Zika in India

Communication is key during a public health threat like Zika and India has fallen short

Even if an isolated case is detected, the government needs to tell the public so as to prepare for the possibility of an outbreak.

In 2016, the National Center for Disease Control in India published a National Risk Communication Plan. The key guidelines prescribed disseminating information about uncertain health risks, including Zika, to the public before actual cases were diagnosed, in a timely and transparent manner that would engender public trust, through multiple media channels including social media, and constant sharing updates with journalists. These risk communication principles seem to have been rendered largely irrelevant when the government informed the World Health Organisation about three cases of Zika in Gujarat months after they were confirmed. More importantly, we do not know why the public was kept in the dark.

A union health ministry official’s statements that the situation is under control with no further cases reported seems to be due to three related reasons:

  1. The cases were isolated as opposed to an outbreak in which cases are linked to one another.
  2. Consequently, the level of Zika transmission was categorized as “low”.
  3. Given this, the government refrained from triggering public panic disproportionate to the level of threat.

To see how these arguments fare in a global context, however, it is worthwhile considering the case of Singapore.

Singapore’s smart strategy

In May 2016, an isolated, imported case of Zika was confirmed in Singapore. An imported case refers to a patient who gets infected outside of the country where it is diagnosed, as opposed to a locally transmitted case, which is usually considered a more urgent threat. Almost immediately Singapore’s health ministry and National Environmental Agency, institutions charged with the task of managing Zika, informed the public through traditional and social media channels.

Singapore’s first Zika case was soon cured. Nearly three months later, the country experienced a large Zika outbreak that swelled to nearly 380 cases within weeks. The agencies resumed their efforts with greater vigor using social media channels to connect with citizens one-on-one, allay fears and anxieties, and make them aware of specific strategies by which to protect themselves. The most compelling story was that of a Member of Parliament, who, while being pregnant herself, assuaged her constituents’ fears on Facebook, and visited them to hand out insect repellants and posters.

Not surprisingly, Singapore received a WHO commendation for efficiently tracking and containing the outbreak and demonstrating high levels of transparency in the process. Their story demonstrated the value of an efficient, transparent integrated public communication strategy during a Zika outbreak.

The communications from their Indian counterparts, in comparison ranged from non-existent to passive. For a government famed for its public relations machinery, it was indeed baffling to note that they issued no official press releases to the news media since the cases were confirmed.

Similarly, none among Prime Minister Narendra Modi who actively campaigns for Swachch Bharat, Union Health Minister JP Nadda, or the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare have provided any statement related to Zika on Twitter since news about the cases were released on the WHO website.

Gujarat’s Health Minister Shankar Chaudhary retweeted two tweets from his interview to a wire service.

As such, officials have only shared information when approached by the news media instead of reaching out to them as part of the government’s communication plan. Health Commissioner JP Gupta’s assertion that the situation has not yet reached crisis levels is reassuring, but it should also worry us if his words imply that the public only need to be informed if the situation worsens. It is also unclear if any concrete communication or outreach measures have yet been undertaken to address public concern and questioning triggered by the May 28 media reports.

Publicly available maps from the Integrated Disease Surveillance Programme website for the first three weeks in January 2017, when the Zika cases were confirmed, raise further questions about the motivations behind cases not being made public. These maps provide measles alerts in Jamnagar, Surat and Junagadh, and hepatitis B alerts in Vadodara, but make no mention of Zika. As documented by the United States National Research Council, governments sometimes choose to withhold disease information for various reasons including potential threats to tourism, economic costs to the private sector, and possible exposure to questioning by critics. Not surprisingly, public health scientists are now trying to use mobile and social media to directly crowdsource disease-related reports from the public globally.

Why tell the public?

These analyses beg the question: why is it important for the government to inform the public when the threat of disease appears to not be grave enough? The answer is that it is a necessary component of preparedness efforts that can influence efficient response to and swifter recovery from an outbreak if one does happen.

As seen in Singapore, an isolated case or cases does not negate the possibility of a bigger outbreak. To prepare the public for a future threat, the government should make its people aware of the level and nature of threat, and specific strategies they can use to protect themselves. In doing so, the authorities would do well to be ready to counter short-term public panic, given that outreach is bound to bear longer term benefits. Moreover, WHO experts and public health scientists have said that a Zika outbreak is inevitable in India, given that both dengue and chikungunya are endemic in the country and that all three infections are caused by the Aedes mosquito. Lastly, globally accepted risk communication practices suggest that greater transparency and a constant flow of information from the government to its people are vital to strengthen trust and reassure people during outbreaks like Zika. These factors might facilitate people’s adherence to health-related directives from the government if and when such a situation arises.

