Pandemic preparedness and missed opportunities
By Michael T. Osterholm
Very few public health officials would disagree about the need for pandemic preparedness. But sometimes the public health community is its own worst enemy in explaining the critical need for pandemic planning and preparedness and the price the world will pay for not preparing.
A report last week from a leading nongovernmental agency—which was lauded in the public health community, and rightly so, for the most part—is a classic example of misunderstanding on this critical issue.
Epidemics differ from pandemics
Last week PATH issued a report titled, Healthier World, Safer America: A US Government Roadmap for International Action to Prevent the Next Pandemic. PATH, a leading international nonprofit organization, is widely recognized for its work to save lives and improve health, especially among women and children. Its key to success has been its ability to accelerate innovation across five areas of critical medical and public health practice—vaccines, drugs, diagnostics, devices, and system and service innovations. Our own work at CIDRAP has benefited greatly from the tremendous public health expertise of PATH team members.
The PATH report provides a number of important issues for addressing emerging infectious disease threats, and I applaud this crucial effort. The report, however, generates some confusion about preparing and responding to pandemics versus preparing and responding to epidemics.
The report has everything to do with preventing major epidemics, or least reducing the impact of these events. But it doesn't truly address how best to prevent pandemics or how to improve pandemic preparedness.
[...]