Talk:Eradication of infectious diseases

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 12 August 2020 and 25 November 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Kef283.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 20:47, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Response to request for feedback

Very nice work! In reply to Procrastinator supreme's RFF, here's a few suggestions:

• How about some images? I bet you could jack some from polio or smallpox or other related articles to use in context. Image:EM smallpox, grown via tissue, isolate by centrifuge.jpg is one idea. Alternately, you can upload your own: look on public domain resources e.g. the CDC (US government work is public domain). biomedcentral is an awesome source of creative commons content, as is plos.org. Ask me if you need help figuring out licenses or uploading.
• I'd recommend converting bare URLs in the references to full references with info on author, date, publisher, etc.
• WP:MOS discourages use of slashes usually: WP:SLASH
• The lead is good in that it provides a clear definition. In addition, I'd recommend expanding the lead section to provide more of a summary of the article. For example, it could list the diseases discussed in detail in subsequent sections.
• Avoid linking a term more than once in the same section (and in the same article if it can be avoided).
• How about expanding the article to include more info on practices by organizations, outreach methods, collaboration among organizations, etc? I'd like to see a broader view beyond just a list of diseases.
• The article needs more referencing. Any statistic, e.g. the 30% one with Smallpox. (Pardons if the last ref in that para covers the whole thing.) Also, "fewer than 2000 cases reported globally each year from 2000-2006." I can tag with {{cn}} if you like, but really when in doubt, reference.
• The lead clarifies that elimination is a different thing. Should elimination be discussed in a different article?
• Good job explaining unfamiliar terms in layperson's terms.

Let me know if you need clarification or if I can be of any help with anything! delldot talk 01:48, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! I'll do my best to clean up the refs and expand the lead to start with, while I think about where to put elimination. Procrastinator supreme (talk) 16:00, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Status of article March 2009

Up-to-date, but I think this needs some major additions:

• Graphs/other figures showing progress to date of Guinea Worm & Poliomyelitis campaigns
• A history of the aborted prior eradication campaigns (Hookworm, Malaria, Yaws & Yellow Fever).
• A discussion of the criteria for eradication being worthwhile for any given disease, being careful not to slip over into POV - perhaps this would be best described as an eradication controversy section.
• A discussion of eradication & elimination in diseases of animals & livestock, particularly Rinderpest.

EDIT: Rinderpest added, article further tidied up etc. Procrastinator supreme (talk) 15:24, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

BSE

125 of BSE cases were in 2008. Isn't it suppose to be in this article? 93.172.192.57 (talk) 16:28, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

As far as I can find, there's no global campaign to eradicate BSE. It's hard to detect the prion agents, and some low level of spongiform encephalopathy may be inevitable, as in humans. There is a campaign to eliminate this in cattle in the UK, certainly, and similar campaigns in various other countries, but I can't find anything global. I've therefore moved your section on this to the "local elimination" campaigns section. Procrastinator supreme (talk) 16:25, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Diphtheria

To the user who added the diphtheria section, I'm afraid I've had to remove it. The last time this disease seems to have got serious consideration for global eradication was in 1998, when it was decided that it wasn't feasible due to difficulties in diagnosis and the issues in administering the multiple dose vaccine with sufficient coverage. Being on the retreat is, sadly, not sufficient to be a candidate for eradication. 80.189.251.160 (talk) 15:18, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Nonetheless, the article should have a discussion of schemes to eradicate diphtheria, and why that was judged not to be feasible.--Solomonfromfinland (talk) 05:14, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Vandalism

I'm worried about the edits made by 92.2.208.17, as the first edit changed several dates and numbers and the second edit added a reference to "gayness" as an infectious disease. The second edit obviously being vandalism makes me question the first edit wherein dates and numbers were changed. Given the second edit I think it might be prudent to restore the page prior to 92.2.208.17's editing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.225.223.4 (talk) 18:11, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Polio - Statistics Contradiction

For polio, the text says there were 483 cases in 2001, but 498 in the chart. --Zed (talk) 01:31, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Corrected to 483 in both (based on http://www.polioeradication.org/content/general/casecount.pdf and http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/300/7/839). Thank you for spotting that! Procrastinator supreme (talk) 16:22, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Introduction

I do not think the final paragraph of the introduction ... i.e.

