3 ms·

Yes and no. I think the current Ebola outbreak would not be happening if the US was still committed to global health.

by bix6 5mo ago

amazingamazing 5mo ago
The world should be more independent and self sufficient. It will be better in the long run.
- 9dev 5mo ago
  To what goal? USAID and similar programs always had the indirect benefit of opening up foreign markets to the USA. It's just short-sighted out of sheer economic considerations - and that's ignoring the ridiculous recklessness of pulling the rug under millions of people. Hundreds of thousands have died due to the USAID cuts; those deaths could have been prevented by approaching this in a more professional manner.
  - somenameforme 5mo ago
    Stability. In 'decentralized' systems, if any entity does something dumb, the impact is localized and consequently negligible. By contrast in centralized systems, one misstep by the central power can trigger catastrophic consequences. Another benefit of decentralized systems is that sometimes those dumb things end up being brilliant, and so we end up with a much richer system with a better idea of what works and what doesn't work, what's stable and what isn't, and so on. Decentralized systems also help local entities develop and grow into their own. Necessity is the mother of invention and centralized systems largely remove the necessity of local expertise which cripples efforts to advance it. This is the 17th declared major outbreak of ebola in the DRC. One would think that by the time you've had a few major ebola outbreaks, let alone 16, you'd be building up a rich body of expertise, knowledge, and competence, but that does not really seem to be the case.
    - ceejayoz 5mo ago
      One might think that, if one was entirely unaware of the on-the-ground situation in the DRC for the past few decades.
OrvalWintermute 5mo ago
[flagged]
- ceejayoz 5mo ago
  https://www.npr.org/sections/goats-and-soda/2025/02/27/g-s1-50929/elon-musk-ebola-usaid https://www.npr.org/sections/goats-and-soda/2025/02/27/g-s1-... Musk: “So, for example, with USAID, one of the things we accidentally canceled very briefly was Ebola prevention.” “As of early February, the U.S. was not providing funding to support testing and port screenings in Uganda because of Trump's freeze on almost all U.S. foreign assistance.” “Within USAID's Global Health Bureau there was a team of people that specialized in high risk outbreaks, like Ebola. "Virtually all of those people have been pushed out of the agency, and they have not been brought back. Only a very small handful — like low single digits — remain from what had been something like a 30 person team," says Jeremy Konyndyk, who oversaw USAID's response to the 2014 Ebola outbreak.” “As for the role of the CDC, Spencer says what its officials can do is limited by Trump's order that the CDC not communicate with WHO.”
somenameforme 5mo ago
You mean the 17th ebola outbreak in the DRC?
- bigfudge 5mo ago
  Yes, the one authorities are struggling to contain because of recent withdrawal of resources, and consequently predicted to be more prolonged and at greater risk of wider spread. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/may/29/friday-briefing-what-do-the-cuts-in-aid-mean-for-the-fight-against-ebola-in-the-drc https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/may/29/friday-briefin...
haunter 5mo ago
The Ebola virus is not simply a health issue but a cultural and eudcational "problem" too. There is a reason people eat bushmeat because 1, it's their culture 2, they would otherwise have nothing to eat especially not meat protein. NSFL https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XasTcDsDfMg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XasTcDsDfMg
- ceejayoz 5mo ago
  USAID was, among many other things, working on educating folks about this. Education, cultural sensitivity, etc. are health issues.

Yes and no. I think the current Ebola outbreak would not be happening if the US was still committed to global health.

by bix6 5mo ago

Yes and no. I think the current Ebola outbreak would not be happening if the US was still committed to global health.

amazingamazing 5mo ago

The world should be more independent and self sufficient. It will be better in the long run.

9dev 5mo ago
To what goal? USAID and similar programs always had the indirect benefit of opening up foreign markets to the USA. It's just short-sighted out of sheer economic considerations - and that's ignoring the ridiculous recklessness of pulling the rug under millions of people. Hundreds of thousands have died due to the USAID cuts; those deaths could have been prevented by approaching this in a more professional manner.
- somenameforme 5mo ago
  Stability. In 'decentralized' systems, if any entity does something dumb, the impact is localized and consequently negligible. By contrast in centralized systems, one misstep by the central power can trigger catastrophic consequences. Another benefit of decentralized systems is that sometimes those dumb things end up being brilliant, and so we end up with a much richer system with a better idea of what works and what doesn't work, what's stable and what isn't, and so on. Decentralized systems also help local entities develop and grow into their own. Necessity is the mother of invention and centralized systems largely remove the necessity of local expertise which cripples efforts to advance it. This is the 17th declared major outbreak of ebola in the DRC. One would think that by the time you've had a few major ebola outbreaks, let alone 16, you'd be building up a rich body of expertise, knowledge, and competence, but that does not really seem to be the case.
  - ceejayoz 5mo ago
    One might think that, if one was entirely unaware of the on-the-ground situation in the DRC for the past few decades.

OrvalWintermute 5mo ago

[flagged]

ceejayoz 5mo ago
https://www.npr.org/sections/goats-and-soda/2025/02/27/g-s1-50929/elon-musk-ebola-usaid https://www.npr.org/sections/goats-and-soda/2025/02/27/g-s1-... Musk: “So, for example, with USAID, one of the things we accidentally canceled very briefly was Ebola prevention.” “As of early February, the U.S. was not providing funding to support testing and port screenings in Uganda because of Trump's freeze on almost all U.S. foreign assistance.” “Within USAID's Global Health Bureau there was a team of people that specialized in high risk outbreaks, like Ebola. "Virtually all of those people have been pushed out of the agency, and they have not been brought back. Only a very small handful — like low single digits — remain from what had been something like a 30 person team," says Jeremy Konyndyk, who oversaw USAID's response to the 2014 Ebola outbreak.” “As for the role of the CDC, Spencer says what its officials can do is limited by Trump's order that the CDC not communicate with WHO.”

somenameforme 5mo ago

You mean the 17th ebola outbreak in the DRC?

bigfudge 5mo ago
Yes, the one authorities are struggling to contain because of recent withdrawal of resources, and consequently predicted to be more prolonged and at greater risk of wider spread. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/may/29/friday-briefing-what-do-the-cuts-in-aid-mean-for-the-fight-against-ebola-in-the-drc https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/may/29/friday-briefin...

haunter 5mo ago

The Ebola virus is not simply a health issue but a cultural and eudcational "problem" too. There is a reason people eat bushmeat because 1, it's their culture 2, they would otherwise have nothing to eat especially not meat protein. NSFL https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XasTcDsDfMg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XasTcDsDfMg

ceejayoz 5mo ago
USAID was, among many other things, working on educating folks about this. Education, cultural sensitivity, etc. are health issues.