sacrifice its most precious resource on the altar of malaria, its children and young mothers. In developed countries disease and death affects the old and consumes perhaps 90% of the national medical resources, treating it's citizens with expensive medications and operations for the last 10% of their life span. However the average life span is twice as long as in the developing nations.
In Ghana the death rates are much higher in the young, than the old. This is neither a natural nor an acceptable outcome. This is the reason for an average life expectancy of only 40 or 50 years.
The annual expenditure of 100 million dollars now dedicated to treating the symptoms of malaria in Ghana is perhaps 10 times more than is necessary to eradicate this disease. However over the past several years the problem only gets worse, in spite of grand statements to the contrary. One definition of insanity is the expectation of a different outcome, each time you perform the same act. I can only conclude that the institutions charged with dealing with this problem are certifiably NUTS!
What I would like to propose is a pilot program to eliminate malaria from the City of Accra, with the goal of making Accra the first malaria free City in Sub Saharan Africa, employing the same methods used to achieve success in the United States some 60 years ago. A successful outcome of such a program will have a more far reaching impact than the Apollo program, in that it will serve a humanitarian objective of saving lives, the most precious lives, that of the young.
With this thought in mind, if Ghana government or corporate Ghana will not come together to fund such a project, perhaps the funding source should logically be the PMI or Presidents Malaria Initiative that has dedicated some 17.3 million dollars for malaria in Ghana this year alone. All that would be necessary is 3 million dollars to eliminate malaria for one year in the City of Accra, a City that contains 10% of our population. They can use the rest of the funding to satisfy their bed nets spree.
At this time I would like to ask anyone that has an opportunity to gain the ear of President Obama on his trip to Ghana this coming July to make mention of this proposal for 3 million dollars for this pilot program. If you live in Accra like me, you will be doing yourself a favor.
Hayford Siaw
Executive Director, Volunteer Partnerships for West Africa (VPWA)
Tel : 00233 21 928245
00233 24 3340112
www.vpwa.org
info@vpwa.org
On May 25, 1961 President John F. Kennedy of United States announced his support for the Apollo program with the goal of landing men on the moon by the end of 1969. This objective was met with 6 months to spare.
This seemingly impossible feat was accomplished only because the leader of the Country made it a matter of priority, the landing of a man on the moon. At the time it seemed that President Kennedy had taken leave of his senses. In spite of the nay sayers this goal was met within the allotted time frame of eight years.
What I would like to propose at this time is establishing the goal of eliminating malaria in Ghana within 3 years. This is a more achievable objective than sending a man to the moon. The reason, it has already been done in the United States, the Country that sent Commander Neil Armstrong to the moon. Perhaps we should take a page out of their play book on this one. First of all, the Americans did not waste any time or national treasure treating the symptoms. They attacked the cause. The cause of malaria is not the malaria parasite, it is the mosquito. Removing the mosquito from the environment will eliminate malaria. When you break the transmission cycle, the malaria parasite present in the human population will be expelled from the body within about two years. The method used by the Americans to eliminate malaria was a massive aerial application program. This method achieved the objective of dramatically decimating the mosquito population as to destroy its ability to maintain the transmission cycle. It has been some 60 years now since the United States was declared malaria free and it continues to be malaria free until this day.
At present here in Ghana and most African countries, there is a policy of treating the symptoms of malaria, with prophylactic pills, bed nets and indoor residual spraying. The marginal effect of this reactive policy only institutionalizes failure. Meanwhile, our country continues to sacrifice its most precious resource on the altar of malaria, its children and young mothers. In developed countries disease and death affects the old and consumes perhaps 90% of the national medical resources, treating it's citizens with expensive medications and operations for the last 10% of their life span. However the average life span is twice as long as in the developing nations.
In Ghana the death rates are much higher in the young, than the old. This is neither a natural nor an acceptable outcome. This is the reason for an average life expectancy of only 40 or 50 years.
The annual expenditure of 100 million dollars now dedicated to treating the symptoms of malaria in Ghana is perhaps 10 times more than is necessary to eradicate this disease. However over the past several years the problem only gets worse, in spite of grand statements to the contrary. One definition of insanity is the expectation of a different outcome, each time you perform the same act. I can only conclude that the institutions charged with dealing with this problem are certifiably NUTS!
What I would like to propose is a pilot program to eliminate malaria from the City of Accra, with the goal of making Accra the first malaria free City in Sub Saharan Africa, employing the same methods used to achieve success in the United States some 60 years ago. A successful outcome of such a program will have a more far reaching impact than the Apollo program, in that it will serve a humanitarian objective of saving lives, the most precious lives, that of the young.
With this thought in mind, if Ghana government or corporate Ghana will not come together to fund such a project, perhaps the funding source should logically be the PMI or Presidents Malaria Initiative that has dedicated some 17.3 million dollars for malaria in Ghana this year alone. All that would be necessary is 3 million dollars to eliminate malaria for one year in the City of Accra, a City that contains 10% of our population. They can use the rest of the funding to satisfy their bed nets spree.
At this time I would like to ask anyone that has an opportunity to gain the ear of President Obama on his trip to Ghana this coming July to make mention of this proposal for 3 million dollars for this pilot program. If you live in Accra like me, you will be doing yourself a favor.
