The Ebola outbreak in the US has been a long time coming, and the federal government has been working hard to address the threat that it poses to our national security.
A decade ago, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) declared a public health emergency in the United States and deployed a team of more than 4,000 to the United Kingdom and Australia.
The mission was to provide direct medical support to people affected by the outbreak and, if needed, provide logistical and technical assistance.
Over the years, the team has evolved into the National Security Council, the National Response Center and the Centers of Disease Control.
But while these efforts have been vital to the overall response to the outbreak, they have also been costly and disruptive.
What is the US response?
A national strategy The National Response Plan, developed in the mid-1990s and designed to address a rapidly expanding and highly contagious disease, has evolved in recent years to address several challenges: a changing national security environment, an increase in economic strain on the US economy, and heightened political and public opinion about the potential for an outbreak.
We have deployed hundreds of staff, contracted hundreds of thousands of dollars of equipment, and invested more than $300 million in research and technology to respond to the Ebola outbreak.
But as we enter the Ebola pandemic, the plan is still evolving.
It is not a finished product.
We continue to develop new and better tools, strategies, and plans to address any emerging challenges that emerge in the coming months and years.
There are a number of challenges facing the CDC, however.
One of the challenges is the growing demand for the public health response in the U.S. In the mid 1990s, we had about a dozen US states, including Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Alabama, Georgia, and Missouri, and a handful of international health organizations that we are closely monitoring.
Now we have nearly 800 US states and more than 700 international health agencies and governments.
This is an unprecedented level of activity, but there are challenges to the system.
We have to make sure we are responding to the needs of the affected populations and to the people who are going to be affected.
At the same time, we have to do it quickly and effectively.
As the Ebola virus evolves, so does the public response.
As a result, it is going to require us to take some of our best and most sophisticated tools and capabilities to respond.
As the pandemic progresses, so will our response.
For example, in the first three weeks of the pandemics outbreak in 2009, the CDC conducted more than 1.3 million field and laboratory visits, compared to more than 535,000 visits in the case of the current outbreak.
These visits, along with our capacity to administer our protective gear and to support those who are in the hospital, have been critical to the response to our current pandemic.
These visits have also played a key role in helping to reduce the spread of the virus and to improve our ability to respond in the future.
Another challenge is the fact that there is a tremendous amount of information about the pandenas potential impact on the public.
So, while there are more than 2,000 public health alerts issued in the past 24 hours, there are hundreds of additional public health messages that we haven’t yet received.
That said, as the pandemaker progresses, we will continue to take the time and the resources necessary to share information with our communities and the public and to provide the best possible information to inform decision-making.
While the CDC and other federal agencies have developed and deployed new technologies and technologies to help the public respond, the most effective response has been the cooperation of our state and local partners.
The U.K., Australia, and New Zealand have joined with the CDC to establish the New York State Emergency Operations Center and have deployed more than 20,000 personnel to the U