Chapter 1: When to Worry


This is the first installment of what was a book project of mine. It is written for a general scientifically interested audience and the style reflects that. Feedback on my ideas is always welcome.

==============================

“You’ll tell us when you’re worried, right?” This was a question I was frequently asked by reporters, colleagues, and even my barista during the height of the 2014 West African Ebola outbreak — the deadliest in history — when, drawing on my work in infectious diseases and pandemic preparedness, I was called upon to serve as a media expert.

Throughout the hysteria and the 24-hour news cycle, I repeated one statement: “Ebola is a deadly scary disease, but it is not that contagious and will not find the United States (or other industrialized nations) to be a hospitable environment.” In the end, this was borne out, increasing my credibility with those who had heard my predictions.

But my predictions were not based on some overly rosy outlook on the landscape of infectious disease. How could I have a rosy outlook on infectious disease with serial killers such as HIV, malaria, and tuberculosis presently threatening the human race, and diseases such as MERS and SARS emerging as deadly threats? We had just experienced a pandemic of a novel influenza virus that took the world by storm and surprise. Meanwhile, its highly lethal avian cousins, including to this day, seem to be waiting for the right opportunity to pounce. In 2014, abetted by the primal scream of the anti-vaccine movement, the US had a record number of measles cases (in the post-vaccine era) and just 4 years later the Americas lost their measles elimination status and the US broke measles records. Perpetually lurking in the background of all these explosive outbreaks, antibiotic resistant bacteria threatened to collapse the entire structure of modern medicine.

 In short, I know just how deadly and disruptive infectious diseases have been, both historically and presently, as well as what it takes for an infectious disease to be included in the pantheon of pandemic causing pathogens.

Despite almost no chance of contracting Ebola, ordinary people in industrialized nations took extreme, unwarranted measures – such as buying spacesuit-like apparatuses for what they believed was the coming apocalypse – that would not make them any safer from the disease. Though many people truly feared the world was poised to become a dead zone inhabited by Ebola-stricken zombies, their fears have not come true.

 Indeed, in the midst of the unprecedented Zika outbreak in 2016, I echoed a similar message to dampen fear. Drawing on historical examples such as rubella – which caused similar devastating fetal anomalies – I tried to explain that Zika, notwithstanding its considerable public health impact, doesn’t measure up to a widespread pandemic threat.

 What some actually fear, with each outbreak of emerging infectious disease, is the arrival of an extinction event. Hypothetically, such an event would cause such a large proportion of the human race to succumb to infection, leaving few or no survivors, that the population would cross a critical threshold, beyond which the species cannot be sustained. The extinction event concept activates the human imagination like nothing else: our minds fill with dinosaur images, science fiction narratives, and post-apocalyptic scenarios.

This focus on extinction or existential level infectious disease threats may be intellectually stimulating, has synergy with ordinary pandemic preparedness, catches the eye of prominent philanthropists such as those involved in the Effective Altruism movement, but is often hyperbolic and distracts away from actual infectious disease and public health tasks that are tractable and merit attention. As we have learned through COVID-19, hyperbolic pronouncements sow mistrust between public health authorities and the public and often create false alternatives for policymakers.

 The most famous extinction event is, of course, that of the dinosaurs 66 million years ago. Though we tend to associate it exclusively with dinosaurs, the truth is that three quarters of animal and plant species perished during this period, formally known as the Cretaceous-Paleogene extinction event. The leading hypothesis, which has amassed enough supportive evidence to reach the level of a theory, points to an asteroid impact. It is important to note that the impact alone, rather than cause mass extinctions in itself, created changes in planetary conditions that made life impossible for those species unable to adapt and ill-equipped to a markedly different habitat.

 Such a cataclysmic result is not surprising, since many species would not have developed resiliency mechanisms to cope with a major habitat change. Natural selection would not have produced superfluous traits (in the absence of an asteroid strike) on a large scale. In essence, the Cretaceous-Paleogene extinction event was a great culling, the survivors of whom possessed, by chance mutations, the characteristics that allowed them to survive.

 An interesting footnote to this event is the idea that drastic reductions in the amount of sunlight killed those plants that relied on photosynthesis for life, resulting in the proliferation of non-photosynthetic organisms such as fungi. If, like me, you try to find an infectious cause in every event, you may wonder if the increase of fungi led to widespread fungal infections, magnifying the devastation posed by the loss of nutritious vegetation relied upon by most species. Today, fungal infections are responsible for annihilating species of reptiles and amphibians.

 Whatever the mechanics, the Cretaceous-Paleogene extinction event is the most widely known of its kind, but it is decidedly not akin to something an infectious disease pathogen could do. I mention this event only to draw a distinction between an actual mass extinction event and what a severe human pandemic is capable of doing.

