thescientist--2020-10-08--Molecular Biologist Jeff McKnight Dies at 36

ABOVE : Jeff McKnight with his daughter Katherine LAURA MCKNIGHT Jeff McKnight , a molecular biologist at the University of Oregon interested in how cells package and maintain their DNA , died on October 4 after a brief battle with lymphoma that he documented on social media for thousands of his followers .
“ He had this humility and vulnerability about him that was really endearing , ” David Garcia , a molecular biologist at the University of Oregon and colleague of McKnight , tells The Scientist .
“ And like a lot of scientists , he just had this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ work .
He was really passionate about what he did , and he worked really hard.
” McKnight was well-known in his field for his work studying the structure of chromatin—a complex made up of strands of DNA wrapped around a core of proteins called a histone—that controls when and how DNA can be accessed for replication and gene expression .
Dozens of diseases involve some level of chromatin disruption , including Parkinson ’ s , Alzheimer ’ s , Huntington ’ s , and some cancers that modify the chromatin to proliferate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the University of Oregon as a faculty member in 2016 , McKnight was one of the only researchers in the world capable of intentionally manipulating chromatin structure , a technique he was honing with the intent of developing treatments for disease .
“ The real dream is that this strategy can one day be applied in humans to help correct or turn off some of the mechanisms that lead to cancer progression , ” McKnight said in a 2016 article announcing his hiring .
Born in New Jersey in 1984 , McKnight attended @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , where he majored in biochemistry .
On his LinkedIn profile , McKnight acknowledged his early exposure in synthetic chemistry for instilling in him “ a mechanism centered view that I carried through my molecular biology/biochemistry graduate experience.
” McKnight next completed a PhD at Johns Hopkins University , where he first began studying the molecular underpinnings of chromatin .
His thesis research focused on the domains of the chromatin remodeling gene CHD1 .
CHD genes alter gene expression by modifying chromatin structure , opening the chromatin up for access by transcriptional machinery @ @ @ @ @ @ @ these genes have been implicated in diseases such as schizophrenia and cancer .
Building on his dissertation research and his desire to develop treatments in humans , McKnight accepted a postdoc as a Leukemia & Lymphoma Society Fellow at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle in 2012 .
There , he studied how epigenetic changes can modify the structure of chromatin , and began trying to intentionally rearrange chromatin in the model organism Saccharomyces cerevisiae .
When he arrived at the University of Oregon , McKnight was the first of a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for Genome Function , chosen from among more than 250 applicants .
“ Jeffrey McKnight represents exactly the kind of talent we are seeking to attract , ” university provost Scott Coltrane said in the article announcing McKnight ’ s hiring .
Eric Selker , the hiring coordinator , shared in the same piece , “ with Jeff , there was no arguing necessary , there was no twisting of arms ; It was , ‘ Yes , get this guy.
’ ” Much of his work in the last several years sought @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and he received grant money for the National Institutes of Health to support his research .
Some of his more recent work has focused on better understanding the targeted ability of chromatin remodeling proteins to home in on certain sequences with high specificity , and McKnight had also continued his in his efforts to engineer these proteins .
“ His contributions were really important in the short amount of time that he had running his own lab , ” Garcia tells The Scientist .
McKnight was diagnosed with hepatosplenic T cell lymphoma @ @ @ @ @ @ @ through the course of his illness , he spoke openly about his treatment , difficulties with his insurance , and his mental and physical outlook from day to day .
In a GoFundMe campaign set up by McKnight , he shared that his wife Laura McKnight , a fellow researcher and manager of the McKnight lab , might lose her job .
She has since shared that the lab plans to continue running under a new principal investigator .
His chronicling of his disease was met with an outpouring of support .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the world .
I ’ ve never met you , but I ’ m moved by your existing .
Peace to you and your family , ” Bianca Jones Marlin , a neuroscientist at Columbia University , said in response to his final message , which received almost 2,000 comments .
McKnight is survived by his wife Laura and his daughter Katherine , who turned eight today .

ABOVE: Jeff McKnight with his daughter Katherine
LAURA MCKNIGHT
Jeff McKnight, a molecular biologist at the University of Oregon interested in how cells package and maintain their DNA, died on October 4 after a brief battle with lymphoma that he documented on social media for thousands of his followers.
“He had this humility and vulnerability about him that was really endearing,” David Garcia, a molecular biologist at the University of Oregon and colleague of McKnight, tells The Scientist. “And like a lot of scientists, he just had this natural curiosity about life and how things work. He was really passionate about what he did, and he worked really hard.”
McKnight was well-known in his field for his work studying the structure of chromatin—a complex made up of strands of DNA wrapped around cores of proteins called histones—that controls when and how DNA can be accessed for replication and gene expression. Dozens of diseases involve some level of chromatin disruption, including Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s, Huntington’s, and some cancers that modify the chromatin to proliferate out of control.
When he joined the University of Oregon as a faculty member in 2016, McKnight was one of the only researchers in the world capable of intentionally manipulating chromatin structure, a technique he was honing with the intent of developing treatments for disease. “The real dream is that this strategy can one day be applied in humans to help correct or turn off some of the mechanisms that lead to cancer progression,” McKnight said in a 2016 article announcing his hiring.
Born in New Jersey in 1984, McKnight attended Bucknell University in Pennsylvania for his undergraduate, where he majored in biochemistry. On his LinkedIn profile, McKnight acknowledged his early exposure in synthetic chemistry for instilling in him “a mechanism centered view that I carried through my molecular biology/biochemistry graduate experience.”
McKnight next completed a PhD at Johns Hopkins University, where he first began studying the molecular underpinnings of chromatin. His thesis research focused on the domains of the chromatin remodeling gene CHD1. CHD genes alter gene expression by modifying chromatin structure, opening the chromatin up for access by transcriptional machinery in the cell, and disruptions in these genes have been implicated in diseases such as schizophrenia and cancer.
Building on his dissertation research and his desire to develop treatments in humans, McKnight accepted a postdoc as a Leukemia & Lymphoma Society Fellow at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle in 2012. There, he studied how epigenetic changes can modify the structure of chromatin, and began trying to intentionally rearrange chromatin in the model organism Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
When he arrived at the University of Oregon, McKnight was the first of a cluster of hires for the new Center for Genome Function, chosen from among more than 250 applicants. “Jeffrey McKnight represents exactly the kind of talent we are seeking to attract,” university provost Scott Coltrane said in the article announcing McKnight’s hiring. Eric Selker, the hiring coordinator, shared in the same piece, “with Jeff, there was no arguing necessary, there was no twisting of arms; It was, ‘Yes, get this guy.’”
Much of his work in the last several years sought to answer fundamental biological questions about chromatin, and he received grant money for the National Institutes of Health to support his research. Some of his more recent work has focused on better understanding the targeted ability of chromatin remodeling proteins to home in on certain sequences with high specificity, and McKnight had also continued his in his efforts to engineer these proteins. “His contributions were really important in the short amount of time that he had running his own lab,” Garcia tells The Scientist.
McKnight was diagnosed with hepatosplenic T cell lymphoma in March of this year, and through the course of his illness, he spoke openly about his treatment, difficulties with his insurance, and his mental and physical outlook from day to day.
Confirmed. Doc said maybe a week or so left. In ER for comfort care. Thank you all for battling with me. — McKnight Lab (@McKnightLab_UO) October 2, 2020
In a GoFundMe campaign set up by McKnight, he shared that his wife Laura McKnight, a fellow researcher and manager of the McKnight lab, might lose her job. She has since shared that the lab plans to continue running under a new principal investigator.
His chronicling of his disease was met with an outpouring of support. “Thank you for sharing something so unknown with the world. I’ve never met you, but I’m moved by your existing. Peace to you and your family,” Bianca Jones Marlin, a neuroscientist at Columbia University, said in response to his final message, which received almost 2,000 comments.
McKnight is survived by his wife Laura and his daughter Katherine, who turned eight today.


thescientist--2020-10-08--Investigating the Immune Response Using Advanced Flow Cytometry

The immune system protects the human body from foreign and internal threats .
Despite the diverse nature of potential pathogens @ @ @ @ @ generally conserved .
At the same time , individual cell types within the immune response @ @ @ @ @ and activities depending on their location , genetic profile , functional phenotype , and the @ @ @ @ @ Flow cytometry , with its ability to rapidly quantify , profile , and characterize large @ @ @ @ @ is invaluable to delineating the inner machinations of the immune response .
Download this ebook @ @ @ @ @ Services team and Sartorius to investigate • The stages of the immune life cycle • @ @ @ @ @ cytometry to understand cancer

The immune system protects the human body from foreign and internal threats. Despite the diverse nature of potential pathogens, the immune response is generally conserved. At the same time, individual cell types within the immune response exhibit a range of roles and activities depending on their location, genetic profile, functional phenotype, and the nature of the threat. Flow cytometry, with its ability to rapidly quantify, profile, and characterize large numbers of individual cells, is invaluable to delineating the inner machinations of the immune response.
Download this ebook from The Scientist's Creative Services team and Sartorius to investigate


thescientist--2020-10-08--Protein Detection in Cell-Based Assays

Protein Detection in Cell-Based Assays

Recent advances in protein detection assays give scientists a better view inside cells .
With modern imaging systems and the @ @ @ @ @ new therapeutics can perform reproducible and publication-worthy experiments .
Download this ebook from LI-COR Biosciences @ @ @

Recent advances in protein detection assays give scientists a better view inside cells. With modern imaging systems and the proper controls, researchers developing new therapeutics can perform reproducible and publication-worthy experiments.
Download this ebook from LI-COR Biosciences to learn about


thescientist--2020-10-09--Electric and Magnetic Field Treatments Lower Mouse Blood Sugar

