- The Washington Times - Thursday, August 13, 2015



Good news, an old newsroom canard goes, doesn’t sell newspapers. It’s true that it’s the rare reader who wants to read about the ship that didn’t sink, the house that didn’t catch fire, the hurricane that blew itself out at sea.

But sometimes the good news is the most thrilling news of all, and last week there were two items of news nothing short of thrilling about the march of medicine through Africa, where the news is almost never good.

The World Health Organization announced that an entire year, 365 happy days, had passed without a single case of polio reported anywhere on the African continent. The Global Polio Eradication Initiative, led by the World Health Organization, now thinks eradication of polio, the childhood killer that terrified everyone with the advent of summer, can be achieved by the year 2018. The last two places that remain in peril are Pakistan and Afghanistan.

The other good news is that Ebola virus disease, which emerged from close by the Ebola River valley in the Congo to slay thousands and terrify millions, is on the run and may soon be dispatched to the place where germs go to die. The number of new cases, measured in the thousands by the week in Sierra Leone, Guinea and Liberia only a few months ago, has dipped below 10 a week, and most momentous of all, Lancet magazine, the prestigious British medical journal, reports that a new Ebola vaccine has tested “100 percent effective.”

Across the globe, medical authorities, who are taught to respect caveats and restrain their enthusiasm on announcements of medical breakthroughs, are little short of giddy (for scientists). “We believe that the world is on the verge of an efficacious Ebola vaccine,” says Marie Paule Kieny, the assistant director-general of the World Health Organization. “It could be a game-changer.”

The vaccine is a genetically engineered hybrid of the benign “vesicular stomatitis” virus and a strain of the Ebola virus from Zaire. Clinical trials of the vaccine were conducted in Guinea, one of the hardest hit of the African countries. Giddy or not, the scientists celebrating the breakthrough issue the usual caveats: more tests lie ahead, there’s a lack of comparisons with placebos, or harmless imitations of vaccine, and early studies are always subject to statistical flukes.

The usual method of testing a new vaccine is to test it against placebos, but given the horror of the disease and the swiftness of the spread — whole villages were sometimes wiped out almost overnight in the weeks and months just past — the investigators drew up a different approach, called “ring vaccination,” and subjected it to a panel on ethics because some subjects in the test might get effective protection, and others would not.

Researchers recruited 7,651 subjects who fit a rough profile of those who had been exposed to the Ebola virus or to someone who had been exposed. These subjects were not then hard to find. They were divided into two groups, with one group to get immediate vaccination and the other to wait 21 days for the vaccine. All were carefully tracked for several weeks. No one in the group that got an immediate vaccination developed Ebola in the first 10 days after vaccination. Sixteen subjects in the group whose vaccination was delayed developed the disease.

The most sobering treatment of understandable giddiness is the caveat in Lancet: “More data on efficacy are needed before it can be widely deployed.” The logical next step would be testing it against placebos in a much larger clinical trial, with far more than the 7,651 subjects in the first limited clinical trial. Ironically, this might not be possible until there is another epidemic when and where a remote village could be subjected a vaccine.

Bringing the Ebola epidemic of 2015 under control was a remarkable exercise of modern medicine in a sea of barely imaginable ignorance and superstition. Once out of the cities — where the limits of modern medicine are problematic enough — and into the remote back county, the suspicion, resistance and hostility to the little-known modern know few bounds. When the family and friends of one sickened doctor managed to arrange a flight out of Africa, several countries denied him permission to fly through their air space, terrified that the virus would drop from the sky.

The fight to control and suppress the Ebola virus is an unusual story of how science and religion can be allies. Many of the doctors and nurses who risked their lives — some paying with their lives — in Africa were Christian missionaries, often evangelical Christians. To science the credit, to God the glory.

Wesley Pruden is editor emeritus of The Washington Times.

Sign up for Daily Opinion Newsletter

Manage Newsletters

Copyright © 2019 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

Please read our comment policy before commenting.


Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide