Public health responses are most effective when they are grounded in reality. This is particularly important if the response is intended to address an ‘emergency’ and involves the transfer of large amounts of public money. When we reallocate resources, there is a cost, as the funds are taken from some other programme. If the response involves buying lots of products from a manufacturer, there will also be a gain for the company and its investors.
So, clearly, there are three obvious requirements here to ensure good practice:
- Accurate information is required, in context.
- Those gaining financially can have no role at all in decision-making.
- The organisation tasked with coordinating any response would have to act with transparency, publicly weighing costs and benefits.
The World Health Organisation (WHO), tasked by countries to help coordinate international public health, has just proclaimed Mpox (monkeypox) an international emergency. It considered a new outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and nearby Central African countries to be a global threat, requiring an urgent global response. In declaring its emergency, the WHO stated there were 537 deaths among 15,600 suspected cases this year. In its August 19th Emergency Meeting on Mpox, the WHO clarified its figures:
During the first six months of 2024, the 1,854 confirmed cases of Mpox reported by States Parties in the WHO African Region account for 36% (1,854 of 5,199) of the cases observed worldwide.
The WHO reiterated that there had been 15,000 “clinically compatible” cases, and about 500 suspected deaths. The implications of these 500 unconfirmed deaths, equaling just 1.5% of the malaria deaths in DRC over the same period, are discussed in a previous article.
Journals such as the Lancet have dutifully toed the WHO’s ‘emergency’ line, though intriguingly noting that the mortality could be far lower if “adequate care” had been provided. Africa CDC agrees, with more than 17,000 cases (2,863 confirmed) and 517 (presumably suspected) deaths of Mpox reported across the continent.
Mpox is endemic to central and west Africa, being present in species of squirrels, rats and other rodents. While it was identified in monkeys in a Danish lab in 1958 (hence the misnomer ‘monkeypox’), it has probably been around for thousands of years, causing intermittent infections in humans between whom it is spread by close physical contact.
Small outbreaks in Africa mostly went unnoticed by the rest of the world, mainly because they were (as now) small and confined. Mass Smallpox vaccination may also have suppressed numbers still further a few decades ago, as Smallpox is in the same Orthopoxvirus genus of viruses. So, we may be seeing an upward trend of this generally milder illness (fever, chills, and a vesicular rash) over recent decades since Smallpox vaccination ceased. The Smithsonian Magazine put an informative summary together in 2022, after the first out-of-Africa outbreak which was spread by sexual contacts within a limited demographic group.
So, here we are in 2024, on the tail of a massively profit-driving (and impoverishing) outbreak called COVID-19 that enabled the largest transfer of wealth from the many to the few in human history. WHO’s announcement that 5,000 (or fewer) suspected Mpox cases is a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) allows it to fast-track vaccines thought its Emergency Use Listing (EUL) programme, bypassing the normal rigour required to approve such pharmaceuticals, and is suggesting pharmaceutical companies start lining up. At least one drug-maker is already discussing supply of 10 million doses before year end. The business case for this approach, from the corporate viewpoint, is well proven. So are the harms in countries like DRC, as a mass vaccination programme of this nature requires redirection of millions of dollars and thousands of health workers who would otherwise be addressing diseases of far larger burden.
The WHO is a large organisation, and while some at the WHO have been on the hustings asking for money, others have been working hard to accurately inform the public (a core responsibility of the WHO, which retains some dedicated people). Like much of the WHO’s work in the past, this is thorough and commendable. Some of this information is summarised in the following graphics:
These charts provide data on confirmed cases, where someone with somewhat non-specific symptoms has been tested and shown to have evidence of Mpox virus in blood or secretions. Clearly, not everyone suspected can be tested, as Mpox is a very small issue for people facing civil wars, mass poverty and vastly more dangerous diseases. However, the WHO has absorbed a lot of money for outbreak investigation, and so have partner organisations, so we can assume there is a fairly good effort going on to detect and confirm numbers (or where has this money gone?)
