Could Dengue Spread in a Warming World?

Guest Essay by Kip Hansen

featured_image_dengueA new paper in nature microbiology makes the following statement:

Dengue is a mosquito-borne viral infection that has spread throughout the tropical world over the past 60 years and now affects over half the world’s population. The geographical range of dengue is expected to further expand due to ongoing global phenomena including climate change and urbanization.”

 The paper, “The current and future global distribution and population at risk of dengue” [Messina2019 ] is open source and available as a .pdf here.  As required by the Editorial Narrative of the NY Times regarding all things climatic, our ever-hard-working NY Times journalist, Kendra Pierre-Louis, was tasked with spreading the gloom.

If you don’t know what Dengue Fever is you obviously have not traveled to the Caribbean or South or Central America recently, where dengue is endemic and epidemic.

“Dengue fever is a mosquito-borne tropical disease caused by the dengue virus. Symptoms typically begin three to fourteen days after infection. This may include a high fever, headache, vomiting, muscle and joint pains, and a characteristic skin rash.  Recovery generally takes two to seven days. In a small proportion of cases, the disease develops into severe dengue, also known as dengue hemorrhagic fever, resulting in bleeding, low levels of blood platelets and blood plasma leakage, or into dengue shock syndrome, where dangerously low blood pressure occurs.” —  Wiki

Like malaria, dengue is transmitted by mosquitoes, but the mosquitoes each individually need to obtain the virus by biting an infected human before they can pass dengue on to an uninfected human by biting them.   Thus, two things are necessary for the occurrence of dengue fever in a human population:  a widespread population of mosquitoes (typically  Aedes aegypti) and infected humans.  Note that Aedes mosquitoes can only fly about 100 meters in the wild, so suitable breeding sites have to be ubiquitous in the environment and many infected human hosts have to be present and live close together.  This is why dengue has such prevalence in the tropical third world.

Further, Aedes aegypti prefer to breed in very small bodies of water — such as the rain water collected in a discarded car tire or a tin can  and often in the rain barrels common in communities that do not have reliable municipal water systems.

In the Domincan Republic, where my wife and I recently worked for a humanitarian NGO, dengue is rampant — both endemic (said of a disease or condition that is regularly found among particular people or in a certain area) and epidemic (an instance of widespread occurrence of an infectious disease in a community at a particular time). (see maps below)   This just means that it is commonly found among the people there, and that, sometimes, some city or region will experience an outbreak that effects a significant percentage of the population.

Personal Experience:  While we were serving there, the largest city on the northern coast had a dengue epidemic which had been ongoing for a couple of months.  The regional health minister contacted us with a plea for help (we had worked with him on some local health clinic projects).  When we asked what they had done in the past for these outbreaks, he explained that the health department would go to the local “all-inclusive resort” (owned and operated by international corporations) and borrow their anti-mosquito spraying equipment.  In this case though, the epidemic was so wide-spread that the resort had its equipment in almost full-time use to ensure that none of their American or European guests contracted dengue.  We arranged for the organization that we worked for to purchase a powerful aerosol  sprayer that could be mounted in the back of a small pickup (that could easily pass through the narrow streets) and two backpack sprayers (think Ghost Busters) to go into the narrow alleyways between homes.  Spraying along with community efforts to remove all mosquito breeding sites (trash, tires, tin cans) and to cover water barrels with cloth tops stopped the epidemic within a week.  The availability of community-owned vector control equipment (sprayers) resulted in a long term improvement in dengue control in this city.    Dengue was and is still present there, due to the mobility of infected individuals and the mobility of Aedes aegypti due to transportation of goods and materials from around the country, resulting in their re-introduction to the city. But its incidence has been reduced below epidemic levels.

backpack_sprayersBackpack sprayers, which look oddly like those featured in Ghost Busters, are very effective in knocking down mosquito populations in crowded cities with their narrow alleyways between and behind houses.

