[ad_1]
The Covid-19 pandemic has elevated scrutiny on how pathogens spread in humans like no crisis before it. To better understand how these events occur – and to respond better when they do occur – the World Health Organization is establishing a new Scientific Advisory Group on the Origins of New Pathogens, or SAGOs.
Now the agency needs experts to apply.
“It’s much better to apply than to stay on the sidelines” Maria Van Kerkhove, the agency’s Covid-19 technical manager, told STAT this week. “It’s much better to get involved than to sit on the sidelines, especially if it’s just to really criticize. Get your hands dirty. Work with us.”
advertising
The advisory group of up to 25 experts will come from a range of scientific specialties, including biosecurity and biosecurity, Van Kerkhove said. This is a new group, spurred in part by the Covid-19 pandemic, but who will continue to work with the WHO as new threats emerge and previous threats recur. Think of coronaviruses, Lassa, Ebola, bird flu – and the next big disease X as yet unknown. The deadline to apply is September 10th. More information is available here.
The group will help establish frameworks to investigate the origins of pathogens as soon as cases of disease are reported. As an example, Van Kerkhove said if the group was operational right now, WHO could look to experts to determine where the recently confirmed Ebola infection detected in person traveling to Côte d’Ivoire originated, or what studies could tell us about a recent fatal case from Marburg in Guinea.
advertising
“It’s not about deploying this group on the ground,” Van Kerkhove said. “It’s a question of what studies are absolutely necessary, what tools exist – or perhaps do not yet exist – to be able to support these types of surveys? “
And yes, the group will be tasked with working on determining the origin of SARS-CoV-2. The debate has bogged down in a political quagmire, with some pushing the hypothesis of a laboratory leak and many scientists claiming that a natural overflow from bats or via an intermediate species or multiple species is much more likely, even if they can at this point. t definitively rule out a laboratory accident. (The U.S. intelligence community’s report on the origins of the coronavirus, delivered to President Biden on Tuesday, was also inconclusive, The Washington Post reported.)
WHO has already sent an international team of scientists to China to study the origin of SARS-2, which has resulted in a report in March which supported a natural overflow. However, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the director general of the agency, said since all assumptions remain on the table and that there will also be future research on the matter.
The intention behind SAGO is not to replicate the work already done to investigate the origins of SARS-2, Van Kerkhove said. Rather, the advisory group will help guide the next round of studies that could help clarify where Covid-19 is coming from.
“We want to get the politics out of that as much as possible and stay really rooted in science and the science base, which is our mandate,” Van Kerkhove said. “Our aim is to transform a political debate into a scientific debate and to keep going. “
Excerpts from STAT’s interview with Van Kerkhove are below, slightly edited for clarity.
Why is WHO creating this group?
WHO has many advisory groups, and this is the one we are establishing because we have identified a gap in having this comprehensive framework to study when and where these pathogens emerge. The emergence of SARS-CoV-2 is the latest in a long line of new and known high-risk pathogens that have epidemic and pandemic potential. And there will be more.
We have an immediate need for SARS-CoV-2, but it is not to reinvent the wheel. There is a lot of work that has already been described that needs to be continued, and that should be continued now. The March report described a large number of studies to be carried out. We understand from our colleagues in China that a lot is underway.
What is your presentation to scientists who might consider joining this group? Why should they consider doing it?
What we need as WHO are people applying. Over the past two days I have received numerous emails saying, “Oh, I don’t know, should I or shouldn’t I? Or, just skeptical. I have received some pretty interesting emails, some of them not very pleasant, about “Oh, that’s settled, that’s just too political”. I understand that, because people are beaten up and bruised, including me, but I believe that we have a role to play as scientists, and we want to bring together those who have technical know-how, who have experience of field, which can really grow in the future, so we have a scientific, transparent, comprehensive, rapid and inclusive framework for the future.
What kind of experts are you looking for?
People who have experience in epidemiology, virology, veterinary medicine, anything related to microbiology, bacteriology, bioinformatics, molecular epidemiology, serological epidemiology, biosafety, biosafety, science of l environment, social sciences – a large number of disciplines. But we are also looking for people with direct experience with these types of pathogens, especially field experience.
We need good geographic representation and we need good gender balance. I expect we will get a lot of applications from North America, Europe, and it’s wonderful, but we want the inclusion of all continents, all of our WHO regions, income high or low income. There are a lot of great scientists working in the field daily and we hope they will apply.
The first task of this group appears to be looking at SARS-CoV-2. So what will this group do in the face of the coronavirus?
One of the urgent tasks will be to review what is known in terms of global studies on the origins of SARS-CoV-2 – hence the work in China, but we have also followed all the studies and preprints that have suggested positive results. samples. It’s not about redoing the rapport, it’s just saying, from there, what else do we know, and what should we prioritize?
It is also to help with the operational plans that WHO is working on to implement the next round of studies. I want to make it very clear that WHO will work with any Member State where one of these studies is to be carried out. It is not for the WHO to go to just any country to do anything. We don’t have the mandate for that. We will work with all countries, including China of course, to bring them to fruition.
China has very capable scientists, many, many capable scientists, and as I said, we understand that many of the studies suggested in the March 2021 report are ongoing. We would very much like to see the results of these studies, so that we can say, OK what next?
China pushed back WHO’s plan last month for the next phase of the study on the origin of Covid, then how is the WHO trying to go about it and get China’s cooperation?
We continue to work with China. We had an information meeting with Member States last week on [SAGO] and the call for nominations and we have received very positive feedback from all Member States. What I think we will continue to do is ensure that all of these assumptions are pursued and continue to work with China to implement these studies in the future and provide whatever support is needed.
It’s not about pointing fingers, it’s not about blaming. We just need to better understand how SARS-CoV-2 started in order to better prepare for the next one, which could emerge anywhere.
At a broader level, have you seen a significant commitment from countries around the world to reduce the likelihood of or prepare for additional pathogens? Obviously, they’re still grappling with this pandemic, but do you at least even see plans to increase surveillance or put plans in place for better mitigation efforts, for example, or to improve the safety of the? laboratory?
I see work in this area, but there is not enough. There are many calls for better surveillance of animal populations, there is a huge effort to increase sequencing capacity worldwide. We see a lot of effort to build community structures. My doctorate was on avian flu in Cambodia, and I draw a lot of inspiration from it as it was the village animal health worker who recognized that the poultry mortality was slightly different from last year or the previous month, and sounded the alarm from the district level through the province to the national level, and it triggered action. So there are efforts going on there, but I don’t think it’s fast enough.
Preparation and availability are a constant. It is not something that begins and ends. And I’m afraid we’re not using this traumatic experience we all live in to do enough. I want to remain hopeful because I see a lot of effort in this area, but we need the commitment and the financial support to be able to do it at the local level. It’s a good start and we are better prepared than a year ago, but we still have a long way to go. I fear that we will pass to the next crisis, because there are plenty of others, before we are in a better position here.
[ad_2]
Source link