In the past two and a half years, the WHO has confirmed 223 deaths in the whole world, with just six in July 2024 (the time when the WHO Director General warned the world of a rapidly increasing threat). Note here that 223 deaths is just 0.2% of the 102,997 confirmed cases. In Africa, just 26 deaths have been confirmed in 2024 among 3,562 cases (0.7%), spread across five countries (and 12 countries with cases). These are influenza-like mortality rates, not Ebola-like. As severe cases are more likely to be tested than mild cases, the infection fatality rate may be far lower. We also don’t know (though someone does and should tell us) what the characteristics of those dying are. Most in Africa are reported to be children, so it is likely they are malnourished, otherwise immunocompromised (e.g. HIV) and have susceptibilities that could be addressed.
As is obvious from the third graphic below, nearly all the global deaths listed above were from the previous outbreak in 2022. This was a different clade (variant) and mostly occurred outside of Africa.
It is important to note a few things here. It is difficult to confirm all cases in areas with poor infrastructure and security. Mpox symptoms and signs are also frequently mild and overlap other diseases (e.g. chickenpox or even flu) so many cases may go unnoticed. Notification of results can also lag, so some recent results may not appear yet. However, the 19 confirmed DRC Mpox deaths set against roughly 40,000 DRC malaria deaths so far this year is about one versus 2,000. Whichever way you count it, it is not going to become much more significant. That is what the new international emergency looks like in actual data. Even if you are among the population of DRC at Mpox ground zero, it is likely you would not notice anything at all.
Why has WHO declared an international emergency? Some claim it helps mobilise resources, which is a bit pathetic. Firstly, grown-ups should be able to discuss a situation that has persisted for two years in a rational manner and decide what might be needed, without banging a drum. Secondly, an outbreak that is killing a tiny fraction of malaria (or tuberculosis, or HIV) deaths, and far less than those currently dying in war, is a dubious ‘international emergency’.
And what should be done? Diverting resources from DRC’s major priorities would undoubtedly kill far more than are currently dying from Mpox. It is quite probable that direct adverse events from vaccination alone will kill more than the 19 DRC Mpox victims confirmed this year. We likely undercount Mpox deaths, but we also undercount pharmaceutical deaths. Perhaps a useful response would be to improve immune competence through nutrition, providing very broad benefits (but completely failing in terms of Pharma profit). Gavi’s half a billion dollars would provide vast and broad-based benefit if applied to sanitation. Perhaps limited, well-targeted vaccination may also help some communities, but there is no business case for such approaches.
What is clear, as noted above, is the following:
- The data on Mpox and other competing priorities must continue to be shown in context, along with costs and opportunity costs of the response.
- Those who will gain financially from vaccinating millions of people must not be part of the decision-making process (whether or not such a huge resource transfer can possibly be supported for such a small disease burden).
- The WHO should continue to act with transparency, as the public have an absolute right to know what they are paying for, and the harm (and perhaps benefit) they can expect from it.
The number of Mpox deaths will rise as more are infected, and perhaps as some suspected cases are confirmed. However, we are facing a small problem in an area with far larger ones. It is posing low local risk, and minimal global risk. It is not a global emergency, by any sane, rational, public health-based definition.
The rest of the world will respond by sending vaccines and lots of foreigners whose needs have to be looked after, diverting local health and security personnel and almost certainly killing more DRC residents overall. Or, we can recognise a local problem, support local responses when local populations ask, and concentrate, as the WHO once did, on addressing the underlying causes of endemic disease. They are the things that make the lives of people in DRC so difficult.
Dr David Bell is a clinical and public health physician with a PhD in population health and background in internal medicine, modelling and epidemiology of infectious disease. Previously, he was Director of the Global Health Technologies at Intellectual Ventures Global Good Fund in the USA, Programme Head for Malaria and Acute Febrile Disease at FIND in Geneva and coordinating malaria diagnostics strategy with the World Health Organisation. He is a Senior Scholar at the Brownstone Institute.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
“Net Zero Will Lead to the End of Modern Civilisation”
I expect that’s a feature, not a bug.
Beautifully put.
