The decrease from 3.5 million cases to only 15 is impressive but I don't see how we can eradicate zoonoses

From the article it looks like they are working on that too

> To fully eradicate the disease, cases in animals (infected by the same species of worm) must also be wiped out. In 2025, animal cases were detected in Chad (147 cases), Mali (17), Cameroon (445), Angola (70), Ethiopia (1), and South Sudan (3).

▲

MrDunham 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Those are bonkers (low) numbers compared to the 3.5M (human?) cases if I'm to believe the GPs comment.

It's also crazy how much Mother Theresa's quote rings true, even in reverse ("If I look at the mass, I will never act. If I look at the one, I will.") When I initially read 3.5M cases, I thought "wow, that's a lot", and somehow the 445 animal cases in Cameroon felt (at first) more real and similarly "a lot".

No comment other than interesting how our human brains work and distort how numbers "feel".

Once my rational brain kicked in, realized that's over 5,000 years for the current number of animal cases to match the former number of human cases. The future is awesome.

	▲	esafak 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		If you halve the cases every year you'll eradicate it in a generation.

▲

Insanity 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

But the question would be how many more go undetected in those animals. (I.e if wild animals carry it, how accurate are these numbers).

	▲	poulpy123 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		glancing at the wikipedia page on the topic it seems that it is limited to dogs, cat and baboons, and animal hosts have been only proved in the 2010s, so I guess they are unlikely to become infected by the parasite

▲

0cf8612b2e1e 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

It was a somewhat recent discovery that there were animal reservoirs escaping detection. Carter had hoped to outlive the worm, but it was thought that the animal pools were going to make full eradication take an additional 20 years.

▲

gus_massa 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I think the worm reproduce better in humans, so if we can cut humans the population in other animals will hopefully decrease. (And probably add a plan to identify and capture infected animals, to ensure this.)

	▲	poulpy123 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		You are right. Wikipedia write it is limited to dogs, cat and baboons, and that animal hosts have been only proved in the 2010s, so I guess they are unlikely to become infected by the parasite

▲

tialaramex 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It probably helps that the worms don't care. That is, a worm whose ancestors lived in dogs can live in a human no problem and vice versa.

If you eradicate GWD in your region but, eh, not in dogs, well people in your region keep getting GWD anyway. But if you eliminate it entirely you're just done. So that's a strong incentive to ensure the latter.

Most drastic options are probably available in the afflicted countries than would be acceptable in many places that haven't had GWD for a hundred years or more. If you tell the population of rural France that military and police are going to start shooting wild animals dead as a disease control measure there will be mass protests. But in South Sudan hey, at least you aren't proposing to shoot all the members of some minority ethnic group.

▲

bookofjoe 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

>In 2024, there were just 15 cases, and, according to the provisional tally for 2025, the number is down to just 10.