This exercise holds important lessons for estimating the economic impact of future outbreaks -- such as pandemic influenza -- and measures to control or prevent them. We suggest that further work is needed to develop a more comprehensive macro-economic model able to more accurately estimate the relative cost and effect of a global response to outbreaks of international concern. The implications of our findings are discussed in the light of a prospective influenza pandemic.

The dwindling supply of new antibiotics largely reflects regulatory and commercial challenges, but also a failure of discovery. In the 1990s the pharmaceutical industry abandoned its classical ways of seeking antibiotics and instead adopted a strategy that combined genomics with high-throughput screening of existing compound libraries. Too much emphasis was placed on identifying targets and molecules that bound to them, and too little emphasis was placed on the ability of these molecules to permeate bacteria, evade efflux and avoid mutational resistance; moreover, the compound libraries were systematically biased against antibiotics. The sorry result is that no antibiotic found by this strategy has yet entered clinical use and many major pharmaceutical companies have abandoned antibiotic discovery. Although a raft of start-up companies-variously financed by venture capital, charity or public money--are now finding new antibiotic compounds (some of them very promising in vitro or in early trials), their development through Phase III depends on financial commitments from large pharmaceutical companies, where the discouraging regulatory environment and the poor likely return on investment remain paramount issues.

Objectives To estimate the potential economic impact of pandemic influenza, associated behavioural responses, school closures, and vaccination on the United Kingdom.Design A computable general equilibrium model of the UK economy was specified for various combinations of mortality and morbidity from pandemic influenza, vaccine efficacy, school closures, and prophylactic absenteeism using published data.Setting The 2004 UK economy (the most up to date available with suitable economic data).Main outcome measures The economic impact of various scenarios with different pandemic severity, vaccination, school closure, and prophylactic absenteeism specified in terms of gross domestic product, output from different economic sectors, and equivalent variation.Results The costs related to illness alone ranged between 0.5% and 1.0% of gross domestic product (£8.4bn to £16.8bn) for low fatality scenarios, 3.3% and 4.3% (£55.5bn to £72.3bn) for high fatality scenarios, and larger still for an extreme pandemic. School closure increases the economic impact, particularly for mild pandemics. If widespread behavioural change takes place and there is large scale prophylactic absence from work, the economic impact would be notably increased with few health benefits. Vaccination with a pre-pandemic vaccine could save 0.13% to 2.3% of gross domestic product (£2.2bn to £38.6bn); a single dose of a matched vaccine could save 0.3% to 4.3% (£5.0bn to £72.3bn); and two doses of a matched vaccine could limit the overall economic impact to about 1% of gross domestic product for all disease scenarios.Conclusion Balancing school closure against “business as usual” and obtaining sufficient stocks of effective vaccine are more important factors in determining the economic impact of an influenza pandemic than is the disease itself. Prophylactic absence from work in response to fear of infection can add considerably to the economic impact.

Little is known about the possible impact of an influenza pandemic on a nation's economy. We applied the UK macroeconomic model 'COMPACT' to epidemiological data on previous UK influenza pandemics, and extrapolated a sensitivity analysis to cover more extreme disease scenarios. Analysis suggests that the economic impact of a repeat of the 1957 or 1968 pandemics, allowing for school closures, would be short-lived, constituting a loss of 3.35 and 0.58% of GDP in the first pandemic quarter and year, respectively. A more severe scenario (with more than 1% of the population dying) could yield impacts of 21 and 4.5%, respectively. The economic shockwave would be gravest when absenteeism (through school closures) increases beyond a few weeks, creating policy repercussions for influenza pandemic planning as the most severe economic impact is due to policies to contain the pandemic rather than the pandemic itself.Accounting for changes in consumption patterns made in an attempt to avoid infection worsens the potential impact. Our mild disease scenario then shows first quarter/first year reductions in GDP of 9.5/2.5%, compared with our severe scenario reductions of 29.5/6%. These results clearly indicate the significance of behavioural change over disease parameters.