Dengue needs lots of people crammed into small areas with plentiful breeding sites — small warm bodies of water.  This describes almost all the poorer sections of all Developing World (3rd World) countries in the tropical regions of the planet.

malaria_and_dengue-environm

This map shows malaria in the top half — we can see that malaria has been more or less confined to central Africa, with lower risk areas in the north of South America and throughout India and Southeast Asia.  Malaria has been more or less eliminated from North America and Europe – and has never been a real problem in dry, desert areas.  Dengue has a different, though similar, distribution,   although again Central Africa, India and SE Asia are potential hot spots as this map is of “suitable” environment.

This next map gives a bit  more informative view:

current_dengue

from Bhatt el al. 2013, in Nature “The global distribution and burden of dengue”.Click here for full sized image.

(Note:  the bottom global map in the image was distorted in the original.)

The three global views in this image are of different things and the colors do not represent the same ideas.  The top map shows “evidence consensus” (how sure are we that dengue exists in this nation or does not exist).  The second show how probably it is that dengue exists (0 to 1) in 5 km grids sections.  The bottom (distorted) map shows “number of infections” which depends on reliability of reporting.

Now that we have some idea of where dengue is found now, and WHY it is found there, let’s see what Messina et al. (2019) are projecting:

projected_dengue_2080

Now, let’s see what they are trying to show in this map. “Under a moderate warming scenario, 2.5 billion more people could be at risk for dengue fever by 2080.” The darker colors represent “higher dengue risk” than in 2015.   The authors claim to have “modeled”  the future of dengue as follows (serious readers can skip their description):

Dengue future modelling ensemble approach. Our final aim was to produce nine maps, a prediction for dengue suitability in the years 2020, 2050 and 2080 under three different emissions scenarios (RCPs). Each of these nine maps were composed of 100 ensemble predictions that randomly sampled (with replacement) the  following aspects of the analysis:

  1. The fitted dengue BRT [ensemble boosted regression tree] model (from a choice of 100 BRT models fitted to 2015 data).
  2. The predicted future distribution of Ae. aegypti (from a choice of 100 modelpredictions).
  3. The predicted future distribution of Ae. albopictus (from a choice of 100 model predictions).
  4. The predicted temperature suitability for dengue transmission (from a choiceof 17 GCMs).
  5. The predicted minimum monthly precipitation (from a choice of 17 GCMs)
  6. The predicted relative humidity (from a choice of 17 GCMs).
  7. The predicted maximum monthly precipitation (from a choice of 17 GCMs).

This approach sought to fully propagate the uncertainty in the climate, Aedes and dengue models through to the final prediction (see maps of uncertainty estimates in Supplementary Fig. 5). These 100 predictions were then summarized by mean and 95% credible intervals to give the final prediction for each year RCP combination.

This approach is so fraught with problems that I don’t know where to start.  But biological and historical plausibility is a good place to start.  Is the distribution of Ae. Aegypti mosquitoes, and thus dengue,  primarily temperature dependent?

The answer to that is NO and YES.  Ae. Aegypt cannot survive in deserts with extremely low humidity, they cannot survive where temperatures get too cold in winter, thus there is a lower temperature climatic limit, but according to the CDC, they already  can and do survive in much of the United States, as of 2017:

Ae_aegypti_in_US_2017

But when we look at the map of where dengue is found today, first map in this essay, we find it is not simply found where Ae. Aegypti are currently found, as the map of the United States shows.  Why not?  Because the existence of dengue in any particular place depends on much more than simply the (possible) existence of its primary insect vector.  Note that the same is true for malaria — the mosquitoes are here (in reduced numbers due to controls) but malaria is not.

Ae Aegypti  mosquitoes are the primary insect vector for both dengue and yellow fever — by looking at the historical records for yellow fever we have a proxy for dengue (which was confined to SE Asia before World War II).  Even in the depths of the Little Ice Age,  yellow fever was present and killing people as far north as Boston in the 1600s-1800s.  Should we expect a modern epidemic of dengue in Boston?  Of course not.

historical_yellow_fever_USA

Why? Because:

“….the mosquito vectors capable of transmitting malaria, yellow fever, and dengue have been present throughout much of the United States since the 1600s. What has clearly changed in the United States from the 18th and 19th centuries to the present is the availability of potable water, sanitation, and social lifestyles. These developments have essentially eliminated the need to store water in indoor containers and reduced contact with mosquitoes. After World War II, and particularly during the 1950s, a boom in the US economy increased the standard of living and aided the widespread use of television and air conditioning. In addition, the use of screened terraces and windows increased.”…”Thus, diseases such as malaria, yellow fe­ver, and dengue have all but disappeared.”