Treating diabetes often involves daily pills or insulin injections , but a study published this week ( October 6 ) in Cell Metabolism presents another potential treatment option : electromagnetic fields .
Researchers found that exposing mice with type 2 diabetes to static electric and magnetic fields increases insulin sensitivity and lowers blood sugar .
The paper “ is a noninvasive way of treating glycemia in animal models with diabetes , so I thought that was pretty remarkable , ” says Juleen Zierath , who studies type 2 diabetes at the Karolinska Institute in Sweden and was not involved in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a really thorough job to convince themselves that what they were looking at was something worth investigating further , that it wasn ’ t just an artifact.
” Calvin Carter , a postdoc in Val Sheffield ’ s lab at the University of Iowa , didn ’ t believe the results at first himself , he says .
Carter finished his PhD at the university in 2014 and had about six months before he left Iowa to go to medical school .
He decided to use that time to start a “ crazy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to look at how energy fields affect the body .
He built several devices that emitted electromagnetic fields—at strengths between 10 and 100 times that of the earth and 1/1000th of that of an MRI—and started testing them on mice for seven or 24 hours per day .
The devices generated static electromagnetic fields , while animals moved freely in metal-free cages .
A few months before Carter ’ s planned move , MD/PhD student Sunny Huang joined the Sheffield lab .
She was starting a diabetes-related project and needed to practice measuring @ @ @ @ @ @ @ donated some of the animals he ’ d been using , which included models of type 2 diabetes .
Huang quickly noticed that the mice who had been exposed to electromagnetic fields had half the blood glucose levels as the unexposed mice , data she showed Carter .
“ I ’ m like , ‘ No , get out of here .
You did the measurements wrong .
The glucometer ’ s messed up .
Let ’ s try it again , ’ ” Carter says .
The pair repeated the measurements , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that were supposed to be diabetic was normal .
At that point , Carter and Huang showed the data to Dale Abel , a physician and diabetes researcher at Iowa .
“ I said , ‘ Look , you ’ ve got to reproduce this two or three different ways to begin to convince me , ’ ” Abel tells The Scientist .
So Carter , Huang , and their colleagues tested electromagnetic field exposure in three different mouse models of diabetes and demonstrated that each had lower blood sugar and were more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exposed to inactive devices .
The findings didn ’ t differ when the animals were treated for seven or 24 hours .
Previous work has shown that cells use electromagnetic fields in migration , which is mediated in part by a molecule called superoxide , a reactive oxygen species that seems to function like a molecular antenna , picking up on electrical and magnetic signals .
Patients with type 2 diabetes have been shown to have elevated levels of superoxide , which has been linked to vascular issues and diabetic retinopathy .
To @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exerting their effects , the researchers depleted superoxide molecules from the animals ’ livers and found that exposure to the fields didn ’ t have any effect on blood sugar or insulin resistance .
“ We think that that molecule is what ’ s signaling a lot of the other things that happen in the cell to adapt and then to go on to improve blood sugar , ” says Huang .
“ It was very intriguing what they found , and potentially very important if you could reverse hepatic insulin resistance with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Douglas Rothman , who studies metabolism and metabolic control at Yale University and did not participate in the work .
It would be nice , he adds , “ to establish in a simpler system—for example , a non-biological system—a measure showing that the impact of the magnetic and the electric fields on superoxide reactivity was significant.
” Many of the protein players remain undefined , and further exploration of how this works will be the subject of future studies , the authors acknowledge in the paper .
They also plan to test @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Huang , Carter , and colleagues have started a company , Geminii Health , which will focus on commercialization of the treatment .
“ They would really want to do very carefully calibrated studies to be able to show that this could work for people with diabetes , but if there are no deleterious side effects , this could be an interesting way to help manage diabetes , ” says Zierath .
The study also shows that “ it ’ s really important to keep your eyes open , ” she adds @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sometimes you really see something very unexpected .
Don ’ t discount a very unexpected result .
Take some time , like these authors did , and try to dig into the details.
” C.S .
Carter et al.
, “ Exposure to static magnetic and electric fields treats type 2 diabetes , ” Cell Metabolism , doi:10.1016/j.cmet.2020.09.012 , 2020 .

An illustration of treating a mouse with magnetic and electric fields CHARLES ROMANS, CALVIN CARTER, SUNNY HUANG
Treating diabetes often involves daily pills or insulin injections, but a study published this week (October 6) in Cell Metabolism presents another potential treatment option: electromagnetic fields. Researchers found that exposing mice with type 2 diabetes to static electric and magnetic fields increases insulin sensitivity and lowers blood sugar.
The paper “is a noninvasive way of treating glycemia in animal models with diabetes, so I thought that was pretty remarkable,” says Juleen Zierath, who studies type 2 diabetes at the Karolinska Institute in Sweden and was not involved in the study. “The authors did a really thorough job to convince themselves that what they were looking at was something worth investigating further, that it wasn’t just an artifact.”
Calvin Carter, a postdoc in Val Sheffield’s lab at the University of Iowa, didn’t believe the results at first himself, he says. Carter finished his PhD at the university in 2014 and had about six months before he left Iowa to go to medical school. He decided to use that time to start a “crazy project, just for fun,” to look at how energy fields affect the body. He built several devices that emitted electromagnetic fields—at strengths between 10 and 100 times that of the earth and 1/1000th of that of an MRI—and started testing them on mice for seven or 24 hours per day. The devices generated static electromagnetic fields, while animals moved freely in metal-free cages.
Don’t discount a very unexpected result. Take some time, like these authors did, and try to dig into the details. —Juleen Zierath, Karolinska Institute
A few months before Carter’s planned move, MD/PhD student Sunny Huang joined the Sheffield lab. She was starting a diabetes-related project and needed to practice measuring blood sugar in mice, so Carter donated some of the animals he’d been using, which included models of type 2 diabetes. Huang quickly noticed that the mice who had been exposed to electromagnetic fields had half the blood glucose levels as the unexposed mice, data she showed Carter.
“I’m like, ‘No, get out of here. You did the measurements wrong. The glucometer’s messed up. Let’s try it again,’” Carter says. The pair repeated the measurements, and the blood sugar in treated animals that were supposed to be diabetic was normal.
At that point, Carter and Huang showed the data to Dale Abel, a physician and diabetes researcher at Iowa. “I said, ‘Look, you’ve got to reproduce this two or three different ways to begin to convince me,’” Abel tells The Scientist.
So Carter, Huang, and their colleagues tested electromagnetic field exposure in three different mouse models of diabetes and demonstrated that each had lower blood sugar and were more sensitive to insulin than controls that were exposed to inactive devices. The findings didn’t differ when the animals were treated for seven or 24 hours.
Previous work has shown that cells use electromagnetic fields in migration, which is mediated in part by a molecule called superoxide, a reactive oxygen species that seems to function like a molecular antenna, picking up on electrical and magnetic signals. Patients with type 2 diabetes have been shown to have elevated levels of superoxide, which has been linked to vascular issues and diabetic retinopathy. To investigate how these electromagnetic fields might be exerting their effects, the researchers depleted superoxide molecules from the animals’ livers and found that exposure to the fields didn’t have any effect on blood sugar or insulin resistance.
“We think that that molecule is what’s signaling a lot of the other things that happen in the cell to adapt and then to go on to improve blood sugar,” says Huang.
“It was very intriguing what they found, and potentially very important if you could reverse hepatic insulin resistance with static magnetic electric fields,” says Douglas Rothman, who studies metabolism and metabolic control at Yale University and did not participate in the work. It would be nice, he adds, “to establish in a simpler system—for example, a non-biological system—a measure showing that the impact of the magnetic and the electric fields on superoxide reactivity was significant.”
Many of the protein players remain undefined, and further exploration of how this works will be the subject of future studies, the authors acknowledge in the paper. They also plan to test the technology in larger animals and people. Huang, Carter, and colleagues have started a company, Geminii Health, which will focus on commercialization of the treatment.
“They would really want to do very carefully calibrated studies to be able to show that this could work for people with diabetes, but if there are no deleterious side effects, this could be an interesting way to help manage diabetes,” says Zierath.
The study also shows that “it’s really important to keep your eyes open,” she adds. “Because as a researcher, sometimes you really see something very unexpected. Don’t discount a very unexpected result. Take some time, like these authors did, and try to dig into the details.”
C.S. Carter et al., “Exposure to static magnetic and electric fields treats type 2 diabetes,” Cell Metabolism, doi:10.1016/j.cmet.2020.09.012, 2020.


thescientist--2020-10-09--Amid Pandemic, Scientists Lean on Credentials in Political Races

