Jonathan Mann was tremendously excited. True, there were any number of things that could still go awry; diplomatic noses might start bleeding, political shenanigans could well break out. But he and his highly energeticâand slyâstaff of the World Health Organization's Global Programme on AIDS had for months carefully and strategically planned for this day.
“We are entering a new era,” Mann had assured an international press corps. “We will make 1988 the year we turn the tide against the AIDS virus.”
And here he sat, his bow tie straight, hair brushed, as usual, straight back off his forehead, wearing a natty tailored European suit, giving him the air not of a CDC epidemiologist but of a French diplomat. He looked out over the largest gathering of Ministers of Health ever assembled. Of the representatives of 148 nations who now sat before him in the vast Queen Elizabeth II Conference Center in London, 117 were Ministers of Health or their country's equivalent. Every key nation, save one, was represented by the most politically powerful health official in their land: Mann was ashamed to say that the exception was his own country. Still not wishing to give AIDS a priority status, the Reagan administration sent Dr. Robert Windom, who ranked two notches down the power ladder from the Secretary of Health and Human Services, Otis Bowen.
Never in history had the majority of the world's top health officials gathered to discuss an epidemic. No scourgeânot malaria, smallpox, yellow fever, or the plagueâhad ever commanded such diplomatic attention. Some 700 delegates and 400 journalists were also present in the London hall on this ice-cold January morning in 1988 to witness the World Summit of Ministers of Health on Programmes for AIDS Prevention. Mann felt that it was a coup for his program, for WHO, and for millions of powerless people with AIDS.
Mann urgently hoped to drive home a message to the world's health leadership: AIDS is spreading; if it hasn't yet emerged in your country, it will, unless you plan now, follow our recommendations, educate your populations, and embrace condom-based programs as a prevention strategy.
As of January 26, 1988, some 75,392 cases of AIDS had officially been reported to the World Health Organization. But that figure was a gross
understatement of the true dimensions of the pandemic: most nations lacked genuine systems for amassing and recording such health statistics. Mann tactfully didn't mention from the podium what everyone in the audience knew to be true; namely, that many nations were deliberately covering up their epidemics for political and economic reasons. Such delicate issues would be dealt with later, in private arm-twistings and minister-to-minister preplanned strategic confrontations.
Mann differentiated the ways in which the AIDS virus was spreading from person to person. In what he called Pattern I countries, such as those of North America and Western Europe, AIDS was spreading primarily via the sharing of needles between intravenous drug users and sexually among gay men. In Pattern II countries, such as those of Africa, AIDS was a heterosexual disease.
Though he was cautious in his public choice of words, it was Pattern III nations that most concerned Mann as he spoke in London. Asia, the communist bloc, the largely Muslim Middle East, and much of the Pacific region had only very tiny outbreaks of AIDS. Some of these countries were truthfully reporting no cases of the disease, and several more were accurately stating that the handful of cases in their countries all involved foreigners or citizens who had acquired HIV while living overseas. In those Pattern III countries, the relative handfuls of cases were equally likely to have resulted from heterosexual, homosexual, needle, or blood exposure.
Pattern III, in other words, represented the potential future of the worldwide AIDS epidemic. There was still a window of opportunity for public health action that might successfully prevent HIV from emerging in the majority of the world's populations.
Many of the Pattern III political leaders had already recognized the threat of HIV importation, of course, and taken their own steps to curb such events. However, Mann and his staff, which included smallpox hero Daniel Tarantola, were appalled by many of the anti-emergence measures some countries had taken. Privately, Tarantola had already spent months flying all over the world in attempts to convince many of the same ministers who now sat in the London conference hall that AIDS wasn't anything like smallpox. There was no vaccine that one could require that immigrants and visitors receive. The virus didn't manifest itself symptomatically for yearsâperhaps over a decadeâin ways that indicated its presence even to the infected individual. And the AIDS blood test wasn't foolproof.
“What are you going to do, test every immigrant five or six times a year, every visiting student once a week? If you think you can keep the virus out of your country with legislation and testing, you are wrong,” Tarantola told public health officials.
Mann was worried that the world would become a patchwork of repressive public health regimes with laws aimed at keeping a virus, as well as its potential carriersâgays, Africans, prostitutes, drug users, poor immigrantsâout.
He feared that it would push populations that already existed at the margins of global society further away from the mainstream, medicine, and all hopes of disease control. Indeed, restrictions intended to control populations at greatest danger for HIV infection might actually have the reverse effect, exacerbating the social and economic conditions in their lives that drove them to adopt risky behaviors. Simply put, he felt certain that this moment in London was pivotal to deciding whether HIV's emergence in most countries would be prevented through education of local populaces or temporarily stalled by repressive laws.
“Our opportunityâbrought so clearly into focus by this Summitâis truly historic,” Mann told his distinguished audience. “We live in a world threatened by unlimited destructive force, yet we share a vision of creative potentialâpersonal, national, and international. The dream is not newâbut the circumstances and the opportunity are of our time alone. The global AIDS problem speaks eloquently of the need for communication, for sharing of information and experience, and for mutual support; AIDS shows us once again that silence, exclusion, and isolationâof individuals, groups, or nationsâcreates a danger for us all.”
Though his words were received with thunderous applause and a standing ovation, Mann knew that many of those before him who were loudly slapping their hands together and politely nodding approval were, back home, promoting policies of mandatory quarantine of HIV-positive individuals, escalated repression against homosexuals, even public execution of AIDS sufferers.
As a scientist, Mann knew that the men and women now looking up at him on the dais, studying his smile and careful public modesty, were People of Politics. They might wear the titles of health officials, but their modi operandi were less those of the laboratory or hospital than those of the maneuvering, backstabbing, and power plays seen in parliaments and presidential inner circles. What the ministers said publicly here in London would be at least as much for domestic consumption as for the sake of any global effort to stop the pandemic.
