top of page

Maria Van Kerkhove: The last two weeks have been intense, on top of an incredibly intense couple of years, on top of an incredibly intense couple of years before that. So with the emergence of Omicron, this new variant of concern, this was on top of a really serious situation that we're in currently in the pandemic. I know many people around the world think this pandemic is over, but unfortunately it's far from over.

And in fact, what I wanted to talk with you about in person was about the fact that never again should we be in a situation where the world is overtaken and controlled by an invisible virus. Never again should we be in a situation where a virus takes so many lives. And never again should we be in a situation where a virus steals so many futures. But unfortunately, we will. And I wanted to talk with you a little bit about why that may be, but also talk about how we can get out of this and how we need to be better prepared.

And I am incredibly hopeful that number one, we’ll get out of this pandemic, because we will. We will persevere, we will get out of this pandemic. But what we have to do is work so hard to make sure that we’re better prepared for the next one, because unfortunately there will be. And every single one of us, every single one of you, in the role that you have, wherever you are, have a role to play in making sure that we are better prepared and that we handle the next one better.

Whitney Pennington Rodgers: Thank you for that, Maria. I know you have some great solutions that you can offer for how we can actually become better prepared. And before we dive into that, I know a lot of us are curious to know what you know and what you can share with us about Omicron. What do we know right now about about this variant?

MVK: So it's a variant of concern. It's a new variant, it's highly divergent from the other variants that are circulating, other viruses that are circulating. And it is quite different from the other ones that we know about. It has a large number of mutations. And the concern that we have is the number of mutations that are there, some of the ones that are present in this variant, Omicron, are present in some of the other ones: Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta. And we know that they have some detrimental properties. For example, some of these mutations can confer increased transmissibility. Some of them can confer potential immune escape, which means our vaccines may not work as well.

Now, right now, as I speak to you today, the evidence is emerging. There are scientists around the world who are generating evidence, who are sharing it with us in real time, and with the world, so that we know more about it. We understand that this variant has some properties of increased transmissibility, but we don't know exactly how much, and we don't know if it will outcompete Delta. So you have to remember that this is all in the context of Delta, another variant of concern that is raging worldwide and killing people worldwide. We know a little bit about severity, but not enough to be able to give you the profile of whether or not there is more -- those who are infected with Omicron have more severe disease or less. So that data is unfolding, and we hope to have more of that in the next week or so. But people infected with Omicron can have mild disease, and they can have severe disease and die. We just don't know enough yet because it takes time for people to be infected, develop disease and actually progress to severe disease, if they in fact will progress to

severe disease.

And the big question is, will the vaccines work? And what we understand from some of the mutations within Omicron, they do confer some potential immune escape, or what we call immune escape, which means the vaccines may not be as effective. But the vaccines that we have right now are incredibly effective at preventing severe disease and death. Incredibly effective. It's astounding that so many vaccines are actually available. And what we need are people all over the world to get vaccinated. But most importantly, we need people who are at risk in every single country to get vaccinated, rather than giving more and more and more vaccines to people who are already protected.

This is a global problem, and we need a global solution. We cannot protect one country. We cannot protect one population while other people suffer. So that's something WHO is working very hard on in terms of ensuring vaccine equity and working with partners all over the world on this.

WPR: And I don't know if you can hear, but you got a lot of applause on that last statement.

You know, I think it's interesting that the variant, at least for me, it's definitely caught me off guard, every time there is a new variant, you know, Omicron, Delta, Alpha, all the ones you've mentioned. And I’m curious if you think that this is something we can expect for the future. Are we living in a world where this is just going to be continuous?

MVK: We are. The emergence of Omicron is completely expected. You know, the virus is evolving. This is what viruses do. And the more the virus circulates, the more opportunities it has to change. Delta is also evolving. We're tracking at least 30 sublineages right now of Delta, one of which has increased transmissibility properties. The question is not just their emergence but if they actually take off. So there's a lot of concern of Omicron, and there should be, because of the sheer number of mutations that we've seen. But whether or not this variant outcompetes Delta, we don't

know yet.

