Ebola Death Toll in DR Congo Climbs to at Least 131

At least 131 people are dead. More than 395 suspected cases have been recorded across eastern Congo's Ituri Province. Two confirmed cases have reached Uganda's capital, Kampala. An American health worker has tested positive. And unlike every major Ebola outbreak of the past decade, there is no approved vaccine and no licensed therapeutic for the virus strain that is killing them [1][2].

On May 17, 2026, the World Health Organization declared the epidemic of Ebola disease caused by Bundibugyo virus a public health emergency of international concern (PHEIC) — the highest alarm the organization can sound [3]. The declaration came just three days after laboratory testing confirmed what field teams had suspected for weeks: a rare species of Ebola, genetically about 30% different from the Zaire strain that has driven previous outbreaks, had been circulating undetected in one of the most conflict-affected regions on Earth [4].

The Outbreak: Timeline and Scale

The index case was a nurse who arrived at a health facility in Bunia, the capital of Ituri Province, on April 24 with fever, hemorrhaging, and vomiting [5]. DRC Health Minister Samuel Roger Kamba later confirmed the case as the outbreak's patient zero [5].

But the virus had likely been spreading for weeks before that. Initial diagnostic tests — designed to detect the more common Zaire species of Ebola — returned negative results. Samples had to be shipped to specialized laboratories, a process slowed by the region's poor infrastructure and ongoing armed conflict [4]. WHO was not alerted to a cluster of unexplained deaths until May 5. Laboratory confirmation of Bundibugyo virus did not come until May 14-15 [6].

By then, 246 suspected cases and 80 deaths had already been recorded [6]. Within three more days, those numbers had climbed to 395 suspected cases and 131 deaths [7].

Source: WHO / DRC Ministry of Health

Data as of May 18, 2026CSV

The speed of escalation has alarmed epidemiologists. "We're just hearing about this now? That makes no sense. Those numbers take weeks to accumulate," said Dr. Ashish Jha, former White House COVID-19 response coordinator [8].

How This Outbreak Compares to Past Epidemics

The DRC has experienced 17 known Ebola outbreaks — more than any other country. The current Ituri epidemic is already the fourth-largest by death toll, trailing only the 2018–2020 Kivu outbreak (2,287 deaths), the 1976 Yambuku outbreak (280 deaths), and the 1995 Kikwit outbreak (254 deaths) [6][9].

Source: WHO / CDC Historical Data

Data as of May 18, 2026CSV

But direct comparisons are complicated by the virus species involved. The 2018 Kivu outbreak and the original 1976 Yambuku epidemic were both caused by Zaire ebolavirus, which carries a historical case fatality rate of 60–90%. Bundibugyo, by contrast, has an estimated fatality rate of 30–50% [2][10]. Health Minister Kamba has described the current outbreak's lethality as "very high, which can reach 50 percent" [10].

The critical difference is in response capacity. When the 2018 Kivu outbreak began, responders had two advantages that do not exist today: the rVSV-ZEBOV vaccine (Ervebo), which was deployed under compassionate use and later proved roughly 97.5% effective against Zaire Ebola, and the monoclonal antibody therapeutics mAb114 (Ebanga) and REGN-EB3 (Inmazeb), which showed over 60% survival rates in clinical trials [11][12]. None of these tools was designed for Bundibugyo. None has demonstrated efficacy against it.

In 1976, outbreak responders had no vaccines, no therapeutics, and limited epidemiological infrastructure. Fifty years later, DRC faces a Bundibugyo outbreak with functionally the same toolbox — despite billions of dollars spent on Ebola preparedness in the interim.

The Bundibugyo Problem: No Vaccine, Limited Cross-Protection

Bundibugyo ebolavirus was first identified in 2007 in Uganda's Bundibugyo District and has caused only two previous known outbreaks (2007 and 2012), both relatively small [2]. The rarity of the strain has meant limited investment in Bundibugyo-specific countermeasures.

Ervebo, manufactured by Merck, targets Zaire ebolavirus specifically. The genetic divergence between Zaire and Bundibugyo species is substantial enough that immunologists expect limited cross-reactivity [13]. A 2011 study in macaques found that three of four vaccinated animals survived lethal Bundibugyo exposure — but one of three unvaccinated controls also survived, and all vaccinated animals still showed disease symptoms [13][14].