The Messina et al. projections of dengue risk in the American south and in the desert areas of southern Arizona and New Mexico are not biologically plausible when one takes into account current living standards and modern vector control efforts already extant in these areas.  Northern Australia is another area that is unlikely to be plagued by mosquito borne disease.

As for Africa, India, China, and SE Asia, as population increases and concentrates in cities, the poor will live in slums, rife for dengue, and incidence of dengue will rise proportionally.   But as  these developing countries advance and standards rise to include screened windows, air conditioning, and sanitation — there will be less risk of mosquito-spread diseases.  As health standards rise, there will be fewer infected individuals being bitten by mosquitoes thus less transmission of these diseases.

The Bottom Line:

 1.  Dengue is a mosquito borne disease that depends on poor sanitation and non-existent vector control to remain a problem in areas where it is endemic. It can be eliminated, just like yellow fever and malaria were eliminated in the United States.

 2.  Raising standards of living high enough to allow homes to be protected with screened windows, screen doors, municipal water (with pipes) and to have reliable functioning trash collection will eliminate much of the dengue load in a country.

 3.  Public health programs that inform the population of risks and instruct them to eliminate breeding spots for mosquitoes, along with serious vector control (spraying)  reduces risk.

 4.  Where dengue is endemic and epidemic, it is a real ongoing public health problem and should not be ignored or brushed off, even if this new paper exaggerates the increasing risks — in some countries it is just a fact of life taking children and the elderly to their graves.

 5.  It is unreasonable to maintain that as these developing countries advance that they will not achieve the two items (2 and 3) above….international aid programs can help in this regard and will do much more to protect the health of people  than any of the climate change initiatives being pushed by political activists.

6.  Recommended reading for those interested in this topic: Lessons from malaria control to help meet the rising challenge of dengue

# # # # #

Author’s Comment Policy:

 Please try to stay on topic — I know it is a real temptation to simply rail against models and modelling but that is not the real problem with this paper or its use as climate change propaganda by the NY Times.

I think that there has been a failure to review the results of their models against biological and sociological/political plausibility.

I’d like to read your views on the subject. Address your comment to “Kip…” if you are ‘speaking’ to me.

# # # # #

 

Get notified when a new post is published.
Subscribe today!
0 0 votes
Article Rating
126 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
David
June 11, 2019 2:11 pm

Doesnt the world need to warm first? Dr. Roy Spencer says only .32C last month. Down over .5C the last 2 years. Anyway .32 over 40 years does not sound frightening. Especially with the AMO turning to cold phase.

MACK
June 11, 2019 3:34 pm

This nonsense was anticipated and refuted by experts writing in the Medical Journal of Australia ten years ago:
https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2009/190/5/dengue-and-climate-change-australia-predictions-future-should-incorporate
As noted above, Paul Reiter has spelt it out clearly as well. The science is settled.

Editor
Reply to  MACK
June 11, 2019 5:21 pm

Mack ==> Thanks for the Australia link….a good one.

June 11, 2019 4:51 pm

I wouldn’t rail against modelling. Its putting forward an argument quantitatively rather than qualitatively with more hand waving than logic.

I would rail against the expertise label being awarded to those with the right politics rather than ability. The raise their deductive reasoning to divine by labelling it scientific modelling. The results are parroted by media as “evidence based research” and, even though its why quantitative arguments are better, they ignored the inductive reasoning ie the models predictions suck.