But we just want to put this into context of what's happening worldwide. I mean, the big story a week ago was what was happening in Europe. You know, where almost 70 percent of the cases worldwide were in Europe, where, you know, people are dying where they have access to vaccine. So the big question is: Why is that? Why are we not actually getting the vaccines to those who are most at risk? At the same time, why are we not actually driving transmission down where we can? And I don't mean lockdown. This idea that we have to either be completely open or completely closed is frankly rubbish. We have masks, we have distancing, we have efforts to improve ventilation where we live, where we work, where we study. We know we can avoid crowds. Why aren't we doing that right now, not forever? We're not going to be in this pandemic forever. It will end. That is something that I can say for certain, that this pandemic will end. The question is when. And the question is: Are we all going to actually come together? Are leaders actually going to come together to bring us closer to the end or push us further from that end point?

WPR: I think that that's an interesting question to think about when we think about your role with the World Health Organization. And even just taking a step back to the beginning of the pandemic, I'd be so interested to hear what your experience has been over these past two years and what your involvement has been in thinking about preparedness for COVID-19.

MVK: Well, it's been intense. I mean, part of me feels like this has been happening for years. Well, it has been two years, we're entering the third year. Part of me, you know, it's an instant. This was something, you know, that was not necessarily a matter of if, but when. But I think the issue that I struggle with the most is that it didn't need to be this bad. There will always be emerging pathogens. There will always be the threat of a new virus that will infect us. And in a susceptible world, people will get infected. To be able to prevent all pandemics, I don't actually think is possible, but we can be in a better situation where we mitigate the chance of it spilling over from an animal to a human and then spreading. And, you know, the last two years have been of focus. They’ve been ... concerned. I have to say, I would love to just thank all of my colleagues here at WHO. I mean, I work with incredible people all over the world, not just here in HQ, but here in Geneva, in our six regional offices, in our 152 country offices. People who are on the ground every single day, they have a much harder job than I do. But we all have a role to play, and I have felt overwhelmed at times. I’ve felt distraught at times. But I get up every single day, and I’m inspired by the people I work with. And I feel that I have a platform, and I feel privileged to be part of this. When this began, my husband said to me -- well, we have two little boys, 11 and almost three -- and he said to me, in the beginning of this, he's like, "I got this, I got the boys, I got the house. You go, deal with that." And to have that level of support in my family, to be able to do this job, is special, because none of this is normal. The hours that we work -- and I'm not complaining, but I have support in my family, and I know my family will watch this and send me wonderful text messages, but it inspires me. And I think all of us, I think what you guys were saying before about helping each other and inspiring each other, I think we need to do a hell of a lot more of, because the negative out there is awful. And something as a scientist I've never experienced before or am completely unprepared to deal with is the negative. What I am personally accused of, what WHO as an organization is accused of, it's hard for me to wrap my head around because my entire job is to help people and to save people's lives. The entire job of the director-general is to keep people safe. That's all we're here for. There is no other agenda.

So it’s been tough, and I’m struggling, but I think that's normal. I think if I weren't struggling, you may wonder what's wrong with me, but it's hard.

WPR: Well, thank you for all that you're doing and have been doing. And, you know, I think part of what, to this point of the things you've been struggling with and the things that you're hearing from people is that I think from a public perspective, there is this sense of confusion about the information we're receiving and where we're receiving it from. And you know, how possible do you think it is for us to have some sort of coordinated response or coordinated source of information from people that we look to, organizations that we look to as authorities on this

subject?

