Science Policy For All

Because science policy affects everyone.

Posts Tagged ‘WHO

Containing Emerging and Re-emerging Infections Through Vaccination Strategies

leave a comment »

By: Arielle Glatman Zaretsky, PhD

Source: CDC [Public Domain], via Wikimedia Commons

           Throughout history, humans have sought to understand the human body and remedy ailments. Since the realization that disease can be caused by infection and the establishment of Koch’s postulates, designed to demonstrate that a specific microbe causes a disease, humans have sought to identify and “cure” diseases. However, while we have been successful as a species at developing treatments for numerous microbes, viruses, and even parasites, pure cures that prevent future reinfection have remained elusive. Indeed, the only human disease that has been eradicated in the modern era (smallpox) was eliminated through the successful development and application of preventative vaccines, not the implementation of any treatment strategy. Furthermore, the two next most likely candidates for eradication, dracunculiasis (guinea worm disease) and poliomyelitis (polio), are approaching this status through the use of preventative measures, via water filtration and vaccination, respectively. In fact, despite the recent pushback from a scientifically unfounded anti-vaxxers movement, the use of a standardized vaccination regimen has led to clear reductions in disease incidence of numerous childhood ailments in the Americas, including measles, mumps, rubella, and many others. Thus, although the development of antibiotics and other medical interventions have dramatically improved human health, vaccines remain the gold standard of preventative treatment for the potential of disease elimination. By Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

Recently, there have been numerous outbreaks of emerging or reemerging infectious diseases. From SARS to Ebola to Zika virus, these epidemics have led to significant morbidity and mortality, and have incited global panic. In the modern era of air travel and a global economy, disease can spread quickly across continents, making containment difficult. Additionally, the low incidence of these diseases means that few efforts are exerted to the development of treatments and interventions for them, and when these are attempted, the low incidence further complicates the implementation of clinical trials. For example, though Ebola has been a public health concern since the first outbreak in 1976, no successful Ebola treatment or vaccine existed until the most recent outbreak of 2014-2016. This outbreak resulted in the deaths of more than 11,000 people, spread across more than 4 countries, and motivated the development of several treatments and 2 vaccine candidates, which have now reached human trials. However, these treatments currently remain unlicensed and are still undergoing testing, and were not available at the start or even the height of the outbreak when they were most needed. Instead, diseases that occur primarily in low income populations in developing countries are understudied, for lack of financial incentive. Thus, these pathogens can persist at low levels in populations, particularly in developing countries, creating a high likelihood of eventual outbreak and potential for future epidemics.

This stream of newly emerging diseases and the re-emergence of previously untreatable diseases brings the question of how to address these outbreaks and prevent global pandemics to the forefront for public health policy makers and agencies tasked with controlling infectious disease spread. Indeed, many regulatory bodies have integrated accelerated approval policies that can be implemented in an outbreak to hasten the bench to bedside process. Although the tools to identify new pathogens rapidly during an outbreak have advanced tremendously, the pathway from identification to treatment or prevention remains complicated. Regulatory and bureaucratic delays compound the slow and complicated research processes, and the ability to conduct clinical trials can be hindered by rare exposures to these pathogens. Thus, the World Health Organization (WHO) has compiled a blueprint for the prevention of future epidemics, meant to inspire partnerships in the development of tools, techniques, medications and approaches to reduce the frequency and severity of these disease outbreaks. Through the documentation and public declaration of disease priorities and approaches to promote research and development in these disease areas, WHO has set up a new phase of epidemic prevention through proactive research and strategy.