Hayford Siaw
Executive Director, Volunteer Partnerships for West Africa (VPWA)
Tel : 00233 21 928245
00233 24 3340112
www.vpwa.org
info@vpwa.org
Sunday, May 24, 2009
Institutional Inertia
The World Health Organization on October 30, 1998, announced the creation of an affiliated organization, that was named, Roll Back Malaria. The reduction of malaria in
Dr. Donald Roberts, Ph.D, an entomologist, Professor of Tropical Public Health at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences in Bethesda, Maryland, stated, "The Roll Back Malaria program, a partnership of WHO and UN organizations, has been an abysmal failure. Since the RBM founding in 1998, deaths from malaria have steadily increased". This statement was taken from an article showing a graph with a projection of actual malaria deaths at 30% increase over the baseline rate just 10 years ago.
The question is why the increase instead of the projected 50% decrease in mortality over the life of this project? Let us examine the mission statement attached to the press release announcing the inception of this program. It starts out on the first page with the claim "simple prevention and control methods has shown startling results: in trials conducted in the Gambia, Burkina Faso, Kenya and Ghana, the use of bed nets, which are treated with pyrethroid insecticide, was shown to effectively protect sleeping children from malarial mosquitoes, resulting in dramatic reductions in deaths among children under five years of age. Deaths were reduced by average of one fourth in these mega trials". Perhaps the term "dramatic" in this instance is shall we say; "dramatic", in its context, this method is much ado about nothing as in ineffective.
Let's see what other interventions, the Roll Back Malaria mission statement has for our consideration. "Simpler and more effective means of administering medicines" and the encouragement of "new anti-malaria drugs and vaccines", it sounds like a defensive strategy. First you hide under a net to avoid the mosquito, if that does not work; you take a pill to keep the malaria parasite from killing you. As in an American football expression goes, "the best defense resides in a good offense". Why not deep six the little suckers and be done with it.
The reference to development of "new anti-malaria drugs and vaccines" is a fools errand, and overlooks the incredibly complex nature of the malaria parasite. Some 9,000 genes. This parasite has the incredible ability to adapt to anything. Mr. Robert Desowitz, a medical research entomologist in his book, MALARIA CAPERS says, the search for a malaria vaccine has gone on for generations, and none will ever be found, to be effective. This research he says is for the sole purpose of getting grant money for universities, from wealthy individuals, foundations and governments. The cause is noble, however the goal is unobtainable. Meanwhile resources that could be applied to the elimination of this disease are wasted by academics. Even Bill Gates is a victim of this scam, having poured untold millions into this effort.
The failure to eliminate malaria is more than a humanitarian one, it also has a dramatic impact on economic development as well. Included in this Roll Back Malaria mission statement is a quote from Jeffrey Sachs, Professor at Harvard. and says in part "We and other groups of economist researchers are trying to determine the consequences of malaria on economic development" and "Our findings are striking. They point to Malaria as a major impediment to economic development" enough said. I once did an internet search and pulled up a colored graph of the poorest countries on planet earth and a corresponding colored graph of the countries with most malaria. To my amazement they were identical. In the arena of public health, the failure to eliminate malaria in the world is by far the greatest failure. It is not the failure of technology; it is a failure of leadership! The West has proven the technology is available. The Will to do something meaningful about this scourge is absent.
Let us examine the nature of the World Health Organization, the organization that has taken the lead as "expert" to the 80 or so sister organizations known as NGO's or Non Governmental Organizations. The WHO although it is a quasi governmental organization, is by nature a not for profit, additionally there is a kinship since they both provide public services. Any organization is of course a simple legal instrument, so to determine the personality of an organization you have to examine the personality profiles of its leaders.
A person known as a bureaucrat is in charge of this complex multi faceted organization, the nature of a bureaucrat is to keep steady the course of the organization. Stifling anyone who shows creativity or initiative; otherwise how can this organization maintain its identity, if it allows any creative actions on the part of its employees or anyone else for this matter? If any changes are made it is a committee that makes them. Of course in the recorded history of mankind there is no record of a monument ever being erected to a committee; regrettably, only to individuals.
An entomologist is the next personality type that needs examination. An entomologist is a person that studies insects, usually insects that transmit diseases, the WHO in this case would employ an entomologist that knows more than a person wants to know about malaria mosquitoes, mating habits etc. However an entomologist has no training in the art and science of killing mosquitoes only to identify them. The problem lies in the perception in their mind that he is an expert in this endeavor. Hence this is how you get a recommendation for the use of bed nets, an intervention that is only 25% effective. Then you have the medical doctors, with their prescriptions pads ever at the ready, to write a prescription for whatever ails you. In this case a prophylactic pill to keep the malaria you already have from killing you or modifying the disease in the event you get it.
The people who suffer from this misfeasance are of course, the victims of malaria here in
The Solution, eliminate the mosquito! this is the only method that will free
Hayford Siaw
Executive Director – VPWA Ghana (www.vpwa.org)
+233 24 3340112
Saturday, May 23, 2009
2 persons die every minute! How long shall we continue to say it?
In his unprecedented efforts for policy change on malaria programmes in sub-Saharan Africa, the Executive Director of Volunteer Partnerships for West Africa (VPWA), Mr Hayford Siaw in an interview on Choice fm 102.3, an Accra radio station last Tuesday ,reiterated his call for civil society groups and governments in sub-Saharan Africa to take the opportunity of President Obama’s presence on the African soil as President for United States of America to call for policy change in the way Malaria is been handle by the powers that be.
He chronicled the methodology used by United States and Canada and some parts of Europe in eliminating the scourge of this deadly disease and hinted that, President Obama will ‘’by all means’’ mention his country’s efforts in combating diseases on the African continent including Malaria and as such, it is important to let him know that, the President’s Malaria Initiative (PMI) which is a direct contribution by the US government in fighting the disease along with Global Fund and other donors are not been used properly and it is time to stop the game of controlling the disease to a serious approach of eradicating the disease using same tools the United States implored in defeating Malaria.