MVK: It's entirely possible. It's entirely possible. There is a global plan for COVID-19. In this world that we live in, where there are so many challenges that all of us face, COVID-19 has solutions. We, as WHO, issued a plan four days after we declared this as a public health emergency of international concern. Before we reached the state of a pandemic, which is important, because you want to raise the alarm before you're actually in a pandemic. The plan exists in that sense. What I think many countries didn't take into account was how important leadership is. And in particular, political leadership. What we saw in many countries in the beginning of this pandemic is those countries that had experience with SARS, with MERS, with avian influenza, with Ebola, they knew the threat firsthand. They didn't need all of the data in front of them to understand what a risk this posed. And they acted aggressively. And those countries that had that experience really tackled this with the aggression that was necessary. Far too many countries thought, "Not a problem for us. It's a problem over there. We've got a health system that's very strong. We can handle it." But when you have an emerging new virus where the entire world is susceptible, you know very little about it -- it can spread very easily between people, it can cause everything from asymptomatic to severe disease and death and can overwhelm your systems so quickly -- that experience with those past epidemics really was lifesaving. And what was key in those countries is that from the experience that they had with those past epidemics, they took steps following the ends of those outbreaks to make change. They invested in surveillance. They invested in a workforce with their clinicians and their nurses and their community health workers. They invested in testing and contact tracers. And they invested in changing of some laws, some public health laws, that allowed the governments to act where necessary while keeping in mind the rights of people. And so what we've seen in so many countries, mainly in the East, mainly in Asia, in the Pacific, across Africa, they may not have had the perfect systems in place. Quite frankly, nobody does, but they used the capacities that they had strategically and in such a smart way, and they fared much, much better in the beginning of this pandemic.

And I think all of us need to ask what could have been. I think that's the part that I struggle with the most, is like: What could have been? I don't let it hold me back because otherwise it would be very hard to get out of bed. But I think what can I do today with the platform that I have today? What can I do with the teams that I have, with the role that I have, to make today a hell of a lot better than it was yesterday? And that's why I feel so privileged in the job that I have.

WPR: Well, that's great --

I don't know if you can hear this applause, Maria, but you're getting a lot of applause through this conversation. People are really appreciating what you're sharing with us. I think that's a good place for us to dive into next. And you alluded to this at the very top of the conversation, that you have some ideas for how we can change the trajectory of this, how we can do better as individuals, as organizations, as governments. And I'd love to hear what you think we could actually do to move forward and chart a

better path.

MVK: Well, there’s so many, so many things we can do, and I know we’re not going to talk for the next three hours. But a lot of this is about the investment that we make now and the changes that we make right now, while we're going through this traumatic experience. In the example that I just gave with countries that did better, they made changes following that trauma and in the middle of that trauma. And in the middle of this pandemic around the world, what we need are governments to make change and make those investments. Pandemic preparedness is a constant. It doesn't start and stop. And unfortunately, we are currently living through cycles of panic and neglect in the middle of the worst pandemic we've had in a century. And this boggles my mind because if we don't use this opportunity to make those changes in building that infrastructure, that public health infrastructure in primary health care, making sure that people have access to tools, to life-saving tools like diagnostics, therapeutics and vaccines, when is the right time to actually do that? So we've been working very hard through our COVAX and partners to ensure vaccine equity around the world. But governments also need to make changes right now. Because when this is over, and again, it will end, we're going to move on to the next crisis because there's plenty on deck.

The other thing that is really quite exciting to me and we don't know all about this yet, is this pandemic treaty. So this week, in WHO and around the world, governments, ministries from all of our member states met at a special session of the World Health Assembly. And this is really, really unique because it's not common for WHO to bring member states together for one topic. And what they decided to do was to come together to develop this pandemic treaty, this agreement, this protocol. I don't know what it will eventually be called, but to come together to make a promise and to make a contract to do better on pandemic preparedness. And this is really critical because it goes beyond words. It goes into a binding agreement that all countries have to follow so that we are actually better prepared, not just say we will, because that's easy. What we need to do is actually take those concrete steps. So this week was a really important week. All of us are really quite excited about this, and we’re so proud of our director-general for bringing everybody together on this. But this has to come -- It will take some time as the treaty is developed, and the contents of the treaty need to be discussed and negotiated, and this will take some time. But it was a really, really important

step.