Anticipating such limitations, Mann and his Global Programme on AIDS (GPA) staff had toiled for months in preparation for this moment. Lifelong WHO veterans, and occasional renegades, Tarantola and Manuel Carballo showed Mann how to maneuver around the labyrinthine and often byzantine United Nations bureaucracy. Swiss-American Tom Netter, having spent years covering the rise of Solidarity and the fall of communism in Poland for the Associated Press, plotted every step of the GPA's interactions with the international media. Spanish-born Carballo, who knew every nook and cranny of the World Health Organization even better than WHO Director-General Halfdan Mahler, helped spot the few potentially influential individuals within the bureaucracy who understood the urgency of the AIDS epidemic.
“This is a place where people put URGENT! on requests for pencil supplies,” Mann said in wonder. “The concept of genuinely dire emergency has almost no meaning here.”
Carballo couldn't have agreed more. One of the happiest days of his life was when he joined the GPA staff. He felt charged up, at the top of his performance and truly impassioned about his work, possibly for the first time in his life.
They all did: American epidemiologists Jim Chin and David Heymann, Venezuelan biologist José Esparza, British public health expert Roy Widdus, Tarantola, Mann, and the dozens of scientists and public education experts who came to Geneva under special contracts to advise the GPA. They shared a mission: stopping the further spread of AIDS. And as Heymann and Tarantola had done before in their efforts to stop smallpox, these men were willing to bend every UN and WHO rule as far as possible to stop the pandemic. They were believers. Between them they shared the ability to write and converse in at least fifteen languages. And they had a camaraderie that was quite uncharacteristic of the usually opportunistic careerist atmosphere pervading most United Nations programs.
When Mann had originally left Kinshasa to take the reins of power in Geneva in November 1986, he had a total working budget of $5 million, a part-time secretary, and three epidemiologists who were borrowed from other programs. Mann's own salary was still paid by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control.
By the time he reached London for the January 1988 Summit, less than two years later, forty-year-old Mann commanded a far-flung AIDS program, a considerable staff, and a budget of over $50 million, with $92 million promised for 1989. It was, by WHO bureaucratic standards, a meteoric rise.
And none of it went unremarked by Mann's WHO peers, who headed other disease programs. With the envy of Cinderella's stepsisters, they watched as the cinder maid grabbed all the attention and the Prince's love at the ball.
That Mann had unique access to Director-General Mahler and could enter the chief's office without first passing through the usual rungs of intermediary power was noticed. That Mahler increasingly mentioned AIDS in his speeches, placing it with each oration higher on the WHO totem pole of priorities, was noticed. That U.S., Canadian, and Western European currency poured into Geneva specifically earmarked for the GPA was noticed. That Dr. Jonathan Mann, this Johnny-come-lately international bureaucrat, was almost daily gracing the front pages of leading newspapers and magazines from Tokyo to Casablanca was inescapable.
While Mann, Tarantola, Heymann, Carballo, and the rest of the AIDS staff did their best to create a highly publicized sense of worldwide emergency and mobilization, jealousy simmered in the hallways of the vast Geneva complex. In the enormous vaulted lobby of WHO headquarters,
experts on cholera, malaria, diarrheal diseases, schistosomiasis, health economics, polio, and vaccine development gathered in discreet clusters by the three-story-high glass wall that afforded a view of Lake Geneva and Mont Blanc. And they whispered. They cited the Programme's own statistics on AIDSâthose modest numbers of underreported casesâand asked why the new disease should command such resources and attention when other microbes were killing tens of millions of people. They noted that Mann and some other Programme staffers were Americans, and assured one another that all the concern was
only
in place because AIDS was killing homosexuals in New York and San Francisco.
And even that increased their envy: they admired the skills and energy of the American and European gay activists who relentlessly lobbied WHO, knowing that cholera victims in Bangladesh or Cambodian malaria patients would never be able to mount similar campaigns on their behalf.
Mann and his team either were oblivious to the talk behind their backs or chose to ignore it. In either case, when questioned directly about comparisons between WHO commitments to, for example, malaria versus AIDS, the Programme group would say that all global health programs were underfunded and not one dollar or yen of AIDS monies should be gathered at the expense of other health efforts.
And they would politely remind critics that AIDS was a newly emerging epidemic which, by definition, would swell to claim tens of millions of lives if not stopped immediately. On that point Mann enjoyed the full support of the director-general.
1
The staff of the Global Programme on AIDS discussed quite consciously among themselves the inherent contradictions in the need for a state of emergency to halt a newly emerging disease versus the essential nature of WHO and the United Nations system. Though Ebola, Marburg, Lassa, and other emergencies had received the quick attention of WHO, they couldn't serve as models for action against AIDS. First of all, each had surfaced as seemingly confined local emergencies. Second, they, at least in part, burned out on their own. Third, the microbes caused almost immediate disease in those who were infected, with an alarming level of mortality; there could be no doubt to the populaces or their governments that a state of emergency was warranted. Fourth, fairly simple measures, such as provision of sterile syringes, could stop the primary spread of the diseases.
In contrast, HIV surfaced almost simultaneously on three continents and was quickly a feature on the health horizons of at least twenty different nations. Not only was there no sign that AIDS might burn out on its own; scientists could see no evidence of the famous bell-shaped curve of infection and disease.
2
Far from causing immediate disease and death, HIV was a slow burner that hid deep inside people's lymph nodes, often for over a decade, before producing detectable infections. As a result, a society could already have thousands of infected citizens before any sound of alarm was rung, and even when the first AIDS cases appeared, their numbers were
small enough to allow governments to feel comfortable about ignoring the seemingly trifling problem. Denial was all too easy a response to AIDS.