Mr Siaw wondered why in the 21st century, we should be advocating to ‘’control’’ a disease we could eradicate if our leadership in Africa will be serious enough to work with proving methods. As he has always done, he emphasised that even if mosquito net were to be 100% used by an individual, it effectiveness is only part at 25% and that is why people are still dying and it is time we put the billions of dollars going to purchase net to control the disease into effective mechanisms of eradicating it. He buttresses this argument by asking the Host of the Programme if the World Health Organization (WHO) has stopped saying 2 persons die every minute. He recollects that, he got to know it 20 years ago and we still continue to say it as if human life is such a disposable commodity.
He mentioned that, despite the colossal expenditure of over $100 million to combat malaria in Ghana in 2006 and 2007, WHO still reports that there is no evidence of decrease in Malaria cases and reported deaths has increased. He questioned how the money was used and for what purpose.
The Host of the Choice FM Breakfast show, Mr Alfred Ocansey who had also enquire on the current state of Malaria in Ghana from National Malaria Control Programme (NMCP) quoted them as saying Malaria cases for 2008 was less but was however not able to give the figures. The Executive Director of VPWA ask how sustainable is their so call reduction in figures and quoted from a WHO Malaria report on Ghana that in 2002, there was total death of 1917 and it was less in 2003 at 1680 but in 2007, death from Malaria has risen to almost a triple at 4622.
Meanwhile, some critics have argued that the aerial insecticide dispensing system that the VPWA Executive Director is advocating to be introduced in Ghana to defeat Malaria in Ghana within three years is expensive and we should therefore concentrate on simple mechanism of distributing nets to as much people as possible. Speaking to this Reporter, Mr Siaw has described the critics as ‘’failures refusing to think outside the box’’. He also described critics as been ‘’brainwashed by Malthusians’’.
In his opinion, Human life is expensive than the method he is suggesting and society must not tolerate people who desire to suppress population growth in such a way. He also ask why net is been recommended and wondered how many mosquito nets was distributed in Europe and America during their fight to eradicate Malaria in those places. He wondered why the Global Fund will boast it success of fight against Malaria by posting the number of nets they have been able to distribute without calculating the life saved if any on their website.
He chronicled the methodology used by United States and Canada and some parts of Europe in eliminating the scourge of this deadly disease and hinted that, President Obama will ‘’by all means’’ mention his country’s efforts in combating diseases on the African continent including Malaria and as such, it is important to let him know that, the President’s Malaria Initiative (PMI) which is a direct contribution by the US government in fighting the disease along with Global Fund and other donors are not been used properly and it is time to stop the game of controlling the disease to a serious approach of eradicating the disease using same tools the United States implored in defeating Malaria.
Mr Siaw wondered why in the 21st century, we should be advocating to ‘’control’’ a disease we could eradicate if our leadership in Africa will be serious enough to work with proving methods. As he has always done, he emphasised that even if mosquito net were to be 100% used by an individual, it effectiveness is only part at 25% and that is why people are still dying and it is time we put the billions of dollars going to purchase net to control the disease into effective mechanisms of eradicating it. He buttresses this argument by asking the Host of the Programme if the World Health Organization (WHO) has stopped saying 2 persons die every minute. He recollects that, he got to know it 20 years ago and we still continue to say it as if human life is such a disposable commodity.
He mentioned that, despite the colossal expenditure of over $100 million to combat malaria in Ghana in 2006 and 2007, WHO still reports that there is no evidence of decrease in Malaria cases and reported deaths has increased. He questioned how the money was used and for what purpose.
The Host of the Choice FM Breakfast show, Mr Alfred Ocansey who had also enquire on the current state of Malaria in Ghana from National Malaria Control Programme (NMCP) quoted them as saying Malaria cases for 2008 was less but was however not able to give the figures. The Executive Director of VPWA ask how sustainable is their so call reduction in figures and quoted from a WHO Malaria report on Ghana that in 2002, there was total death of 1917 and it was less in 2003 at 1680 but in 2007, death from Malaria has risen to almost a triple at 4622.
Meanwhile, some critics have argued that the aerial insecticide dispensing system that the VPWA Executive Director is advocating to be introduced in Ghana to defeat Malaria in Ghana within three years is expensive and we should therefore concentrate on simple mechanism of distributing nets to as much people as possible. Speaking to this Reporter, Mr Siaw has described the critics as ‘’failures refusing to think outside the box’’. He also described critics as been ‘’brainwashed by Malthusians’’.
In his opinion, Human life is expensive than the method he is suggesting and society must not tolerate people who desire to suppress population growth in such a way. He also ask why net is been recommended and wondered how many mosquito nets was distributed in Europe and America during their fight to eradicate Malaria in those places. He wondered why the Global Fund will boast it success of fight against Malaria by posting the number of nets they have been able to distribute without calculating the life saved if any on their website.
Obama visit to Ghana, what it means for Civil Society in Africa.
The President of United States of America, Barack Obama will make a historic visit to Ghana between July 10 – July 11, 2009.
According to Ghana’s Foreign Ministry, the first Black US President will hold bilateral talks with Ghanaian President, John Evans Atta Mills aimed at strengthening the fraternal relations existing between the two countries.
The visit to be the first trip to sub-Sahara Africa by President Obama and wife Michelle Obama since assumption of office will be symbolic to advance the strategic role Ghana has grown to play on the world stage.
It is an indication of strong democratic governance and freedom that thrives in the fibre of Ghanaian society. It is also a manifestation of the fundamental role that governments and non-governmental organizations have played in moulding Ghana as a success story on the African continent.