And for us, what we need to see is you think of the last time some of these big agreements were made. Think about the last World War. Think about after World War II, when all of the countries came together, and instead of having isolationism, they came together for multilateralism. And you think about the situation of "never again," like, never again being in this situation. This is actually an opportunity to take that one step forward. So this is a good step. It will take some time to actually develop, but all of us are really quite excited that that step was taken this week.

WPR: I think that to your last point, there is this question of: How do you hold people accountable? You know, there have been other agreements, and it seems like the intentions are there to make things better. But how do you ensure that this

is more than just, you know, words on

paper?

MVK: Well, this is a step getting us closer to that. I mean, I think all of us in this whole pandemic about accountability, it's really critical. I mean, think about it in your own daily life, about what you are accountable for and what you are responsible for. This is TEDWomen, I mean, you've got amazing people there in the audience who have jobs and careers and passions and families. We’re accountable for I don’t know how many things in our daily lives. But we know that, we know that we are responsible things, and we are accountable to our families and to our jobs and to our staff. We need governments accountable as well. We need all governments to be in a position where they take steps to be better prepared. We need governments in better positions where they can share information more regularly with us and with the world, because this is how decisions are made. And we need the mechanisms in place to be able to do so. We need sharing of samples. We need sharing of materials. We need people to be able to better collaborate. Scientific world collaborates. We don't need a treaty for that. We just do that because no matter who’s in office, no matter what political cycle is there, we work together, but we

need that from a political level as well and through ministries of health.

So this is quite exciting for us to hold more governments accountable. And all of us as citizens have to hold our own leaders accountable. And wherever we live, whatever mechanism we have by that, we should. And we should hold our governments accountable for vaccine equity. So we should be screaming from the rooftops. I cannot believe that more people are not screaming from the rooftops about vaccine inequity from this pandemic. We have safe and effective vaccines that were developed in record time based on a lot of existing collaboration, based on years of work. But these are safe and effective against the Delta variant, which is dominant worldwide. Why aren't those in every single country and in the arms of people who are most at risk? People are dying unnecessarily. Where is the accountability for that?

So I think all of us have a role to play, whether or not it’s you asking your government to take some steps, or whether or not it's you making sure you keep yourself safe. So if you think it's over, even where you live, because I know many people do, you still have a

responsibility to make sure you keep yourself safe and keep your family safe.

Please, if you hear anything from me today, please do that. Please remain vigilant. Because everything you do every day will either get us closer to

ending this pandemic -- or it will prolong it. So please play your part.

WPR: Thank you so much for sharing all of this with us, and we’re sorry we missed you in person but are so appreciative that you took the time out of what we know is an extremely busy schedule to share this with us and be here with us virtually. And we can't wait to see you hopefully at the next

TEDWomen sometime in person.

Thank you, Maria.

MVK: Thank you so much for having me.

WPR: Thank you for your work.

瑪莉亞.梵・克爾霍夫:疫情在過去兩個禮拜、比之前幾年還要更加嚴峻。

因為Omicron這種新變異株的出現,現在疫情真的處於很嚴重的狀態。

 我知道世界上很多人都覺得疫情已經結束了,但不幸的是,還遠遠看不到疫情的終點。

事實上,我想跟你們說的是:我們不應該再次讓世界被看不見的病毒所掌握或控制; 我們不應該再次讓病毒帶走這麼多生命;我們不應該再次陷入讓病毒奪走我們的未來。

但遺憾的是,這種情況將再次發生。

我想稍微說明為什麼這種情況可能發生,也說明我們該如何解決並做更好的準備。

首先我很有信心的是,我們會擺脫疫情。我們會堅持下去並擺脫疫情。

但我們要盡力確保我們已經準備好面對下一階段的狀況,因為下一階段一定會到來。而每一個人,不論角色為何、身在何處,都已經準備好去面對下一階段的事情。

惠特尼・彭寧頓・羅傑斯:謝謝你的介紹,瑪莉亞。我相信你能提供我們應該如何做好更周全的準備的方法。但在我們仔細討論之前,很多觀眾都很好奇你對Omicron的瞭解有多深,還有你能和我們分享什麼有關Omicron的資訊。

我們現在對這種變異株有多少了解呢?