Absolutely, beautifully put indeed, and all the while we’re cheating by instead shipping in all the necessities, including that which enables us to claim a supposed ‘net zero’ status (or something near it), i.e: the batteries, solar panels, windmills which are all made in the industrial nations (not to mention raping Africa and the like of its resources) who are seemingly exempted from the same political forces & agenda, at least at the moment. What happens once these industrial nations are also to comply with nonsensical net zero dictates? .. “The end of modern civilisation.” C’mon people.. this is obviously a scam whilst credible solutions such a nuclear are left to the wayside.
Net Zero won’t lead to the end of Modern Civilisation, as numerous countries such as China and India refuse to subscribe to the ideology and know that they need to continue increasing fossil fuel use to maintain their civilisation. The worst that can be said about net zero is that it will lead to the end of modern civilisation in those countries that try to achieve it.
The idea that humanity’s carbon emissions are harming the planet is obviously a delusion, but compared with religion it’s hardly the greatest mass delusion in history.
True. Maybe the end of Western Civilisation.
The difference between Net Zero and religion is arguably that the people pushing Net Zero claim they are backed by science, whereas religion is explicitly based on faith – that’s the whole point, or a large part of it.
Didn’t we all know this when we where kids?
Our human race gave up windmills and water wheels because they are just not efficient enough for a prosperous life for all the peoples on earth!
Of cause, they are perfect if you only need enough energy for the self chosen few, and you’ll have plenty of eager prolls to serve you on your new spacious,clean planet, all just for you and your billionair mates, how nice
https://www.netzerowatch.com/net-zero-is-a-disaster-waiting-to-happen/
When we are naked in the forest, foraging for berries, even that will ‘not be enough’ for the green totalitarians (look they will moan, you are breathing and emitting the dreaded Co2…)
“Google warns it will not provide information on claims denying that long-term trends show that the global climate is warming”. Most people on the sceptic side would not dispute that temperatures have risen since the mid 19th century following the end of the Little Ice Age.
Some may dispute that rises since the beginning of the 20th century are not as significant as claimed – due to a number of factors such as urban heat island effect, changes in measuring equipment, increased night-time temperatures, manipulation of the datasets by vested interests and so on; however, even if you acknowledge warming, the MSM and social media companies will suppress articles from people and organisations who do not believe that man-made emmissions are the primary driver of changes in climate.
The climate has warmed over the past 175 years, but claim that this is not primarily caused by anthropogenic CO2 emmissions and your views are at the mercy of the full force of state and bigtech censorship.
“Google warns…”
We’re in a war and Google are part of the enemy alliance. They are actively working to harm us.
There are options available. https://spreadprivacy.com/why-use-duckduckgo-instead-of-google/
For the Duckduckgo down voter maybe they would prefer Ecosia as an alternative search engine. Maybe they would like to try alternative browsers to Chrome with such as Brave or Vivaldi. Protonmail is alternative to GMail. Not forgetting that You Tube is owned by Googlewe can support the following where possible – Nordvpn, Bitchute, Odysee and Rumble.
Perfectly written summary. I’ll copy that for future use myself. Google of course now are a regime mouthpiece whose main aim is to collude with government agencies like the CIA to convince ppl of things which are untrue.
I missed the MSM from the list of perps. The BBC, for example, is an utter disgrace on the CO2 / climate change narrative. This blog post from 2014 is quite nostalgic; most of the comments are interesting too.
https://biasedbbc.tv/blog/2014/04/20/that-settled-science-bbcs-approach-ignorant-and-medieval-to-debate/
The BBC is an utter disgrace.
Idem on excess deaths. Poor old Evan Davies gave it a tentative try last night on PM, gone again by this morning.
“The climate has warmed over the past 175 years”
I think it has warmed since about 1600. In fact, a multi-pronged question I ask those who buy the man-made climate catastrophe narrative is as follows: how much has the earth’s temperature risen since the 1850s (i.e. post industrialisation)? To which I answer “around 1.1C” and they argue that this is mainly due to man-made emissions. Then I ask: how much did the earth warm from 1600 to 1850? To which I answer “1.0C”. Then I ask – and what was this increase caused by? To which the answer is … silence, of course.
Jordan Peterson did a long interview with Richard Lindzen recently, from which this quote might derive.
Reading his Ivy League credentials took him almost 5 minutes.
I just wonder where these people have been over the last decade.
If they had opened their mouths earlier, this enormous public brainwash and its resulting disastrous policies might have been prevented.
