Skip Navigation
Explore our COVID-19 Resources and Updates
CHS blue logo square
 
 
Home > Our Work > All Publications > 2020

Publications

Our publications keep professionals working across the public, private, and academic sectors informed on the most important developments and issues in health security and biosecurity.

Find an article or report by keywords:

 
 
Find an article or report or see all by area, author, or year:

Title:

Vector control in Zika-affected communities: Local views on community engagement and public health ethics during outbreaks

Authors:
Monica Schoch-Spana; Crystal Watson; Sanjana Ravi; Diane Meyer; Laura E. Pechta; Dale A. Rose; Keri M. Lubell; Michelle N. Podgornik; Tara KirkSell
Date posted:
March 04, 2020
Publication type:
Article
Publication:

Preventive Medicine Reports

DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmedr.2020.101059
See also:
Introduction:

Aerial spraying of products to kill larvae or adult mosquitoes is a public health measure used to control vector-borne diseases. In some outbreaks, the intervention has evoked controversy and community resistance. This study evaluated how local opinion leaders in US localities affected by Zika think about community engagement in public health policies for outbreak response. In December 2017 through March 2018, 4 focus groups were convened in Houston, TX, New Orleans, LA, Miami, FL, and Brooklyn, NY. They discussed a hypothetical scenario that featured vector control by aerial spraying. Participants (N = 20) more readily accepted this vector control method under 4 conditions: They were informed of alternatives, benefits, and risks for human health and the environment. Public health claims were backed by objective evidence and an authority figure genuinely working in the community’s interests. They received timely notice about how to mitigate toxin exposure. And, aerial spraying helped to protect vulnerable individuals. The community engagement requirements of the local opinion leaders resonate with core principles of recent public health ethics frameworks: namely, personal autonomy, transparency, reasonableness, and solidarity. Participants foresaw problems with community consent in an era of growing social media use and mistrust in governmental and scientific authority. They also debated whether health authorities should use moral-based arguments, in addition to science-based ones, to communicate aerial spraying’s risks and benefits.

 

 

Our Mission

To protect people’s health from epidemics and disasters and ensure that communities are resilient to major challenges.