Just in case you missed it

[Nearly Sane]

God invented smallpox of course


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Henderson

[Hope]

God invented smallpox of course


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Henderson

Unfortunately, we were told in 1997 or so by the WHO, that leprosy had been eradicated. 

[Sebastian Toe]

Unfortunately, we were told in 1997 or so by the WHO, that leprosy had been eradicated.

Why was that unfortunate?

[Nearly Sane]

Unfortunately, we were told in 1997 or so by the WHO, that leprosy had been eradicated.

1. eh?
2. Citation?

[Gordon]

Unfortunately, we were told in 1997 or so by the WHO, that leprosy had been eradicated.

What has leprosy to do with this article about smallpox?

By the way, leprosy isn't as yet eradicated (although the direction of travel is encouraging).

Globally in 2012, the number of chronic cases of leprosy was 189,000, down from some 5.2 million in the 1980s.[2][6][7] The number of new cases was 230,000.[2] Most new cases occur in 16 countries, with India accounting for more than half.[2][4] In the past 20 years, 16 million people worldwide have been cured of leprosy.[2] About 200 cases are reported per year in the United States.[8]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leprosy

[Hope]

What has leprosy to do with this article about smallpox?

By the way, leprosy isn't as yet eradicated (although the direction of travel is encouraging).

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leprosy

Gordon, you really do seem to be slow this week.  Smallpox declared eradicated by the WHO in 1980; leprosy declared eradicated by the WHO circa 1998.  I happen to know that there have been a number of cases of smallpox since 1980, whilst - as you say - leprosy is still prevalent in a number of places of the world.  Ironically, the number of cases of leprosy notified in Nepal ROSE in the 2 or 3 years following the WHO's declaration, partly because the work of various agencies has reduced the stigma that it used to carry, but partly because the international funding of leprosy treatment plummetted following the declaration.

I am aware that the work on smallpox reduction was dramatic and hard won, but its also worth noting that 'eradication' is rarely based on a 'no occurrence' basis, but on a reduction to less than a given prevalence basis.

[Gordon]

Gordon, you really do seem to be slow this week.

Not sure it is me who is slow: the OP is about smallpox and your reply (#1) is about leprosy, and in it you don't even mention smallpox.

[Nearly Sane]

Gordon, you really do seem to be slow this week.  Smallpox declared eradicated by the WHO in 1980; leprosy declared eradicated by the WHO circa 1998.  I happen to know that there have been a number of cases of smallpox since 1980, whilst - as you say - leprosy is still prevalent in a number of places of the world.  Ironically, the number of cases of leprosy notified in Nepal ROSE in the 2 or 3 years following the WHO's declaration, partly because the work of various agencies has reduced the stigma that it used to carry, but partly because the international funding of leprosy treatment plummetted following the declaration.

I am aware that the work on smallpox reduction was dramatic and hard won, but its also worth noting that 'eradication' is rarely based on a 'no occurrence' basis, but on a reduction to less than a given prevalence basis.

Again citation on the WHO declaration. And you know this just puts your god on the hook for leprosy as well as smallpox, so you aren't making much of a case.

[Shaker]

Again citation on the WHO declaration. And you know this just puts your god on the hook for leprosy as well as smallpox, so you aren't making much of a case.

You could try asking him if he thinks his god created smallpox and leprosy.

Won't do you any good, mind 

[Shaker]

leprosy declared eradicated by the WHO circa 1998.

I'd be very interested indeed to see a citation for that.

Especially as they changed their minds so quickly; in 2000 the WHO listed 91 countries in which the disease is endemic.

[Nearly Sane]

You could try asking him if he thinks his god created smallpox and leprosy.

Won't do you any good, mind 

tbh I probably should have avoided the god barb in the OP, would still be nice to see a citation for the leprosy claim, and then to have a coherent explanation of the relevance to celebrating someone whose work saved so many people from the misery of smallpox, given their death passed with so little fanfare.

[Sebastian Toe]

I am aware that the work on smallpox reduction was dramatic and hard won, but its also worth noting that 'eradication' is rarely based on a 'no occurrence' basis, but on a reduction to less than a given prevalence basis.

So, what point were you trying to make with your original statement?

[Gordon]

The WHO info on smallpox (from June this year) seems to confirm its eradication in terms of new natural cases, although some governments have a concern that it could be released maliciously hence the vaccine is stored in two places only.

WHO Smallpox

The last known natural case was in Somalia in 1977. Since then, the only known cases were caused by a laboratory accident in 1978 in Birmingham, England, which killed one person and caused a limited outbreak. Smallpox was officially declared eradicated in 1979.

