Kidson C, Indaratna K
Centre for Health Economics, Faculty of Economics, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Parassitologia. 1998 Jun;40(1-2):39-46.
The documented history of malaria in parts of Asia goes back more than 2,000 years, during which the disease has been a major player on the socioeconomic stage in many nation states as they waxed and waned in power and prosperity. On a much shorter time scale, the last half century has seen in microcosm a history of large fluctuations in endemicity and impact of malaria across the spectrum of rice fields and rain forests, mountains and plains that reflect the vast ecological diversity inhabited by this majority aggregation of mankind. That period has seen some of the most dramatic changes in social and economic structure, in population size, density and mobility, and in political structure in history: all have played a part in the changing face of malaria in this extensive region of the world. While the majority of global malaria cases currently reside in Africa, greater numbers inhabited Asia earlier this century before malaria programs savored significant success, and now Asia harbors a global threat in the form of the epicenter of multidrug resistant Plasmodium falciparum which is gradually encompassing the tropical world. The latter reflects directly the vicissitudes of economic change over recent decades, particularly the mobility of populations in search of commerce, trade and personal fortunes, or caught in the misfortunes of physical conflicts. The period from the 1950s to the 1990s has witnessed near "eradication" followed by resurgence of malaria in Sri Lanka, control and resurgence in India, the influence of war and postwar instability on drug resistance in Cambodia, increase in severe and cerebral malaria in Myanmar during prolonged political turmoil, the essential disappearance of the disease from all but forested border areas of Thailand where it remains for the moment intractable, the basic elimination of vivax malaria from many provinces of central China. Both positive and negative experiences have lessons to teach in the debate between eradication and control as alternative strategies. China has for years held high the goal of "basic elimination", eradication by another name, in sensible semi-defiance of WHO dictates. The Chinese experience makes it clear that, given community organization, exhaustive attention to case detection, management and focus elimination, plus the political will at all levels of society, it is possible both to eliminate malaria from large areas of an expansive nation and to implement surveillance necessary to maintain something approaching eradication status in those areas. But China has not succeeded in the international border regions of the tropical south where unfettered population movement confounds the program. Thailand, Malaysia and to an extent Vietnam have also reached essential elimination in their rice field plains by vigorous vertical programs but fall short at their forested borders. Economics is central to the history of the rise and fall of nations, and to the history of disease in the people who constitute nations. The current love affair with free market economics as the main driving force for advance of national wealth puts severe limitations on the essential involvement of communities in malaria management. The task of malaria control or elimination needs to be clearly related to the basic macroeconomic process that preoccupies governments, not cloistered away in the health sector Historically malaria has had a severe, measurable, negative impact on the productivity of nations. Economic models need rehoning with political aplomb and integrating with technical and demographic strategies. Recent decades in Chinese malaria history carry some lessons that may be relevant in this context.
亚洲部分地区有记录的疟疾历史可追溯到2000多年前,在此期间,随着许多民族国家的兴衰,疟疾一直是社会经济舞台上的主要因素。在更短的时间尺度上,过去半个世纪里,疟疾的流行程度和影响在稻田、雨林、山区和平原上经历了大幅波动,反映了居住在这片人类聚居地的巨大生态多样性。在这段时期内,社会和经济结构、人口规模、密度和流动性以及政治结构都发生了一些历史上最显著的变化:所有这些都对世界这个广袤地区疟疾情况的变化产生了影响。虽然目前全球大多数疟疾病例集中在非洲,但在本世纪初疟疾防治项目取得重大成功之前,亚洲曾有更多的疟疾病例,而现在亚洲存在着以多重耐药恶性疟原虫中心为形式的全球威胁,这种威胁正逐渐蔓延到热带地区。后者直接反映了近几十年来经济变化的沧桑变迁,尤其是人口为了商业、贸易和个人财富而流动,或者陷入武装冲突的不幸遭遇。从20世纪50年代到90年代,斯里兰卡经历了疟疾近乎“根除”后又复发的过程,印度经历了疟疾得到控制后又复发的过程,战争和战后动荡对柬埔寨疟疾耐药性产生了影响,缅甸在长期政治动荡期间严重和脑型疟疾有所增加,除了泰国森林覆盖的边境地区外,该国其他地区疟疾基本消失,而在这些边境地区疟疾目前仍然难以控制,中国中部许多省份间日疟基本消除。在根除和控制这两种替代策略的辩论中,正反两方面的经验都有可供借鉴之处。多年来,中国一直高举“基本消除”的目标,这实际上就是另一种形式的根除,在一定程度上无视了世卫组织的指令。中国的经验清楚地表明,有了社区组织、对病例检测、管理和重点消除的详尽关注,再加上社会各层面的政治意愿,就有可能在一个幅员辽阔的国家的大片地区消除疟疾,并实施必要的监测,以在这些地区维持接近根除的状态。但中国在热带南部的国际边境地区并未取得成功,那里不受限制的人口流动给防治计划带来了困扰。泰国、马来西亚以及在一定程度上越南也通过强有力的垂直项目在稻田平原地区基本消除了疟疾,但在森林覆盖的边境地区仍未达标。经济是国家兴衰历史以及构成国家的人民的疾病历史的核心。当前对自由市场经济作为国家财富增长主要驱动力的热衷,严重限制了社区在疟疾管理中的必要参与。疟疾控制或消除任务需要与各国政府关注的基本宏观经济进程明确相关,而不应被孤立在卫生部门。从历史上看,疟疾对各国的生产力产生了严重、可衡量的负面影响。经济模式需要在政治上进行完善,并与技术和人口战略相结合。中国疟疾历史的最近几十年提供了一些在这种背景下可能相关的经验教训。