Recently, this inspired the establishment of the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) by a mixed group of public and private funding organizations, including the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, inspired by the suggestion that an Ebola vaccine could have prevented the recent outbreak if not for the lack of funding slowing research and development, to begin to create a pipeline for developing solutions to control and contain outbreaks, thereby preventing epidemics. Instead of focusing on developing treatments to ongoing outbreaks, the mission at CEPI is to identify likely candidates for future outbreaks based on known epidemic threats and to lower the barriers for effective vaccine development through assisting with initial dose and safety trials, and providing support through both the research and clinical trials, and the regulatory and industry aspects. If successful, this approach could lead to a stockpile of ready-made vaccines, which could easily be deployed to sites of an outbreak and administered to aid workers to reduce their morality and improve containment. What makes this coalition both unique and exciting is the commitment to orphan vaccines, so called for their lack of financial appeal to the pharmaceutical industry that normally determines the research and development priorities, and the prioritization of vaccine development over treatment or other prophylactic approaches. The advantage of a vaccination strategy is that it prevents disease through one simple treatment, with numerous precedents for adaptation of the vaccine to a form that is permissive of the potential temperature fluctuations and shipping difficulties likely to arise in developing regions. Furthermore, it aids in containment, by preventing infection, and can be quickly administered to large at risk populations.

Thus, while the recent outbreaks have incited fear, there is reason for hope. Indeed, the realization of these vaccination approaches and improved fast tracking of planning and regulatory processes could have long reaching advantages for endemic countries, as well as global health and epidemic prevention.

Have an interesting science policy link?  Share it in the comments!

Advertisements

Written by sciencepolicyforall

January 26, 2017 at 9:47 am

Eradicating global infectious disease: Two steps forward and one step back?

leave a comment »

By: Jessica Hostetler, PhD

Source: CDC

The world made some good progress recently toward controlling or eliminating several diseases. Such gains are often long and hard fought. Vaccines are often a primary tool for eliminating diseases, which makes the rise in vaccine scepticism in many developed nations all the more troubling and fears of disease resurgences and outbreaks all too real.

The good news for disease control started in July with the commendation from the World Health Organization (WHO) to India for its work in eliminating yaws earlier in May of 2016. Yaws, often described as a “forgotten disease,” is a chronic skin disease caused by the bacterium Treponema pallidum, which is closely related to the organism that causes syphilis. It affects primarily children in poverty-stricken, crowded communities in about 13 countries with limited access to clean water, sanitation, and healthcare and can lead to severe disfigurement if not treated. Yaws is treated by a single dose of oral (Azithromycin) or injected (Benzathine penicillin) antibiotic. India tackled yaws through a campaign spanning years. “Highly targeted awareness and early treatment campaigns in vulnerable communities enabled treatment of yaws cases and interruption of disease transmission,” said Dr. Khetrapal Singh, the WHO Regional Director for South-East Asia in a WHO July press release. The success in India as the first country to eliminate yaws under the 2012 WHO neglected tropical diseases (NTD) roadmap gives renewed momentum toward global eradication in the remaining yaws-endemic countries by 2020.

More good news followed on September 5th with the announcement from WHO that Sri Lanka is now free of malaria. It is a large turnaround from the historical burden of the disease which was as high as 5 million cases per year in the 1930’s followed by a highly successful elimination program resulting in only 17 recorded cases in 1963. However, due to multiple factors, potentially including “human migrations, asymptomatic parasite-carriers, vector-reintroduction, behavioural changes in the vector and the emergence of drug and insecticide resistance,” cases soared again to half a million or more cases per year in the 1970s and 1980s. With a renewed focus on global malaria elimination in the 2000s, Sri Lanka has become a remarkable success story. As laid out in the WHO September press release, Sri Lanka’s strategy for elimination included targeting the parasites and the mosquitoes transmitting them through “mobile malaria clinics in high transmission areas” to give “prompt and effective treatment,” which reduced disease transmission and the parasite reservoir. Work such as this requires large teams of people for “effective surveillance, community engagement and health education.” But given Sri Lanka’s proximity to India, where malaria is still endemic, active surveillance for newly introduced cases will be essential to keep the disease at bay.

On September 27th, 2016, the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) certified that the region of the Americas is free from endemic measles. This news isn’t strictly “new” as the last locally transmitted case of measles in the Americas occurred in Venezuela in 2002. Certification as being disease-free is a long process, however, and the Americas continued to experience over 5000 imported measles cases between 2003 and 2014, necessitating careful documentation to ensure local transmission had ended. Measles is a highly contagious virus and causes fever and a characteristic rash. It can lead to severe symptoms including “pneumonia, brain swelling and even death.” This is a historical success, but the WHO reports that measles still caused over 100,000 deaths globally, mostly children, in 2014. Continued vigilance and worldwide vaccination compliance are needed to maintain gains and reduce the disease where it still spreads endemically.

