Locating Zika

Abstract

The emergence of Zika virus in 2015 challenged conventional ideas of mosquitoborne diseases, tested the resilience of health systems and embedded itself within local sociocultural worlds, with major implications for environmental, sexual, reproductive and paediatric health. This book explores this complex viral epidemic and situates it within its broader social, epidemiological and historical context in Latin America and the Caribbean. The chapters include a diverse set of case studies from scholars and health practitioners working across the region, from Brazil, Venezuela, Ecuador, Mexico, Colombia, the United States and Haiti. The book explores how mosquito-borne disease epidemics (not only Zika but also Chikungunya, Dengue and malaria) intersect with social change and health governance. By doing so, the authors reflect on the ways in which situated knowledge and social science approaches can contribute to more effective health policy and practice for mosquito-borne disease threats in a changing world.

Integrating the social sciences in epidemic preparedness and response: A strategic framework to strengthen capacities and improve Global Health security

“…Epidemic preparedness and response, as well as health systems strengthening initiatives are increasingly recognizing epidemics as complex biosocial events – epidemiologically, clinically, socially and geopolitically [ 37 , 38 ]. Day-to-day decision-making – by communities, frontline health staff and humanitarian responders – takes place in a context of uncertainty, complexity, fear and stress across different temporal and spatial scales, embedded within the forces of politics, history and the unequal and inadequate distribution of resources.…”

Responding to the 2018–2020 Ebola Virus Outbreak in the Democratic Republic of the Congo: Rethinking Humanitarian Approaches

“…Although SSHAPS preparedness 66 and behavioral briefings 53 , 56–59 identify a wide range of potential stakeholders and trusted interlocuters, including traditional healers, we found no studies or reports confirming that these interlocutors had been engaged in any systematic way. The briefings also made a good attempt to systematically capture rumors and perspectives from people in Eastern DRC, some of which had clear, practical implications for simple changes, for example, the colors used for PPE were traditionally associated with death and bad omens, therefore, had a negative impact.…”

“…53 The widespread perception that the international community is not interested in the challenges local people face, beyond Ebola outcomes, was reinforced by events like the measles outbreak that killed more than 6600, mainly children, across DRC between January 2019 and June 2020 but received almost no international attention 54 , 55 and the lack of attention to other diseases was noted in multiple “engagement” sessions run by responders. 53 , 56–59 …”

“…The briefings also made a good attempt to systematically capture rumors and perspectives from people in Eastern DRC, some of which had clear, practical implications for simple changes, for example, the colors used for PPE were traditionally associated with death and bad omens, therefore, had a negative impact. 56 The very first briefing, using data collected between August and October 2018, noted that “the more local the institution the more favorably it was seen by respondents” who wanted to see “their” people and doctors leading the local response. 53 This intelligence, which reinforced what was already known from the West Africa outbreak on the need for local involvement and ownership, 2 , 16 , 67 appears not to have been acted on.…”

Insecticide-treated house screening protects against Zika-infected Aedes aegypti in Merida, Mexico

“…Even tough, HS was largely ignored for policies & programs for the prevention and control of ATD; and it was not until the Zika emergency that the WHO [ 48 ], and their regional offices, finally emphasised the prevention and protection against mosquito bites using physical barriers such as window screens [ 49 ]. To complicate things further, and even nowadays, the evidence on the effectiveness of the current “toolbox” for ABDs is mixed in terms of “arboviral control” and not specific for Zika, mainly because the lack of scientific evidence (both insufficient to dengue and also because Zika was a newly emerged disease) [ 12 , 50 ].…”