June 11, 2019 5:14 pm

Dengue is endemic where I live. “Breakbone fever”. Feels like every bone in your body is broken. We have a very competent public health agency who do their best when there is an outbreak, but some of the silliness persists. People get threatened with prosecution if water collects in flower pot saucers, old tyres and the like. The risk that gets ignored is telephone cable and similar service pits that are at natural ground level (so the agency doesn’t get blamed when someone trips over on the raised edge). I used to tip kerosene into the pit in front of my place. I now use cooking oil as its a bit cheaper. Seals the water surface enough to suffocate the larvae.
As far as I am concerned, Mosh’s “dengue suitability” refers to the suitability of the problem for reviving the global warming/climate change scam now that all the other excuses have failed.

RiHo08
June 11, 2019 5:24 pm

In the book: Little House on the Prairie, Laura Ingallis Wilder describes “summer fever”, a disorder more likely than not, malaria. Malaria was eliminated from most of the US by draining wetlands, hence the decreasing the density of breading mosquitoes. The introduction of DDT provided the coup de grace to mosquitos population density and a whole host of mosquito borne diseases disappeared only to re-appear when foreign visitors brought their diseases with them to our shores. However, the number of people with these diseases diminished so, along with the vector population diminishing, so too, the human population infected. There is something to be said for: “draining the swamp.”

The Northern spread of mosquitos vector borne infections will occur only with the restoration of water paradises needed by the mosquito breeding population. Keep draining the swamps. Spray DDT on the walls of living quarters. Stay safe and prosper.

June 11, 2019 5:32 pm

While its a very long time ago, I can recall as a child in India in the early
1930 tees being told that the mosquito needed to fly from one bit of
vegetation to another over a short distance.

The area as far as one could see around the military base was devoid of any
green vegetation. As a result Malaria was very rare, I never suffered from it.

Many tears later in Papua New Guinea 1956 to 1973 we never had any
problems with diseases, part due to anti Malaria pills, and even TB which
was a major problem seldom affected the Europeans.

I do recall what we used to call the smoke truck frequently driving through
the area spraying DDT. Again I never got any of the tropical
diseases.

Of course none of the above would please the Greens, but I wonder if they
would be happy to suffer these diseases instead.

MJE VK5ELL

RACookPE1978
Editor
Reply to  Michael
June 11, 2019 6:03 pm

Depends on the type of illness (yellow fever/yellow jack is spread by a different type of mosquito than malaria), and the breeding habits of the different mosquitos. Worked in the Canal Zone as well in 1908-1914, but the French earlier never applied anti-mosquito techniques at all. (Admittedly, the theory was very young when the French were digging.)

But Hey! “Established Science” held there was no such thing as a mosquito-malaria connection!)

DaveW
June 11, 2019 6:54 pm

Kip, Thanks for the informative article and paying more attention to the modelling aspect than I could bring myself to. At least one commentator seems too dense to understand that without Aedes aegypti and albopictus there would be no dengue and no Zika, etc. (albopictus is generally considered a poor vector, but I wouldn’t count on that being true forever if we keep feeding it infected people), but you explained it very clearly.

Completely missing from the paper and, as far as I’ve seen, in the comments is any historical perspective. Public health efforts were able to eliminate Aedes aegypti from most of the US and places like Brazil before WWII through aggressive sanitation primarily. After WWII with the synthetic pesticide boom Aedes aegypti was eliminated – not just controlled enough to stop transmission, but wiped out – in most of the Americas. Then the US dropped the ball and decided that wiping out the last populations in the US was not worth the hassle since we had no problems with the arbovirus-caused diseases. It seems likely that Latin America was recolonised by Aedes aegypti mostly from US populations. I don’t know anything about this University of Geneva course, but this short lecture gives a concise overview of Aedes aegypti control in the Amercas; https://www.coursera.org/lecture/zika/3-1-historical-perspectives-on-the-suppression-and-eradication-of-aedes-aegypti-fk5gm

steven mosher
Reply to  DaveW
June 12, 2019 12:45 am

Completely missing from the paper and, as far as I’ve seen, in the comments is any historical perspective. Public health efforts were able to eliminate Aedes aegypti from most of the US and places like Brazil before WWII through aggressive sanitation primarily. ”

did you read what they say the left out?