Although Cameron Webb decided to run for political office long before the pandemic started , his campaign appears to be made for times like these .
The 37-year-old physician announced his bid to represent Virginia ’ s 5th congressional district last August , and he says the main thing on his mind then was repairing the country ’ s broken healthcare system .
While seeing patients with diabetes , hypertension , and heart disease as an internist at the University of Virginia ’ s Department of Medicine , he witnessed the structural problems that contributed to his patients ’ conditions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ income inequality , and poor access to healthcare .
“ I see those systems , those policies , failing people and manifesting in poor health outcomes , and that makes me want to address the policies rather than just keep treating sick patients , ” Webb tells The Scientist .
He adds that he was also motivated by mounting threats to the Affordable Care Act by President Donald Trump ’ s administration .
Webb had helped work on the implementation of Obamacare as a White House Fellow under President Barack Obama .
( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ . )
In June of this year , amid a raging pandemic and nationwide protests over racial justice in the wake of George Floyd ’ s killing by police , Webb won the Democratic nomination after receiving two-thirds of the vote in a crowded primary .
While he continues to treat COVID-19 patients in the clinic , Webb is now running in a close race against Republican nominee Bob Good to win over the large district , which voted for Trump in 2016 with 58 percent of the votes , after twice voting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ career in finance before taking a position as an athletic director at the evangelical Christian Liberty University , a position he left to pursue politics .
If Webb wins on November 3 , he ’ ll become the first Black physician in Congress .
More than 30 candidates with science-related backgrounds—engineers , chemists , physicians , and astronauts—have landed on the ballot for House and Senate races , of which most are seeking reelection for seats they already hold .
And an all-time high of more than 170 candidates are running in state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Most Democrats are supported by 314 Action , a nonprofit political action committee created in 2016 to boost the representation of fact- and science-driven decision-makers in Washington and beyond .
314 Action does not endorse Republican candidates for congressional races due to what the organization perceives as a conflict between the party ’ s policy positions and the overwhelming scientific consensus on climate change and other issues , although Republican candidates are able to take part in 314 Action ’ s campaign preparation training .
Shaughnessy Naughton , the founder and president of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ candidates ’ scientific backgrounds give them an advantage this year in particular , as the pandemic has underscored the importance of following scientific principles as well as the potential consequences of ignoring expertise .
Many doctors “ got into the race because of the healthcare issues , but then perhaps have earned themselves a little bit more focus and credibility because of everything that ’ s happened since , ” notes Jacob Rubashkin , a reporter and analyst at Inside Elections , which provides nonpartisan analysis of US elections .
That said , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what will or will not sway voters.
” Track the candidates with STEM backgrounds running for federal seats While the overall numbers of scientists in the House and Senate remain small , 2018 saw an influx of lawmakers with STEM backgrounds .
Of 20 candidates who ran for House seats that year—most of them Democrats supported by 314 Action—around half won their races .
Two out of three Senate candidates won , according to a list compiled by The Scientist .
Although it ’ s unclear if they succeeded because of their science @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them did leverage their experiences to their advantage .
For instance , Congresswoman Lauren Underwood ( D-IL ) , who is now representing Illinois ’ s 14th district , “ was able to parlay her credibility as a nurse , as a public health expert , into trust from voters at a time when healthcare was the number one thing on their minds .
.
.
and because of that , she was able to turn this Republican district blue , ” Rubashkin says .
In Congress , such representatives have contributed to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dominated by lawyers and introduced legislation tackling medicine and environmental issues , although many of those bills have stalled in the Senate , The Scientist reported last year .
This year , 314 Action has endorsed 19 House candidates—14 of them , including Underwood , are running for reelection—and five who are targeting Senate seats , four of whom are newcomers .
Among them is retired astronaut Mark Kelly , who aims to fill in the remainder of the term for the late Senator John McCain ( R-AZ ) .
Academic researchers are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ former chair of Stony Brook University ’ s chemistry department , Nancy Goroff , who is challenging Republican incumbent Lee Zeldin ( R-NY ) , a military veteran and lawyer , in a close race for a seat representing New York ’ s 1st Congressional district .
Her campaign emphasizes her reliance on facts and data and stresses the importance of taking a fact-based approach in navigating the COVID-19 pandemic .
Her campaign even features pictures of her in a lab coat examining brightly colored fluids .
If she ’ s successful she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a science PhD in Congress .
Naughton says that earlier in the year , candidates with STEM backgrounds competing for federal seats fared better in their primaries than in 2018 .
Naughton attributes this success largely to the pandemic , which has placed those with science backgrounds as assets and trusted voices in their communities , she says .
Rubashkin notes that Goroff ’ s campaign strategy of leaning on her identity as a scientist to appeal to voters is “ a big part of why she won her contested primary , [ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who also has a law degree , has raised his profile by the strength of his medical background , Rubashkin adds .
But Webb ’ s success was also thanks to support from African American voters , who make up one-fifth of the district ’ s population .
“ I think that ’ s going to be a key ingredient for November , ” Webb told the Associated Press after his primary victory in June .
Continued momentum from 2018 , now possibly fueled by the pandemic Although the number of candidates in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t changed much since 2018 , there ’ s been a substantial increase in candidates with STEM backgrounds running for state legislative positions .
Across the country , 314 Action counts 174 , a more than sevenfold increase from the number of candidates the organization endorsed in 2018 .
Naughton says the organization has also seen a surge in funding since the midterms : for that election cycle , the organization raised some $ 5.2 million to support its candidates , a figure that has grown to some $ 18 million for this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ she sees this uptick in support for 314 Action as a reflection of a desire to counter an increasingly widespread antiscience sentiment in US politics over the past few years .
“ The attacks on science didn ’ t start with the Trump administration , but they turned what felt like an attack on science to an all-out war on reality , ” Naughton says .
“ I think something has happened in our politics that makes people question facts , ” Webb adds .
Data are often misconstrued to suit particular narratives @ @ @ @ @ @ @ issues such as climate change , but also on the state of the economy , he says .
“ I think the more we have credible and authentic leadership on issues , the more people are inclined to accept those facts as the foundation of a policy intervention.
” In an April online poll commissioned by 314 Action surveying 1,002 likely voters from across the country , 61 percent of respondents indicated that they think that US politicians lack the experience necessary to handle the pandemic .
Furthermore , 88 percent agreed with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more representatives with a science background .
To Naughton , those results bode well for the success of candidates with STEM backgrounds on November 3 .
“ I think that is what Americans are looking for in this election : someone who they can .
.
.
base their conclusions and policies on the facts and evidence and to keep them safe.
” Webb says he thinks his experience in treating COVID-19 patients , while also meeting with business owners and seeing the economic toll , has given him a balanced perspective on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to voters .
“ I have human faces and fears attached to my vision of what navigating this pandemic looks like , ” he says , “ and I think that that ’ s something that voters [ want ] to hear a really thoughtful approach [ on ] .
” Rubashkin says he thinks it ’ s possible that the pandemic could influence the outcomes of the ongoing congressional races .
But while COVID-19 is a key concern in voter ’ s minds , so are a host of other issues , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over many of them .
“ If you think about everything that has happened over the past seven months , it ’ s kind of insane when you break it down into its component parts .
Between the pandemic , the conversation over racial justice , unrest in the streets , impeachment , Supreme Court , the economy—there are a whole bunch of ingredients that are coming together here.
” Inside Elections projects that Democrats are likely to retain their majority in the House and may expand representation .
For the Senate , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ three to five seats , which would grant the party narrow control of the chamber .
But with regard to individual races playing out in the states , “ each of them with their own unique set of issues , ” Rubashkin says— “ it ’ s hard to know until votes are cast .
”

