Is It Out of Control?

In Liberia, the Ebola situation appears to be easing, while in Sierra Leone things seem to be getting worse. It is not clear why the numbers should be diverging in these two closely-related countries. 

Many factors contribute to Ebola statistics. We must assume, first off, that those publishing the numbers are beyond the temptation of massaging them. That said, there are many other ways in which figures can be subject to error. For example, those who enumerate may not be able to do so accurately because humans are tricky creatures with minds of their own: they may hide, dissemble or otherwise make life difficult for the canvasser. Thus, final numbers must always be regarded as tentative, even when conditions are normal.

When things are as chaotic as they tend to be in the hothouse atmosphere that is Ebola, counting can be even less reliable. Besides, Ebola, in itself, is rather tricky. First off, we know very little about it in spite of the noisy declarations of “experts” and amateurs alike concerning its origin, infectivity, clinical manifestations and natural history. As for individuals afflicted by the disease, they find themselves in totally uncharted territory. They have no idea what is happening to them or what their eventual fate would be. They are petrified and their behaviour tends to the unpredictable. Some drift around and others may even cross borders without respect for immigration formalities.

Those who treat Ebola patients are also quite stressed and, sometimes, are confused too. Whether in America, Spain or in the disease’s epicentre there is lack of cogency. Rules are made up on the trot, and at the height of the confusion everything is likely to be slapped into quarantine on sight. Even unsuspecting dogs may be put down, a fate to which humans appear at some risk on return to their home country, judging by the shrillness among some sections of the media.

It is easy enough to mock these antics. But in countries where Ebola disease does exist, it is no laughing matter. The outlook is grim. Pundits worry that not enough is being done and dread the possibility of a pandemic. Why this anxiety? Is it because there is incompetence? Or malfeasance? Many are convinced that the latter is the case. They could see no reason why the problem should be so intractable when so much money is being thrown at it. It should have gone away by now, shouldn’t it? But it hasn’t. So there has to be some dodgy doings. “Follow the money,” they say. Money, in this case, is not an enabler, but rather a spoiler, a temptation too strong for the moral resolve of those in charge.

So Ebola remains wrapped up in all manner of theories and speculations. Money disappearing into the wrong channels is just part of that mix. However, as for the case of the origin of the epidemic, I remain, for the present, sceptical.

Eleven months down the line, we are beyond the shock and surprise that the epidemic chose West Africa to descend on in 2014 (2013, if you like). Also, for now, let us suspend recrimination over who or what did or did not do what when Ebola first struck. What is needed now is a ramping up of resources, human and non-human, local and international, for full engagement with a foe that gives no quarter.

Once the emergency is over, there will be time enough for an accounting.

Tell Fren Tru