Ghana should however take the opportunity of getting the first African-American President personally aware of the most challenging issues confronting the nation and the African continent. It is important that, we make clear cut statements with our needs with specific time frame and budget to achieving such goals. Simply asking for support without plan action and budget will be like making noise in the ears of the US President.
For those of us in the civil society and especially campaigning for Malaria Eradication in Ghana and Africa, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, has indicated that President Obama will highlight critical role that ‘’good governance and civil society play in promoting development’’ and this affords us an opportunity to make our voice heard by requesting for new and refreshing strategy in tackling malaria through the President Malaria Initiative (PMI) by the United States. It is estimated that, Ghana alone will be receiving a $ 17million grant this year from PMI towards malaria projects and it is time we call for proper utilitarian of the US tax payer’s money on malaria in Ghana and Africa while urging African governments to take lead by adopting policies that is geared towards eradication of the disease which kills 1 person every 2 hours on average in Ghana and 2 people per minute globally with 90% of this deaths occurring in black Africa.
It is instructive to point to the US President whose authority, the PMI is been managed to consider adopting strategies that his country used after the second world war in eradicating the disease also on the African continent rather than going the conventional ways which has failed over the years hence an increase in Malaria deaths for instance in 2007 in Ghana according to the WHO.
In this vain, Ghana should take lead as it has always done in difficult times of the African continent to move from policies of controlling the disease to policies of eradicating the disease since it is that which will propel a change in donor rules of controlling the disease which has failed and continues to fail to a more compelling policy to eradicate it.
Ghana should therefore immediately call for a holistic approach in eradicating the disease by investing in treating people with existing malaria parasite, conduct aerial insecticide dispersal and embark on intensive public education.
This should help Ghana to eradicate the disease within 3 years.
Hayford Siaw
Executive Director
Volunteer Partnerships for West Africa (VPWA)
www.vpwa.org
info@vpwa.org
+233 24 3340112
According to Ghana’s Foreign Ministry, the first Black US President will hold bilateral talks with Ghanaian President, John Evans Atta Mills aimed at strengthening the fraternal relations existing between the two countries.
The visit to be the first trip to sub-Sahara Africa by President Obama and wife Michelle Obama since assumption of office will be symbolic to advance the strategic role Ghana has grown to play on the world stage.
It is an indication of strong democratic governance and freedom that thrives in the fibre of Ghanaian society. It is also a manifestation of the fundamental role that governments and non-governmental organizations have played in moulding Ghana as a success story on the African continent.
Ghana should however take the opportunity of getting the first African-American President personally aware of the most challenging issues confronting the nation and the African continent. It is important that, we make clear cut statements with our needs with specific time frame and budget to achieving such goals. Simply asking for support without plan action and budget will be like making noise in the ears of the US President.
For those of us in the civil society and especially campaigning for Malaria Eradication in Ghana and Africa, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, has indicated that President Obama will highlight critical role that ‘’good governance and civil society play in promoting development’’ and this affords us an opportunity to make our voice heard by requesting for new and refreshing strategy in tackling malaria through the President Malaria Initiative (PMI) by the United States. It is estimated that, Ghana alone will be receiving a $ 17million grant this year from PMI towards malaria projects and it is time we call for proper utilitarian of the US tax payer’s money on malaria in Ghana and Africa while urging African governments to take lead by adopting policies that is geared towards eradication of the disease which kills 1 person every 2 hours on average in Ghana and 2 people per minute globally with 90% of this deaths occurring in black Africa.
It is instructive to point to the US President whose authority, the PMI is been managed to consider adopting strategies that his country used after the second world war in eradicating the disease also on the African continent rather than going the conventional ways which has failed over the years hence an increase in Malaria deaths for instance in 2007 in Ghana according to the WHO.
In this vain, Ghana should take lead as it has always done in difficult times of the African continent to move from policies of controlling the disease to policies of eradicating the disease since it is that which will propel a change in donor rules of controlling the disease which has failed and continues to fail to a more compelling policy to eradicate it.
Ghana should therefore immediately call for a holistic approach in eradicating the disease by investing in treating people with existing malaria parasite, conduct aerial insecticide dispersal and embark on intensive public education.
This should help Ghana to eradicate the disease within 3 years.
Hayford Siaw
Executive Director
Volunteer Partnerships for West Africa (VPWA)
www.vpwa.org
info@vpwa.org
+233 24 3340112
DDT: Panel of Doctors lacks logic
In a report on Scientific American on 4th May 2009, a panel of doctors led by a University of California epidemiologist called for restriction in the use of DDT having regards to it widespread use in Africa especially after the endorsement in 2006 by the World Health Organization(WHO).
According to scientificamerican.com ‘’ The scientists reported that DDT ‘may’ have a variety of human health effects, including reduced fertility, genital birth defects, breast cancer, diabetes and damage to developing brains. Its metabolite, DDE, can
block male hormones’’.
‘’Based on recent studies, we conclude that humans are exposed to DDT and DDE, that indoor residual spraying can result in substantial exposure and that DDT may pose a risk for human populations," the scientists wrote in their consensus statement, published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives.
"We are concerned about the health of children and adults given the persistence of DDT and its active metabolites in the environment and in the body, and we are particularly concerned about the potential effects of continued DDT use on future generations."
In 1947, shortly after the Second World War II, the United States decided to eradicate Malaria from its territory using DDT in an overwhelming aerial dispensing spree. By 1952, US had declared it 13 states in the southern eastern part which had perennial malaria reported cases as Malaria free.