Editor
Reply to  DaveW
June 14, 2019 7:45 pm

Dave ==> Thanks…..Endemic Dengue is kind of like a fire — you need all the ingredients to have endemic dengue, just like a fire must have oxygen, heat, and fuel, endemic dengue must have lots of breeding sites close together (the mosquitoes are limited to about a 100 yard/meter flying radius), inside that radius there must be infected humans unprotected by window screens and indoor insecticidal treatment, and uninfected humans . Getting rid of any one of these requirements eliminates dengue. Attacking all three aspects simultaneously is most effective.

Once there are no (or almost no) infected humans, dengue is no longer endemic.

MarkWhelan
June 11, 2019 11:52 pm

Speaking from personal experience, I have had Dengue and it is not pleasant! I was working in Jakarta at the time and after rainy season had passed, there was a lot of stagnant water lying around in the area next to our house. This is an ideal breeding ground, caused by poor drainage of the building site next door. The Bloody Mozzies that carry dengue are active during the day and are easy to recognize as they are prominently marked by stripes on their legs. I can actually remember swatting the one that bit me…the next two weeks are the most ill I have ever been, they don’t call it “Break-Bone Fever” for nothing. Other people in the compound we lived in got dengue at the same time. it was only through a concerted coordinated effort of the Landlords and the locals that we managed to stop the spread – Locally – by spraying or “fogging” the area with an unbelievable amount of chemicals. Trying to eliminate/manage areas of stagnant water – other than wetlands – in an urban environment is of a high priority to compliment mitigation efforts in reducing the impact of Dengue

Editor
Reply to  MarkWhelan
June 12, 2019 6:51 am

Mark ==> Thanks for sharing your personal experience. Many of our colleagues in the DR contracted dengue — and were usually hospitalized immediately to reduce their risk of serious complications.

Eric Campbell
June 12, 2019 4:12 am

If only there were a vaccine…….

/snark

Peter
June 12, 2019 5:03 am

I recommend looking at the WHO historical maps of Dengue. It is spreading. Then look at the maps provided above. The areas where it has become established in Australia is First World, the poor are phenomenally wealthy by world standards. It is spreading. It has nothing to do with climate change, and everything to do with travel. As a fresh graduate in Queensland decades ago and long before Dengue came to the region, we used to joke about it, Aedeies mosquitoes used to breed under the hospital.
I helped sponsor a reduction program in one small Indonesian city. Dengue Haemorrhagic Fever was killing the employees kids. When I left, my replacement was not going to take the issue seriously. I took him to the top of the hill, and showed him where the problem existed. It was everywhere. I quietly quoted studies, Indonesian data, and world wide trends. He got the message.
Message. Dengue is not just a third world issue. It is spreading by common travel. Control programs are just that – control. Environmental activists will resist management, until they contract the illness. But it can kill.

Hasbeen
June 12, 2019 5:33 am

When I first went to New Guinea DDT had not been denigrated by ratbag greenies, & Australian management & money maintained the spraying program.

They sprayed problem breeding areas, but also sprayed the inside walls of all premises & homes every 6 months. DDT not only kills mozzies, but also is highly irritating to them. They leave sprayed homes very quickly. This was law, no one could opt out.

There were effectively no mozzies. Later after independence all this broke down, & mozzies returned in droves. In our spare parts warehouse we burned 30 mozzie coils all day. Without them it was impossible to work in there at all.

I came back to Oz, basically to get away from Mozzies.

Editor
Reply to  Hasbeen
June 12, 2019 9:21 am

Hasbeen==> Thanks for the eye witness account –before and after DDT spraying.