Such good news represents decades of hard work from international organizations, national governments and NGOs and many field workers on the ground. These efforts represent the best of humanity in working to alleviate suffering and eradicate disease. One of the primary tools in the fight against infectious diseases remains the development and mass administration of vaccines. In the US, vaccination skepticism has been growing for years on the heels of a now-retracted study in The Lancet in 1998 that proposed a link between the Measles-Mumps-Rubella (MMR) vaccine and the development of autism. While there is no evidence that vaccinations or vaccine ingredients cause autism in any way, the paper caused lasting damage to the public perception of vaccinations. A recent study examining American Academy of Pediatrics Periodic Surveys from 2006 and 2013 reports that while most parents no longer cite autism as a reason for avoiding vaccines for their children, many are now avoiding vaccinations because they are “unnecessary.” An increasing number of pediatricians (up from 6% in 2006 to 11% in 2013) report always dismissing patients for “continued vaccine refusal” citing both a lack of trust in the physician-patient relationship and concern for other patients as primary reasons. Non-compliance with vaccinations is largely viewed as the driver behind an outbreak of measles in and around the Disneyland resort in California in 2014-2015 as 67% of those with infections (who were vaccine eligible) “were intentionally unvaccinated because of personal beliefs.” Vaccination rates in some California communities had fallen below the level required for protection of the population; this spurred a controversial tightening of regulations requiring vaccinations for all public-school educated children with no exemption for religious or personal beliefs.

The international news is even more concerning with a recent global survey (with a commentary in Science) looking at attitudes toward vaccination showing that 41% of respondents from France and 31% of respondents from Japan disagreed with the statement that vaccines are safe. Russia had the highest scepticism about the importance of vaccines at 17%. The survey notes that “Countries with high levels of schooling and good access to health services are associated with lower rates of positive sentiment, pointing to an emerging inverse relationship between vaccine sentiments and socio-economic status.” The WHO reports that vaccines prevent 2-3 million deaths per year from diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis (whooping cough), and measles, but that as many as 1.5 million children under the age of 5 died from vaccine-preventable diseases in 2008. Vaccine-scepticism and outbreaks from vaccine non-compliance represent an alarming and avoidable threat as we aim to eliminate vaccine-preventable diseases from the world. As a perspective by Dr. Douglas S. Diekema in the New England Journal of Medicine notes, we must set a high goal in the US and globally to improve childhood vaccination rates through increased and free access to vaccines, but also swift rebuttals of unbalanced or incorrect reporting on vaccinations. The physician-patient relationship may offer the best opportunity to educate and “influence the vaccine-hesitant.”

Have an interesting science policy link?  Share it in the comments!

Written by sciencepolicyforall

October 21, 2016 at 9:34 am

Posted in Essays

Tagged with , , , , ,

Science Policy Around the Web – October 18, 2016

leave a comment »

By: Agila Somasundaram, PhD

Source: WHO

Global Health

Why is the news about TB so bad?

The Global Tuberculosis Report released recently by the World Health Organization (WHO) reveals that the Tuberculosis (TB) epidemic is larger than previously estimated. TB has generally been considered a disease of the past, but the new report estimates that around 10.4 million people were infected in 2015, 480,000 of the new cases being multidrug-resistant TB (MDR-TB). TB claimed on average more than 34,000 lives a week, exceeding the death toll by Ebola. 60 % of the new cases were seen in India, Indonesia, China, Nigeria, Pakistan and South Africa.

TB is especially difficult to combat in the developing world, for many reasons. Firstly, it is difficult to accurately estimate the number of TB cases. For example, WHO estimates that about half of the TB cases in India are not reported to health authorities. In parts of Central Africa, the lack of resources to carry out large-scale surveys results in insufficient data on the epidemic. Secondly, crowded living conditions and poor nutrition make people more susceptible to the disease. TB is also financially draining on the families of those infected, resulting in poor treatment. Thirdly, new drugs (Bedaquiline, Delamanid) that have been developed to treat MDR-TB are being used very cautiously to avoid the development of drug-resistance and side effects. And last, current efforts to cure TB are focused on symptomatic cases, and not pre-symptomatic or early stage cases.