Lindzen has been opposing this a long while, avd Peterson has always been opposed to net zero when questioned.
Lindzen has been active in the climate realist movement for thirty years or more.
The fact that you seem unaware of that, suggests that you have only just woken up.
All part of the plan to usher in a new era of technological feudalism. Your WEF appointed digital overlords will have you tagged and assigned to your local prefecture in due course.
An excellent article, these econuts do not realise that everything we touch or need in todays society has been made from, with, or by fossil fuels, cloths, food, housing everything. The UK will replace fossil fuel generated electricity with solar and wind turbines made with fossil fuels, and these methods will be imported by shipping methods using fossil fuels, installed on foundations created with machinery and materials, made with the use of and by fossil fuels…………….Lemmings off a cliff comes to mind.
spot on …
Time to release the real Kraken: Nikola Tesla’s free energy devices. And LENR.
At the root of this is a utopian desire for a depopulated world where the super-rich do what they want and everyone else is a slave class. In essence, the Net Zero mob wants Fritz Lang’s Metropolis, even down to the workers physically producing the power they use to live!
We are hearing all the time about the risk of fossil fuels, but we never hear about the risk of NO FOSSIL FUELS. That risk far outweighs the use of fossil fuels —— Coal Oil and Gas are what empowers the world. 90% of the world’s energy comes from fossil fuels, and along with Nuclear are the only form of ON DEMAND energy. They are what has doubled life expectancy, freed up people from a miserable life of back breaking labour and has given us the lifestyle we now enjoy, with warm homes, labour saving appliances, leisure time, holidays, computers, television, cars and infact everything that can be associated with modern civilisation. ——— NET ZERO policies that want to eliminate fossil fuels because the use of them causes CO2 emissions were never put to the public. No MP asked a single question as to the cost/benefit of this ideologically motivated nonsense that will impoverish people. Politicians and bureaucrats actually have no idea whatsoever how any of this can possibly be achieved and many would have great difficulty in explaining to a bunch of primary school children the so called “science” that they hide behind. Far from destroying the world, fossil fuels make the world a far more liveable and hospitable place. Without them we are in the Middle Ages. The apocalypse will come from getting rid of fossil fuels, not by their use.
An excellent paper, well worth reading. It certainly shows, if we needed any further evidence, than the Net Zero crowd are barking mad.
It is worth noting that a lot of sceptical climate science comes from retired but well qualified scientists. Could this be because those still in employment are scared of losing their position or grant should they criticise the eco-madness of anthropogenic climate change?
There is nothing here that has not been said before. The problem is that the politicians, encouraged by celebrities and school children, refuse to accept it. Why?
What is most important is free speech so we can debate the issue without being censored, demonized and smeared.
First create the utopian ‘Green’ economy and environment and then, if it’s so great, people will choose to move from fossil fuels.
But first create the ‘Green’ option.
“A damning indictment of the Net Zero political project has been made by one of the world’s leading nuclear physicists.”
The man is a nuclear physicist. Precisely. No chance whatsoever of conflicts of interest here, right? No chance that at some point he got to hate Greenpeace so much that he became a rabid anti-climate change politicised activist, right?
From the abstract of his paper:
“Radiation forcing calculations by both skeptics and believers show that the carbon dioxide radiation forcing is about 0.3% of the incident radiation, far less than other effects on climate.”
Here is a graph of radiative forcings:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiative_forcing#/media/File:Physical_Drivers_of_climate_change.svg
They aren’t what he is saying at all. He is straight-out lying about the science in his so-called “paper”, written for a “private for-profit organization”, by their own admission. Not an academic institution.
And if you wanted to know about the science of climate change, there is no shortage of correct information on the Internet, written in actual peer-reviewed academic journals. Or the popular versions of them, if you don’t have the level of education needed for a proper academic paper.
You could begin by learning that the greenhouse effect was discovered by 19th century physicists. Yes, you read 19th century correctly.
That’s because in the 19th century, people didn’t have the Internet or video, so they were much better educated and informed on average. The Internet and videos don’t help you be better informed, they feed your addiction for rubbish that will erase things from your memory and make you stupid.