Tom Geisbert, a co-author of that primate study, acknowledged the ambiguity: "When you get three out of four survivors, we've got to factor in that some of those survivors may have survived without the vaccine" [13]. Darryl Falzarano, lead author of the study, described the situation as "damned if you do, damned if you don't," warning that deploying Ervebo against Bundibugyo would mean "going in almost blind with very little data supporting it" [13].

WHO's Vasee Moorthy indicated the organization was convening an expert panel to discuss whether to test Ervebo in the current outbreak, while emphasizing that affected countries must make the final decision [13].

Source: OpenAlex

Data as of Jan 1, 2026CSV

Despite 1,671 academic papers touching on Ebola and Bundibugyo published since 2011, the translational pipeline from research to licensed products remains empty for this species.

Therapeutics: A Similar Gap

The therapeutic landscape mirrors the vaccine deficit. The WHO-recommended monoclonal antibody treatments Ebanga (mAb114) and Inmazeb (REGN-EB3) both received FDA approval in 2020 based on trial data from the Kivu outbreak [11][12]. The U.S. Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) established a strategic stockpile of REGN-EB3, paying Regeneron more than $300 million between 2021 and 2026 for supply [12].

But both therapeutics target the Zaire Ebola glycoprotein. Their binding sites are specific to molecular structures on Zaire ebolavirus, and there is no published clinical or preclinical evidence demonstrating efficacy against Bundibugyo [12]. Health Minister Kamba stated plainly: "The Bundibugyo strain has no vaccine, no specific treatment" [10].

Treatment of confirmed cases in the current outbreak relies on supportive care — intravenous fluids, electrolyte management, oxygen support, and treatment of secondary infections — the same approach used in 1976 [6].

Armed Conflict and Displacement: The Amplifiers

The Ituri outbreak is occurring in a region that has experienced continuous armed conflict for decades. Ituri Province hosts an estimated 273,403 displaced people, with 1.9 million people across the province in need of humanitarian assistance according to the 2026 Humanitarian Response Plan [15]. Between January and March 2026 alone, 32,600 people were newly displaced [15].

Source: UNHCR Population Data

Data as of Dec 31, 2025CSV

The DRC as a whole is the world's fourth-largest displacement crisis, with 5.2 million internally displaced persons [16]. The humanitarian situation in eastern DRC has been driven by conflict between the Congolese armed forces and the Rwanda-backed M23 rebel group, which seized the North Kivu capital Goma in early 2025, as well as operations by other armed factions including FDLR militias [17].

The conflict is directly complicating the Ebola response. The outbreak has spread across at least nine health zones in Ituri, including Rwampara, Mongbwalu, and the provincial capital Bunia [6]. One confirmed case reached Goma — the M23-controlled city in North Kivu — involving the wife of a man who died of Ebola in Bunia and traveled to Goma while already infected [17].

Médecins Sans Frontières has warned of "catastrophic hygiene conditions" in displacement sites across the region, raising the risk of further transmission [15]. The combination of insecurity, population displacement, limited infrastructure, and highly mobile communities linked to mining activity makes surveillance, contact tracing, vaccination campaigns (even if a vaccine were available), and safe transport of laboratory samples extraordinarily difficult [6][15].

During the 2018 Kivu outbreak, attacks on health workers and treatment centers were a defining feature — 420 security incidents were recorded between 2018 and 2020, including the killing of WHO epidemiologist Dr. Richard Valery Mouzoko Kiboung [18]. While specific incident data from the current outbreak is still emerging, the security environment in Ituri is at least as volatile as the Kivu theater was during the 10th outbreak.

The USAID Question: Aid Cuts and Detection Delays

The outbreak has reignited debate over the impact of U.S. foreign aid reductions on global health surveillance.

The Trump administration dismantled USAID in 2025, resulting in the closure of the agency's DRC mission [4][8]. Total U.S. humanitarian funding to the DRC dropped from approximately $900 million in 2024 to $179 million in 2025 — a reduction of roughly 80% [4].

Source: NPR / USAID

Data as of May 18, 2026CSV

USAID staff in the DRC had previously played a role in flagging outbreaks of unidentified diseases, and CDC personnel contributed to laboratory sample transport and testing [4]. Dr. Craig Spencer, a physician who survived Ebola infection during the 2014 West Africa outbreak, told CBS News that under the prior system, "The CDC would have been on the ground at a moment's notice... because we were in a bunch of countries" [8].