The WHO report states, “Global actions and investments fall far short of those needed to end the global TB epidemic.” Dr. Margaret Chan, Director General of WHO said, “We face an uphill battle to reach the global targets for tuberculosis. There must be a massive scale-up of efforts, or countries will continue to run behind this deadly epidemic…” (Rina Shaikh-Lesko, NPR)

Science Diplomacy

U.S. and Cuban biomedical researchers are free to collaborate

The United States reconciled with Cuba in 2014, and has been removing several sanctions since then. Along with ease of trade and travel between the two countries, scientists from the two nations can now collaborate more easily with each other. Earlier, scientists in the US had to go through a “a very involved and detailed process” with the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) to get a license to conduct research with Cuban scientists, and these licenses typically lasted only a year or two. Also, what kinds of collaborations were permissible was unclear under the old rules.

Both the US and Cuban scientists welcome the new move. Dr. Pedro Valdés-Sosa, research director at the Cuban Neuroscience Center in Havana said on his visit to the US, “…Everywhere I went there were concrete ideas for collaborations that would benefit the people of both countries. These new measures pave the way for cooperation.” Also, Cuban scientists can now receive research funding from the US government, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) can review drugs developed in Cuba, and FDA-approved drugs can be imported from Cuba and sold in the US. Dr. Thomas Schwaab of Roswell Park Cancer Institute in Buffalo, New York wonders whether Cuban scientists who have ongoing collaborations with scientists in other parts of the world would welcome working with the US, given that they were shunned for so long. But the Cuban scientists “are very proud of what they’ve achieved,” says Dr. Schwaab. (Richard Stone, Science)

Have an interesting science policy link?  Share it in the comments!

Written by sciencepolicyforall

October 18, 2016 at 9:00 am

Science Policy Around the Web – October 7, 2016

leave a comment »

By: Eric Cheng, PhD

Source: pixabay

Antibiotic Resistance

World health leaders agree on action to combat antimicrobial resistance, warning of nearly 10 million deaths annually if left unchecked

World leaders committed to take action on antimicrobial resistance during their September 21, 2016 high-level meeting on Antimicrobial Resistance in New York. This is the first time Heads of State made a commitment to address the root cause of antimicrobial resistance in human health, animal health, and agriculture. Dr. Margaret Chan, Director-General of the World Health Organization emphasized that “antimicrobial resistance poses a fundamental threat to human health, development, and security. The commitments made today must now be translated into swift, effective, lifesaving actions across the human, animal and environmental health sectors. We are running out of time.”

The committed countries pledged to strengthen regulation of antimicrobials, improve knowledge and awareness, and promote best practices. World leaders also agreed to foster innovative approaches using alternatives to antimicrobials and new technologies for diagnosis and vaccines. The committed countries will base their national action plans on the Global Action Plan on Microbial Resistance, a blueprint developed in 2015 by the World Health Organization along with Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and the World Organization for Animal Health. (United Nations Meetings Coverage and Press Releases)

Zika

Documents reveal intense battle over CDC Zika tests

In addition to battling the spread of Zika infections, the Center for Disease and Prevention (CDC) is currently in an internal battle with determining which test will be best in diagnosing someone with the disease. Robert Lanciotti is the Chief of the Diagnostics and Reference Activity in the Division of Vector-Borne Infectious Diseases in Fort Collins, CO. At the center of the debate is the agency’s prioritization of the Trioplex real-time PCR-based assay that tests for Zika, dengue, and chikungunya over the Singleplex assay which only detects Zika, which Lanciotti’s research found to be 39% more effective than the Trioplex assay.

Lanciotti claimed that the CDC “created a substantial and specific danger to public health” when it did not disclose lower sensitivity of the test it used. Lanciotti was subsequently reassigned to a non-supervisory position in his laboratory who then filed a whistleblower retaliation claim with the US Office of Special Counsel. Lanciotti alleged that the demotion was because of his concerns with the Zika test. Lanciotti has since been reinstated as director of his lab. In addition, the Office of Special Counsel requested that the CDC investigate Lanciotti’s concerns with the sensitivity of the Trioplex test.

