This article published today in US News and World Report, appears to me to be particularly related to topics discussed in class this past week.
As a topic that has received great attention, both in professional science publications and in mass media coverage, information regarding pandemics is constantly inundating the public. Predictions, cost analysis, and preventative measures for diseases like SARS, bird flu, AIDS, and many others seem to find a particularly eager audience.
The information provided by these scientists has the ability to alter people's ideas regarding pandemics, depending on the method in which it is reported. By singling out certain nations as particular hot zones, such research may even have the potential to alter policies within these areas or those implemented on an international scale.
Such possibilities make evident the role of communication in shaping not only scientific, but social opinions as well.
Thursday, February 28, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I thought it was interesting to see that most surveillance resources are focused on the more developed countries, when these pandemics can be brewing in other places. It makes sense, in terms of how people think, that countried with money want to be protected in their immediate area. It's easier for people to ignore the threat of disease if it is in a far away place, but one must think how this far away disease may make its way to us. This is an example of how global communication can be critical.
My first reaction to reading this article is that the threat of emerging diseases is not presented in a very alarming way. Last semester in Comm 352 we read a lot about Avian Influenza ("Bird Flu"), and it was interesting to see how communication about the level of risk varied. An interesting note on the previous comment that "It's easier for people to ignore the threat of disease if it is in a far away place . . ." Its very true that we have to think about how these diseases can make their ways to us - a big debate when it comes to bird flu is whether or not this disease can be carried by migratory birds over long distances. If they can do this, this could greatly increase the risk for humans if a pandemic were to occur.
I think that a couple of factors need to be taken into account when looking over this article. First, the research for the conclusions presented in this article was funded by the National Science Foundation here in the U.S. Furthermore, the conclusions of the research were published in a major, peer-reviewed journal: Nature. At first I was skeptical of the conclusions presented, after all, the Spanish Influenza of 1918, one of the largest pandemics in the history of human civilization had its origins in the heart of the U.S. But upon mentioning NSF and especially after mentioning Nature, I began to look into the matter more, and I gained trust in the idea that I had been reading reliable knowledge. A simple example of how a couple of simple “dropped names” can influence one’s opinions and skepticisms.
I found this article very interesting, especially because I think I want to go into global health and disease research in the future. This article reminded me of a guest lecture we had in my intro to global health class, where the lecturer discussed emerging zoonotic diseases. He listed several factors that contribute to emerging diseases that were also mentioned in the article, such as human encroachment and attempts at urbanization into "wild" territories and then also agricultural intensification. As the article mentions, I think it is especially important to focus attention and research on developing areas, where wild and domestic animals and then people can have more contact.
Overall, I enjoyed reading this article and thought it was interesting. The threat of an emerging disease or pandemic is very relevant in developing countries, and I found it odd that these threats were not presented in a more frightening fashion. It is much easier for disease to spread in developing countries, and I believe that it is vital that we communicate to the public these threats. It would significantly reduce the risks of a pandemic, and would increase general health awareness.
Post a Comment