ABOVE: DR. CAMERON WEBB FOR CONGRESS
Although Cameron Webb decided to run for political office long before the pandemic started, his campaign appears to be made for times like these. The 37-year-old physician announced his bid to represent Virginia’s 5th congressional district last August, and he says the main thing on his mind then was repairing the country’s broken healthcare system. While seeing patients with diabetes, hypertension, and heart disease as an internist at the University of Virginia’s Department of Medicine, he witnessed the structural problems that contributed to his patients’ conditions, factors such as food insecurity, income inequality, and poor access to healthcare.
“I see those systems, those policies, failing people and manifesting in poor health outcomes, and that makes me want to address the policies rather than just keep treating sick patients,” Webb tells The Scientist. He adds that he was also motivated by mounting threats to the Affordable Care Act by President Donald Trump’s administration. Webb had helped work on the implementation of Obamacare as a White House Fellow under President Barack Obama. (He was also a Fellow under Trump.)
In June of this year, amid a raging pandemic and nationwide protests over racial justice in the wake of George Floyd’s killing by police, Webb won the Democratic nomination after receiving two-thirds of the vote in a crowded primary. While he continues to treat COVID-19 patients in the clinic, Webb is now running in a close race against Republican nominee Bob Good to win over the large district, which voted for Trump in 2016 with 58 percent of the votes, after twice voting for Obama. Good had a long career in finance before taking a position as an athletic director at the evangelical Christian Liberty University, a position he left to pursue politics. If Webb wins on November 3, he’ll become the first Black physician in Congress.
The attacks on science didn’t start with the Trump administration, but they turned what felt like an attack on science to an all-out war on reality. —Shaughnessy Naughton, 314 Action
More than 30 candidates with science-related backgrounds—engineers, chemists, physicians, and astronauts—have landed on the ballot for House and Senate races, of which most are seeking reelection for seats they already hold. And an all-time high of more than 170 candidates are running in state and local races across the country. Most Democrats are supported by 314 Action, a nonprofit political action committee created in 2016 to boost the representation of fact- and science-driven decision-makers in Washington and beyond. 314 Action does not endorse Republican candidates for congressional races due to what the organization perceives as a conflict between the party’s policy positions and the overwhelming scientific consensus on climate change and other issues, although Republican candidates are able to take part in 314 Action’s campaign preparation training.
Shaughnessy Naughton, the founder and president of the organization, says she believes that candidates’ scientific backgrounds give them an advantage this year in particular, as the pandemic has underscored the importance of following scientific principles as well as the potential consequences of ignoring expertise.
Many doctors “got into the race because of the healthcare issues, but then perhaps have earned themselves a little bit more focus and credibility because of everything that’s happened since,” notes Jacob Rubashkin, a reporter and analyst at Inside Elections, which provides nonpartisan analysis of US elections. That said, “it’s hard to say what will or will not sway voters.”
While the overall numbers of scientists in the House and Senate remain small, 2018 saw an influx of lawmakers with STEM backgrounds. Of 20 candidates who ran for House seats that year—most of them Democrats supported by 314 Action—around half won their races. Two out of three Senate candidates won, according to a list compiled by The Scientist. Although it’s unclear if they succeeded because of their science backgrounds, Rubashkin notes, many of them did leverage their experiences to their advantage. For instance, Congresswoman Lauren Underwood (D-IL), who is now representing Illinois’s 14th district, “was able to parlay her credibility as a nurse, as a public health expert, into trust from voters at a time when healthcare was the number one thing on their minds . . . and because of that, she was able to turn this Republican district blue,” Rubashkin says.
In Congress, such representatives have contributed to diversifying a political body that is largely dominated by lawyers and introduced legislation tackling medicine and environmental issues, although many of those bills have stalled in the Senate, The Scientist reported last year.
This year, 314 Action has endorsed 19 House candidates—14 of them, including Underwood, are running for reelection—and five who are targeting Senate seats, four of whom are newcomers. Among them is retired astronaut Mark Kelly, who aims to fill in the remainder of the term for the late Senator John McCain (R-AZ). Academic researchers are also on the ballot, including the former chair of Stony Brook University’s chemistry department, Nancy Goroff, who is challenging Republican incumbent Lee Zeldin (R-NY), a military veteran and lawyer, in a close race for a seat representing New York’s 1st Congressional district. Her campaign emphasizes her reliance on facts and data and stresses the importance of taking a fact-based approach in navigating the COVID-19 pandemic. Her campaign even features pictures of her in a lab coat examining brightly colored fluids. If she’s successful she’d become the first woman with a science PhD in Congress.
Naughton says that earlier in the year, candidates with STEM backgrounds competing for federal seats fared better in their primaries than in 2018. Naughton attributes this success largely to the pandemic, which has placed those with science backgrounds as assets and trusted voices in their communities, she says.
Rubashkin notes that Goroff’s campaign strategy of leaning on her identity as a scientist to appeal to voters is “a big part of why she won her contested primary, [albeit] very narrowly.” Webb, who also has a law degree, has raised his profile by the strength of his medical background, Rubashkin adds. But Webb’s success was also thanks to support from African American voters, who make up one-fifth of the district’s population. “I think that’s going to be a key ingredient for November,” Webb told the Associated Press after his primary victory in June.
Continued momentum from 2018, now possibly fueled by the pandemic
Although the number of candidates in the running for federal seats hasn’t changed much since 2018, there’s been a substantial increase in candidates with STEM backgrounds running for state legislative positions. Across the country, 314 Action counts 174, a more than sevenfold increase from the number of candidates the organization endorsed in 2018.
Naughton says the organization has also seen a surge in funding since the midterms: for that election cycle, the organization raised some $5.2 million to support its candidates, a figure that has grown to some $18 million for this year’s elections. Naughton says she sees this uptick in support for 314 Action as a reflection of a desire to counter an increasingly widespread antiscience sentiment in US politics over the past few years. “The attacks on science didn’t start with the Trump administration, but they turned what felt like an attack on science to an all-out war on reality,” Naughton says.
If you think about everything that has happened over the past seven months, it’s kind of insane when you break it down into its component parts. —Jacob Rubashkin, Inside Elections
“I think something has happened in our politics that makes people question facts,” Webb adds. Data are often misconstrued to suit particular narratives not only when it comes to science-based issues such as climate change, but also on the state of the economy, he says. “I think the more we have credible and authentic leadership on issues, the more people are inclined to accept those facts as the foundation of a policy intervention.”
In an April online poll commissioned by 314 Action surveying 1,002 likely voters from across the country, 61 percent of respondents indicated that they think that US politicians lack the experience necessary to handle the pandemic. Furthermore, 88 percent agreed with the statement that Congress would benefit from more representatives with a science background. To Naughton, those results bode well for the success of candidates with STEM backgrounds on November 3. “I think that is what Americans are looking for in this election: someone who they can . . . base their conclusions and policies on the facts and evidence and to keep them safe.”
Webb says he thinks his experience in treating COVID-19 patients, while also meeting with business owners and seeing the economic toll, has given him a balanced perspective on the pandemic that he hopes will appeal to voters. “I have human faces and fears attached to my vision of what navigating this pandemic looks like,” he says, “and I think that that’s something that voters [want] to hear a really thoughtful approach [on].”
Rubashkin says he thinks it’s possible that the pandemic could influence the outcomes of the ongoing congressional races. But while COVID-19 is a key concern in voter’s minds, so are a host of other issues, and the country has become increasingly polarized over many of them. “If you think about everything that has happened over the past seven months, it’s kind of insane when you break it down into its component parts. Between the pandemic, the conversation over racial justice, unrest in the streets, impeachment, Supreme Court, the economy—there are a whole bunch of ingredients that are coming together here.”
Inside Elections projects that Democrats are likely to retain their majority in the House and may expand representation. For the Senate, it predicts a Democrat net gain of three to five seats, which would grant the party narrow control of the chamber. But with regard to individual races playing out in the states, “each of them with their own unique set of issues,” Rubashkin says—“it’s hard to know until votes are cast.”


thescientist--2020-10-09--Candidates from STEM and Medical Fields in the National Elections

This year , more than 30 candidates with science , technology , engineering , math , and medical backgrounds are @ @ @ @ @ elections .
See “ Amid Pandemic , Scientists Lean on Credentials in Political Races ” @ @ @ @ @ a scientist running for office , please let us know .

ABOVE: MODIFIED FROM © ISTOCK.COM, BUBAONE
This year, more than 30 candidates with science, technology, engineering, math, and medical backgrounds are on the ballot for national elections.
If we’ve missed a scientist running for office, please let us know.
Winning candidates are highlighted in green. We will continue to update this list. (Last updated November 4)
Candidates running for House seats:
Candidates running for Senate seats:


thescientist--2020-10-09--Scientists' Advice for Ways to Ward off the Coronavirus

Ten months since the disease now known as COVID-19 first crept into the headlines , standard advice for avoiding it—such as wearing a mask , avoiding crowds , and washing hands well and often—has become familiar .
But as winter approaches in the northern hemisphere , and with it an anticipated surge in cases , we sought out additional science-backed tactics to lower the chances of becoming infected , or of developing severe disease .
The Scientist spoke with experts in virology , immunology , and medicine about the measures they ’ re taking themselves and recommending to others that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and other pathogens .
None yet meet the gold standard for clinical evidence—a randomized controlled trial showing they reduce COVID-19 transmission or severity—but for each , there ’ s a scientific rationale for thinking they may provide some protection .
As we anxiously await a proven vaccine for SARS-CoV-2 , studies indicate that certain existing vaccines—namely , those made with live , attenuated pathogens—confer some degree of temporary protection against germs they weren ’ t designed to target .
For example , a trial published last month in Cell found that 25 percent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tuberculosis vaccine bacille Calmette-Guérin ( BCG ) developed any kind of infection over the following year , compared with 42 percent of those who got a placebo shot .
The vaccine appeared to be most protective against viral respiratory infections .
Trials are now underway to test whether BCG and two other live vaccines , oral polio and measles , mumps , and rubella ( MMR ) , provide some protection against COVID-19 .
Robert Gallo , who directs the Institute of Human Virology at the University of Maryland School of Medicine and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Global Virus Network , has advocated for testing oral polio in particular against the coronavirus .
It ’ s cheap , easy to administer , and readily available , he says , adding that he expects other live vaccines would likewise provide bonus protections , including the intranasal flu vaccine , “ which I ’ d love to take myself for the flu season.
” He is unfortunately over the age limit—it ’ s only approved for people between 2 and 49 years old .
The conventional flu shot is not a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ flu vaccine provides against influenza itself is particularly important this year , notes Rachel Roper , who studies SARS-CoV-1 , SARS-CoV-2 , and other viruses at Eastern Carolina University .
You don ’ t want to get the flu and need medical attention at a time when the healthcare system may be overwhelmed with COVID-19 cases , she writes in an email to The Scientist .
“ If you get flu and have to go to the doctor , you may be exposed to people who have COVID and catch it yourself !
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ supplement ) Far from being only important for bone health , the hormone vitamin D “ affects many , many , many systems and cells throughout the body , ” including innate and adaptive immunity , says Carol Wagner , a neonatologist at the Medical University of South Carolina who studies the vitamin in clinical trials .
“ I , of course , have all my family members and friends taking vitamin D. ” Wagner and others now have clinical trials underway to test whether supplements of vitamin D—which can also be obtained @ @ @ @ @ @ @ risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection or of developing severe COVID-19 .
In the meantime , some observational studies have pointed to an effect , such as an analysis published last month that compared 191,779 US patients ’ SARS-CoV-2 test results with a vitamin D blood test they ’ d undergone within the past 12 months .
That study found an inverse relationship between levels of vitamin D in the blood and the chances of SARS-CoV-2 infection , which persisted after researchers adjusted their model for demographic factors .
Taking extremely high doses of vitamin @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Wagner says that based on studies she ’ s done , it ’ s “ very safe ” at the doses she recommends , namely , 4,000–6,000 international units ( IU ) per day for adults , depending on their BMI .
Children , she says , should take about 50 IU per kilogram of body weight until they ’ re big enough to take the adult dose .
The goal for both is to get to a concentration of between 40–60 nanograms per microliter in the blood , Wagner says .
Along @ @ @ @ @ @ @ winter ’ s arrival tends to herald a decline in humidity levels both indoors and out .
Studies have indicated that viruses can travel further through drier air and remain stable for longer than they would at humidity levels above 40 percent , says Akiko Iwasaki , an immunobiologist at Yale University .
In her own lab , she ’ s looked at the other side of the story—how dry air affects host defenses—and has found it ’ s bad news there , too .
Based on her studies in rodents , some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Condair , and work she ’ s seen in human subjects , she says that drier air thins the aqueous layer that lines our airways , which impairs the movement of cilia that work to expel viral particles .
This leads to a scenario in which “ the virus particles remain longer in the airway and therefore they have a chance to infect the cells , more so than if you are inhaling moist air , ” she says .
Iwasaki uses humidifiers in her own home with the aim of hitting a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 60 percent , she says , and she recommends the same to friends and family .
“ Having a whole house humidified would be great , but that ’ s kind of expensive , ” she says .
“ But having even a small humidifier in the rooms , especially where you sleep , I think makes a difference.
” Another practice that appears to fortify the airways involves the mucus layer that sits under the aqueous layer .
When we breathe , air rushing through our trachea and main bronchi breaks off @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ when you breathe in , you generate little droplets in your upper airways that go deep .
And when you breathe out , you breathe them out , ” says David Edwards , a bioengineer who has studied the phenomenon for decades and is now the CEO of the company Sensory Cloud .
Those droplets can in turn carry viruses into the lungs or out into the environment to potentially infect others .
Edwards and his colleagues have found in a not-yet-published study that the number of smaller , aerosol-size exhaled droplets @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with people who are older , have a high BMI , or are infected with COVID-19 tending to exhale more of them .
“ Typically , in a young person , there ’ s very few particles , which gets to the fact that the proper barrier function of mucus is such that it really resists that kind of breakup , ” he says .
In other work , such as a study published last week in Molecular Frontiers Journal , he and colleagues have found that inhaling a saline solution that contains @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a person exhales .
That ’ s because , Edwards says , the positively charged calcium links negatively charged mucin proteins in the mucus , bolstering its surface tension and its resistance to sloughing off .
That fortification should not only lower the number of small droplets a person exhales , but also reduce the chances that any virus that makes it into the upper airway will cause disease , he says .
“ If you can lower airborne movement of mucus in the upper airways , in the event that you ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that infection will spread to your deeper lungs where symptoms then arise.
” He adds that using the calcium-fortified solution should complement wearing a surgical mask , with the treatment reducing exhalation of very small droplets and the mask catching larger ones .
Sensory Cloud is now taking preorders for a $ 50 product , FEND , that delivers the calcium-containing solution ; the company recommends that customers use it several times a day to cleanse their airways .
The company hasn ’ t yet conducted clinical studies on whether FEND reduces SARS-CoV-2 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but he ’ s hoping to study the product ’ s use soon in a high-risk setting such as a nursing home or prison .

