Search

The end of a pandemic is as much a political act as biological reality. It is over not simply when case counts or deaths are reduced to some objectively determined acceptable level but also when, and if, the public accepts the stories that politicians and health officials tell about it. This paper has three aims. First, to develop the concept of a pandemic illness narrative – a public narrative that makes the experience of an outbreak meaningful to a community of people and explains when it will be finished. Using the case of the United States, the paper then examines how American state organisations and public health officials tried to disseminate a version of the 'restitution illness narrative' to make sense out of the COVID-19 pandemic and explain how it would ultimately end. Lastly, the paper describes the factors that made this narrative ultimately implausible to the American public. As most Americans are now seemingly indifferent about the pandemic, it has ended in the United States without ever actually being narratively concluded. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

China has been contributing to new approaches to global governance. The Health Silk Road (HSR), a significant component of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), was proposed by China in 2016. This paper claims that HSR is a new institution introduced alongside the existing WHO-led multilateral health system, and its relationship with the existing system can be described as layering. Having explored the new development of HSR during COVID-19, this paper further argues that while HSR has its unique strength in making contributions to global health governance and economic recovery, it faces a prominent issue of securitisation in the context of China-U.S. strategic competition, suspicion of the quality of medical products and sectoral fragmentation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

When the COVID-19 pandemic struck and China reported the first case to the World Health Organization in December 2019, there was no evidence-based treatment to combat it. With the catastrophic situation that followed, materialised by a considerable number of deaths, researchers, doctors, traditional healers, and governments of all nations committed themselves to find therapeutic solutions, including preventive and curative. There are effective treatments offered both by modern medicine and traditional medicine for COVID-19 today. However, other therapeutic proposals have not been approved due to the lack of effectiveness and scientific rigour during their development process. Proponents of modern medicine prefer biomedical therapies while in some countries, traditional treatments are used regularly because of their availability, affordability and satisfaction they bring to the population. In this paper, we propose a transactional medicine approach where the interaction between traditional and modern medicine produces a change. With this approach, the promoters of traditional medicine and those of modern medicine will be able to acquire knowledge through the experience produced by their encounters. Transactional medicine aims to be a model for decolonising medicine and recognising the value of both traditional and modern medicine in the fight against COVID-19 and other global emerging pathogens. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Researchers and practitioners recognise the importance of context when implementing healthcare interventions, but the influence of wider environment is rarely mapped. This paper identifies the country and policy-related factors potentially explaining the country differences in outcomes of an intervention focused on improving detection and management of heavy alcohol use in primary care in Colombia, Mexico and Peru. Qualitative data obtained through interviews, logbooks and document analysis are used to explain quantitative data on number of alcohol screenings and screening providers in each of the countries. Existing alcohol screening standards in Mexico, and policy prioritisation of primary care and consideration of alcohol as a public health issue in Colombia and Mexico positively contributed to the outcome, while the COVID-19 pandemic had a negative impact. In Peru, the context was unsupportive due to a combination of: political instability amongst regional health authorities; lack of focus on strengthening primary care due to the expansion of community mental health centres; alcohol considered as an addiction rather than a public health issue; and the impact of COVID-19 on healthcare. We found that wider environment-related factors interacted with the intervention implemented and can help explain country differences in outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper evaluates global health responses to the COVID-19 pandemic through the 'two regimes of global health' framework. This framework juxtaposes global health security, which contains the threat of emerging diseases to wealthy states, with humanitarian biomedicine, which emphasises neglected diseases and equitable access to treatments. To what extent did the security/access divide characterise the response to COVID-19? Did global health frames evolve during the pandemic? Analysis focused on public statements from the World Health Organization (WHO), the humanitarian nonprofit Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF), and the American Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Following a content analysis of 486 documents released in the first two years of the pandemic, the research yielded three findings. First, the CDC and MSF affirmed the framework; they exemplified the security/access divide, with the CDC containing threats to Americans and MSF addressing the plight of vulnerable populations. Second, surprisingly, despite its reputation as a central actor in global health security, the WHO articulated both regime priorities and, third, after the initial outbreak, it began to favour humanitarianism. For the WHO, security remained, but was reconfigured: instead of traditional security, global human health security was emphasised – collective wellbeing was rooted in access and equity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted global interdependencies, accompanied by widespread calls for worldwide cooperation against a virus that knows no borders, but responses were led largely separately by national governments. In this tension between aspiration and reality, people began to grapple with how their own lives were affected by the global nature of the pandemic. In this article, based on 493 qualitative interviews conducted between 2020 and 2021, we explore how people in Argentina, Austria, Bolivia, Ecuador, Ireland, Italy and Mexico experienced, coped with and navigated the global nature of the pandemic. In dialogue with debates about the parameters of the 'global' in global health, we focus on what we call people's everyday (de)bordering practices to examine how they negotiated (dis)connections between 'us' and 'them' during the pandemic. Our interviewees' reactions moved from national containment to an increasing focus on people's unequal socio-spatial situatedness. Eventually, they began to (de)border their lives beyond national lines of division and to describe a new normal: a growing awareness of global connectedness and a desire for global citizenship. This newfound sense of global interrelatedness could signal support for and encourage transnational political action in times of crises. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is limited information about how the mental health of people has changed over time during the COVID-19 pandemic in low- and middle-income countries. In a cross-sectional study, we identified factors associated with psychological distress at two periods immediately after two peaks of the COVID-19 pandemic in Russia. Data were collected via online surveys. In May–June 2020, we surveyed 373 respondents across Russia. In January-February 2021, we surveyed 743 people, using the same approach for survey distribution. With Kessler-10 as a measure of psychological distress, we used regression analysis to determine factors associated with higher psychological distress among Russians. Levels of psychological distress were high in both time periods and did not significantly change between the surveys. Having had COVID-19, losing one's job, experiencing problems accessing healthcare, and changing drinking behaviour during the pandemic were associated with higher psychological distress. Apart from getting sick or worrying about the virus, psychological distress is affected by restrictions and the consequences of the pandemic situation. As the COVID-19 pandemic continues, actions are needed to address the mental well-being of the population in Russia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

