Analysis of the Ebola Outbreak through Networks
In the New York Times, Michael T. Osterholm, the director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota, gives an analysis of the current pressing concerns of the Ebola outbreak in West Africa which has killed thousands of people since its inception several months ago. In particular, he contrasts the current outbreak with other historical outbreaks, stating that “it is much easier to control Ebola infections in isolated villages… there has been [however,] a 300 percent increase in Africa’s population over the last four decades, much of it in large city slums” (Osterholm). Indeed, when perceiving the Ebola outbreak as a system of interconnected networks, with each person as a node connected via edges that signify possibly means of transmission, many of Osterholm’s conclusions become easily deducible. For example, the explosion in population puts people into contact with many others, increasing the number of edges between an infected person and other potential victims of the virus, a fact exacerbated in low income slum neighborhoods that possess poor sanitation and waste removal. No longer is it possible with the current interconnected socioeconomic situation in Africa to limit outbreaks to individual villages as the barriers travel and the intermingling of people are removed.
His mention that “many private airlines are refusing to fly into the affected countries, making it very difficult to deploy critical supplies and personnel,” (Osterholm) while detrimental to local economics, is similarly explainable by network principles. Because the Ebola virus is only transmittable via contact of bodily fluids, victims must be in close proximity to the infected person and, although very pathogenic, is not particularly virulent. As such, it spreads reasonably slowly (when taken in comparison to other viruses like the H1N1), and would require very long paths to travel long distances through many edges from Africa to Asia. However, air travel allows individuals to serve as a bridge between these two networks that would otherwise have very few possible bridges between them, allowing the virus to travel a dramatically shorter path and access to entire populations that it would otherwise not have before.
Lastly, Osterholm also warns against the possibility that the virus may evolve the ability to transmit through the air, citing that the “Evola Zaire, the same virus that is causing the West Africa outbreak, could be transmitted by the respiratory route from pigs to monkeys, whose lungs are very similar to those of humans” (Osterholm). Indeed, viral genomes possess an extraordinary rate of mutations and the evolution of respiratory transmission would immediately open up many more edges between individuals than would have ever been previously possible. Infection would no longer be limited to those in close proximity to the infected victim, such as family members, friends, doctors, and nurses, but anyone the infected individual may walk by, share the same room with, etc. That may be one of the most frightening aspect of the virus and would totally transform the dynamics of the network.
Citation
Osterholm, Michael T. “What We’re Afraid to Say About Ebola.” The New York Times. The New York Times, 11 Sept. 2014. Web. 16 Sept. 2014. <http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/12/opinion/what-were-afraid-to-say-about-ebola.html?_r=0>.