"These attempts to eradicate infectious diseases may have been impacted by the science-politics paradox, which implies that every campaign is politically influenced. The involvement of politics can get out of hand and lead to failure. The reason being is that political leaders use health campaign for political and economic advantages. As a result, eradication programs might be more focused on the wrong approach causing it to not reach its full potential.[3]"

Is needed - or justified. The incident the reference covers is well reported in the hookworm section later in the section, and happened 90 years ago. Repeating it in the introduction seems to highlight it as a major factor in current eradication of infectious diseases. Without any sources supporting this happening in the last 90 years I disagree with this. However, I thought this should be discussed before any changes made - so here is my view! Holland jon (talk) 10:34, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Ethical Considerations

Is there any ethical considerations worth developing in this article on the planned eradication & extinction of another species or life-form? Virus and bacterial life is entirely normal in the natural world and man's ability to potentially eradicate another life-form is worth discussion in my view. Were does it end? Vectors for disease transmission such as rats and mosquitos? How many human lives could be saved at the expense of the eradication of another higher species such as those? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fizzackerly (talk • contribs) 21:08, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Both rinderpest and smallpox virus samples are held in various laboratories. The same would be true for polio and probably also for yaws, although harder as that is a bacteria not a virus. A larger problem would be trying to preserve guinea worm which is a more complex organism. I don't know if anyone is planning to try. Rmhermen (talk) 18:36, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Anyway, such discussions should not be our own per no original research policy. If you have any reliable sources discussing ethical considerations of eradicating "primitive" species, you are welcome to add a section about this subject to the article. --Abanima (talk) 21:32, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Nonetheless, I think the article should have a discussion of such ethical questions.--Solomonfromfinland (talk) 05:12, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Treponema

Under the section “yaws”, it said, “trematoses”. “Trematosis” implies a worm (trematode), and syphilis and yaws are bacteria, genus Treponema, not worms. Therefore, i changed “trematoses” to “treponemoses”. Okay? Or should it be “treponematoses”?--Solomonfromfinland (talk) 02:26, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

What was the first disease eradicated?

This article seems to be somewhat obscure IMO. Komitsuki (talk) 04:20, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

International Wild Poliovirus Cases by Year table

I copied the table of polio cases per year in this page into the Polio Eradication page. It is also very relevant there.

And then updated one of them when new figures came out, and forgot to update the other ...

Is there a better way to do this? 20:04, 16 July 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Holland jon (talk • contribs)

Trachoma

Can we include it? It's a disease that causes blindness. The International Coalition for Trachoma Control and International Trachoma Initiative are trying to eliminate trachoma by 2020, with support from the WHO and other fairly serious-minded organizations. HLHJ (talk) 17:48, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

The efforts against trachoma seem to be elimination, not eradication (see the definition, first few sentences). Maybe add more on elimination efforts on the trachoma page. juanTamad 02:35, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

I've added a bit. Do you think it should also go in the "Regional elimination established or under way" in this article? HLHJ (talk) 13:45, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I would say so. There are organizations doing this (International Trachoma Initiative for one). juanTamad 13:57, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Inconsistencies

The introduction to this article is inconsistent with the rest of it. I suggest that someone sync them up. I'm not an expert, so I'll leave that to someone else. But here's a list of the inconsistencies I found:

1. The introduction refers to the hookworm eradication program as a "former" program, but the body of the article implies that it's ongoing.

2. The introduction says there was a program for yellow fever, but the body of the article doesn't mention it.

3. The introduction says there's a potential to eradicate mumps and cysticercosis, but the body of the article doesn't mention them.

4. The body of the article says there are eradication programs underway for onchocerciasis and bovine spongiform encephalopathy (including Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease), but the introduction doesn't mention them.

5. The body of the article says there's a potential to eradicate peste des petits ruminants, but the introduction doesn't mention it.

