Skip to main content

Sign up for our newsletter.

Quality journalism. Progressive values. Direct to your inbox.

Health workers get ready to spray insecticide to combat the Aedes aegypti mosquitoes that transmits the Zika virus in January, under the bleachers of the Sambadrome in Rio de Janeiro, which will be used for the Archery competition in the 2016 summer games. (Photo: Leo Correa/AP)

Zika and the Olympics

Gwynne Dyer

In the past, the only excuse for cancelling the Olympic Games has been a world war  (Berlin 1916, Tokyo 1940, London 1944). But if this year’s Games had been scheduled for  somewhere in West Africa two years ago, when the Ebola outbreak was nearing its peak, they  would certainly have been called off. So should the Olympic Games scheduled to begin in Rio de  Janeiro on 5 August be cancelled, moved or postponed? 

The health risk in Brazil’s case is the Zika virus, transmitted by mosquito bites, which  appeared in the country two years ago. It causes only a mild fever, if any at all, but it has been  linked to a huge increase in the number of cases of microcephaly, in which babies are born with  small, underdeveloped brains. Some die; most survive, but with moderate to severe learning  difficulties. 

The 4,700 cases of microcephaly in Brazil since last October (vs. 150 in all of 2014)  suggest that the counntry has a big public health problem, but the Zika virus hardly compares with  the Ebola virus, which kills half the people who become infected. Yet 152 health professionals  from around the world have now signed an open letter demanding that the Brazil Olympics do not  go ahead as scheduled. 

The letter, addressed to the World Health Organisation (WHO) and the International  Olympic Committee (IOC) and published on Friday, was initiated by Prof. Amir Attaran of the  University of Ottawa. “Sports fans who are wealthy enough to visit Rio’s Games choose Zika’s  risks for themselves,” he said, “but when some of them return home infected, their fellow citizens  bear the risk too.” 

The WHO and the IOC immediately rejected his proposal, the former pointing out that the  Olympic visitors, expected to number between 350,000 and 500,000, are only a small fraction of  the 6 million visitors to Brazil each year – and and that 9 million Brazilians, potentially already  carrying the Zika virus, travel abroad each year. Why focus specifically on the Olympics? 

Because, says Dr. Attaran, the Olympic athletes and tourists will include many people  from countries whose citizens would not normally visit Rio. Some of those countries have poor  public health services and warm climates, but are still Zika­free: “It cannot possibly help to send a  half­million travelers into Rio from places that would not normally have strong travel connections  with Rio and therefore set up new dissemination channels.” 

Ah, says WHO, but there should be relatively few mosquitoes in Rio in August, which is  mid­winter in Brazil. Yes, but dengue fever, which is transmitted by the same mosquitoes, is up  this year, says Attaran. 

Federal troops are spraying for mosquitoes, and neighborhood health inspectors have been  tasked with eliminating standing bodies of water where they are known to breed, says the  government. Do you really believe that the Brazilian government is capable of eradicating  mosquitoes in Rio even temporarily?, asks anyone who has ever had contact with Brazilian  bureaucracy. So the argument goes, back and forth, and it’s getting ugly. 

Prof. Attaran has even publicly accused the WHO of defending the IOC because the two  organisations have officially been in partnership since 2010: “It is ignorant and arrogant for the  WHO to march hand­in­hand with the IOC.” And there is a lot of money on the table. 

The Brazilian government is spending $10 billion on the Olympics and there’s another $3  billion at risk in various media and service contracts, very little of which will be covered by  insurance if the Games are cancelled. So much of the insistence that all will be well is certainly  driven by concern about the money that would be lost. 

The risk of spreading the Zika virus to some countries that would probably not otherwise  get it until much later is real and relevant, because work is underway on a vaccine and a year or  two could make a big difference. But let’s be realistic: the Rio Olympics cannot be moved in the  time that remains and will not be cancelled or postponed. So what should be done? 

Dr. Lawrence Gostin, director of the O'Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law  at Georgetown University, has the answer: “What is urgently needed is for the international  community, led by the WHO, to declare an all­out war on the mosquito population in Rio.” A  concerted, well­funded effort under close international supervision could reduce that population to  near zero, at least for the time that the Olympics last. 

That has not yet happened, mainly because it would be humiliating for Brazil to admit that  it cannot do it on its own. Given the internal political crisis raging in the country, it will be hard to  find a senior politician in Brasilia with the guts to ask for that kind of help. But it’s time to go  looking for one.

Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Gwynne Dyer

Gwynne Dyer

Gwynne Dyer has worked as a freelance journalist, columnist, broadcaster and lecturer on international affairs for more than 20 years, but he was originally trained as an historian. Born in Newfoundland, he received degrees from Canadian, American and British universities. His latest book, "Climate Wars: The Fight for Survival as the World Overheats", was published in the United States by Oneworld.

... We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.

'We Won't Stop Fighting,' Vow South African Activists After Judge OKs Shell Seismic Blasting at Sea

"We must do everything we can to undo the destructive colonial legacy of extractivism, until we live in a world where people and the planet come before the profits of toxic fossil fuel companies."

Brett Wilkins ·

Biden Continues Drilling Boom on Public Lands Despite Campaign Pledge, Analysis Shows

"The reality is that in the battle between the oil industry and Biden, the industry is winning."

Julia Conley ·

Big Oil Profits Surge to $174 Billion in 2021 Amid Rising Gas Prices: Report

"Americans looking for someone to blame for the pain they experience at the pump need look no further than the wealthy oil and gas company executives who choose to line their own pockets."

Kenny Stancil ·

Rights Groups Decry 'Farcical and Corrupt' Verdict as Myanmar's Suu Kyi Sentenced to Four Years in Prison

"There are many detainees without the profile of Aung San Suu Kyi who currently face the terrifying prospect of years behind bars simply for peacefully exercising their human rights."

Jake Johnson ·

Campaigners Warn of 'Wave After Wave of Variants' as Long as Vaccine Apartheid Remains

"Omicron is with us because we have failed to vaccinate the world. This should be a wake-up call."

Jake Johnson ·

Support our work.

We are independent, non-profit, advertising-free and 100% reader supported.

Subscribe to our newsletter.

Quality journalism. Progressive values.
Direct to your inbox.

Subscribe to our Newsletter.

Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit | Privacy Policy
Common Dreams Logo