The success of this exercise led to the WHO adopting the DDT strategy in a so called Global Malaria Eradication Campaign which however excluded Black African countries with an excuse that, our part of the world was ‘’not ready’’. While the United States method was aerial dispensing system, WHO opted for Indoor Residual Spraying system. Though not the best strategy having regards to the effectiveness of aerial dispensing system, the programme is reported to have saved 500 million lives in 8 years that would have otherwise have been lost due to Malaria. This number largely does not include black Africans and this explains why 90% of all Malaria illness now occurs in sub-Saharan Africa.
DDT was then praised in superlative terms by the American National Academy of Science and declared a ‘’miracle pesticide’’.
The success of this programme however did not go down with Malthusians. In 1972, United States declared a ban on the use of DDT twenty years later after it had declared Malaria Free. The ban was base on it agricultural use which was responsible for depopulation of birds. Environmental groups joined hands with Malthusians for an unprecedented war against DDT use till today even after WHO endorsement in 2006 under the leadership of Dr. Araka Kochi who admitted to WHO Malaria ‘’policy mess’’ and therefore allowed DDT to be used.
Now, the world has a new group of ‘’menticides’’ referring themselves as Panel of Doctors who want to cause change in priority for donors to push their cash into other interventions other than IRS for eradication. The panel of doctors with all their long paper works were clueless to give alternative to eradicating Malaria and went ahead to say that DDT should be used as a ‘’last resort’’.
This is deeply shocking and should send Black Africans on full scale demonstration against this panel of doctors and their allies. At what point will the world know to use DDT as the last resort? When 100 people are dying per second? Currently, WHO taunts that Malaria kills 2 persons each minute! Is it not enough to tell this Panel of doctors we are in the last resort?
They also had no authentic finding against DDT thereby referring to their disastrous wishes with a ‘’may’’ phrase.
There is no evidence that in the 1960s and 80s when DDT was widely used, it had any disastrous consequence on people.
A research finding in Uganda in 2007, emphatically indicates low levels of DDT in parts per billion (ppb) in the human blood samples, urine, soil, beans, and fish, even after being exposed to the chemical for a long time. The study further established that “there is also no associated environmental damage or human defects of infertility, impotence, neurological abnormalities and cancers.”
What is more, this research is African oriented – conducted on African soil, by African researchers and scientist and clothed with excellent reliability and validity of results. According to Dr Myers Lugemwa of the Department of Medicine, National referral Hospital, in Mulago, Uganda – a member of the team that conducted the research on the effects of DDT in humans and the environment – when the chemical is applied strictly for indoor spraying, it poses very little environmental threat.
After all, if the so call future health problems are to be true, then America should also not produce food and send to so call malnourished and starving children in Africa because it is likely to also cause obesity which has ill effects in the long run just as they claim DDT has ill effect in the future on humans.
I am not an advocate for DDT but found the findings and statement by the so call Panel of Doctors as unreasonable, ill conceived and a ploy against humanity. I am equally aware of effective and efficient technology and insecticides that could be used for a much more highly result oriented aerial dispensing to eradicate Malaria in the continent of Africa if resources going into researches sponsoring programmes like this panel of doctors and nets are channelled for an efficient aerial dispensing system and public education.
Signed:
Hayford Siaw
Executive Director
Volunteer Partnerships for West Africa
According to scientificamerican.com ‘’ The scientists reported that DDT ‘may’ have a variety of human health effects, including reduced fertility, genital birth defects, breast cancer, diabetes and damage to developing brains. Its metabolite, DDE, can
block male hormones’’.
‘’Based on recent studies, we conclude that humans are exposed to DDT and DDE, that indoor residual spraying can result in substantial exposure and that DDT may pose a risk for human populations," the scientists wrote in their consensus statement, published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives.
"We are concerned about the health of children and adults given the persistence of DDT and its active metabolites in the environment and in the body, and we are particularly concerned about the potential effects of continued DDT use on future generations."
In 1947, shortly after the Second World War II, the United States decided to eradicate Malaria from its territory using DDT in an overwhelming aerial dispensing spree. By 1952, US had declared it 13 states in the southern eastern part which had perennial malaria reported cases as Malaria free.
The success of this exercise led to the WHO adopting the DDT strategy in a so called Global Malaria Eradication Campaign which however excluded Black African countries with an excuse that, our part of the world was ‘’not ready’’. While the United States method was aerial dispensing system, WHO opted for Indoor Residual Spraying system. Though not the best strategy having regards to the effectiveness of aerial dispensing system, the programme is reported to have saved 500 million lives in 8 years that would have otherwise have been lost due to Malaria. This number largely does not include black Africans and this explains why 90% of all Malaria illness now occurs in sub-Saharan Africa.
DDT was then praised in superlative terms by the American National Academy of Science and declared a ‘’miracle pesticide’’.
The success of this programme however did not go down with Malthusians. In 1972, United States declared a ban on the use of DDT twenty years later after it had declared Malaria Free. The ban was base on it agricultural use which was responsible for depopulation of birds. Environmental groups joined hands with Malthusians for an unprecedented war against DDT use till today even after WHO endorsement in 2006 under the leadership of Dr. Araka Kochi who admitted to WHO Malaria ‘’policy mess’’ and therefore allowed DDT to be used.
Now, the world has a new group of ‘’menticides’’ referring themselves as Panel of Doctors who want to cause change in priority for donors to push their cash into other interventions other than IRS for eradication. The panel of doctors with all their long paper works were clueless to give alternative to eradicating Malaria and went ahead to say that DDT should be used as a ‘’last resort’’.