瑪莉亞:這種高關注變異株是新的變異株。和其他流通的變異株還有病毒不同。

它和其他我們所認識的變異株都不太一樣。Omicron有很多的變種。我們擔心這些在這些現有的變種中,已經再次出現一些新的變化了。

在目前我們知道的變異株Alpha、Beta、Gamma、Delta,Omicron是其中的一種。

如同我們知道的,他們都有有害的,例如有些變種會增加傳染力、有些變種可以降低潛在的免疫系統,導致疫苗無法有效發揮作用。

現在,就在我和你們說話的同時,上述狀況都在增加中,世上所有正在蒐集證據的科學家都共同分享即時的成果。所以我們會越來越了解Omicron。

我們現在知道這種變異株有增加傳染性的特性,但還不確定增加的程度,也不知道它的傳染性會不會比Delta還強。

所以要記得Omicron和Delta的差別。

Delta,另一種高關注變異株在全球肆虐並帶走人們的性命,對於它的嚴重性我們已經有了一些了解,但還不清楚是否有更多資訊 ——  與Delta相比,Omicron感染者的症狀比較嚴重還是比較輕微。

隨著更多研究的發現,我們希望下禮拜左右能有更多了解。

感染Omicron可能只有輕微的症狀,也可能有嚴重到致命的症狀。

目前我們了解的還不夠多,因為如果它會演變為重症的話,人從被感染、出現症狀到演變為重症需要花一段時間。

現在最大的問題是,疫苗是否能發揮功效? 我們從Omicron 的一些突變中了解到,它們確實會在一些潛在免疫系統無法對傳染因子做出反應時,發生抗原逃逸,或者我們稱之為免疫逃逸,這意味著疫苗可能沒有那麼有效。但我們現在的疫苗在避免重症或死亡的情況下極有效。讓人驚訝的是,實際上還有許多疫苗可以用,而我們需要全世界的人都接種疫苗。但最重要的是,我們需要讓那些處於高度風險地區的人們注射疫苗,而不是給那些已經受到保護的人們接種更多疫苗。

這是全球問題,而我們需要符合全球的解決辦法。我們不能只保護一個地方。我們也不能為了保護一部分的人而讓其他人受苦。所以這是世界衛生組織 (WHO) 在確認疫苗的平等以及與其他全球合作夥伴等方面非常努力的事情。

惠特尼: 我不知道你是否有注意到,你在上一段的陳述中得到許多掌聲。

 

你知道很有趣的是,至少對我來說,每一次出現新的變種病毒時,你知道的,Omicron、Delta 、Alpha,所有你提過的都讓我措手不及。我很好奇你對未來的猜想,你認為我們的生活會以現況持續下去嗎?

瑪莉亞: 是的。Omicron的出現是完全可以預期的,病毒就是會持續進化。而病毒傳播得越多,變種的機會就越大。Delta也在進化中。我們正在追蹤至少30種Delta分支,其中一種分支增加了多種新的傳染途徑。問題不僅在於病毒分支的出現,還在於它們是否真的擴散開來。因此,Omicron引起了很多關注,而且應該存在,因為我們已經看到了大量的突變。但我們還不知道這種變體是否能勝過Delta。

假設在全世界被各種病毒肆虐下,歐洲在一個禮拜前又發生了一件大事。你知道的,全世界近70%的病例發生在歐洲地區,儘管歐洲人能獲得充足疫苗,仍無法避免死亡。總而言之,問題是: 為甚麼會發生這種事? 為甚麼我們不直接把疫苗給那些處在高風險地區的人們? 在分配疫苗的同時,為甚麼我們不去重視能降低傳染率的措施? 我的意思不是封城。 不管是全面開放或是封閉的想法事實上都很愚蠢。我們有口罩、社交安全距離,我們致力於讓我們住、工作或是讀書的地方保持通風。我們也知道要避開人群。為甚麼我們不現在就做?我們不會永遠處在這個疫情衝擊中。這會結束的。我可以肯定地說,這波疫情將會結束。問題是甚麼時候? 我們真的會團結到最後嗎?各國領導者到底會聚在一起讓我們更接近終點,還是讓我們離終點更遠?