COVID-19 prevention measures including lockdowns, school closures, and restricted movement disrupted young people's lives. This longitudinal qualitative study conducted in Soweto, South Africa aimed to explore young people's knowledge and perceptions of COVID-19, vaccination, and the impact of infections. A convenience sample of 30 young black people (n = 15 men; n = 15 women, aged 16–21 years) from Soweto participated in 24 focus group discussions (FGDs), conducted in six phases – each phase had four FGDs stratified by gender and age. Young people's understanding of COVID-19 deepened throughout the study, however, did not always translate into adherence (following the government's COVID-19 prevention measures). Although deemed inadequate, TV and radio were preferred over internet COVID-19 information. Parents, teachers, and schools were trusted sources of information. Vaccines and limited access to information attributed to low-risk perception, while new COVID-19 variants attributed to high-risk perception. A low-risk perception and conspiracy theories contributed to non-adherence (disregarding COVID-19 preventative measures provided by the government), particularly among young men. Accessing reliable information that considers young people's lives and their living context is important. Communities, scientists, and policymakers must learn from the COVID-19 experience and implement localised preventive strategies for education, awareness, and economic support in future emergencies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted and exacerbated inequities in health for structurally marginalised Canadians. Their location on society's hierarchies constrained their ability to access healthcare and follow recommended health behaviours. The aim of this article is to identify, from the perspective of marginalised populations, factors influencing the acceptance or rejection of COVID-19 countermeasures by structurally marginalised Canadians. Interviews were conducted with Canadians 18 + who identified as Black (n = 8), First Nations, Métis, or Inuit (n = 7) and low-income (<40,000 annual household income) (n = 8) between August and December 2021. Measures were said to impact well-being and interfere with revenue generating activities. Longstanding unfavourable living and environmental conditions as they relate to structural marginalisation was said to fuel anger toward the government and lead to a greater reluctance to accept countermeasures. Participants described concerns about government decisions being made without considering their unique contexts, or knowledge of the experiences of the population for whom these decisions were being made. Effective proactive action from government is important to foster trust with marginalised populations to support acceptance of health information and address growing inequities. Action that demonstrates government competence and commitment to the interests of marginalised populations is critical. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines the experience of healthcare professionals working in primary healthcare provision during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in North Kivu, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and in Kambia District, Sierra Leone. Drawing on ethnographic observation, interviews and focus groups, we explore everyday narratives of 'crisis' in these two regions which had recently seen Ebola epidemics. In describing the impact of COVID-19 on their life, work, and relationships with patients, healthcare workers made sense of the pandemic in relation to broader experiences of structural economic and political crisis, as well as differing experiences of recent Ebola epidemics. There were contradictory experiences of rupture and continuity: whilst COVID-19 disrupted routine health provision and exacerbated tensions with patients, the pandemic was also described as continuity, interacting with broader structural problems and longer-term experiences of 'crisis'. In effect, healthcare workers experienced the COVID-19 pandemic at the crossroads between the exceptional and the everyday, where states of exception brought by emergency measures shed new light on long-standing tensions and structural crisis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While global health leaders call disparities in access to COVID-19 vaccines an 'apartheid,' this gap is not the first such disparity. The recurrence of these gaps in low and middle-income countries and especially in Africa, raises questions about their determinants and about the persistent failures of global health institutions to remediate them. We interrogate these determinants and questions by examining: (1) the distribution of COVID-19 vaccines; (2) primary determinants of vaccine access including availability and affordability; (3) factors affecting availability (hoarding, COVAX, and manufacturing capacity); and (4) factors affecting affordability (pricing, intellectual property rights (IPR), the TRIPS waiver and a potential pandemic treaty). We conclude that IPR constrained the affordability and availability of COVID-19 vaccines in ways inadequately addressed by COVAX and a waiver compromise thwarted by political, corporate, and philanthropic interests. While stronger limits to IPR in a pandemic treaty and a reformed International Health Regulations will not resolve structural inequities, they could meaningfully expand LMIC autonomy to protect public health. We urge equity-seeking Global South and North actors to fight for such IPR reforms as small and meaningful steps towards a more equitable global health order. Otherwise, criminally racist 'apartheids' will continue to be the norm when it comes to the distribution of essential health goods during global health emergencies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