ABOVE: © ISTOCK.COM, ERHUI1979
Nine months since the disease now known as COVID-19 first crept into the headlines, standard advice for avoiding it—such as wearing a mask, avoiding crowds, and washing hands well and often—has become familiar. But as winter approaches in the northern hemisphere, and with it an anticipated surge in cases, we sought out additional science-backed tactics to lower the chances of becoming infected, or of developing severe disease. The Scientist spoke with experts in virology, immunology, and medicine about the measures they’re taking themselves and recommending to others that may boost defenses against the novel coronavirus and other pathogens. None yet meet the gold standard for clinical evidence—a randomized controlled trial showing they reduce COVID-19 transmission or severity—but for each, there’s a scientific rationale for thinking they may provide some protection.
Get vaccinated
JAMES GATHANY/ CDC
As we anxiously await a proven vaccine for SARS-CoV-2, studies indicate that certain existing vaccines—namely, those made with live, attenuated pathogens—confer some degree of temporary protection against germs they weren’t designed to target. For example, a trial published last month in Cell found that 25 percent of elderly people randomized to receive the tuberculosis vaccine bacille Calmette-Guérin (BCG) developed any kind of infection over the following year, compared with 42 percent of those who got a placebo shot. The vaccine appeared to be most protective against viral respiratory infections.
Trials are now underway to test whether BCG and two other live vaccines, oral polio and measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR), provide some protection against COVID-19. Robert Gallo, who directs the Institute of Human Virology at the University of Maryland School of Medicine and chairs the international scientific leadership board of the Global Virus Network, has advocated for testing oral polio in particular against the coronavirus. It’s cheap, easy to administer, and readily available, he says, adding that he expects other live vaccines would likewise provide bonus protections, including the intranasal flu vaccine, “which I’d love to take myself for the flu season.” He is unfortunately over the age limit—it’s only approved for people between 2 and 49 years old.
The conventional flu shot is not a live vaccine, but the protection any flu vaccine provides against influenza itself is particularly important this year, notes Rachel Roper, who studies SARS-CoV-1, SARS-CoV-2, and other viruses at Eastern Carolina University. You don’t want to get the flu and need medical attention at a time when the healthcare system may be overwhelmed with COVID-19 cases, she writes in an email to The Scientist. “If you get flu and have to go to the doctor, you may be exposed to people who have COVID and catch it yourself!”
Get some sunshine (or a supplement)
Far from being only important for bone health, the hormone vitamin D “affects many, many, many systems and cells throughout the body,” including innate and adaptive immunity, says Carol Wagner, a neonatologist at the Medical University of South Carolina who studies the vitamin in clinical trials. “I, of course, have all my family members and friends taking vitamin D.” Wagner and others now have clinical trials underway to test whether supplements of vitamin D—which can also be obtained through sun exposure and some foods—reduces the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection or of developing severe COVID-19. In the meantime, some observational studies have pointed to an effect, such as an analysis published last month that compared 191,779 US patients’ SARS-CoV-2 test results with a vitamin D blood test they’d undergone within the past 12 months. That study found an inverse relationship between levels of vitamin D in the blood and the chances of SARS-CoV-2 infection, which persisted after researchers adjusted their model for demographic factors.
Taking extremely high doses of vitamin D supplements can cause toxicity, but Wagner says that based on studies she’s done, it’s “very safe” at the doses she recommends, namely, 4,000–6,000 international units (IU) per day for adults, depending on their BMI. Children, she says, should take about 50 IU per kilogram of body weight until they’re big enough to take the adult dose. The goal for both is to get to a concentration of between 40–60 nanograms per microliter in the blood, Wagner says.
Fire up the humidifier
Along with a drop in sun exposure, winter’s arrival tends to herald a decline in humidity levels both indoors and out. Studies have indicated that viruses can travel further through drier air and remain stable for longer than they would at humidity levels above 40 percent, says Akiko Iwasaki, an immunobiologist at Yale University. In her own lab, she’s looked at the other side of the story—how dry air affects host defenses—and has found it’s bad news there, too. Based on her studies in rodents, some of them partly supported by humidifier company Condair, and work she’s seen in human subjects, she says that drier air thins the aqueous layer that lines our airways, which impairs the movement of cilia that work to expel viral particles. This leads to a scenario in which “the virus particles remain longer in the airway and therefore they have a chance to infect the cells, more so than if you are inhaling moist air,” she says.
Iwasaki uses humidifiers in her own home with the aim of hitting a relative humidity level between 40 percent and 60 percent, she says, and she recommends the same to friends and family. “Having a whole house humidified would be great, but that’s kind of expensive,” she says. “But having even a small humidifier in the rooms, especially where you sleep, I think makes a difference.”
Tamp down aerosols
SENSORY CLOUD
Another practice that appears to fortify the airways involves the mucus layer that sits under the aqueous layer. When we breathe, air rushing through our trachea and main bronchi breaks off bits of this layer, so that “when you breathe in, you generate little droplets in your upper airways that go deep. And when you breathe out, you breathe them out,” says David Edwards, a bioengineer who has studied the phenomenon for decades and is now the CEO of the company Sensory Cloud. Those droplets can in turn carry viruses into the lungs or out into the environment to potentially infect others.
Edwards and his colleagues have found in a not-yet-published study that the number of smaller, aerosol-size exhaled droplets varies widely from person to person, with people who are older, have a high BMI, or are infected with COVID-19 tending to exhale more of them. “Typically, in a young person, there’s very few particles, which gets to the fact that the proper barrier function of mucus is such that it really resists that kind of breakup,” he says.
In other work, such as a study published last week in Molecular Frontiers Journal, he and colleagues have found that inhaling a saline solution that contains calcium can reduce the number of aerosols a person exhales. That’s because, Edwards says, the positively charged calcium links negatively charged mucin proteins in the mucus, bolstering its surface tension and its resistance to sloughing off. That fortification should not only lower the number of small droplets a person exhales, but also reduce the chances that any virus that makes it into the upper airway will cause disease, he says. “If you can lower airborne movement of mucus in the upper airways, in the event that you’re infected, it lowers the probability that infection will spread to your deeper lungs where symptoms then arise.” He adds that using the calcium-fortified solution should complement wearing a surgical mask, with the treatment reducing exhalation of very small droplets and the mask catching larger ones.
Sensory Cloud is now taking preorders for a $50 product, FEND, that delivers the calcium-containing solution; the company recommends that customers use it several times a day to cleanse their airways. The company hasn’t yet conducted clinical studies on whether FEND reduces SARS-CoV-2 transmission or infection rates, Edwards says, but he’s hoping to study the product’s use soon in a high-risk setting such as a nursing home or prison.
Correction (October 12): The first paragraph of this article has been updated to state that it's been nine, not ten months since COVID-19 first crept into the headlines. The disease was first reported by the World Health Organization and international media in early January 2020. The Scientist regrets the error.


thescientist--2020-10-09--COVID-19 Diagnostics: How Do Saliva Tests Compare to Swabs?