For many species – unequipped by evolution for changes in habitat, predator-prey relationship variations, and myriad other factors – micro-extinction events occur continuously.

Amongst these micro-extinction events, there has been only one semi well-established infectious disease extinction event—that of the Christmas Island rat by Trypanosoma lewisii, a mosquito-borne protozoan (related to the causes of the human infectious diseases African Sleeping Sickness and Chagas Disease). In this instance, the poor rodent, stuck on an island and unequipped to leave it, had nowhere to run. Incidentally, there is an effort to de-extinct this rat using modern technology.

However, between a fleeting infectious disease outbreak and an extinction level event there is a lot of room for disaster. I agree with most experts who do not think an extinction event is possible. However, there is a concern for what are termed global catastrophic biological events (GCBRs). These events, which are caused by infectious disease outbreaks, have the capacity to lead to dire consequences for modern industrial society as the resources needed to contain them outstrip national governments and the private sector.

The COVID-19 pandemic, with its relatively low mortality ratio of <1%, has proved to be such a case. The early failures to see it as the looming threat it was — and eventually became — reflect either a degree of evasion or a failure to understand the threat matrix of infectious diseases. The events of this pandemic exposed major vulnerabilities in what were deemed the world’s most prepared nations. There have been several times that I have been baffled and frustrated by the response. This was especially true in the early stages where inaction followed by wrong actions could not have been more perfectly calibrated to orchestrate disaster if they were planned. For example, ineffectual travel bans, flawed testing criteria, the lack of testing capacity, the lack of personal protective equipment (PPE), the failure to fortify nursing homes, and the general reactive evasive nature of the response set the stage for the million plus deaths that followed in the U.S.

 

When it comes to infectious diseases, it is events such as these that induce people to worry about the future of the species, societal collapse, and economic ruin.

The human species, for the vast majority of its existence, has struggled against infectious diseases of one sort or another. And the explosive increase in our average life span, a very recent occurrence, can be directly attributed to the control of infectious diseases through sanitation, vaccination, and antimicrobial therapies. So, for most of mankind’s history, infectious diseases were the existential threat. And time after time, they have proven their success at killing humans and impacting civilizations. The emotion of fear, given this context, is quite understandable. The luxury of death from cancer, heart disease, or stroke in our eighth decade of life has only emerged in the modern era, when industrialized societies learned to mitigate many infectious diseases. Idyllic childhoods – free from watching siblings and friends die from outbreaks of typhoid, scarlet fever, smallpox, or measles – were not the norm for most of our ancestors. Even today, some parts of the world still face such threats.

 

Extinction Event is the result of my daily engagement in this field which ranges from treating patients, to speaking to the media, to thinking deeply about the role of infectious diseases and human societies. My aim is to provide you, the reader, with an important context by which to gauge any infectious disease outbreak by providing you a grounding in the key factors that govern an infectious disease’s trajectory, grasping the significance of certain facets of historical outbreaks, understanding other variables that set boundaries for infectious disease outbreaks, and recognizing the key tasks of pandemic and emerging infectious disease preparedness.

 

In what follows, I will alternate between discussing outbreaks, epidemics and pandemics, because much can be gleaned from looking at extreme and varied cases to elucidate, and set limit conditions, of what will be most likely to occur. Also, and crucially, preparations for the mitigation of these events are similar, utilize the same infrastructure, and engender expertise in outbreak response fundamentals. By executing the right actions for the most minute threat such as a limited salmonella outbreak or the occurrence of a single case of a high consequence pathogen, the threat of larger occurrences is lessened.

           

It is important to emphasize that when it comes to humans and infectious disease outbreaks, we cannot evolve our way out of them. Whether it is influenza, COVID-19, or plague, the key question to ask is how to diminish the societal disruption that will be engendered. This can only be accomplished by knowing the key questions to ask, acquiring knowledge iteratively, and ultimately taking the right actions.

 

Though I will argue against an infectious disease being able to cause an extinction or even a global catastrophic biological event for humans it should not be construed as minimizing the impact and importance of extreme resiliency against infectious disease threats. What my discussion does provide is a framework to better focus preparedness on the most crucial elements. How can we minimize the chance that infectious disease threats cause disarray? If a low lethality pandemic like COVID-19 can wreak such havoc, what would happen if something far more dangerous took hold.

