Poor Surveillance Impeding Battle to Hold Back M-pox, Expert Warns
The resurgence of mpox, also known as monkeypox, has raised concerns among global health experts about the effectiveness of current surveillance systems. Dimie Ogoina, a Nigerian professor and chair of the World Health Organisation’s (WHO) emergency committee of independent experts on mpox, has emphasized that the lack of adequate surveillance is critically hindering efforts to monitor and manage the spread of the disease.
According to Ogoina, the official figure of 17,000 infected individuals may significantly underestimate the actual number of cases. This discrepancy is attributed to the absence of rapid diagnostic tests and insufficient data collection mechanisms. “Now that we have a new mpox [type].. it is time for us to rethink our surveillance system and make it more proactive,” Ogoina stated, highlighting the urgency of revamping current systems to prevent further outbreaks.
In response to the growing threat, the WHO recently declared its second public health emergency for mpox in less than two years. The situation underscores the need for a more robust and agile global health infrastructure capable of identifying and containing outbreaks quickly. However, the call for increased surveillance raises important questions about the balance between public health security and individual privacy rights.
Surveillance: A Tool for Health or a Means of Control?
While the need for improved disease surveillance is clear, particularly in the wake of recurring global health crises, the expansion of monitoring capabilities often brings with it a host of ethical and privacy concerns. Surveillance systems, if not carefully implemented and regulated, can lead to unintended consequences, including the erosion of civil liberties.
There is a growing debate about whether increased surveillance genuinely serves the interests of public safety or whether it is a convenient pretext for expanding governmental control over the populace. This concern is particularly pronounced in the context of the upcoming presidential election in the United States, where the timing of heightened surveillance measures could be viewed with suspicion. Critics argue that the implementation of more rigorous monitoring systems under the guise of public health could set a precedent for intrusive governmental practices that persist beyond the current health emergency.
The challenge lies in creating a surveillance framework that is effective enough to track and manage diseases like mpox without overstepping into the realm of excessive monitoring. Pragmatic solutions should focus on enhancing diagnostic capabilities, improving data collection and sharing, and ensuring that any surveillance measures are transparent, accountable, and strictly limited to public health objectives. By focusing on rapid diagnostic tests and reliable data collection methods, public health officials can obtain a more accurate picture of the mpox situation. Such measures can facilitate timely interventions without the need for invasive surveillance tactics that may infringe on individual freedoms.