The CDC’s own investigation found that Dr. Lanciotti’s allegations “are not substantiated by the available evidence.” The CDC ruled that “[t]here is insufficient, statistically robust, definitive data to reach an evidence-based conclusion that use of the Trioplex assay over the Singleplex in clinical practice will result in 39 percent of Zika virus infections being missed.” The CDC also noted that it is continuing to improve on the Trioplex assay such as enabling testing laboratories to use larger sample volumes in order to increase the assay’s limit of detection. The Trioplex assay is still approved for use as a method of detecting Zika virus, dengue, and chikungunya. (Jon Cohen, Science Magazine)

Research Funding

HHMI Launches New Program for Early-Career Scientists

The Howard Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI) recently launched a new program to recruit and retain early-career scientists that are underrepresented in the life sciences. These individuals include those coming from a disadvantaged background. The selected HHMI scientists will become Hanna H. Gray fellows, named after Hanna H. Gray, former chair of the HHMI Trustees and former president of the University of Chicago.

The purpose of the Gray Fellows Program is to find and encourage talented students and early scientists that are committed to continuing their scientific training in the nation’s top laboratories. The Hanna H. Gray Fellows grant competition is open to all eligible applicants and no nomination is required.  Selected fellows are required to devote at least 75 percent of their total effort to research during both the postdoctoral training and faculty phases of the award. In addition, part of the goal for the program is to position Gray fellows to be competitive for NIH grants and other awards when they transition to the faculty phase of their careers. (Howard Hughes Medical Institute)

Have an interesting science policy link?  Share it in the comments!

Written by sciencepolicyforall

October 7, 2016 at 11:12 am

Science Policy Around the Web – February 16, 2016

leave a comment »

By: Julia Shaw, Ph.D.

Photo Credit: Kara Wall

The Environment

NYC waters are teeming with plastic particles, study finds

A recent study, conducted by the environmental group NY/NJ Baykeeper, has concluded that the waters around New York City are a “soup of plastic.” Inspired by a similar study of the Great Lakes, NY/NY Baykeeper collected water samples from the East River, the Hudson River in New York Harbor area, and the Passaic River and Raritan Bay in New Jersey and analyzed them for their plastic content. This study found an average of 256,322 plastic particles per square kilometer, with approximately 165 million plastic bits floating in the Harbor area. Plastic microbeads used in exfoliating skin care products contributed tens of millions of particles alone. The Microbead-Free Waters Act of 2015, which goes into effect in July 2017, will require companies to cease selling microbead products. Carcinogenic chemicals can also adhere to plastic particles, and be ingested by fish and shellfish mistaking the particles for food. As a result, city and state officials are advising women who are or may become pregnant and children to avoid eating seafood caught in the waters around New York City. A spokeswoman for the mayor said reducing plastics and other waste is a priority for the administration, which is working to put in place a ban on plastic-foam food containers as well as engaging in a public awareness campaign encouraging the use of reusable bags, mugs, and bottles in place of disposables. (Karen Matthews, Phys.org)

Global Health

Zika Virus Test is ‘Weeks, Not Years’ Away, WHO Says

Though first discovered almost 70 years ago in Uganda in 1947, the Zika virus has not been well-studied. However, the latest outbreak of Zika in Latin America is about to change that. On February 1st the World Health Organization (WHO) declared Zika virus a global public heath emergency. Zika virus is related to other mosquito-vectored viruses including those that cause dengue, yellow fever, and West Nile, but no test specific for Zika is commercially available. However, ten companies have developed assays to either directly detect viral particles in the blood or to detect specific antibodies raised against the virus. According to the W.H.O. assistant director general for health systems and innovation, Dr. Marie-Paule Kieny, these assays bode well for the first commercial tests being available in a matter of weeks following independent validation and regulatory approval. Symptoms of infection include fever, rash, joint pain, and red eyes, yet the most startling consequences are an apparent link to the neurological disorders microcephaly and Guillain-Barre syndrome in babies born to women exposed to the virus while pregnant. The government of El Salvador has advised women to delay any pregnancies until 2018, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the WHO are recommending pregnant women avoid travel to areas where the virus is actively circulating. Because the virus also appears capable of sexual transmission, the WHO further advises couples living in endemic areas to use condoms. Two early vaccine candidates, one from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and another from an Indian pharmaceutical company, Bharat Biotech, are being developed, yet Dr. Kieny cautions that “vaccines are still at least 18 months away from large-scale trials.” (Sewell Chan with contributions from Donald G. McNeil Jr., The New York Times)

