Last week, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared a public health emergency over the growing spread of the Zika virus in Latin America and parts of the Caribbean.
During
their analysis of the level of threat, the Emergency Committee
concluded that there was a viable association between the mosquito-borne
virus and pregnant women bearing children with microcephaly or other neurological abnormalities.
Fifty
cases of Zika virus have now been reported in five U.S. states,
prompting the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to issue a nationwide alert and certain states including Texas to launch a task force
to coordinate a statewide response.
Yet upon reviewing the facts, are
sensational headlines playing an inordinate role in setting public
health policy?
The most common indicators of the virus include rash, fever, joint pain, muscle pain and headache. These symptoms usually last for a few days or up to a week. It is rare for people to be hospitalized or die from the virus.
After reviewing the alarming cluster of babies born with microcephaly in Brazil
in the last few months, the WHO took decisive action when they
determined these cases resembled a similar outbreak in French Polynesia
in 2014.
As global and public health communities grapple
with how to conduct an effective response to the Zika virus, here is
what you need to know:
1. The Zika virus has re-emerged after a 60-year slumber.
The
virus was first discovered in rhesus monkeys in Uganda and Tanzania in
1947, during the monitoring of yellow fever—another mosquito-borne
disease. At that time, given the isolated location of the monkeys, the
virus did not appear in humans. Prior to 2007, there were just 14 documented cases.
Zika
virus is transmitted to people by the bite of an infected Aedes
mosquito, which is typically found in tropical regions. There were
subsequent outbreaks in the Pacific Islands, particularly the 2013-14
rate of 388 cases in French Polynesia.
2. Zika virus might not be the cause of all those microcephaly cases in Brazil.
There has been an undeniable surge of microcephaly cases in Brazil recently. Or has there?
According
to the Ministry of Health, there have been 4,783 reported cases since
last October. Prior to that, Brazil only had 150 cases annually. Yet it
remains unclear how many of those babies actually have microcephaly, the
rare condition in which babies are born with abnormally small heads and
other neurological disorders—and whether their condition was caused by
the Zika virus.
Out of 404 confirmed cases of
microcephaly in the region, only 17 of them tested positive for the
virus. Another 709 babies have been ruled out as having microcephaly. So
out of 1,113 evaluated cases so far, only 17 were linked to the virus.
Apparently local health officials acted on the Brazilian government's
guidance on how to report microcephaly cases and ended up setting broad
criteria. As a result, we are seeing a steady rise of false reports.
Driven by our culture's 24/7 news cycle, local errors
spread from news reports have magnified confusion on a global scale
about what is actually going on. The accepted media narrative doesn't
add up. In neighboring Colombia
northwest of Brazil, there is currently no evidence of microcephaly in
the country—although 3,177 pregnant women have been diagnosed with the
Zika virus.
3. Pregnant women with Zika virus are being given a false solution in abortion.
The
causes of microcephaly cases in Brazil and parts of Latin America
remain unknown. Yet as soon as reports emerged of a strong possible
threat to the health of unborn children, abortion proselytizers
quickly fueled the media with their "solution" for expectant mothers.
Dr. Rebecca Gomperts, founder of abortion-by-mail service Women on Web,
and her organization have offered to provide free abortion pills to any
woman who can provide them with a positive Zika virus laboratory test
result.
Gomperts affirms
that "women have the right to decide to end their pregnancy to avoid
such harm." What sort of harm, exactly? The scientific community is
still uncertain about the link between the virus and microcephaly; as of
today, it is only strongly suspected. While this ongoing public health
situation has many unknowns, International Planned Parenthood Federation
and other groups are rushing to present one solution: abortion.
In other regions like Asia and Africa, where the virus has appeared, there aren't documented incidents of microcephaly. While some assume
this may be due to a greater level of immunity, how do we explain the
absence of microcephaly in Colombia's verified Zika virus cases?
Advising
women not to get pregnant, or encouraging expectant mothers to have
abortions, are false solutions that only perpetuate fear.
4. Worst-case scenarios should be considered in light of ethics and the value of life.
The
worst-case scenario would be a proven causation link between the Zika
virus and babies being born with unusually small heads. If this were
true, is it justified for women to be told to abstain from getting pregnant for at least two years? Or encouraged to end the life of their unborn children? Apparently, the Zika virus can also be transmitted by sexual intercourse, but the guideline issued in this scenario is focused on managing the infection and preventing further spread of the virus.
Yet
pregnant women are issued the reckless advice to abort their unborn
children in the off chance that they could contract a birth defect that
might be caused by a bite from an infected mosquito. Why aren't we
hearing more about the preventive measures pregnant women can take to avoid contracting Zika virus?
Above
all, with the dominant media message being "Avoid having a child born
with microcephaly at all costs," what are we saying to the existing population
of individuals with microcephaly and other special needs? Instead of
allowing our perceptions of this issue to be influenced by fear, let's
search for the truth beyond the headlines in order to gain
understanding.
No comments:
Post a Comment