 

As part of my argument, I will introduce several themes or principles that will provide a framework that I, personally, rely on as a lens to understand past infectious disease events, gauge the impact of current threats, and try and predict those that lie in the future. Whether or not they are exhaustive, at minimum this framework provides an integrated and principled way of thinking about this field. I consider the below points my primaries, first principles, or starting points:

 

1.    For an extinction level event to occur, an infectious disease will have to possess certain attributes that allow it to first cause a pandemic. Not every infectious disease has pandemic potential.

 

2.    By its very nature a pandemic pathogen must be capable of transmitting efficiently between humans, putting bounds on which of the myriad members of the microbial world are capable of this feat.

 

3.    The human immune system, which evolved in the midst of our microbial planet, is a major constraining factor on the impact of infectious disease threats because of how it operates.

 

4.     The human mind’s ability to develop new tools to attenuate the impact of infectious disease threats — in increasingly more rapid fashion — has grown increasingly formidable through our species’ existence.

 

Any human pathogen — whether pandemic, epidemic, or outbreak worthy — will have to overcome these factors.

 

So, here again is the crucial question I began with, but reformulated: why couldn’t an infectious disease constitute an existential level threat to humans?

 

Holding Out For a Hero: A Long 6 Years without DA Henderson

It’s been six years since DA Henderson died and I think it is painfully obvious to everyone — not just those in infectious disease and public health — how much he’s needed. As has become my tradition, I am going to list several questions I have for him. Thought it is a pale comparison to the terms when I could just walk through the office and find him at his desk reading and just ask him, I find it useful to refine my own thinking on the issues of the day and wonder how his unrivaled mind might approach the problem. Sometimes, it just makes me appreciate just what it was like to be in the presence of such a person.

Interestingly, just a few days ago I was excited and not surprised to see DA’s name in print in the Washington Post as an anecdote from over 20 years ago in which he warned of the threat of monkeypox was recounted.

So here are my questions for DA.

  1. What do you think the trajectory of monkeypox will be? Is this something that will burn itself out as people become immune through vaccination and prior infection while also changing their behavior? Do you think sustained spread is possible in the US outside of men-who-have sex with men? Is this clustering among MSM akin to how meningococcus can do the same thing?

  2. What do you think of Jynneos’s effectiveness? I know you always swore by Dryvax and it’s modern equivalent, ACAM2000, because it — with you driving its use — banished smallpox from the planet. Would you favor the use of ACAM2000 in select cases (I know I would). Also, what about Lc16m8, the Japanese 2nd generation vaccination you favored. I remember a story you told me about how after the anthrax attacks the Jynneos (or MVA) was prioritized over the existing Lc16 m8 for reasons you never quite understood (a good story for a journalist to try to uncover)

  3. As COVID-19 becomes more manageable with all the medical countermeasures that have been developed how do you help people risk acclimatize to a never-abating threat?

  4. What should be done about circulating vaccine derived polio viruses (cVDPVs) ? Following what you taught me I draw a distinction between wild poliovirus and these Sabin-vaccine derived strains. Should we just move to full Salk for the rest of the world to eliminate this problem? Why do people conflate wild polio — which exists in just Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Mozambique -0 with cVDPVs?

  5. Do you think that waning immunity against ordinary respiratory viruses due to decreased social interaction because of COVID is responsible for pediatric hepatitis cases and off season RSV? What will happen with flu as some strains have become extinct ?

  6. How do you think the CDC should be reformed? What was your final impression of it’s promise after spending so much time there? I think there was a reason you didn’t ever direct the organization that stemmed from who “they” wanted at the helm vs. who is best qualified.

These are just 6 questions I want to know DA’s answer to — there are so many more.

One last point to make. As infectious diseases have, understandably, taken center stage DA’s presence and voice would be unequalled. His would be an intransigent voice that spared no one’s feelings, one that would not be carefully calibrated to curry favor with any political party, leader, or administration, and one that provide a resolute direction for clinicians, the public health workforce, and the whole country and planet. Would that a DA-like figure emerge again — I hope his qualities are not a once in a century appearance.

Hail to the Chief: DA Henderson's Mind was the Ultimate Pandemic Countermeasure

The infectious disease world has been without DA Henderson for exactly 5 years and his presence is something that is needed more than ever. i don’t think there’s every going to be a time when we don’t need his mind, his knowledge, his experience, and his wisdom.

Each year on the anniversary of his death I pose questions to him that I wish I could hear him answer. His booming voice, his certainty, his ability to see things exactly for what they were drawing on decades and decades of battling — and annihilating — humankind’s greatest scourges are a far cry from what we hear and see today. Given the current environment, I just wish he could take over the whole infectious disease apparatus and extinguish this pandemic, recalibrate public health, and silence politicians whose continual incompetence is to blame for over 600,000 lives.

