Search

1)      How is Ebola best contained? From a report studying how Ebola was handled in Nigeria, there were several practices that were credited with its relatively quick eradication.  "The dense population and overburdened infrastructure create an environment where diseases can be easily transmitted and transmission sustained" (cdc.gov). In Nigeria, all 900 or so people who came in contact with the original patient zero were identified and monitored in isolation. The Nigerian CDC made over 18 thousand visits to screen suspected patients who would be moved to isolated treatment centers if highly suspect. Nigeria also holds a virology laboratory in Lagos University Teaching Hospital which allowed for quick and accurate testing. (http://www.livescience.com/48359-nigeria-how-ebola-was-contained.html)

2)      I also investigated the shooting of the boy who died, and why they shot him and what the circumstances were. I found that the boy, Shakie Kamara, was with a group of people trying to leave the neighborhood— against the government directive quarantine. The soldiers who fired on him and two other men were trying to prevent them from leaving. (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/22/world/africa/liberian-boy-dies-after-being-shot-during-clash-over-ebola-quarantine.html)

3)      The last point I investigated further was why it took international aid so long to arrive in West Africa (almost six months). The main reason for the long delay was due to logistics. Sites need to be located to store supplies and medical equipment which has to be transported to their sites in West Africa via underdeveloped roads. Just the transportation alone, mind sake organizing the manpower to run it, is an enormous task. Trying to find trucks, helicopters, and ambulances to move gear and get them in place takes time on the logistics end. "I need everything. I need it everywhere. And I need it super-fast." (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-29654974)

The main narrative of the film “In the Shadow of Ebola” is to show the impact from the top to bottom of the disease and the response to that disease. This includes international decisions affecting the nation of Liberia, the national government’s actions affecting the local communities and families there. Disease awareness and infrastructure are the main focus.

The main narrative of the film “In the Shadow of Ebola” is to show the impact from the top to bottom of the disease and the response to that disease. This includes international decisions affecting the nation of Liberia, the national government’s actions affecting the local communities and families there. Disease awareness and infrastructure are the main focus.

The film takes more of an observer stance than an active role. The corrective action I imagine being effective is better preparedness on the local national and international level to be able to better respond not only to the direct impact of the disease but also the secondary social impacts to the community such as food, water, enforcing emergency orders, and travel restrictions. 

I found the part where the healthcare worker relates to the difficulty of his position most compelling and persuasive. A man on the burial team talks about some of the challenges he faced. He says that they are in denial about the disease. For example, a man’s wife died from the disease. They took the body and marked the room with the health tattoo, do not enter and barricaded the door. A health team was tasked to disinfect the building but the moment they left the husband bust the door down and went inside. He died as well. “You see the challenges? You tell people, don’t do this, they pass behind you go do it, don’t do this, they say we are eating free money, the government is lying”.

                I was probably influenced by the fact that I am a healthcare worker and while not the same situation, I can relate to his dilemma. 

More focus on the care, treatment, containment, and management of contagious diseases like Ebola would have increased its educational value, especially to first responders.

Emergency responders were not the main focus of the film but were portrayed as having to deal with difficult situations that they had little real control over, mostly because the state was portrayed as trying to do the right thing but making things worse. The consequences of the government fell on the emergency workers. The doctors and responders had to risk personal safety and had to deal with people not trusting them and ignoring their requests.

There were a few notable viewpoints that were not included. First, those on the international level, but also the doctors and those managing the outbreak (other than the one Ebola response member that was interviewed). 

Several stakeholders are presented in this film. First, the families in the communities that were affected. This especially focused on Emmanuel Urey’s family who had to decide to leave some of their children behind in Liberia as they could not secure the necessary affidavits to bring them all to the US. Next, The first responders who have to deal with a public that does not trust them and does not follow health instruction. The government is the last main stakeholder presented in the film. They are trying to control the disease as well as treat those already infected which has many social issues on top of the medical issues such as starvation, water shortages, and shooting their own citizens to enforce the measures designed to protect them.

This film, I feel, best addresses those trying to understand the broader social impacts of a disease which can include government officials and policy makers, first responders, emergency personal and more.