Search

This letter comments on the article “Emergence of the invasive malaria vector Anopheles stephensi in Khartoum State, Central Sudan” published in Parasites and Vectors 2021, 14:511. Here we aim of provide a response to this paper in the broader context of the invasion and spread of An. stephensi in the Horn of Africa, and the required response to it. We agree with the authors that the arrival of this invasive vector in Khartoum State is of high public health concern. Equally concerning, however, we found that the detection of the vector by the authors in 2018 seemingly took 3 years to communicate to the Ministry of Health and World Health Organization (WHO), and was reliant on an academic journal. We consider that this short report sets a poor example of how public health threats should be reported. Suitable communication alternatives to alert public health authorities to such threats have been put in place by the WHO and its Member States, and are well known to at least some of the authors of the short report. We would like to encourage all readers not to follow the example of Ahmed et al. but instead act as responsible public health professionals by drawing on the established reporting mechanisms and escalate potential threats as soon as they are identified. Graphical Abstract

Characterizing persistent malaria transmission that occurs after the combined deployment of indoor residual spraying (IRS) and long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) is critical to guide malaria control and elimination efforts. This requires a detailed understanding of both human and vector behaviors at the same temporal and spatial scale. Cross-sectional human behavior evaluations and mosquito collections were performed in parallel in Magude district, Mozambique. Net use and the exact time when participant moved into each of five environments (outdoor, indoor before bed, indoor in bed, indoor after getting up, and outdoor after getting up) were recorded for individuals from three different age groups and both sexes during a dry and a rainy season. Malaria mosquitoes were collected with CDC light traps in combination with collection bottle rotators. The percentage of residual exposure to host-seeking vectors that occurred in each environment was calculated for five local malaria vectors with different biting behaviors, and the actual (at observed levels of LLIN use) and potential (i.e. if all residents had used an LLIN) personal protection conferred by LLINs was estimated. Anopheles arabiensis was responsible for more than 74% of residents’ residual exposure to host-seeking vectors during the Magude project. The other four vector species (An. funestus s.s., An. parensis, An. squamosus and An. merus) were responsible for less than 10% each. The personal protection conferred by LLINs prevented only 39.2% of the exposure to host-seeking vectors that survived the implementation of both IRS and LLINs, and it differed significantly across seasons, vector species and age groups. At the observed levels of bednet use, 12.5% of all residual exposure to host-seeking vectors occurred outdoor during the evening, 21.9% indoor before going to bed, almost two thirds (64%) while people were in bed, 1.4% indoors after getting up and 0.2% outdoor after leaving the house. Almost a third of the residual exposure to host-seeking vectors (32.4%) occurred during the low transmission season. The residual bites of An. funestus s.s. and An. parensis outdoors and indoor before bedtime, of An. arabiensis indoors when people are in bed, and of An. squamosus both indoors and outdoors, are likely to have sustained malaria transmission throughout the Magude project. By increasing LLIN use, an additional 24.1% of exposure to the remaining hosts-seeking vectors could have been prevented. Since An. arabiensis, the most abundant vector, feeds primarily while people are in bed, increasing net use and net feeding inhibition (through e.g. community awareness activities and the selection of more effective LLINs) could significantly reduce the exposure to remaining host-seeking mosquitoes. Nonetheless, supplementary interventions aiming to reduce human-vector contact outdoors and/or indoors before people go to bed (e.g. through larval source management, window and eave screening, eave tubes, and spatial repellents) will be needed to reduce residual exposure to the outdoor and early biting An. funestus s.s. and An. parensis.

The Lancet Countdown: tracking progress on health and climate change was established to provide an independent, global monitoring system dedicated to tracking the health dimensions of the impacts of, and the response to, climate change. The Lancet Countdown tracks 41 indicators across five domains: climate change impacts, exposures, and vulnerability; adaptation, planning, and resilience for health; mitigation actions and health co-benefits; finance and economics; and public and political engagement. This report is the product of a collaboration of 27 leading academic institutions, the UN, and intergovernmental agencies from every continent. The report draws on world-class expertise from climate scientists, ecologists, mathematicians, geographers, engineers, energy, food, livestock, and transport experts, economists, social and political scientists, public health professionals, and. doctors. The Lancet Countdown’s work builds on decades of research in this field, and was first proposed in the 2015 Lancet Commission on health and climate change,1 which documented the human impacts of climate change and provided ten global recommendations to respond to this public health emergency and secure the public health benefits available (panel 1).

The Lancet Countdown is an international, multidisciplinary collaboration, dedicated to monitoring the evolving health profile of climate change, and providing an independent assessment of the delivery of commitments made by governments worldwide under the Paris Agreement.\ud The 2019 report presents an annual update of 41 indicators across five key domains: climate change impacts, exposures, and vulnerability; adaptation, planning, and resilience for health; mitigation actions and health co-benefits; economics and finance; and public and political engagement. The report represents the findings and consensus of 35 leading academic institutions and UN agencies from every continent. Each year, the methods and data that underpin the Lancet Countdown's indicators are further developed and improved, with updates described at each stage of this report. The collaboration draws on the world-class expertise of climate scientists; ecologists; mathematicians; engineers; energy, food, and transport experts; economists; social and political scientists; public health professionals; and doctors, to generate the quality and diversity of data required.\ud The science of climate change describes a range of possible futures, which are largely dependent on the degree of action or inaction in the face of a warming world. The policies implemented will have far-reaching effects in determining these eventualities, with the indicators tracked here monitoring both the present-day effects of climate change, as well as the worldwide response. Understanding these decisions as a choice between one of two pathways—one that continues with the business as usual response and one that redirects to a future that remains “well below 2°C”—helps to bring the importance of recognising the effects of climate change and the necessary response to the forefront.\ud Evidence provided by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the International Energy Agency, and the US National Aeronautics and Space Administration clarifies the degree and magnitude of climate change experienced today and contextualises these two pathways.