Biomedical Ethics

Karolinska Institute vice-chancellor resigns in wake of Macchiarini scandal

Anders Hamsten, vice-chancellor of Stockholm’s Karolinska Institute (KI) has stepped down amidst ongoing controversy surrounding the work of surgeon Paolo Macchiarinini, a visiting professor at KI from 2010 through October 2015. A recent documentary that aired on Swedish public television re-ignited interest in the case, which involved the implantation of artificial trachea into eight patients, six of whom have since died. While originally hailed as a great success for regenerative medicine, questions have been raised concerning the accuracy of Macchiarini’s published papers describing the effectiveness of the technique. Hamsten led an investigation into Macchiarini’s work last year following the submission of whistleblower reports detailing suspected research misconduct by the surgeon, however, Hamsten cleared Macchiarini of all charges. In November, KI awarded Macchiarini a new 1-year contract. In a recent article published in the Swedish newspaper Dagens Nyheter, Hamsen reversed his opinion stating, “[I]t seems very likely that my decision in this case was wrong. I realize it will be difficult for me to continue working as Vice Chancellor of Sweden’s most successful university with credibility and effectiveness.” The Macchiarini misconduct case is set to be reopened and responsibility for the inquiry transferred to the Central Ethical Review Board of Sweden. (Gretchen Vogel, ScienceInsider)

Have an interesting science policy link?  Share it in the comments!

Written by sciencepolicyforall

February 16, 2016 at 9:00 am

Science Policy Around the Web – January 29, 2016

leave a comment »

By: Daniël P. Melters, Ph.D.

Infectious Diseases

Zika virus, linked to microcephaly, on the rise

Only a few months after the scare of the epidemic of chikungunya, a new virus has emerged on the American continents: Zika virus. The same mosquito (Aedes aegypti) that transmits yellow fever, dengue, and chikungunya also transmits this virus. In the last few months of 2015, there was a sharp rise in babies born with microcephaly. Some hospitals in north Brazil that would only see five cases a year, now see over 300 in six months. These babies have abnormally small heads and the rare neurological disorder Guillain-Barré syndrome. The rise in cases with microcephaly strongly correlated with an ongoing Zika virus epidemic in the north of Brazil. In addition, the Zika virus RNA was found in the amniotic fluid of two fetuses. It is thought that women who were pregnant became infected with the virus and gave it to the growing fetus. Nevertheless, there is no formal evidence that the Zika virus causes microcephaly. In fact, a recent report argues that a surge in finding birth defects is too blame for the increase in microcephaly cases in Latin America.

This has not stopped local and global authorities from warning people of the potential dangers of the Zika virus. Brazil has suggested its citizens in affected regions not get pregnant. The CDC in the U.S. is warning tourists who go to regions where Zika virus is epidemic to take precautionary measures to prevent being bitten by mosquitos. On Thursday, January 28th, the World Health Organization declared an International Emergency. The last International Emergency was the Ebola outbreak in West Africa. Another complicating factor is the expected increase in number of mosquitos due to El Niño. Although most people who get infected by Zika virus will remain asymptomatic, some people will have a rash and a fever. As of now, no cure exists. Therefore, researchers around the world are rushing to develop a vaccine. Two potential vaccines against West Nile virus, after being repurposed for Zika, might enter clinical trials as early as late 2016, according to Dr. Fauci (NIH/NIAID) [recent talk by Dr. Fauci on emerging viruses]. But caution about a quick cure is warranted, as it might take several years before a Zika vaccine becomes commercially available. (, BBC News website)

Mental Health

One step closer to understanding schizophrenia

Schizophrenia is a debilitating psychiatric disease that affects over two million people in the United States alone. Often, this disease start in the later years of adolescence and early adulthood. Delusional thinking and hallucinations characterize schizophrenia, but the drugs available to date to treat schizophrenia are blunt and frequently patients stop using them because of their side effects. Although this new study will not lead to new treatments on the short term, it does provide researchers with first firm biological handle on the disease.