This is deeply shocking and should send Black Africans on full scale demonstration against this panel of doctors and their allies. At what point will the world know to use DDT as the last resort? When 100 people are dying per second? Currently, WHO taunts that Malaria kills 2 persons each minute! Is it not enough to tell this Panel of doctors we are in the last resort?
They also had no authentic finding against DDT thereby referring to their disastrous wishes with a ‘’may’’ phrase.
There is no evidence that in the 1960s and 80s when DDT was widely used, it had any disastrous consequence on people.
A research finding in Uganda in 2007, emphatically indicates low levels of DDT in parts per billion (ppb) in the human blood samples, urine, soil, beans, and fish, even after being exposed to the chemical for a long time. The study further established that “there is also no associated environmental damage or human defects of infertility, impotence, neurological abnormalities and cancers.”
What is more, this research is African oriented – conducted on African soil, by African researchers and scientist and clothed with excellent reliability and validity of results. According to Dr Myers Lugemwa of the Department of Medicine, National referral Hospital, in Mulago, Uganda – a member of the team that conducted the research on the effects of DDT in humans and the environment – when the chemical is applied strictly for indoor spraying, it poses very little environmental threat.
After all, if the so call future health problems are to be true, then America should also not produce food and send to so call malnourished and starving children in Africa because it is likely to also cause obesity which has ill effects in the long run just as they claim DDT has ill effect in the future on humans.
I am not an advocate for DDT but found the findings and statement by the so call Panel of Doctors as unreasonable, ill conceived and a ploy against humanity. I am equally aware of effective and efficient technology and insecticides that could be used for a much more highly result oriented aerial dispensing to eradicate Malaria in the continent of Africa if resources going into researches sponsoring programmes like this panel of doctors and nets are channelled for an efficient aerial dispensing system and public education.
Signed:
Hayford Siaw
Executive Director
Volunteer Partnerships for West Africa
VPWA supports shake-up in Malaria Policy
Ghana's Health Minister Hon Dr. George Sipa-Adjah Yankey has called for a shake-up in the country's malaria control policy. Speaking to delegates at the Commemoration of World Malaria Day at the Accra International Conference Centre on 25 April, the Minister called for the creation of a 'Malaria Elimination Project' by July 2009 and described existing chain phases for malaria eradication as "too long".
His comments fly in the face of the UN-backed malaria project 'Roll Back Malaria (RBM) and it Global Malaria Action Plan (GMAP), which presently put Ghana in the control stage of the malaria eradication chain. RBM believes that, in the control stage ‘first scaling up appropriate interventions for all populations at risk and then sustaining control over time, malaria will cease to be a major source of deaths world-wide,’ principally through the distribution of nets.
His recommendations have been welcomed by Volunteer Partnerships for West Africa (VPWA), a development NGO based in Ghana, which recently launched its KICK MALARIA OUT (KMO) elimination project. The project is set to raise the public's awareness of simple malaria prevention methods across six West African countries including Ghana and aims to de-bunk the myth that using nets alone can achieve a significant drop in malaria cases.
VPWA's Executive Director Hayford Siaw, who has long campaigned for the implementation of aerial insecticide dispensing system, indoor residual spraying and public education, has applauded the Minister for including this three-pronged approach to fighting the disease. Mr Siaw also urged Ghana to learn from the successes of countries in North America, North Africa and the Middle East, which had successfully eliminated malaria by using these three methods.
"If resources that would be going into the purchase of nets are channelled into tackling the disease on these fronts, Ghana should be able to declare itself as malaria-free zone within three years,’’ he said.
Meanwhile, Mr Siaw also challenged the notion that consistent use of nets can lead to Ghana achieving a 0% malaria cases.
"’In every project proposal, sustainability to achieve real results both in the short-term and long-term is very crucial and this is why we need to adopt strategies that encompass the ability of a nation to achieve both short-term and long-term objectives.
"It is in this vein that, our organization is calling on governments all over the continent of Africa to channel the taxpayers’ money that has been spent on nets to be re-directed into adopting a three-phase approach to eliminating and eradicating malaria from the continent," he said.
According to Dr Constance Bart-Plange, Head of Malaria Control Programme of Ghana, who gave a presentation at the World Malaria Day Celebration, '1.3% of Ghana’s GPD is spent on malaria annually’.
Mr Siaw described this figure as "staggering" for a country that wants to achieve Middle Income Status by 2015. He said that in spite of the massive spending by donor agencies and government of Ghana, a WHO report on malaria in Ghana states: 'There was no evidence of a reduction in malaria cases between 2001-2007, and reported deaths have increased in 2007'.
The same report records that a sum close to $100 million from government, the Global Fund, the World Bank and bilateral donors, was spent on malaria control in Ghana alone between 2006-2007.
Mr Siaw is challenging the Ghanaian Government to change the name of the National Malaria Control Programme to the 'National Malaria Eradication Programme' ’in a belief that this will help attract more sponsorship from corporate Ghana to take the issue more seriously. Malaria affects the majority of the workforce in Ghana and causes a negative output, which has an adverse effect on corporate Ghana.
Mr Kwaku Appau, Board Chairman of VPWA, said: "The question Ghanaians and the donor communities should be asking themselves is why are there all these investments into malaria control and yet the death rate continues to rise? It is simple; expenditure is going into areas that do not stop the malaria vector from breeding so there is a continuous multiplication."
The KICK OUT MALARIA project will run for four weeks between August to September 2009. A team of local and international volunteers will travel across Ghana, Nigeria, Benin, Togo and Cote D'Ivoire raising awareness of some of the simple activities people can do in their home environment to eradicate mosquito breeding grounds.
