World must prepare for new pandemic with surveillance and planning

 

Scientists believe that the world is better prepared to face a new pandemic, given the mistakes and lessons learned from Covid-19, arguing that the future strategy involves surveillance, planning, investment and cooperation.

“As we have more knowledge and experience, we are, in principle, better prepared. But the world has not evolved for the better, particularly in the relationship between politics and public health”, laments, to Lusa, the physicist and science communicator Carlos Fiolhais, in an allusion to the United States, a world power governed by the Covid-19 denier Donald Trump.

Just a few days before the five-year anniversary of the World Health Organization’s declaration of Covid-19 as a pandemic, which has already killed more than seven million people among the more than 700 million infected, Lusa questioned Portuguese scientists about whether the world would be better prepared to face a new pandemic and what the future combat strategy should be.

“First, we must not make the same mistake of forgetting and underestimating again. The way we are ignoring warnings about antimicrobial resistance and the future danger of the spread of bacteria for which we do not have antibiotics should make us reflect on the extent to which we have learned from the pandemic,” says biochemist Miguel Castanho.

According to the researcher at the Gulbenkian Institute of Molecular Medicine and professor at the Faculty of Medicine of the University of Lisbon, “it is necessary to better study how viruses and bacteria adapt to new drugs and vaccines in order to then develop new therapeutic solutions”.

“But we have to do these studies before the next pandemics, like a conscientious student who does his TPC [Homework] before going to class”, he stresses, highlighting that with Covid-19 “we paid dearly” for the “lack of timely planning” and investment in antiviral drugs with wide application.

“There is currently a huge effort to develop broad-spectrum antivirals, including projects by European consortia led by Portuguese scientists (…). When this effort bears fruit, we will be much better prepared for a future viral pandemic because we will be able to use these drugs as soon as the first outbreak of pandemic potential appears”, stresses Miguel Castanho.

The researcher highlights as a “great lesson” from the fight against Covid-19, a respiratory disease declared a pandemic on March 11, 2020, that “cooperation is worth more than competition”.

“While scientific cooperation in the four corners of the world led to the characterisation of the virus in record time, allowing the development of vaccines and medicines to be put into practice, little benefit was gained from the fencing of nations over who would derive the most political and media dividends from the launch of vaccines”, he claims, highlighting, however, the fact that the European Union has shown itself to be a “solidarity space in the acquisition of vaccines and their distribution”.

For physicist Carlos Fiolhais, co-author of the book “Caught by the virus – Facts and myths about covid-19”, because of the “initial delays” in the response to the pandemic “it was convenient to establish international mechanisms for early warning in the event of the emergence of new microorganisms that are potentially lethal to humans”.

Furthermore, “the manufacturing processes for new vaccines can still be accelerated now that technical procedures have been perfected.”

“Next time, we should avoid what went wrong – delays and deficiencies in communication, national egoisms that hampered cooperation – and repeat what went well – public health standards and the design and distribution of new vaccines”, argues Carlos Fiolhais, retired professor at the University of Coimbra.

For geneticist Luísa Pereira, “the response to a global challenge” such as a pandemic “should be concerted and ideally more equitable”.

“There must be sequencing of viruses in several global samples to monitor the high dynamism of viral evolution. Some continents and countries were less well prepared to do this in real time. Technological and expert capacity is needed”, argues the researcher at i3S – Institute for Research and Innovation in Health at the University of Porto.

For immunologist Helena Soares, the future strategy involves “strengthening the capacity to identify infection outbreaks locally and to initiate a response at a global level”, taking advantage of “molecular tests by monitoring centers” and the analysis of genetic material from pathogenic microorganisms in sewage and geolocation data from mobile phones.

“These data should be the basis for epidemiological models that allow us to anticipate the possible evolution of the outbreak”, says the researcher from Universidade Nova de Lisboa, adding that “models will also be needed to inform about the adherence of different communities to mitigation and vaccination measures”, measures and resources that “should be shared globally”.