Each day I have questions for DA and these are a selection of my latest ones.

  1. How do you counsel the population about a new infectious disease that is going to become endemic? How do you dial down people’s sense of alarm to one in which they learn to risk calculate? You did this, I am sure, with the 1957 and 1968 influenza pandemics, Legionnaire’s Disease, HIV, and countless others.

  2. This is a related question. How do you transition people away from an abstinence only message to one of harm reduction? This must have been something you thought about in the early days of the HIV pandemic. Harm reduction works but was jettisoned early on in the pandemic and stunted people’s ability to risk calculate — a skill they need to acquire immediately as COVID-19 is not going away

  3. What is the value of chasing mild cases of COVID-19 in vaccinated individuals? How is there an end game if that becomes the goal? During H1N1 in 2009, I remember how quickly things changed when the severity was downgraded. Isn’t that what vaccination is doing to COVID.

  4. This is less of a question but more of a request to be regaled with another of your innumberable stories bout how you put a politician, a president, a dignitary in their place when they were pursuing a policy you didn’t think highly of. These are my favorite WWDAD thought experiments. I am smiling thinking of the time the Secretary of HHS was waiting to speak at a conference and wanted to interrupt your talk and someone approached the podium the Secretary was there and you replied deadpan “I know” and continued your talk. We could use a lot more of that now.

  5. What is going on with those melioidosis cases in 4 different states in which there is no travel history or linkage? Where do you think they came from? An imported product? A real mystery that is overshadowed by COVID

  6. Is polio eradication in the new Afghanistan even possible? You were so skeptical it could be accomplished a decade ago and now the situation is way way worse. Should it be abandoned and just become part of regular disease control?

  7. What do you think of the Ebola cases in the Ivory Coast? It’s the Zaire strain again not the Cote d’Ivoire or another strain. How do the different strains circulate ? How does one spillover and another doesn’t

These are just the first 7 out of an endless list of questions I have for DA. Tomorrow there’ll be a slew more new ones that occur to me.

One of the aspects of DA that is impossible for me to fully articulate is the feeling I got being around a mind like his. It was a feeling that allowed me to think that insoluble problems were soluble and that a human mind could tame the most wickedly virulent microorganisms.

If those of us that had the opportunity to work alongside him and be mentored by him could pool just a fraction of what he imparted to us, the world would look a lot different now. Emerging infectious diseases would be running scared with just a hint of our commander-in-chief.

Thoughts About Immunity and Booster COVID-19 Vaccine Doses

The recent announcement by the Biden Administration that fully COVID-19 vaccinated adults would be offered booster vaccine doses 8 months after their 2nd dose prompted a lot of thinking and my doing a lot of explaining about immunity and vaccines. 

I wanted to think a little on paper to try to explain what immunity means, what to expect from a vaccine, and draw some conclusions regarding the impending booster program.

So, what is important about COVID-19 vaccines? Their most important aspect is their ability to prevent severe disease, hospitalization, and death. That is what they were designed to do, and they are doing it brilliantly with a combination of antibodies and T-cells. Indeed, the FDA authorization was based on the ability of the vaccines to stop disease (i.e. symptoms) not clinically silent infections. Hospitalized COVID patients are, for the most part, not vaccinated. There has not been waning of the ability of vaccines to prevent these outcomes (though the White House said it “could”) despite crude Israeli data that cannot be taken as evidence given the statistical paradox present. 

The human system is very complex and hard to simply describe. We have innate (or ready-to-go non-specific immunity) and a more targeted specific type of immunity that takes time to develop called adaptive immunity. Adaptive immunity “adapts” or is directed towards specific pathogens. In broad strokes, there are two aspects to adaptive immunity: humoral (or antibody) mediated immunity and cell-mediated immunity. Both are very critical and work in concert. A major component of cell-mediated immunity are T-cells. There are various types of T-cells including T-cells that can kill infected cells, T-cells that orchestrate the operation of the immune system, and T-cells that dampen inflammation. 

 The most common evidence cited for the need for boosters is waning antibody levels. However, this is not – in and of itself – enough. First, we do not know what level of antibody (and the rarely accounted for T-cell immunity) is needed for immunity. We also do not have clinical evidence of true vaccine failure against important outcomes like hospitalization. There is non-peer reviewed data from Moderna showing higher efficacy with higher antibody titers but importantly, as the paper states, it is limited by the fact that efficacy against severe COVID was not assessed.