Since the early days of the pandemic , clinicians and researchers have been looking for alternatives to nasopharyngeal swabs .
While samples collected from swabs are considered the gold standard in terms of generating accurate results , these tests require more supplies , place health care workers in closer contact with potentially infected individuals , and are difficult to scale up for mass testing .
Saliva has been put forth as a low-cost , easy alternative , but it ’ s efficacy and accuracy remain points of contention .
Even as large universities have begun rolling out ambitious , saliva-based @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , private companies looking to develop rapid , in-home diagnostic tests have moved away from such tools .
Trials of saliva-based testing being deployed in the field have yielded mixed results , and it remains unknown under what conditions saliva is most useful or how best it can be rolled into the existing testing framework .
Anne Wyllie , an epidemiologist at the Yale School of Public Health , has studied the use of saliva as a source of genetic material for the last decade , and more recently has investigated saliva ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Wyllie has been tracking the emergent literature during the pandemic to see how often saliva outperforms nasopharyngeal swabs .
Across the almost 30 studies she has analyzed , “ it ’ s almost half and half , ” she says .
To test the efficacy of saliva herself , Wyllie and 50 colleagues did their own side-by-side comparison and recently authored a commentary in the New England Journal of Medicine in which they reported the findings .
Among 70 patients admitted to Yale-New Haven Hospital with suspected cases of COVID-19 , saliva samples @ @ @ @ @ @ @ did swab samples , and a higher percentage of saliva samples were positive up to 10 days after the initial diagnosis .
And when applied to 495 health care workers , saliva tests identified two more asymptomatic cases than swabs did , leading the team to conclude in their letter , “ our findings provide support for the potential of saliva specimens in the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection.
” In controlled health care settings , at least , it seems that saliva can perform comparably to nasopharyngeal swabs .
But COVID-19 is a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hardest-hit communities are rural , poor , or otherwise underserved .
And those conditions may influence just how well saliva-based tests work .
French Guiana—a territory along the east coast of South America—has been heavily affected by COVID-19 , with confirmed infections in more than 3 percent of the region ’ s roughly 300,000 residents .
Through boat travel , the virus has radiated along a convoluted network of rivers to infect remote villages in the Amazon rainforest .
Mathieu Nacher , an epidemiologist at the Université de Guyane in French Guiana , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the French government about conducting clinical trials , including a comparison between swabs and saliva , just after the outbreak ’ s peak in early July .
Between July 27 and September 10 , mobile field teams collected paired samples from 776 people across French Guiana , traveling “ into the jungle , into villages in the middle of the forest , and in very poor neighborhoods ” to recruit participants , Nacher says .
By bringing the testing directly into the field , researchers could assess the efficacy of these screening @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is where you can really see their utility , ” Wyllie tells The Scientist .
Her work has shown SARS-CoV-2 remains stable within saliva for long periods of time , even at room temperature—a characteristic that comes in handy in sampling situations when temperature regulation may come at a premium , or not at all .
After being collected , samples were kept cool and transported to the hospital in the capital of Cayenne for processing within 24 hours .
Both samples underwent the same extraction protocols and PCR test to screen for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ N , E , and RdRP .
The results , shared September 24 on the preprint server medRxiv , show that among the 776 participants , 162 received positive diagnoses from at least one of the two methods ; 76 cases from swabs , 10 from saliva , and 76 from both saliva and swabs .
Sixty-one percent of those with COVID-19 reported experiencing mild symptoms , while 39 percent were asymptomatic .
Overall , saliva testing was less sensitive than nasopharyngeal swabs , although the results differed based on a person ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sequences in cycles , with each cycle doubling the amount of genetic material from the virus .
The higher the starting concentration of virus , the fewer cycles needed to pass a cycle threshold ( Ct ) .
Medical professionals use this value to assess whether a person tests positive for COVID-19 .
When the load was low , meaning the Ct number was large , the two methods disagreed more often .
That ’ s because the virus is more difficult to detect using either method in people who have very recently @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tail end of their illness .
Among asymptomatic patients , saliva ’ s sensitivity was only 24 percent compared to swabs .
The difference in performance between the two methods also varied by the viral gene amplified .
The PCR test targeted all three genes at once , but an analysis of the data separating the detection of each gene showed the N gene , a region of the virus recommended for testing by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , was the least reliable , especially with low viral loads .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ two methods was 77 percent on average , but when the researchers excluded results where the N gene was detected but the E and RdRP genes were not , it bumped up the agreement between swabs and saliva to 90 percent .
Nacher attributes some of his findings to the challenges of field sampling .
In hospitals , people provide their saliva in the mornings , before eating or brushing their teeth .
“ Here , you get people who just drank a Coke , ” he tells The Scientist .
In addition @ @ @ @ @ @ @ symptoms become so bad they require medical attention , meaning their viral loads are generally higher .
Still , Carolyn Banister , a pharmacologist at the University of South Carolina who has helped develop her school ’ s saliva test , says the study ’ s results are “ really similar to some of the things ” she has found in her own experiments , including discrepancies between the two tests when the viral load is low .
“ It ’ s kind of a preliminary study , because their numbers are fairly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ But all the information coming out about COVID right now is somewhat preliminary .
We have to take the new data in stride and incorporate new findings.
” Based on the results of the Nacher ’ s study , the French health authorities have officially declared that saliva testing may be used on symptomatic patients throughout France and its territories , although Nacher plans to continue studying the efficacy of saliva in detecting asymptomatic cases .
Used in the proper context , saliva may still be useful in tracking down even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ US , for example , are using saliva-based tests to screen students and staff .
“ Campus is a high-risk environment for transmission of the virus , so even if you don ’ t have the traditional symptoms , you ’ re still considered at risk , ” Banister says .
“ Because of that .
.
.
we wanted to make sure that college students who may not suffer any ill effects are also not contributing to our city-wide number of cases by spreading it.
” The University of South Carolina , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as many as 1,200 student volunteers a day using Banister ’ s saliva test , hoping to catch invisible infections in its students .
Rather than testing each person once , the university has opened the testing up to students on a repeat basis , with results arriving within 24 hours .
Through this mass testing , the university has identified clusters in campus fraternities and sororities , and as of today ( October 9 ) has 33 active cases among students .
Even if the tests are not as sensitive as swabs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it possible to catch an infection that may have been missed the day before .
“ If they ’ re people who might be coming regularly through a clinic , you ’ ll probably still get quite a bit of information , even if it wasn ’ t performing as sensitively , ” Wyllie says .
Testing on this scale with saliva also requires fewer supplies , such as the swabs and reagents that have become scarce during the pandemic , and people are more likely to sit for repeated tests if they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Banister also recruited two students living in the same house—one with a confirmed diagnosis and one at risk of contracting the virus—to undergo pairwise , daily sampling for comparisons between swabs and saliva .
She found that over the first two weeks of the infection , there was a “ remarkable ” concurrence between the cycle numbers detected in saliva and nasopharyngeal swabs in the positive patient ( the at-risk student never tested positive ) , meaning that saliva “ is as sensitive as the nasopharyngeal swab , ” Banister tells The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weeks , the two samples diverged , with swabs continuing to detect virus for several more days .
Banister attributes this finding not to a higher sensitivity of the swab test , but to the mechanics of the human body : saliva turns over much more quickly in the mouth , while the lungs and nasal cavity can hold the virus for longer , leading to positive results even when a person may no longer be infectious .
How a positive diagnosis relates to infectiousness—and how clinicians should use Ct numbers to decide @ @ @ @ @ @ @ yet clear .
The next step , all three researchers agree , will be to look into these questions .
Based on her preliminary findings , Banister says , “ I think that the saliva detection is actually more representative of who is infectious .
”

