The World Health Organisation says the Ebola virus outbreak in Congo — which spread to Uganda — does not yet merit being declared a global emergency, but is “an extraordinary event” of deep concern.
The UN health agency convened its expert committee for the third time to assess the outbreak, which some experts say met the criteria to be designated an international emergency long ago.
This outbreak, the second-deadliest in history, has killed more than 1,400 people since it was declared in August.
At a press briefing following the meeting, Dr Preben Aavitsland, the acting chair of the committee, announced that the outbreak is “a health emergency in the Democratic Republic of the Congo” but that the situation does not yet meet the criteria for being declared a global one.
For such a declaration, an outbreak must constitute a risk to other countries and require a coordinated response.
The declaration typically triggers more funding and political attention.
Dr Aavitsland said the committee was “deeply disappointed” that WHO and the affected countries have not received the funding needed to stop the outbreak and delivered a blunt message to donors: “Step up.”
The outbreak, occurring close to the borders of Uganda, Rwanda and South Sudan, has been like no other.
Mistrust has been high in a region that had never faced Ebola before and attacks by rebel groups have undermined aid efforts.
On Thursday, WHO’s emergencies chief acknowledged the agency has been unable to track the origins of nearly half of new Ebola cases in DR Congo amid the challenges, suggesting it does not know where the virus is spreading.
WHO’s expert committee has met twice previously to consider the situation in DR Congo.
In April, the UN health agency said the outbreak was of “deep concern” but officials were “moderately optimistic” it could be contained within a “foreseeable time”.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here