A growing controversy has emerged over Kenya's Ebola surveillance program after infectious disease experts raised concerns that some individuals may be being declared Ebola-free before completing the internationally recommended 21-day monitoring period.
The debate was triggered after Health Cabinet Secretary Aden Duale announced that 67 Kenyans who had been under surveillance tested negative for Ebola and that the country remains free of confirmed cases.
However, public health specialists argue that the numbers raise important questions about the timeline used to clear contacts. Just days earlier, authorities had reported only 22 individuals who had completed monitoring. Critics say the rapid increase to 67 cleared persons within four days appears difficult to reconcile with standard Ebola contact-tracing protocols unless all those individuals entered observation at roughly the same time.
Under established Ebola response guidelines, people identified as contacts are typically monitored for 21 days—the maximum known incubation period for the virus. Medical experts warn that declaring contacts free of risk before the end of this window could create dangerous blind spots if symptoms emerge later.
Among those questioning the figures is Professor Otoi, who has called for greater transparency from health authorities. He argues that the Ministry of Health should publicly release detailed contact-tracing timelines, including when each individual was exposed, when monitoring began, and when testing was conducted.
Experts emphasize that a negative test alone may not be sufficient if conducted too early after exposure, since the virus may not yet be detectable. For this reason, they say the sequencing of tests and observation periods is just as important as the test results themselves.
The Ministry of Health maintains that Kenya remains Ebola-free and that surveillance systems are functioning effectively. Nevertheless, health professionals insist that providing clear data on the 67 cleared individuals would help reassure the public and strengthen confidence in the country's preparedness measures.