Group A's Position:
91% of Malaria deaths are in the African region, and most of those deaths are children under the age of 5. Although Malaria was technically eradicated in the 50s in the United States, around 1,500 cases are reported every year in the US. In fact, there have been 63 different local outbreaks of Malaria in mosquitos since its eradication (close calls on having it spread again). The fact of the matter is, one of the mosquito species that can carry Malaria is still living in the US, so as long as it’s not eradicated worldwide, there is always a chance that it comes back here. Due to the illness and death that Malaria causes, it becomes a drain on the economy of the countries that experience it most. Forcing them into the cycle of disease and death, and disabling them from being able to improve their economies. Due to globalization, every economy affects the global economy. And the global economy, including the US’s, would be better off if those countries had a chance to improve theirs. We should help out African countries with their Malaria outbreaks, not just for our humanitarian causes, but for our advancement and self protection.
The African countries cannot eradicate malaria on their own. Although there is a drug for that, it doesn’t work for all species of malaria. Therefore, a new kind of drug needs to be created. With that said, the creation of the first pill is extremely expensive, and pharmaceutical companies will not invest and create that pill unless western countries guarantee them to pay for it. The only reason why pharmaceutical companies invest in drugs without government guarantees is because they know there is a western market for it. The African developing countries do not have the financial resources and therefore, it will never be created without western intervention and resources.
Group B's Position:
Nations that are affected by malaria have a responsibility to better utilize their resources to provide effective malaria prevention and treatment for their people.
A localized approach to the treatment and prevention of malaria is superior as it provides opportunities for the expansion of local economies and reduction of dependency upon developed nations. It could also encourage and lead to collaborative projects amongst neighbouring countries. Local organizations are best placed to understand the logistic and medical complexities of the program necessary to combat malaria – having a knowledge of the lifestyles of native people, and any varieties in resistance to the drugs.
Realistically in a business environment, there is not enough of an incentive for the wealthy nations’ pharmaceutical companies to develop the necessary drugs to eliminate the malaria strains that are specific to the affected countries – the potential profit margin is too insufficient to warrant the millions of expenditure.