惠特尼: 我想在世界衛生組織中你扮演甚麼樣的角色會是一個蠻有趣的問題。就算現在回到疫情剛開始的時候,我還是對你在過去兩年的經驗以及對於新冠肺炎的準備非常有興趣。

​瑪莉亞:是的,這場疫情來的猛烈。對我來說,感覺這場疫情已經發生了很多年。的確,兩年已經過去了,我們正邁入第三年。這場疫情就發生在一瞬間,且這不一定僅是是否會發生的問題,而是何時會發生的問題。但我最掙扎的是,這場疫情不該造成如此悽慘的後果。世界上總有新的病原體出現。我們終將面臨被新病毒感染的風險。在這個易互相影響的世界中,人們都會被病毒感染。我其實不認為人們能夠預防所有流行傳染病,但我們能夠減少病毒從動物傳播到人類後大量散播的機會,來達到更好的處境。而且,前兩年的疫情一直是焦點,大眾們一直都⋯很擔心。我必須說我只想感謝我在世界衛生組織的所有同事。我與世界各地極為優秀的人們一起工作,不僅是在總部、日內瓦、全球六個區域性辦事處、或遍及一百五十二個國家的辦事處,我都有幸與每一位同事共事。那些無時無刻都在崗位上堅守本分的人所付出的,比我所做的要更加辛苦,但我們都有各自應該做的事情。雖然我有時會感到不知所措,有時會感到心煩意亂,但我每天都會受到與我共事的人啟發、鼓勵,並感到很榮幸能與他們站在同一陣線。疫情剛開始的時候,我丈夫對我說——對了,我們育有兩個小男孩,一個十一歲,另一個就快三歲了——那時候,他對我說:「我來處理這個、照顧孩子們、打理房子,你去處理工作就好。」在家庭中擁有這種程度的支持,讓我能夠做這份工作,是非常特別的,因為一切是如此的不正常,像是我們的工時——我並不是在抱怨。我有家人的支持,我也知道我的家人會收看這場訪談並發訊息鼓勵、稱讚我,而他們的支持確實激勵了我。我認為除了我們之前所提到的多幫助別人、多激勵別人,我們需要做更多的事,因為疫情所造成的負面影響甚鉅。作為一名科學家,這些我所沒經歷過的,或完全沒有準備好應對的情況帶來了這種負面影響。我個人所受到的指控,及世衛組織所受到的指控,都讓我難以理解。因為我的工作旨在幫助、拯救人們的生命。我身為技術負責人,唯一的目的就是確保人們的生命安全。這就是為何我們在世衛組織工作,這就是我們唯一的使命。

 

 

 

 

 

 

所以處理疫情的過程非常艱難,而我也正在掙扎。但我覺得這很正常,我想如果我不掙扎,你們可能會認為我哪裡出了問題,總而言之,過程非常難熬。

 

惠特尼:是的,謝謝你曾經做過的和正在做的一切。還有,目前你所一直努力的事情和從人們那裡聽到的事情相比,從大眾觀點來看,我覺得似乎因接收到的資訊不同、資訊的來源不同而產生混亂。你是否覺得大眾有可能透過他們所期望,甚至足以視為權威的人、組織來獲取協調一致的回應及資訊來源?

