Health or Planetary Health for the prevention of pandemics? – Authors’ response

One Health recognizes the fundamental interdependence and complex interdependence of all living species and their common environment.

Thus, the view that One Health focuses only on human-animal interaction, primarily addresses the risk of zoonotic events, and that these events occur due to urbanization, land use and of the increase in human population density, thus suggesting that One Health is sufficient to cope with the risks of a pandemic, is imperfect. Nonetheless, there is ample evidence that pathogens of zoonotic origin account for more than half of all emerging or re-emerging human infectious diseases,

often with pandemic potential. We also know that the most significant pandemic of modern times (which we still live with), COVID-19, can be attributed to persistent and intense human-animal contact. Much of this interaction has been generated under conditions that dramatically increase not only the risk of inter-species transmission, but also the impact on humans, i.e. the wildlife trade.

Courtney Waugh and colleagues draw conclusions that ignore the distinct and complementary values ​​of One Health and planetary health approaches to addressing pandemic risk and control. Fallout contributes to the zoonotic potential, but is not directly correlated with pandemics and is difficult to detect. Relatively static variables and other more dynamic variables that justify a One Health approach become evident when we try to estimate zoonotic potential: first, the risk of inter-species transmission; second, exposure of humans to infected animals and secondary sources; and third, human infection and subsequent human-to-human transmission.

Human activity that increases the risk and rate of disease spread (e.g. urbanization and human population density or trade and travel) has increased dramatically since the heyday of the production of mass. It is the added effect of the human element of zoonotic potential to pandemic potential that motivates us to advocate for solutions through a One Health approach.

Like Waugh and colleagues, despite tremendous advances in science and technology, we agree that the tools currently available are essentially unable to provide enough knowledge to confidently inform the public health and economic benefits of possible long-term measures to prevent spillovers and pandemics, as opposed to the risk of miscalculation, miscommunication of risks, waste of resources and outright failure of measures. This is precisely why we are calling for a multidisciplinary and multilateral COVID-19 One Health Research coalition, which would build on the urgency made necessary by the COVID-19 pandemic to strengthen links with the evolution of change. climate and the global health community.

in the design, coordination and synthesis of research to promote a healthy and sustainable planet.

Indeed, the limits of One Health and planetary health approaches are irrelevant when the results of pandemic management and prevention are put into perspective.