 It is well known that antibody levels fall and then spring back up post-exposure (to the virus or the vaccine). That is how the immune system works – it is anamnestic. It “remembers” after the primary response and mounts a heightened response that staves off severe illness using both T-cells and antibodies in the secondary response. We fully expect antibodies to fall as time from exposure to vaccine or infection increases and we fully expect them to rise upon re-exposure. This isn’t vaccine failure; it’s just how the immune system works. That, infections in the vaccinated are generally mild is evidence of this process working.

When the CDC recommended a modification of the primary immunization series for the immunocompromised – which is distinct from a booster – it did so based on clinical evidence that amongst the relatively rare COVID hospitalizations of vaccinated individuals, the immunocompromised were overrepresented (~45% in a non-peer reviewed paper). Additionally, a study in solid organ transplant patientsrevealed not only did they, as expected based on experience with other vaccines, fail to mount a robust (or sometimes any) antibody response but had a 485X increased chance of COVID hospitalization versus someone without a transplant. That type of clinical evidence was then integrated with data on 3rd doses of mRNA vaccines increasing antibody levels in these populations. 

With this booster recommendation to the public, none of that type of clinical data appears to be available for analysis. It is even unclear 

Vaccines are not bug zappers; they are not forcefields. That breakthrough – the term itself falsely connotes vaccine failure – infections are mild is a vaccine success (even as they may increase in frequency). We must remember it is disease not clinically irrelevant infections we are targeting and that is done with 1st and 2nddoses, not 3rd’s. COVID is an endemic respiratory virus, it cannot be eliminated or eradicated. There is marginal utility in the general healthy population getting booster vaccinations at an 8-month interval. It is currently unclear that a 3rd dose will diminish the rare transmission risk posed by the fully vaccinated which prompted CDC guidance on masks to be modified. Granted, there is little harm but is chasing mild infections in the fully vaccinated an important task when a substantial proportion of the eligible population of this country does not even have one dose. Will this change the trajectory of the pandemic in the US or the world? Does putting 3rd doses in the arms of the heavily vaccinated change the situation in Mississippi? 

There may come a time when boosters are needed and it’s important to be proactive and have streamlined approval and distribution pathways, but I don’t think that time is 8 months.

Superman, Where Are You Now?

Snip20200818_15.png

Each year, to mark the anniversary of DA Henderson's death, I write a blog post posing infectious disease and epidemiology questions that I wish he were around to answer. There usually are myriad public health threats that we have to face each year, but this year is a little different. The COVID-19 pandemic is the insoluble problem I wish he were here to fix. There are so many aspects of this response that have gone wrong and I have to think that part of it is because his voice is no longer part of the dialogue. I could never imagine DA deferring or subordinating his judgment in a situation like this. If DA were around, I believe his booming voice — infused with the confidence, moral authority and scientific certitude from being the man who rid this planet of smallpox — would have been sounding the alarm in January. DA’s would be an eminent voice that could not be ignored, could not be spun, and could not be misunderstood. He — as I witnessed countless times — had no problem or reservation about upsetting political leaders, describing them with choice (and accurate) adjectives, and would never be one who would express fealty. Just imagine what the world would be like if we acted in January instead of pursuing the non-strategy of evasion.

There are so many questions I would want to ask him about this pandemic. Here’s just a sampling.

  1. What would have been the optimal strategy for the US in January, February, and March? Would it have been, as I have advocated, aggressive testing of all compatible syndromes, hospital preparedness, and targeted public health interventions? Would that have prevented the events in NYC from spiraling out of control and the cascading chaos?

  2. What is the way forward now with an uncontrolled pandemic and a vaccine months away (in the best case scenario)? What is the most important thing we must do now? Is it a harm reduction approach that recognizes we will never go the way of Taiwan?

  3. What is the best way to counteract the attacks on expertise? How does the CDC get restored to its prior position ?

  4. What does this mismanagement portend for a more severe pandemic caused by an avian influenza virus? Which, of the myriad missteps, is the one most critical to fix?

  5. Are paper-based cheap quick “contagiousness” tests a pathbreaking solution?

  6. How should the vaccine be ultimately allocated? How should priority groups be decided?

  7. What happens to polio eradication, guinea worm eradication, and measles control?

I suspect all of of us who were fortunate enough to be mentored by DA like to imagine he would agree with our own positions on the pandemic. While that is obviously impossible to know, I do think what is more likely (and more valuable) is that his mentees are likely thinking about the pandemic using a method he bequeathed us with. That method, as I practice it, involves thinking long-range, looking for historical clues, integrating every piece of new knowledge, keeping the full context, providing actionable guidance, and prioritizing the most important tasks in multifaceted complex problems.

Many of us who knew DA always ask ourselves and each other “What Would DA Do?” I think we ask this because we know if we could do just that, it would make all the difference.