Jo Lines BSc MSc PhD

Reader in Malaria Control & Vector Biology

I'm interested in the control of mosquitoes, especially malaria vectors, and especially in control methods that can be used at home. I have worked with insecticide-treated nets (ITNs) since 1984, and I've been involved in epidemiological field trials of ITNs in Tanzania, Mozambique, Gambia, Sierra Leone, India, Thailand, Colombia and Venezuela. More recently, these interests have broadened to include a field trial of Intermittent Preventive Treatment in children (IPTc) in Senegal.

Some of the methods and ideas created by this work have since become accepted as standard: the concept and mode of action of the "mass effect" (the reduction in the vectorial capacity of local vector populations caused by high ITN coverage), the use of light-traps hung beside occupied nets to sample human-biting mosquitoes, the use of verandah-trap huts in a Latin-Square design to assess ITNs, and the design of individual net-treatment kits. I've also been involved in the debate about net implementation methods, and in studies of survey data showing that in 24 out of 26 African countries, the untreated-net coverage produced by local net markets was more equitable than the ITN coverage produced by subsidised local ITN projects. I have been active in the debate about ITN implementation methods, trying to build consensus around a pluralistic approach using multiple distribution systems, because the methods which provide high coverage most rapidly are not the most sustainable, and vice versa.

I work closely with the Malaria Consortium, and have been involved in the design and/or evaluation of ITN implementation strategies in Zimbabwe, Mozambique, Tanzania, Kenya, Nigeria, India and Cambodia.

I am also interested in environmental aspects of mosquito control, especially in urban areas. See the 'repellent lamp'.

My working philosophy is still inspired by something someone said to me in 1984 in Tanzania. I had been visiting this family early in the morning every day for six weeks, doing a mark-recapture study. The study question was "is there a fraction of the vector population which is consistently and habitually outdoor-resting, and which could maintain transmission despite indoor residual spraying?" At the end of the study, the female head of household said to me: "It's good that you've come to help us with our malaria problem. Now you will go back and study the mosquitoes. Then you will write your report. You will send it to the government and they will read it and discuss it. All this will take a while, and it will be SOME TIME before the government puts your important recommendations into practice. You are the malaria expert, and now you have seen where we live and how we live: maybe you have noticed something we could do IN THE MEANTIME while we are waiting for the government, something that would make the problem a little better? What can we do by ourselves to ensure that this new baby of ours will survive?" I was ashamed. I realised at that moment that her question is badly neglected in public health research. My study question was about "what can the government do?". From the baby's point of view, however, the actions of the family would be much more important than the actions of the government. Yet there were, and still are, vast and embarassing gaps in our ability to answer her question. Of course, both questions are important, but currently about 98% of public health research is about the government, and only 2% relevant to her question.....

Affiliation

Research areas

  • Drug resistance
  • Environment
  • Insects
  • Research : policy relationship

Disciplines

  • Epidemiology
  • Operational research
  • Vector biology

Disease and Health Conditions

  • Malaria
Back to top