ABOVE: © ISTOCK.COM, EVENFH
Since the early days of the pandemic, clinicians and researchers have been looking for alternatives to nasopharyngeal swabs. While samples collected from swabs are considered the gold standard in terms of generating accurate results, these tests require more supplies, place health care workers in closer contact with potentially infected individuals, and are difficult to scale up for mass testing. Saliva has been put forth as a low-cost, easy alternative, but it’s efficacy and accuracy remain points of contention.
Even as large universities have begun rolling out ambitious, saliva-based initiatives on campuses across the United States, private companies looking to develop rapid, in-home diagnostic tests have moved away from such tools. Trials of saliva-based testing being deployed in the field have yielded mixed results, and it remains unknown under what conditions saliva is most useful or how best it can be rolled into the existing testing framework.
We went into the jungle, into villages in the middle of the forest, and in very poor neighborhoods with mobile teams. —Mathieu Nacher, Université de Guyane
Anne Wyllie, an epidemiologist at the Yale School of Public Health, has studied the use of saliva as a source of genetic material for the last decade, and more recently has investigated saliva’s role in testing for COVID-19. Wyllie has been tracking the emergent literature during the pandemic to see how often saliva outperforms nasopharyngeal swabs. Across the almost 30 studies she has analyzed, “it’s almost half and half,” she says.
To test the efficacy of saliva herself, Wyllie and 50 colleagues did their own side-by-side comparison and recently authored a commentary in the New England Journal of Medicine in which they reported the findings.
Among 70 patients admitted to Yale-New Haven Hospital with suspected cases of COVID-19, saliva samples often contained more copies of SARS-CoV-2 than did swab samples, and a higher percentage of saliva samples were positive up to 10 days after the initial diagnosis. And when applied to 495 health care workers, saliva tests identified two more asymptomatic cases than swabs did, leading the team to conclude in their letter, “our findings provide support for the potential of saliva specimens in the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection.”
In controlled health care settings, at least, it seems that saliva can perform comparably to nasopharyngeal swabs. But COVID-19 is a global pandemic, and many of the hardest-hit communities are rural, poor, or otherwise underserved. And those conditions may influence just how well saliva-based tests work.
A head-to-head comparison in the jungle
French Guiana—a territory along the east coast of South America—has been heavily affected by COVID-19, with confirmed infections in more than 3 percent of the region’s roughly 300,000 residents. Through boat travel, the virus has radiated along a convoluted network of rivers to infect remote villages in the Amazon rainforest.
Mathieu Nacher, an epidemiologist at the Université de Guyane in French Guiana, tells The Scientist that he was approached by the French government about conducting clinical trials, including a comparison between swabs and saliva, just after the outbreak’s peak in early July.
Between July 27 and September 10, mobile field teams collected paired samples from 776 people across French Guiana, traveling “into the jungle, into villages in the middle of the forest, and in very poor neighborhoods” to recruit participants, Nacher says.
By bringing the testing directly into the field, researchers could assess the efficacy of these screening tools in real-world scenarios. “This is where you can really see their utility,” Wyllie tells The Scientist. Her work has shown SARS-CoV-2 remains stable within saliva for long periods of time, even at room temperature—a characteristic that comes in handy in sampling situations when temperature regulation may come at a premium, or not at all.
After being collected, samples were kept cool and transported to the hospital in the capital of Cayenne for processing within 24 hours. Both samples underwent the same extraction protocols and PCR test to screen for the presence of three viral genes, N, E, and RdRP.
I think that the saliva detection is actually more representative of who is infectious. —Carolyn Banister, University of South Carolina
The results, shared September 24 on the preprint server medRxiv, show that among the 776 participants, 162 received positive diagnoses from at least one of the two methods; 76 cases from swabs, 10 from saliva, and 76 from both saliva and swabs. Sixty-one percent of those with COVID-19 reported experiencing mild symptoms, while 39 percent were asymptomatic.
Overall, saliva testing was less sensitive than nasopharyngeal swabs, although the results differed based on a person’s viral load. PCRs amplify target sequences in cycles, with each cycle doubling the amount of genetic material from the virus. The higher the starting concentration of virus, the fewer cycles needed to pass a cycle threshold (Ct). Medical professionals use this value to assess whether a person tests positive for COVID-19.
When the load was low, meaning the Ct number was large, the two methods disagreed more often. That’s because the virus is more difficult to detect using either method in people who have very recently become infected or those tested on the tail end of their illness. Among asymptomatic patients, saliva’s sensitivity was only 24 percent compared to swabs.
The difference in performance between the two methods also varied by the viral gene amplified. The PCR test targeted all three genes at once, but an analysis of the data separating the detection of each gene showed the N gene, a region of the virus recommended for testing by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, was the least reliable, especially with low viral loads. Among symptomatic patients, agreement between the two methods was 77 percent on average, but when the researchers excluded results where the N gene was detected but the E and RdRP genes were not, it bumped up the agreement between swabs and saliva to 90 percent.
Nacher attributes some of his findings to the challenges of field sampling. In hospitals, people provide their saliva in the mornings, before eating or brushing their teeth. “Here, you get people who just drank a Coke,” he tells The Scientist. In addition, people only visit hospitals when their symptoms become so bad they require medical attention, meaning their viral loads are generally higher.
Still, Carolyn Banister, a pharmacologist at the University of South Carolina who has helped develop her school’s saliva test, says the study’s results are “really similar to some of the things” she has found in her own experiments, including discrepancies between the two tests when the viral load is low. “It’s kind of a preliminary study, because their numbers are fairly low,” Banister tells The Scientist. “But all the information coming out about COVID right now is somewhat preliminary. We have to take the new data in stride and incorporate new findings.”
Based on the results of the Nacher’s study, the French health authorities have officially declared that saliva testing may be used on symptomatic patients throughout France and its territories, although Nacher plans to continue studying the efficacy of saliva in detecting asymptomatic cases.
Saliva on college campuses
Used in the proper context, saliva may still be useful in tracking down even asymptomatic infections. College campuses across the US, for example, are using saliva-based tests to screen students and staff.
“Campus is a high-risk environment for transmission of the virus, so even if you don’t have the traditional symptoms, you’re still considered at risk,” Banister says. “Because of that . . . we wanted to make sure that college students who may not suffer any ill effects are also not contributing to our city-wide number of cases by spreading it.”
The University of South Carolina is using saliva to test as many as 1,200 students a day for COVID-19. University of South Carolina Communications
The University of South Carolina, located in Columbia, recently began testing as many as 1,200 student volunteers a day using Banister’s saliva test, hoping to catch invisible infections in its students. Rather than testing each person once, the university has opened the testing up to students on a repeat basis, with results arriving within 24 hours. Through this mass testing, the university has identified clusters in campus fraternities and sororities, and as of today (October 9) has 33 active cases among students.
Even if the tests are not as sensitive as swabs, the sheer number and repetition makes it possible to catch an infection that may have been missed the day before. “If they’re people who might be coming regularly through a clinic, you’ll probably still get quite a bit of information, even if it wasn’t performing as sensitively,” Wyllie says. Testing on this scale with saliva also requires fewer supplies, such as the swabs and reagents that have become scarce during the pandemic, and people are more likely to sit for repeated tests if they only need to spit into a cup.
Banister also recruited two students living in the same house—one with a confirmed diagnosis and one at risk of contracting the virus—to undergo pairwise, daily sampling for comparisons between swabs and saliva. She found that over the first two weeks of the infection, there was a “remarkable” concurrence between the cycle numbers detected in saliva and nasopharyngeal swabs in the positive patient (the at-risk student never tested positive), meaning that saliva “is as sensitive as the nasopharyngeal swab,” Banister tells The Scientist.
At the end of two weeks, the two samples diverged, with swabs continuing to detect virus for several more days. Banister attributes this finding not to a higher sensitivity of the swab test, but to the mechanics of the human body: saliva turns over much more quickly in the mouth, while the lungs and nasal cavity can hold the virus for longer, leading to positive results even when a person may no longer be infectious.
How a positive diagnosis relates to infectiousness—and how clinicians should use Ct numbers to decide if someone should remain quarantined—isn’t yet clear. The next step, all three researchers agree, will be to look into these questions. Based on her preliminary findings, Banister says, “I think that the saliva detection is actually more representative of who is infectious.”


thescientist--2020-10-09--Scientists' Advice for Ways to Ward Off the Coronavirus

