There's been considerable focus here on swine flu recently following the diagnosis a couple of weeks ago of the first case in Kenya. As it was a British student, our mission was closely involved both in supporting the students and in discussions with the Ministry of Health and other health experts. For those interested, here is the text of a letter I've sent to the editors of the main papers on the case and particularly the importance of clear public messaging:
'The media covered in detail the case of some British students diagnosed with the H1NI Influenza virus (Swine Flu), the first such case in Kenya. This has been a useful opportunity to inform the public of some of the issues around this virus, which has been declared as a global pandemic by the WHO. But at the same time, it's important to be responsible and present the facts clearly.
This type of flu has been spreading round the world rapidly. Fortunately, to date, most cases have been mild, not likely to be life-threatening except in a few cases for people with pre-existing medical conditions or other vulnerabilities (in the same way that normal flu is). When one British student developed symptoms and tested positive while in Kisumu, the group behaved extremely responsibly. They were all medical students and fully understood issues around infectious diseases. So they stayed in quarantine until cleared of the virus by health officials, and even those who did not develop symptoms took the relevant anti-viral drug just to be on the safe side.
The students also liaised with local authorities so that people they had worked closely with could be traced, monitored, tested and treated, as appropriate. All those that they had closest contact with have tested negative. It would not be helpful to sensationalise their departure by giving the false impression that they were still infectious or in isolation. As the WHO and others make clear, once people are symptom free they are no longer infectious and should be able to travel freely. Their response was sensible and followed sound public health principles.
Finally there have been a couple of comments in the press suggesting that had Kenyans arrived in the UK with the virus, they would have been turned away or subject to harsher travel restrictions than British people here. That is of course simply untrue: a Kenyan arriving in the UK testing positive for H1N1 flu would in fact not be under any travel restrictions (following WHO advice that restrictions will not help). But they would be offered the appropriate drugs for treatment and asked to self-isolate until symptoms have gone. This is usually within 7 days. Those who want more information on swine flu and how the UK is dealing with it, can look at the www.directgov.uk pages or the Health Protection Agency pages at www.hpa.org.uk.
So thank you for raising the profile of pandemic influenza and the collaboration between states to deal with it in a responsible way. I would encourage you and other media outlets to continue reporting responsibly and not to risk inadvertently causing unnecessary public concern.'
Posted at 08:42 13 July 2009 by Rob Macaire | Comments[0]
- Share this with:
-
-
-
-
-
UK and Kenya- British and Kenya army medical exercise
I've always had great respect for army medics, and it was increased on a trip I made earlier this week. I was in Baringo district, seeing at first hand some of the British Army's work, jointly with the Kenyan army and Ministry of Health, in providing immunisations and primary healthcare (including dental care) to Kenyans whom the state's medical services find difficult to reach. It's the fourteenth year they have done this annual exercise, covering some of the country's more remote areas. When we dropped in to see them they had already seen over 13,000 people, and were about half way through the exercise. Of course, initiatives like this don't resolve the underlying issues of provision of healthcare in rural areas, but I was glad to see that the Army had coordinated well with DFID's longer term programmes, for example helping to distribute anti-malarial bednets from DFID's programme.
So next time someone asks me what benefit Kenya gets from the British Army exercising here, I'll point them in the direction of some of the people I met in Baringo, as well as pointing out the economic contributions to local communities and the training the Kenyan army gets!
One of the added advantages for me of these trips to relatively remote villages is the chance to speak to local Councillors and Chiefs about the challenges they face day to day. Often their immediate needs (a pump for a manual borehole, a maternity facility in a local diapensary) are strikingly small scale, and it's great when you see CDF money being wisely used to meet those needs. Which is why it's so tragic to hear that, on some estimates, up to 50% of CDF country-wide gets dissipated through mismanagement or corruption. I'd be interested in readers' views on that.
Rob
Posted at 13:45 04 June 2009 by Rob Macaire | Comments[1]
- Share this with:
-
-
-
-
-
I am delighted that there has been so much response to this new blog. I wish there was space to come back on every point, and will try to address as many as I can over the coming weeks. But here are a couple of quick responses for now.
1. Hassan talks about where UK strategic interests stop and concerns about Kenya start. I think that's only an issue when those two collide. Most of the time, they don't. What do we want to see in Kenya? We'd like the country to be more prosperous and stable, fairer, and with less poverty. That means less corruption, better governance. Because all of those things will make Kenya a better partner for Britain across the board - whether it's trade and investment, dealing with regional crises, dealing with transnational problems like crime and terrorism, or meeting the Millenium Development Goals. So if you think about it, what we want lines up pretty well with what wananchi want to see.
2. A lot of the comments people have posted are about impunity in one way or another. My point about justice for the post election violence was not meant to be critical of the ICC - the UK has been a strong supporter of the ICC ever since it was first set up. And if it investigates crimes in Kenya, we'll back that fully. My point was just that if Kenya turns its back on the opportunity to set up the sort of tribunal recommended by the Waki Commission (with international judges, international prosecutors and investigators, etc) then it will be missing out on probably the best chance to hold people accountable for their crimes. That outside input into the tribunal would be necessary to remove the fears people have that it would be manipulated. But it would also help re-build confidence that justice can be done here, not just in the Hague. That's what Kofi Annan, the Waki Commission, and a lot of ordinary Kenyans feel too. But this has to be a decision for Kenyans to take. More broadly, we're doing what we can to help Kenya tackle impunity on issues like corruption. One way we do this is to exclude from our country senior individuals who have been strongly linked with corruption cases, even if they have not been successfully prosecuted. I saw that my colleague Michael Ranneberger's announcement yesterday of such a visa ban got a lot of attention. Most people I meet say this sort of action is effective and welcome and that we should do more of it (we already do it quite a lot). What do you think?
Posted at 15:47 19 March 2009 by Rob Macaire | Comments[16]
- Share this with:
-
-
-
-
-