- 72.184.128.205 (talk) 20:38, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Removing Other extinct diseases section

Removing the red link to Radeskye and this section which now has that as the only entry and that being entirely unsourced. There was at least one previous entry removed as incorrect. I was able to find some references to "radeskye" including http://www.dnms.no/pdf/2010/3-307-20.pdf "Norwegian radesyke (probably a non venereal treponematosis)", and this page with sources in Norwegian, Frederik Holst (physician). However no clear documentation of it as a unique and now extinct disease. There may well be some but I was not able to find it in a brief search. If there are reliable sources for it being an extinct disease it should be added back including those reliable sources. I'd suggest it not be restored until there is a well-supported article on the disease itself including its extinction. Phil (talk) 22:16, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Ring vaccination

Shouldn't this article or vaccination have some coverage of ring vaccination (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3323203/)? It was part of the strategy that eliminated smallpox. Sizeofint (talk) 07:20, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Measles has been eradicated in the Americas?

According to WHO, as reported in Science News (Source), Measles has been eradicated in the Americas, from Canada to Chile. While this is not the same as world eradication, perhaps it is worthy of adding to this article. I'd rather that someone prepared to deal with reversions do the edit; I'm not, thanks. David Spector (talk) 11:39, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Done. Sorry for the delay. TompaDompa (talk) 21:39, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Eradication of infectious diseases. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070303012609/http://www.rotary.org:80/foundation/polioplus/news/milestones/index.html to http://www.rotary.org/foundation/polioplus/news/milestones/index.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070211043940/http://www.who.int:80/vaccines-documents/GlobalSummary/GlobalSummary.pdf to http://www.who.int/vaccines-documents/GlobalSummary/GlobalSummary.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110727060254/http://www.malariaeliminationgroup.org/resources/elimination-countries to http://www.malariaeliminationgroup.org/resources/elimination-countries
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.cartercenter.org/health/lf/treatment.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110222210036/http://new.paho.org/hq/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=782&Itemid=2180&lang=en to http://new.paho.org/hq/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=782&Itemid=2180&lang=en

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:24, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Eradication of infectious diseases. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.rotary.org/foundation/polioplus/news/milestones/index.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.who.int/vaccines-documents/GlobalSummary/GlobalSummary.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081108054616/http://www.searo.who.int/LinkFiles/Yaws_yaws.pdf to http://www.searo.who.int/LinkFiles/Yaws_yaws.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:16, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Eradication of infectious diseases. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130518130227/http://www.polioeradication.org/Portals/0/Document/Data%26Monitoring/Wild_poliovirus_list_2008_2013_05Feb.pdf to http://www.polioeradication.org/Portals/0/Document/Data%26Monitoring/Wild_poliovirus_list_2008_2013_05Feb.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110627083641/http://ec.europa.eu/food/fs/bse/bse20_en.html to http://ec.europa.eu/food/fs/bse/bse20_en.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130319193049/http://www.cjd.ed.ac.uk/documents/figs.pdf to http://www.cjd.ed.ac.uk/documents/figs.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:33, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

New page on Elimination

I suggest that the entire section : Global eradication underway be moved to the new article Elimination, which I have drafted. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:CunningNance/sandbox/Elimination.

I have copied the page into that article—I'm sure there is a better way to do it, but I could not find it.

CunningNance (talk) 09:03, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

rabies

http://apps.who.int/neglected_diseases/ntddata/rabies/rabies.html SHOWS IT is Dog Free Rabies - this should be updated in the maps and article as wild rabies still exists in bats, foxes et cetera cf. polio. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.115.204.102 (talk) 03:16, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

Eradication of SARS?

This page lists two diseases that have been successfully eradicated. However, due to human action, SARS was eradicated. This was primarily through basic public health measures, rather than vaccination. But it fits the basic definition of eradication. A good discussion is here: https://biomedgrid.com/pdf/AJBSR.MS.ID.001017.pdf Spencerw (talk) 10:50, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