How can governing digital health for infectious disease outbreaks be enhanced? In many ways, the COVID-19 pandemic has simultaneously represented both the potential and marked limitations of digital health practices for infectious disease outbreaks. During the pandemic's initial stages, states along with Big Data and Big Tech actors unleashed a scope of both established and experimental digital technologies for tracking infections, hospitalisations, and deaths from COVID-19 – and sometimes exposure to the virus SARS-CoV-2. Despite the proliferation of these technologies at the global level, transnational and cross-border integration, and cooperation within digital health responses to COVID-19 often faltered, while digital health regulations were fragmented, contested, and uncoordinated. This article presents a critiquing reflection of approaches to conceptualising, understanding, and implementing digital health for infectious disease outbreaks, observed from COVID-19 and previous examples. In assessing the strengths and limitations of existing practices of governing digital health for infectious disease outbreaks, this article particularly examines 'informal' digital health to build upon and consider how digitised responses to addressing and governing infectious disease outbreaks may be reconceptualised, revisited, or revised. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Conspiracy theories (evidence-free, improbable narratives about powerful agents conspiring to harm people) circulated widely during the acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) and COVID-19 epidemics. They travelled over time and space, adapted to local conditions and anxieties, and were promoted for commercial and political purposes. Russian conspiracy theories claiming the viruses were United States bioweapons appeared in both epidemics. So did 'cultropreneurs' who, as a marketing strategy for their 'alternative' therapies, promoted conspiracy theories about scientific medicine. Pro-science activists sought to counter medical misinformation and debunk faux cures, but their task was harder in the 'post-truth' social-media driven context of COVID-19. Conspiracy theories about vaccines are an ongoing challenge for public health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the middle of 2020, with its borders tightly closed to the rest of the world, Australia almost achieved the local elimination of COVID-19 and subsequently maintained 'COVID-zero' in most parts of the country for the following year. Australia has since faced the relatively unique challenge of deliberately 'undoing' these achievements by progressively easing restrictions and reopening. Exploring the role of mathematical modelling in navigating a course through the pandemic through qualitative interviews with modellers and others working closely with modelling, we argue that each of these two significant phases of Australia's COVID-19 experience can be understood as distinct forms of 'model society'. This refers at once to the society enacted through the governance of risk, and to the visions of societal outcomes – whether to be sought or to be avoided – that are offered up by models. Each of the two model societies came about through a reflexive engagement with risk facilitated by models, and the iterative relationship between the representations of society enacted within models and the possibilities that these representations generate in the material world beyond them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

COVAX, the vaccines pillar of the Access to Covid-19 Tools Accelerator (ACT-A), has been promoted as 'the only global solution' to vaccine equity and ending the Covid-19 pandemic. ACT-A and COVAX build on the public-private partnership (PPP) model that dominates global health governance, but take it to a new level, constituting an experimental form that we call the 'super-PPP'. Based on an analysis of COVAX's governance structure and its difficulties in achieving its aims, we identify several features of the super-PPP model. First, it aims to coordinate the fragmented global health field by bringing together existing PPPs in an extraordinarily complex Russian Matryoshka doll-like structure. Second, it attempts to scale up a governance model designed for donor-dependent countries to tackle a health crisis affecting the entire world, pitting it against the self-interest of its wealthiest government partners. Third, the super-PPP's structural complexity obscures the vast differences between constituent partners, giving pharmaceutical corporations substantial power and making public representation, transparency, and accountability elusive. As a super-PPP, COVAX reproduces and amplifies challenges associated with the established PPPs it incorporates. COVAX's limited success has sparked a crisis of legitimacy for the voluntary, charity-based partnership model in global health, raising questions about its future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We explore how organisations working on parenting programmes and other types of family support and violence prevention in low-resource settings experienced the pandemic. In August 2020–May 2021, we interviewed (1) staff from three community-based organisations delivering evidence-informed parenting interventions and other psychosocial services for families in Cape Town, South Africa, (2) staff from a parenting programme training organisation and (3) staff from two international organisations supporting psychosocial services in South Africa. Interviews (22) were thematically analysed, with findings in three areas. First, respondents noted changes in the context, including the job losses, food insecurity, and stress experienced by local communities, and reductions in organisational funding. Second, we found that in response to these context changes, the organisations shifted their focus to food provision and COVID prevention. Parenting and psychosocial programmes were adapted – e.g. by changing the physical delivery settings, reducing group sizes, and taking up digital and phone implementation. Participants reported improved perceptions of remote delivery as a feasible approach for working with families – but internet and phone access remained challenging. Third, the pandemic brought new responsibilities for staff, and both the challenges of working from home and the health risks of in-person work. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]