瑪莉亞:這種情況很有可能發生,非常有可能。現在有一個關於Covid-19 的全球計畫。在這個充滿挑戰的世界裡,Covid-19是有方法解決的。我們,世界衛生組織(WHO)在宣布這成為國際健康緊急事件四天後提出了一個計畫。在達到疫情穩定前,重要的是,我們必須有處在疫情中的危機意識。

這個計畫需要人們有意識去實行。我覺得很多國家都沒有考慮到有人應該出來領導的重要性,特別是政治人物的領導。在疫情初期,很多經歷過嚴重急性呼吸系統綜合症(SARS)、中東呼吸綜合症(MERS)、禽流感或是伊波拉病毒的國家都知道這次疫情的嚴重性。

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

這些經歷過不同疫情的國家不需要相關資料才能了解這次疫情有多嚴重。他們很積極地去應對。在必要的積極處理下,這些有經驗的國家把疫情控制得很好。很多國家想著:「我們不會有問題的,有問題的是其他國家。我們有完善的健保系統,控制住疫情不會是難事。」但在易受到其他國家影響的世界中,你不太會知道新的病毒的出現——它很容易就會在人群中傳遞,從無症狀感染到重病甚至死亡的情況都是可能的,而這會很快的散播在日常生活的每一個角落——所以有過去疫情的經驗參考可能可以拯救更多生命。

而對於有過經驗的國家的關鍵優勢是,他們可以改良之前因應疫情的模式。他們投資過監管疫情的儀器設備和臨床醫師、護理師、社區健康人員等勞動力,也投資過各式檢測和接觸追蹤器具。

他們也有修法的經驗,一些有關公共健康法律的修正可以讓政府在實施必要措施時同時確保人民權利的保障。 這些沒有很完整的區域系統的國家,主要位於東半球,從亞洲、太平洋地區到非洲的國家。老實說,很難有完美的系統,但他們用了一個戰略性且很聰明的方法使系統更加完善,更值回票價,在疫情前期也更好控制住。

 

 

我也相信我們必須問自己可能會發生什麼事,這是我最糾結的問題,就像:接下來還會發生什麼事情?我不會讓這成為阻礙我前進的原因,不然我就會很難有動力從床上爬起來了。我思考的是,我現在能用什麼現有平台做一些有用的事情?如果我有能力的話,我能以現在的角色和團隊一起做些什麼?能做什麼讓今天比昨天更進步一點?這也是為什麼這個工作讓我得到很大的成就感的原因。

惠特尼:哇,這是很棒的——​(掌聲)

我不確定妳聽不聽得到,瑪莉亞,但你真的在對談中得到很多掌聲。觀眾都很欣賞你和我們分享的想法。我想這是一個很值得我們接下來再深入討論的想法。在訪談開頭的時候你吊了我們的胃口,有關於我們該如何做好準備的方法,不論是個人、組織或是政府都能做的準備。我很想聽聽你覺得我們是否真的能做的比現在更多、更好。

 

 

 

 

 

瑪莉亞: 那麼,我知道有很多很多事情是我們可以做的,而我也知道這不會成為我們接下來三個小時所要談的東西。但在我們即將深入探討這些投資以及我們所做的改變的同時,這些是令人痛苦難忘的。在我舉的例子中,這些國家比其他地方做得更好,他們在接下來發生的事以及受到創傷的過程中做出改變。在疫情衝擊席捲全球的過程中,我們所需要的是政府針對問題做出改進以及進行上述所提及過的投資。為疫情衝擊所做的準備是不間斷的,它沒有所謂的開始或是結束。不幸的是,我們這個世代生活在痛苦的循環中,習慣了傳染病的流行。事情也令我感到困惑,因為如果我們不把握機會去增進公共醫療主要的基礎建設,並確保人們都有機會施打疫苗以及擁有足夠的醫療器材接受醫師的診斷、治療,那甚麼時候才是正確去做的時機點? 因此我們很努力地與我們的夥伴執行嚴重特殊傳染性肺炎疫苗實施計劃(COVAX),確保全球疫苗施打的公平性。但同時政府也需要跟著跟進。因為當這個危機過了,新的又會到來,最後都會走向結局,接著我們又會迎來一堆新挑戰。