The developing human brain is the site of neuronal pruning. At first, the brain makes an excessive number of connections between neurons, but as children grow-up, most of these redundant connections are lost. You can see this a competition between the connections where the strongest ones survive. Neuronal pruning in the prefrontal cortex, the part of the brain involved in thinking and planning, happens in adolescence and early adulthood. The latest finding, published in Nature, found that people who carry genes that accelerate or intensify that pruning are at higher risk of developing schizophrenia than those who do not. To date, no specific genetic variant has been found, although the MHC locus seems a likely candidate. Indeed, one specific gene in this locus, C4 gene, is involved in neuronal pruning. The C4 gene produces two products: C4-A and C4-B. Too much of the C4-A variant results in too much pruning in mice, which would explain why schizophrenic patients have a thinner prefrontal cortex. These new findings help to connect the dots better than ever before. Next up will be developing drugs that regulate neuronal pruning and the hope is that this will create a new anti-schizophrenia drug. (Benedict Carey, New York Times)

Technology

Analyzing body chemistry through sweat sensor

A small, wearable sensor has been created that can measure the molecular composition of sweat send those results in real time to your smartphone. The sensor, a flexible plastic patch, can be incorporated into wristbands. Several labs have been working on developing such a patch for a while, but most of them could only detect one molecule at a time. This newly developed flexible printed plastic sensor can detect glucose, lactate, sodium, potassium, and body temperature. When the sensor comes in contact with sweat an electrical signal is amplified and filtered. Subsequently, the signal is calibrated with the skin temperature. This latter step is essential, according to the lead scientist Jarvey. The data is then wirelessly transmitted to your smartphone. Because the sensor is not as accurate as a blood test, rigorous testing for medical use is therefore required.

The potential of this new devise is that it can tell, for instance, a diabetic patient in real-time that his blood sugar levels are too low or too high. It could also tell someone who is physically active that she is getting dehydrated and needs to drink water. One particular project could greatly benefit from this new technology. Last year President Obama announced the Precision Medicine Initiative. The goal of this initiative is to enroll over one million American participants and follow them over time to learn about the biological, environmental, and behavioral influences on health and disease. After all, most disease still do not have a proven means of prevention or effective treatments. Having technology such as this that can monitor and track basic biological data in real time could provide a wealth of information to researchers looking to make connections between a person and a disease.  (Linda Geddes, Nature News)

Have an interesting science policy link?  Share it in the comments!

Written by sciencepolicyforall

January 29, 2016 at 9:00 am

UPDATE: Science Policy Around the Web – January 15, 2016

leave a comment »

By: Amanda Whiting, Ph.D.

photo credit: Microbe World via photopin cc

West Africa Ebola epidemic

New Ebola case confirmed in Sierra Leone, one day after the outbreak was declared over

A 22-year-old woman in Sierra Leone who passed away earlier this month has been confirmed as testing positive for Ebola. Authorities in the area are now actively engaged in “investigating the origin of the case, identifying contacts and initiating control measures to prevent further transmission,” according to a statement today by the World Health Organization (WHO). This new case comes a day after the WHO officially declared the West Africa Ebola epidemic over. Dr Bruce Aylward, WHO’s Special Representative for the Ebola Response, said yesterday that “we still anticipate more flare-ups and must be prepared for them.” Francis Langoba Kelly, spokesman for the Office of National Security in Sierra Leone, told local radio Friday that country’s level of preparedness is high and there is no cause for concern over the current case. It it hopeful that the country’s preparedness for and (unfortunate) practice in this situation will quickly shut down any possible transmission routes from this case. (J. Freedom du Lac and Kevin Sieff, The Washington Post)

Have an interesting science policy link?  Share it in the comments!

Written by sciencepolicyforall

January 15, 2016 at 1:34 pm

Posted in Linkposts

Tagged with ,