Kirsty Osei-Bempong – PR/Communications for VPWA
PRESS SECTION- VPWA
His comments fly in the face of the UN-backed malaria project 'Roll Back Malaria (RBM) and it Global Malaria Action Plan (GMAP), which presently put Ghana in the control stage of the malaria eradication chain. RBM believes that, in the control stage ‘first scaling up appropriate interventions for all populations at risk and then sustaining control over time, malaria will cease to be a major source of deaths world-wide,’ principally through the distribution of nets.
His recommendations have been welcomed by Volunteer Partnerships for West Africa (VPWA), a development NGO based in Ghana, which recently launched its KICK MALARIA OUT (KMO) elimination project. The project is set to raise the public's awareness of simple malaria prevention methods across six West African countries including Ghana and aims to de-bunk the myth that using nets alone can achieve a significant drop in malaria cases.
VPWA's Executive Director Hayford Siaw, who has long campaigned for the implementation of aerial insecticide dispensing system, indoor residual spraying and public education, has applauded the Minister for including this three-pronged approach to fighting the disease. Mr Siaw also urged Ghana to learn from the successes of countries in North America, North Africa and the Middle East, which had successfully eliminated malaria by using these three methods.
"If resources that would be going into the purchase of nets are channelled into tackling the disease on these fronts, Ghana should be able to declare itself as malaria-free zone within three years,’’ he said.
Meanwhile, Mr Siaw also challenged the notion that consistent use of nets can lead to Ghana achieving a 0% malaria cases.
"’In every project proposal, sustainability to achieve real results both in the short-term and long-term is very crucial and this is why we need to adopt strategies that encompass the ability of a nation to achieve both short-term and long-term objectives.
"It is in this vein that, our organization is calling on governments all over the continent of Africa to channel the taxpayers’ money that has been spent on nets to be re-directed into adopting a three-phase approach to eliminating and eradicating malaria from the continent," he said.
According to Dr Constance Bart-Plange, Head of Malaria Control Programme of Ghana, who gave a presentation at the World Malaria Day Celebration, '1.3% of Ghana’s GPD is spent on malaria annually’.
Mr Siaw described this figure as "staggering" for a country that wants to achieve Middle Income Status by 2015. He said that in spite of the massive spending by donor agencies and government of Ghana, a WHO report on malaria in Ghana states: 'There was no evidence of a reduction in malaria cases between 2001-2007, and reported deaths have increased in 2007'.
The same report records that a sum close to $100 million from government, the Global Fund, the World Bank and bilateral donors, was spent on malaria control in Ghana alone between 2006-2007.
Mr Siaw is challenging the Ghanaian Government to change the name of the National Malaria Control Programme to the 'National Malaria Eradication Programme' ’in a belief that this will help attract more sponsorship from corporate Ghana to take the issue more seriously. Malaria affects the majority of the workforce in Ghana and causes a negative output, which has an adverse effect on corporate Ghana.
Mr Kwaku Appau, Board Chairman of VPWA, said: "The question Ghanaians and the donor communities should be asking themselves is why are there all these investments into malaria control and yet the death rate continues to rise? It is simple; expenditure is going into areas that do not stop the malaria vector from breeding so there is a continuous multiplication."
The KICK OUT MALARIA project will run for four weeks between August to September 2009. A team of local and international volunteers will travel across Ghana, Nigeria, Benin, Togo and Cote D'Ivoire raising awareness of some of the simple activities people can do in their home environment to eradicate mosquito breeding grounds.
Kirsty Osei-Bempong – PR/Communications for VPWA
PRESS SECTION- VPWA
Friday, May 1, 2009
Eradication of Malaria in the US (1947-1952)
Eradication of Malaria in the US (1947-1952)
BY Courtney Peterson
The National Malaria Society considers malaria to no longer be an epidemic “when no primary indigenous has occurred in the area for three years.”
Between 1949 and 1951, the National Malaria Eradication Program successfully eradicated malaria from the United States. This program was a collaboration of the 13 Southeastern states and the Communicable Disease Center of the US Public Health Service.
The strategy was to apply DDT to the entire interior of homes in rural areas, or to an entire area where malaria was considered an issue. This operation began on July 1, 1947, and by the beginning of 1950, almost 5 million homes had been treated with DDT. By 1952, CDC withdrew the actions, because the eradication attempt had proved to be a success.
In addition to spraying, other successful control efforts conducted by the local departments were adequate drainage to prevent standing water and the removal of mosquito breeding sites.
BY Courtney Peterson
The National Malaria Society considers malaria to no longer be an epidemic “when no primary indigenous has occurred in the area for three years.”
Between 1949 and 1951, the National Malaria Eradication Program successfully eradicated malaria from the United States. This program was a collaboration of the 13 Southeastern states and the Communicable Disease Center of the US Public Health Service.
The strategy was to apply DDT to the entire interior of homes in rural areas, or to an entire area where malaria was considered an issue. This operation began on July 1, 1947, and by the beginning of 1950, almost 5 million homes had been treated with DDT. By 1952, CDC withdrew the actions, because the eradication attempt had proved to be a success.
In addition to spraying, other successful control efforts conducted by the local departments were adequate drainage to prevent standing water and the removal of mosquito breeding sites.
Campaign that Drastically Drops the Price of Malaria Drugs
A New Campaign that Drastically Drops the Price of Malaria Drugs
By Courtney Peterson
April 23, 2009
International health agencies and the European governments have announced their campaign to drive down the cost of malaria medication to 20 cents. The initial budget will be $225 million and will be run by the Affordable Medicines Facility for Malaria (AMFM).
Malaria continues to kill over 1 million people each year, the majority of those people being children. Awa-Marie Coll-Seck, executive director of the Roll Back Malaria partnership describes this new campaign as a “triumph of international cooperation.”