Nine months since the disease now known as COVID-19 first crept into the headlines , standard advice for avoiding it—such as wearing a mask , avoiding crowds , and washing hands well and often—has become familiar .
But as winter approaches in the northern hemisphere , and with it an anticipated surge in cases , we sought out additional science-backed tactics to lower the chances of becoming infected , or of developing severe disease .
The Scientist spoke with experts in virology , immunology , and medicine about the measures they ’ re taking themselves and recommending to others that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and other pathogens .
None yet meet the gold standard for clinical evidence—a randomized controlled trial showing they reduce COVID-19 transmission or severity—but for each , there ’ s a scientific rationale for thinking they may provide some protection .
As we anxiously await a proven vaccine for SARS-CoV-2 , studies indicate that certain existing vaccines—namely , those made with live , attenuated pathogens—confer some degree of temporary protection against germs they weren ’ t designed to target .
For example , a trial published last month in Cell found that 25 percent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tuberculosis vaccine bacille Calmette-Guérin ( BCG ) developed any kind of infection over the following year , compared with 42 percent of those who got a placebo shot .
The vaccine appeared to be most protective against viral respiratory infections .
Trials are now underway to test whether BCG and two other live vaccines , oral polio and measles , mumps , and rubella ( MMR ) , provide some protection against COVID-19 .
Robert Gallo , who directs the Institute of Human Virology at the University of Maryland School of Medicine and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Global Virus Network , has advocated for testing oral polio in particular against the coronavirus .
It ’ s cheap , easy to administer , and readily available , he says , adding that he expects other live vaccines would likewise provide bonus protections , including the intranasal flu vaccine , “ which I ’ d love to take myself for the flu season.
” He is unfortunately over the age limit—it ’ s only approved for people between 2 and 49 years old .
The conventional flu shot is not a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ flu vaccine provides against influenza itself is particularly important this year , notes Rachel Roper , who studies SARS-CoV-1 , SARS-CoV-2 , and other viruses at Eastern Carolina University .
You don ’ t want to get the flu and need medical attention at a time when the healthcare system may be overwhelmed with COVID-19 cases , she writes in an email to The Scientist .
“ If you get flu and have to go to the doctor , you may be exposed to people who have COVID and catch it yourself !
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ supplement ) Far from being only important for bone health , the hormone vitamin D “ affects many , many , many systems and cells throughout the body , ” including innate and adaptive immunity , says Carol Wagner , a neonatologist at the Medical University of South Carolina who studies the vitamin in clinical trials .
“ I , of course , have all my family members and friends taking vitamin D. ” Wagner and others now have clinical trials underway to test whether supplements of vitamin D—which can also be obtained @ @ @ @ @ @ @ risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection or of developing severe COVID-19 .
In the meantime , some observational studies have pointed to an effect , such as an analysis published last month that compared 191,779 US patients ’ SARS-CoV-2 test results with a vitamin D blood test they ’ d undergone within the past 12 months .
That study found an inverse relationship between levels of vitamin D in the blood and the chances of SARS-CoV-2 infection , which persisted after researchers adjusted their model for demographic factors .
Taking extremely high doses of vitamin @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Wagner says that based on studies she ’ s done , it ’ s “ very safe ” at the doses she recommends , namely , 4,000–6,000 international units ( IU ) per day for adults , depending on their BMI .
Children , she says , should take about 50 IU per kilogram of body weight until they ’ re big enough to take the adult dose .
The goal for both is to get to a concentration of between 40–60 nanograms per microliter in the blood , Wagner says .
Along @ @ @ @ @ @ @ winter ’ s arrival tends to herald a decline in humidity levels both indoors and out .
Studies have indicated that viruses can travel further through drier air and remain stable for longer than they would at humidity levels above 40 percent , says Akiko Iwasaki , an immunobiologist at Yale University .
In her own lab , she ’ s looked at the other side of the story—how dry air affects host defenses—and has found it ’ s bad news there , too .
Based on her studies in rodents , some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Condair , and work she ’ s seen in human subjects , she says that drier air thins the aqueous layer that lines our airways , which impairs the movement of cilia that work to expel viral particles .
This leads to a scenario in which “ the virus particles remain longer in the airway and therefore they have a chance to infect the cells , more so than if you are inhaling moist air , ” she says .
Iwasaki uses humidifiers in her own home with the aim of hitting a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 60 percent , she says , and she recommends the same to friends and family .
“ Having a whole house humidified would be great , but that ’ s kind of expensive , ” she says .
“ But having even a small humidifier in the rooms , especially where you sleep , I think makes a difference.
” Another practice that appears to fortify the airways involves the mucus layer that sits under the aqueous layer .
When we breathe , air rushing through our trachea and main bronchi breaks off @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ when you breathe in , you generate little droplets in your upper airways that go deep .
And when you breathe out , you breathe them out , ” says David Edwards , a bioengineer who has studied the phenomenon for decades and is now the CEO of the company Sensory Cloud .
Those droplets can in turn carry viruses into the lungs or out into the environment to potentially infect others .
Edwards and his colleagues have found in a not-yet-published study that the number of smaller , aerosol-size exhaled droplets @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with people who are older , have a high BMI , or are infected with COVID-19 tending to exhale more of them .
“ Typically , in a young person , there ’ s very few particles , which gets to the fact that the proper barrier function of mucus is such that it really resists that kind of breakup , ” he says .
In other work , such as a study published last week in Molecular Frontiers Journal , he and colleagues have found that inhaling a saline solution that contains @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a person exhales .
That ’ s because , Edwards says , the positively charged calcium links negatively charged mucin proteins in the mucus , bolstering its surface tension and its resistance to sloughing off .
That fortification should not only lower the number of small droplets a person exhales , but also reduce the chances that any virus that makes it into the upper airway will cause disease , he says .
“ If you can lower airborne movement of mucus in the upper airways , in the event that you ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that infection will spread to your deeper lungs where symptoms then arise.
” He adds that using the calcium-fortified solution should complement wearing a surgical mask , with the treatment reducing exhalation of very small droplets and the mask catching larger ones .
Sensory Cloud is now taking preorders for a $ 50 product , FEND , that delivers the calcium-containing solution ; the company recommends that customers use it several times a day to cleanse their airways .
The company hasn ’ t yet conducted clinical studies on whether FEND reduces SARS-CoV-2 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but he ’ s hoping to study the product ’ s use soon in a high-risk setting such as a nursing home or prison .
Correction ( October 12 ) : The first paragraph of this article has been updated to state that it 's been nine , not ten months since COVID-19 first crept into the headlines .
The disease was first reported by the World Health Organization and international media in early January 2020 .
The Scientist regrets the error .


thescientist--2020-10-13--Johnson & Johnson Pauses COVID-19 Vaccine Trials

Johnson & Johnson ’ s Janssen subsidiary , one of several companies in Phase 3 testing of vaccines to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection , has temporarily suspended enrollment and dosing in all of its clinical trials after a patient experienced an adverse reaction during its Phase 3 ENSEMBLE trial .
The incident was first reported on Monday ( October 12 ) by STAT after reporters received a copy of a document sent to outside researchers running the study ’ s individual trials .
The document states that a “ pausing rule ” had been met to justify the suspension and that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was closed .
“ We have temporarily paused further dosing in all our COVID-19 vaccine candidate clinical trials , including the Phase 3 ENSEMBLE trial , due to an unexplained illness in a study participant , ” the company says in a statement .
The case is currently being reviewed by an independent safety board , and no details have been shared about the patient or the nature of the illness that prompted the pause .
Pauses in late-stage clinical trials are not uncommon , nor is Johnson & Johnson the first company @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , AstraZeneca paused all of its clinical trials for COVID-19 vaccines following a case of transverse myelitis in a UK patient .
While most trials have since resumed , the US-based study remains on hold pending a regulatory review , Reuters reports .
“ It ’ s actually a good thing that these companies are pausing these trials when these things come up , ” Phyllis Tien , an infectious disease physician at the University of California , San Francisco , a trial location for both vaccine candidates , tells The New York @ @ @ @ @ @ @ let the sponsor and the safety board do their review and let us know their findings.
” Phase 3 trials assess the efficacy of a possible vaccine and attempt to identify even relatively rare side effects by testing large amounts of people .
The Johnson & Johnson ENSEMBLE trial had planned to enroll as many as 60,000 participants in several countries , STAT reports , making it one of the world ’ s largest efforts to test a COVID-19 vaccine .
Like the AstraZeneca vaccine candidate , Johnson & Johnson ’ s vaccine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on an adenovirus vector , that has yet to lead to any approved immunizations , although it was used previously in studies to prevent infections of influenza and Ebola .
Scientists engineered the virus to smuggle the gene for the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein into human cells .
Once inside , the gene expresses the protein , which then primes immune cells to recognize SARS-CoV-2 .
It is unknown , even by the researchers , whether the participant who has fallen ill received the vaccine or a placebo .
The symptoms don ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ related to the vaccine , but it needs to be investigated thoroughly , ” Luciana Borio , a public health administrator who has worked under both President Donald Trump and President Barack Obama , tells the Times .
Ashish Jha , the dean of the Brown University School of Public Health , tells CNN the pause shows that the safeguards are working as they should .
“ We want the vaccine to be safe and we ’ ve got to let the process play out , ” Jha says .
“ To me @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are acting responsibly and pausing when they need to.
” Correction ( October 13 ) : We mistakenly referred to these vaccines as treating SARS-CoV-2 , rather than preventing illness .
The Scientist regrets these errors .

ABOVE: © ISTOCK.COM, GEBER86
Update (October 27): After the company did not find a cause for the participant’ s illness, Johnson & Johnson announced on October 23 that it is seeking to resume the clinical trial, according to a statement.
Johnson & Johnson’s Janssen subsidiary, one of several companies in Phase 3 testing of vaccines to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection, has temporarily suspended enrollment and dosing in all of its clinical trials after a patient experienced an adverse reaction during its Phase 3 ENSEMBLE trial.
The incident was first reported on Monday (October 12) by STAT after reporters received a copy of a document sent to outside researchers running the study’s individual trials. The document states that a “pausing rule” had been met to justify the suspension and that the online system used to enroll patients was closed.
“We have temporarily paused further dosing in all our COVID-19 vaccine candidate clinical trials, including the Phase 3 ENSEMBLE trial, due to an unexplained illness in a study participant,” the company says in a statement. The case is currently being reviewed by an independent safety board, and no details have been shared about the patient or the nature of the illness that prompted the pause.
Pauses in late-stage clinical trials are not uncommon, nor is Johnson & Johnson the first company to temporarily suspend progress. In September, AstraZeneca paused all of its clinical trials for COVID-19 vaccines following a case of transverse myelitis in a UK patient. While most trials have since resumed, the US-based study remains on hold pending a regulatory review, Reuters reports.
“It’s actually a good thing that these companies are pausing these trials when these things come up,” Phyllis Tien, an infectious disease physician at the University of California, San Francisco, a trial location for both vaccine candidates, tells The New York Times. “We just need to let the sponsor and the safety board do their review and let us know their findings.”
Phase 3 trials assess the efficacy of a possible vaccine and attempt to identify even relatively rare side effects by testing large amounts of people. The Johnson & Johnson ENSEMBLE trial had planned to enroll as many as 60,000 participants in several countries, STAT reports, making it one of the world’s largest efforts to test a COVID-19 vaccine.
Like the AstraZeneca vaccine candidate, Johnson & Johnson’s vaccine relies on an experimental method, based on an adenovirus vector, that has yet to lead to any approved immunizations, although it was used previously in studies to prevent infections of influenza and Ebola. Scientists engineered the virus to smuggle the gene for the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein into human cells. Once inside, the gene expresses the protein, which then primes immune cells to recognize SARS-CoV-2.
It is unknown, even by the researchers, whether the participant who has fallen ill received the vaccine or a placebo. The symptoms don’t “mean that the adverse event is related to the vaccine, but it needs to be investigated thoroughly,” Luciana Borio, a public health administrator who has worked under both President Donald Trump and President Barack Obama, tells the Times.
Ashish Jha, the dean of the Brown University School of Public Health, tells CNN the pause shows that the safeguards are working as they should. “We want the vaccine to be safe and we’ve got to let the process play out,” Jha says. “To me, it’s reassuring that companies are acting responsibly and pausing when they need to.”
Correction (October 13): We mistakenly referred to these vaccines as treating SARS-CoV-2, rather than preventing illness. The Scientist regrets these errors.