• I completely agree with you on this post. SARS, by definition of eradication, has been eradicated from the world. The problem here is there are very few reliable sources to back this claim. I searched "SARS was eradicated" on google and the only result that stated SARS was eradicated (with evidence) is the same link that you posted. By definition, SARS was eradicated and it should be added to this list. The World Health Organization is not the defacto decision maker when it comes to which diseases has been eradicated or not. Thus, SARS should be added to this list. A note can be attached stating the WHO does not see SARS as eradicated. SneaselxLv94 (talk) 20:19, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
  • I don't think we can include it based on this source alone. There is no indication that the views espoused by the author of that paper reflect academic consensus, and this is of course a claim that would need to pass WP:MEDRS. TompaDompa (talk) 21:55, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Please updates statistics in Bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) and new variant Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease (vCJD) section

Section ends with statistics for 2013 and 2015. Please update with statistics for 2016-2020.47.139.42.35 (talk) 01:34, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Summary table

I suggest adding a summary section immediately after the lead. I've started compiling it, but I've no time to finish it at the moment, so I'm posting here instead:

== Summary ==

{{see also|List of diseases eliminated from the United States}}

Name	Status	Means	Species affected	First known outbreak	Yearly number of cases (historical)	Yearly number of cases (current)	Last known outbreak	Last known case	Notes
Smallpox	Eradicated	Vaccine	Human		15,000,000 (1967)	0		1977	Samples of the virus continue to be kept in labs in the US and Russia
Rinderpest	Eradicated	Vaccine	Cattle			0		2001
Poliomyelitis (polio)	Partially eradicated	Vaccine	Human		400,000 (1980)	140			Poliovirus types 2 & 3 eradicated, type 1 still in the wild
Dracunculiasis (Guinea worm disease)	Partially eradicated	Water treatment	Humans, dogs, cats and baboons		892,055 (1989)	5 (2021)
Yaws	Partially eradicated	Antibiotics	Human		50,000,000 (1952)	82,564 (2020)
Malaria	Partially eradicated	Mosquito nets, insecticide	Human			229,000,000 (2019)

Cheers.

François Robere (talk) 13:07, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

COVID?

As of 2021-09-04 this article says in the lede, "There are four ongoing programs, targeting the human diseases poliomyelitis (polio), yaws, dracunculiasis (Guinea worm), covid, and malaria." I perceive two problems with this: (1) Five items are listed. (2) I can NOT find evidence that eradication of COVID-19 is a serious target at the moment. I've therefore eliminated it. If you think it belongs, please provide a credible reference. Thanks, DavidMCEddy (talk) 05:46, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

SARS?

I don't know if you would consider SARS to be eradicated, but I feel it should be included.

https://biomedgrid.com/pdf/AJBSR.MS.ID.001017.pdf DukeOfGrammar (talk) 23:42, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

If there's still possibly a reservoir of SARS-CoV-1 virus in the wild in bats, masked palm civets, raccoon dogs, ferret badgers, or domestic cats, how can the disease be considered eradicated (except, perhaps, in humans)? Mojoworker (talk) 05:19, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

It would be worthwhile to get actual sourcing on this to add to the article -- SARS is a major case, and 'why is it not here' is going to come up again. - CRGreathouse (t | c) 03:00, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Este en seguida gracias bay

Como le hago energías 2806:103E:10:9F67:1C1D:3936:AAAC:E309 (talk) 21:06, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

No entiendo. Estaría mejor escribir aquí en inglés. DavidMCEddy (talk) 22:48, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Kuru

The article claims Kuru has been declared eradicated. Declared eradicated by whom? WHO hasn't said anything and I can't find any other sources. A google search of Kuru all the results refer to Kuru in the present tense. i.e 'Kuru is' not 'Kuru was'. The section doesn't cite any sources. Could sources please be cited or the claim removed? Watch Atlas791 (talk) 04:12, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Should Kuru be included?

It was eradicated entirely but idk Wikipedia rules 104.142.120.115 (talk) 05:30, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

Could you cite sources for that? I have a source that describes Kuru as a "Very Rare Disease" [1]https://medlineplus.gov/ency/article/001379.htm I may be wrong, but this seems quite reliable. Watch Atlas791 (talk) 10:33, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

Without a source this really can't be included. Really this should have thorough sourcing at kuru and some quick reference here from an authoritative source like WHO. - CRGreathouse (t | c) 18:31, 22 November 2022 (UTC)