The
America-based drug companies have resisted lower their wholesale price from $4 per unit to $1 per unit price. If the prices can be lowered to a single dollar, donor funds would cover 95 cents of the cost. African and Asian villages would only pay 5 cents for the drug, and their mark up price should not exceed 20 cents. That would lower the cost for the average patient from $8 to the 20 cent price. This will be a huge savings for the poorer regions of African and
The money for this program was raised by slightly raising airline ticket fees. It was a collaborative effort by the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, the Roll Back Malaria partnership, the British,
Within the regions where malaria is an issue, drugs are normally handed out at public health clinics. However, since cerebral malaria can be fatal to children within 24 hours of onset, these drugs must be sold within walking distance of every village. The lower prices predicted by this campaign will make wide drug placement a more plausible goal.
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
West Africa was neglected in global eradication effort
With the success of DDT, the advent of less toxic, more effective synthetic antimalarials, and the enthusiastic and urgent belief that time and money were of the essence, the World Health Organization (WHO) submitted at the World Health Assembly in 1955 an ambitious proposal for the eradication of malaria worldwide. Eradication efforts began and focused on house spraying with residual insecticides, antimalarial drug treatment, and surveillance, and would be carried out in 4 successive steps: preparation, attack, consolidation, and maintenance.
Successes included eradication in nations with temperate climates and seasonal malaria transmission. Some countries such as India and Sri Lanka had sharp reductions in the number of cases, followed by increases to substantial levels after efforts ceased. Other nations had negligible progress (such as Indonesia, Afghanistan, Haiti, and Nicaragua). Some nations were excluded completely from the eradication campaign (most of sub-Saharan Africa).
The emergence of drug resistance, widespread resistance to available insecticides, wars and massive population movements, difficulties in obtaining sustained funding from donor countries, and lack of community participation made the long-term maintenance of the effort untenable. Completion of the eradication campaign was eventually abandoned to one of control.
Content source: Division of Parasitic Diseases
Eradication of Malaria in the United States (1947-1951)
The criteria for eradication as put forth by the National Malaria Society was: "Malaria may be assumed to be no longer endemic in any given area when no primary indigenous case has occurred there for three years".
The National Malaria Eradication Program, a cooperative undertaking by State and local health agencies of 13 Southeastern States and the Communicable Disease Center of the U. S. Public Health Service, originally proposed by Dr. L. L. Williams, commenced operations on July 1, 1947. The program consisted primarily of DDT application to the interior surfaces of rural homes or entire premises in counties where malaria was reported to have been prevalent in recent years. By the end of 1949, over 4,650,000 house spray applications had been made. Total elimination of transmission was slowly achieved. By 1951, CDC gradually withdrew from active participation in the operational phases of the program and shifted to its interest to surveillance, and in 1952, CDC participation in operations ceased altogether.
A major commitment was to the malaria control and assessment activities associated with the Tennessee Valley Authority. The advent of World War II necessitated the control of malaria in and around the many military bases located in malarious areas, primarily in Southeastern U. S. These efforts were so successful that at the end of the war and the founding of CDC, one of the initial tasks was to oversee the completion of the elimination of malaria as a major public health problem. In 1949, the country was declared free of malaria as a significant public health problem.
The role of CDC became one of surveillance within the U. S. and of assistance in the world-wide efforts to eliminate or control malaria in the economically underdeveloped areas of the world.
Malaria has been endemic in the US until the late 1940's. Most of the transmission occurred in the southeastern states. (From this derives the fact that CDC, originally derived from malaria control operations, is located in Atlanta, Georgia).
| Malaria Morbidity and Mortality Rates in All States Reporting Cases and Deaths During 1920-1946 Inclusive
|  |
| Distribution of malaria in the United States, 1882-1935 |
Control efforts conducted by the state and local health departments, supported by the federal government, resulted in the disease being eradicated by 1949. Such measures included drainage, removal of mosquito breeding sites, and spraying (occasionally from aircrafts) of insecticides.
 |
| Aircraft spraying insecticide, 1920's |
 |
| Drainage activities, Virginia, 1920's |
Sunday, March 15, 2009
Why KMO 2009 in West Africa
- Each year approximate 515 million cases of malaria occur worldwide, and over one million people die, most of them young children in sub-Saharan Africa.
- In sub Saharan Africa with high malaria transmission, an estimated 1 million people die of malaria – over 2700 deaths per day, or 2 deaths per minute.
- Malaria is the highest cause of death in children in sub-Saharan Africa, after perinatal conditions (conditions occurring around the time of birth), lower respiratory infections (pneumonias), and diarrheal diseases.
- Malaria forms a huge part of widespread poverty in Africa. It causes a loss of almost 2% of economic growth, A 20% reduction in GNP after 15years and short term benefits control of up to $12billion each year. Very staggering indeed! If we can fight Mosquitoes (the cause of Malaria) Africa’s development will be accelerated because family incomes will rise.
- "Malaria is hurting the living standards of Africans today and is also preventing the improvement of living standards for future generations," said Dr Gro Harlem Brundtland, Director General of the World Health Organization. "This is an unnecessary and preventable handicap on the continent's economic development." According to statistical estimates in 2000 , sub-Saharan Africa's GDP would have been up to 32% greater that year if malaria had been eliminated 35 years ago. This would represent over $100 billion added to sub-Saharan Africa's current GDP of $300 billion. This extra $100 billion would be, by comparison,nearly five times greater than all development aid provided to Africa the year before. (Note: Nothing has change about this statistics till now.We are in 2009)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)