If the government’s responses listed in the WHO report are to be believed, “risk communication materials are being finalized by the Central Health Education Bureau, in consultation with UNICEF”. This tells us that the government has yet to finalise risk communication materials about Zika more than 16 months after it was declared a Public Health Emergency of International Concern and despite its imminent threat to the Indian public.

The government can claim to have not violated International Health Regulation requirements to report Zika cases to the WHO within 24 hours by arguing that an outbreak had not yet occurred. But when the municipal commissioner and mayor of the city where the cases reside have been left uninformed, and the public is caught off-guard, it is clear they have fallen short on grounds of public responsibility and transparency.

The writer is a senior research fellow in digital living at the Faculty of Health & Life Sciences, Northumbria University, UK and former journalist with The Indian Express. He specialises in health communication research with a focus on the role of digital technologies in preventing and managing infectious disease outbreaks like Zika.

Aravind Sesagiri Raamkumar, research associate at Nanyang Technological University, Singapore provided analytics assistance for this article.

Support our journalism by subscribing to Scroll+ here. We welcome your comments at letters@scroll.in.
Sponsored Content BY 

Do you really need to use that plastic straw?

The hazards of single-use plastic items, and what to use instead.

In June 2018, a distressed whale in Thailand made headlines around the world. After an autopsy it’s cause of death was determined to be more than 80 plastic bags it had ingested. The pictures caused great concern and brought into focus the urgency of the fight against single-use plastic. This term refers to use-and-throw plastic products that are designed for one-time use, such as takeaway spoons and forks, polythene bags styrofoam cups etc. In its report on single-use plastics, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) has described how single-use plastics have a far-reaching impact in the environment.

Dense quantity of plastic litter means sights such as the distressed whale in Thailand aren’t uncommon. Plastic products have been found in the airways and stomachs of hundreds of marine and land species. Plastic bags, especially, confuse turtles who mistake them for jellyfish - their food. They can even exacerbate health crises, such as a malarial outbreak, by clogging sewers and creating ideal conditions for vector-borne diseases to thrive. In 1988, poor drainage made worse by plastic clogging contributed to the devastating Bangladesh floods in which two-thirds of the country was submerged.

Plastic litter can, moreover, cause physiological harm. Burning plastic waste for cooking fuel and in open air pits releases harmful gases in the air, contributing to poor air quality especially in poorer countries where these practices are common. But plastic needn’t even be burned to cause physiological harm. The toxic chemical additives in the manufacturing process of plastics remain in animal tissue, which is then consumed by humans. These highly toxic and carcinogenic substances (benzene, styrene etc.) can cause damage to nervous systems, lungs and reproductive organs.

The European Commission recently released a list of top 10 single-use plastic items that it plans to ban in the near future. These items are ubiquitous as trash across the world’s beaches, even the pristine, seemingly untouched ones. Some of them, such as styrofoam cups, take up to a 1,000 years to photodegrade (the breakdown of substances by exposure to UV and infrared rays from sunlight), disintegrating into microplastics, another health hazard.

More than 60 countries have introduced levies and bans to discourage the use of single-use plastics. Morocco and Rwanda have emerged as inspiring success stories of such policies. Rwanda, in fact, is now among the cleanest countries on Earth. In India, Maharashtra became the 18th state to effect a ban on disposable plastic items in March 2018. Now India plans to replicate the decision on a national level, aiming to eliminate single-use plastics entirely by 2022. While government efforts are important to encourage industries to redesign their production methods, individuals too can take steps to minimise their consumption, and littering, of single-use plastics. Most of these actions are low on effort, but can cause a significant reduction in plastic waste in the environment, if the return of Olive Ridley turtles to a Mumbai beach are anything to go by.

To know more about the single-use plastics problem, visit Planet or Plastic portal, National Geographic’s multi-year effort to raise awareness about the global plastic trash crisis. From microplastics in cosmetics to haunting art on plastic pollution, Planet or Plastic is a comprehensive resource on the problem. You can take the pledge to reduce your use of single-use plastics, here.

This article was produced by the Scroll marketing team on behalf of National Geographic, and not by the Scroll editorial team.