Fran
Reply to  Hasbeen
June 12, 2019 10:12 am

I grew up in India in the 50’s and 60’s with DDT sprayed on the walls. A 50lb bag of gammexane (lindane) was in the clinic for treating head lice, When we got a bedbug infestation due to arriving back from a train trip in the rainy season when it was not possible to put bedding out in the sun, the bag was moved to my parents bedroom to conveniently put handfuls into beds and mosquito nets. Malaria (i think P vivax) was treated whenever symptoms occurred, as were ‘tummy bugs’. My Dad and one brother had dengue, and were very sick. I am thankful my girls grew up before they took the lindane out of Kwellada shampoo as the Canadian primary schools were hotbeds of headlice.

Editor
Reply to  Fran
June 12, 2019 12:28 pm

Fran ==> Thanks for your experiences in India. People used to be much more sensible about the seriousness of mosquito-borne diseases and what was needed to prevent them.

The US has defeated malaria and yellow fever and has not had endemic dengue — and will not have.

John Mclondon
Reply to  Fran
June 14, 2019 1:42 pm

ivermectin is as effective as lindane for lice without all the toxicity.
Dengue in India is not as it was in the 50s, it has gone up substantially. When I visited there a few years ago, southern states like Kerala had a lot of Dengue cases which was not there in the 70s and 80s.

Yooper
June 12, 2019 7:07 am

Ya know, this raises the question of the ticking time bombs we have in our exploding homeless communities in urban areas, primarily in temperate climates. They have all the ingredients for an epidemic, dense population packing, environmental exposure, and lack of sanitation. It won’t take much to set one off and then what?

Yooper
June 12, 2019 9:25 am
Neo
June 12, 2019 9:46 am

mosquitoes aren’t a tropical insect.
There are large numbers of mosquitoes above the Arctic Circle, where there are no predators.

Editor
Reply to  Neo
June 12, 2019 11:55 am

Neo ==> Yes, of course, mosquitoes can kill full grown mammals in the Yukon. For dengue transmission, the particular species that can pick up and pass on dengue are limited. The map of the United States in the essay shows the current distribution of Ae Aegypti, the primary insect vector of dengue. Note that despite the presence of the vector, dengue is absent.

Editor
June 12, 2019 11:52 am

Epilogue:

The “spread” or “increased incidence” of dengue will be driven by population increases in the poorer tropical-zone nations. There it will be endemic and epidemic, particularly in the crowded cities and their associated slums. This is a real concern for international health organizations. Development of a safe and effective vaccine would save a lot of lives.

Curtailing CO2 emissions will have a near zero effect on dengue incidence or its geographic spread.

The United States will no have endemic dengue as the two required conditions — plentiful insect vectors and plentiful infected humans — will not co-exist. There will be cases of dengue but they will be among arriving or returning infected persons from areas like Africa and the Caribbean. Despite the continued arrival of infected individuals, dengue will not establish itself here.

Thanks to the many readers who shared with personal stories of dengue infection. It is not pleasant.

# # # # #

ResourceGuy
June 13, 2019 5:42 am

Ouch! I got bit by a model.

John McLomdom
June 14, 2019 1:31 pm

Vector control is extremely difficult for Dengue since these mosquitos use freshwater and don’t need much water. Because of that, sanitation doesn’t have much influence in controlling it. Removing all containers that could collect water is not going to remove small pockets in trees, plants, etc. Dengue is already spreading in France, Spain, etc with better sanitation. https://www.who.int/csr/don/20-may-2019-dengue-reunion/en/
But is it an admission that earth is warming?

Editor
Reply to  John McLomdom
June 14, 2019 7:51 pm

John ==> When I say “sanitation”, I include the idea of picking up the trash, cleaning up the backyards, etc. It is not necessary to eliminate Ae. aegypti to get rid of dengue. Public health just has to knock down mosquito populations and isolate dengue patients. The mosquitoes are not the source of the dengue virus — infected humans are.

Southern France and Spain are seeing dengue cases because of the immigration of infected humans — many of whom move into slum-like poor neighborhoods and refuge-camp like areas.

They can eliminate dengue through serious and sensible public he;lath measures — vector control and isolation of dengue patients in hospitals.

Editor
Reply to  John McLomdom
June 14, 2019 7:55 pm

John ==> Don’t be fooled . . . Reunion, France is an island off the coast of Madagascar (not in Europe).