The State Department disputed a direct connection: "It is false to claim that the USAID reform has negatively impacted our ability to respond to Ebola," a spokesperson said, adding that funding and support to combat Ebola would continue [8].

Critics counter that the delayed detection of the Bundibugyo strain — which may have circulated for six to eight weeks before laboratory confirmation — reflects degraded surveillance capacity [4]. The initial PCR tests used in Ituri were calibrated for Zaire ebolavirus and did not detect Bundibugyo, requiring samples to be sent to specialized facilities. Under prior arrangements, USAID-funded lab networks and CDC field staff helped accelerate that process [4].

U.S. global health spending dropped nearly 57% overall following the USAID shutdown and related aid cuts [8]. PolitiFact reported that while Elon Musk, then leading the Department of Government Efficiency, claimed Ebola prevention funding was "accidentally" canceled and later "restored," public health experts said original funding was not fully reinstated and many outbreak specialists were terminated without replacement [8].

The Billion-Dollar Question: Acute Response vs. Permanent Infrastructure

Since 2018, international donors have spent over $1 billion on Ebola response in the DRC. The 10th outbreak alone had a planned budget of $1.28 billion, of which $1.18 billion (92.5%) was committed [9]. USAID invested more than $300 million specifically on Ebola responses since 2018 [19].

Of that spending during the 10th outbreak, 68% went to acute public health response: rapid response teams, contact tracing, treatment of cases, and vaccination campaigns [9]. A smaller but unspecified fraction went to permanent laboratory infrastructure, surveillance systems, or healthcare workforce development. The World Bank provided $80 million for emergency Ebola response and invested in pandemic preparedness across nine DRC-bordering countries, but detailed breakdowns of permanent capacity investment versus emergency spending are not publicly available [20].

The pattern is clear in the current crisis. WHO released $500,000 from its emergency contingency fund. Africa's health agency, the Africa CDC, mobilized $2 million [8]. Both organizations acknowledged these amounts represented only a fraction of urgent needs. Meanwhile, the outbreak is unfolding in a region where health facilities are overwhelmed or non-functional, laboratory capacity is minimal, and the diagnostic tools on hand were not designed for the pathogen circulating [6][15].

The cycle — emergency, mobilization, spending, outbreak ends, capacity atrophies, repeat — has defined DRC's relationship with Ebola for half a century. Whether this outbreak breaks that pattern or reinforces it depends on decisions being made now.

Government Response and Communication

DRC Health Minister Samuel Roger Kamba has served as the public face of the government's response, with Dr. Richard Kitenge named as the Health Ministry's incident manager for the outbreak [5][10]. The government announced three new Ebola treatment centers and accepted 7 metric tons of emergency medical supplies from WHO, including protective equipment, tents, and beds, which arrived in Bunia on May 18 [5].

The government's communication approach has differed from 2018, when community mistrust and misinformation were identified as factors that amplified transmission. During the Kivu outbreak, armed attacks on treatment centers were partly fueled by rumors that Ebola was invented or that treatment centers were killing patients [18]. The DRC government's early public acknowledgment of the Bundibugyo strain's challenges — including the absence of a vaccine — represents a more transparent approach, though whether that transparency builds or erodes public confidence remains to be seen.

The WHO PHEIC declaration cited "the high risk the disease could spread further beyond DRC's borders" as a primary justification, particularly after two cases were confirmed in Kampala [3]. The CDC and Department of Homeland Security implemented enhanced travel screening, entry restrictions, and public health measures for travelers from the affected region [1].

What Comes Next

The immediate priorities are clear: expand laboratory capacity to handle Bundibugyo-specific PCR testing in-country, scale up contact tracing in the affected health zones, establish functional treatment centers with adequate infection prevention protocols, and resolve the vaccine question — either by fast-tracking a clinical assessment of Ervebo's cross-protective potential or by accepting that vaccination is not available for this outbreak [6][13].

The longer-term questions are harder. The DRC has experienced 17 Ebola outbreaks. It has 5.2 million internally displaced people. Its eastern provinces are controlled by competing armed factions. Its primary international donor slashed funding by 80% in the year before this outbreak began. And the virus now spreading through Ituri belongs to a species that the global health community chose not to develop countermeasures for — because it was rare.

It is no longer rare.