Smallpox no longer occurs naturally since it was totally eradicated by a lengthy and painstaking process, which identified all cases and their contacts and ensured that they were all vaccinated. Until then, smallpox killed many millions of people.

When smallpox was officially certified as eradicated, in December 1979, an agreement was reached under which all remaining stocks of the virus would either be destroyed or passed to one of two secure laboratories – one in the United States and one in the Russian Federation. That process was completed in the early 1980s and since then no other laboratory has officially had access to the virus which causes smallpox.

Some governments believe there is a risk that the virus which causes smallpox exists in places other than these laboratories and could be deliberately released to cause harm. It is impossible to assess the risk that this might happen, but at their request, WHO is making efforts to help governments prepare for this possibility.

So, Hope, since you say you 'happen to know that there have been a number of cases of smallpox since 1980' then perhaps you should pass the info to WHO, since they seem to think otherwise (see first quote above).

[Hope]

So, what point were you trying to make with your original statement?

That 'eradication' is a term that is open to debate.

From what I understand, any disease that is sufficiently reduced in prevalence is also weakened in power in everyday life.  As such, someone can suffer from the desease without it become a massive thing, especially if treated quickly.

[Gordon]

That 'eradication' is a term that is open to debate.

From what I understand, any disease that is sufficiently reduced in prevalence is also weakened in power in everyday life.  As such, someone can suffer from the desease without it become a massive thing, especially if treated quickly.

Then you are wrong: the use of 'eradicate' by WHO (see the link in my #12) is in the context of the disease in question (in this case smallpox) no longer occurring naturally, which seems fairly precise. In epidemiological terms then 'eradicate' means exactly that.

[Nearly Sane]

That 'eradication' is a term that is open to debate.

From what I understand, any disease that is sufficiently reduced in prevalence is also weakened in power in everyday life.  As such, someone can suffer from the desease without it become a massive thing, especially if treated quickly.

got a citation for the WHO eradication of leprosy yet?

[Gordon]

On the leprosy front it seems Hope is confusing 'elimination' (as a public health problem) with 'eradication' (no new naturally occurring cases).

From WHO as of October this year.

WHO Leprosy

Elimination of leprosy as a public health problem

In 1991 the World Health Assembly passed a resolution to “eliminate” leprosy as a public health problem by the year 2000. Elimination of leprosy is defined as a registered prevalence rate of less than 1 case per 10 000 persons. The target was achieved on time.

So, it is not the case that leprosy was declared as 'eradicated'.

[Shaker]

got a citation for the WHO eradication of leprosy yet?

Tick tock tick tock ...

[Harrowby Hall]

This thread caught my interest.

Like Gordon I can find no evidence that that leprosy has been eradicated. In fact, an item in the Guardian last year suggests that vaccines are  still at an early stage (https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2014/jun/06/trial-world-first-leprosy-vaccine).

Incidentally, leprosy, as we are discussing it here, is Hansens disease and not the affliction mentioned in the bible.

[Gordon]

Bumped for Hope.

[Shaker]

Bumped for Hope.

Best of luck there, chap.

[Hope]

What's that got to do with Trent's comment? By the way any citation on the WHO declaring the eradication of leprosy?

If I had access to the WHO publication that included it and which the Pokhara Nursing Campus Library, the International Nepal Fellowship and other medical agencies in Nepal and (I believe) elsewhere in the world received, I would provide the citation.  Sadly, I don't live inNepal any longer, I don't have that access.

[Nearly Sane]

If I had access to the WHO publication that included it and which the Pokhara Nursing Campus Library, the International Nepal Fellowship and other medical agencies in Nepal and (I believe) elsewhere in the world received, I would provide the citation.  Sadly, I don't live inNepal any longer, I don't have that access.

As for your opening point, 'Reform the system' is all very well, but I was hoping that folk would be a little more insightful - and my second paragraph was an extension of the OP.

so that would be a no to the leprosy point. The Neulson Institute says you eat babies.

[Hope]

so that would be a no to the leprosy point. The Neulson Institute says you eat babies.

No, it wouldn't be a 'no' to the point, it would be a 'no' to your request for a citation - something that I have always regretted not making a note of, as I have sometimes been asked for the same by doctors who read the material at the time, and thought that - as I was working in Nepal at the time - might have a record of.

[Nearly Sane]

No, it wouldn't be a 'no' to the point, it would be a 'no' to your request for a citation - something that I have always regretted not making a note of, as I have sometimes been asked for the same by doctors who read the material at the time, and thought that - as I was working in Nepal at the time - might have a record of.

So you have no evidence at all.