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

另一件我很期待但對此還不太了解的事情是COVID-19的治療方式。世界衛生組織以及世界各地的政府、首相在這周將有一場世界衛生大會的特殊會議。這場會議真的非常特別,因為世界衛生組織的會員們鮮少為了同一個議題聚在一起。他們決定共同研究治療方式並達成共識簽訂公約。雖然我不知道最後會發展成甚麼樣子,不過共同宣誓並簽訂契約對於疫情的準備是件好事。這個重要程度無法以言語形容。各個國家都得遵守這個具有約束力的協議,這樣對於疫情的準備也會有幫助。這不是說說而已,因為用講的大家都會。事實上我們需要些具體的步驟方法。因此,這禮拜是至關重要的。在場的我們對於這件事都蠻興奮的,同時也對總幹事把我們聚集在此感到非常自豪。這一天將會到來—疫苗的研發、用藥成分的研議都會花上一段時間,但這都是不可或缺的。

對於我們來說,我們需要檢視的是之前類似的重要協議。想想上一次世界大戰,在二戰後,所有國家聚集在一起追求的是多邊主義而不是孤立主義。再想想二戰,這種不可能再次發生的情況。這是個很好促使大家向前邁進一步的機會。過程中也許會花上一點時間,但對於我們來說這周的會議卻是值得興奮期待的一步。

惠特尼:對於您最後一點所提到的,想請教您一個問題: 您如何使人們都遵守條約? 世上也有許多協議,旨在讓世界變得更好。但您如何確保這些協議不會只是紙上談兵呢?

瑪莉亞:嗯,我認為達成這項目標的重要一步,是我們每個人在疫情大流行中抱有的責任感,這非常關鍵。想想你們的日常生活、你們的責任是什麼,這裡是TEDWomen,這裡的優秀聽眾們都有各自的工作、生涯、愛好、家庭。我們在生活中要對數不清的事情負責任。但我們知道,我們是富有負責感的的人,我們必須要對我們的家庭、工作、員工負責。同樣的,我們也需要負責任的政府。我們需要政府採取措施來做更好的準備,我們需要政府能夠更規律的與民眾、世界共享資訊,因為這是我們制定策略的方式,而我們需要適切的機制才能做到這點。我們需要共享樣本、材料,我們需要人們能有更好的協作機會。我們不須為這些科學上的合作制定條約。我們所做的事情不會因為是誰任職或政治力量替換而改變,我們克守本分,但還是需要透過政治層面以及各地的衛生機關來實現這一點。
 

我們非常振奮能讓更多政府承擔協議的責任。身為公民的一份子,我們必須讓領導人承擔責任。無論我們身居何處、無論我們有什麼機制,這都是我們必須做的事情。呼籲政府致力於公平分配疫苗勢在必行,所以我們應公開討論疫苗公平分配問題。我無法想像疫情肆虐卻沒有人為疫苗不公的問題挺身而出。基於大量的現有合作、多年的工作,我們在紀錄最短時間內研發成功並擁有安全有效的疫苗。但這些針對肆虐全球的Delta病毒既安全、又有效的疫苗,為什麼沒有被分配到每個國家,來幫助高風險族群?人們正在承受不必要的死亡風險,這些責任該歸咎於何處?
 

所以,我們每個人都能發揮影響力,無論是呼籲政府採取措施,還是自己確保身體健康都行。如果你認為疫情已經結束,甚至認為你所居的區域疫情已經結束,因為我知道很多人都這麼想,你們還是有責任確保自己及家人的健康安全。
 

拜託,如果今天你是這場訪談的聽眾之一,請照我說的做,也請保持警惕,因為你們每天所做的,不是讓我們更靠近疫情的終點,就是更加重疫情。所以,我希望每一個人都能出一份力。
 

惠特尼:非常謝謝您所分享的一切。雖然我們很遺憾無法親自與您見面,但很謝謝您在極為忙碌的行程中抽空在線上與我們分享這些。我們迫不及待在下次的TEDWomen中親自見到您。

謝謝您,瑪莉亞。

 

瑪莉亞:謝謝您邀請我。

 

惠特尼:謝謝您的訪談。

bottom of page