scientificamerican--2020-12-13--Any Delay in Ending COVID Could Spur a Different Pandemic

There are plenty of reasons why we need to bring this pandemic to a swift end .
With each day , thousands more people die , and hundreds of thousands more become infected , while the ongoing disruption to daily lives , business , trade and travel is costing countless people their jobs as more businesses go under and economies continue to sink .
But another important and less talked-about reason why we need to end it sooner rather than later is that the longer this crisis continues , the weaker we will be when it comes to fighting the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , this crisis is helping to fuel another , silent pandemic : that of antimicrobial resistance , or AMR .
Even before COVID-19 , AMR was widely seen as one of the biggest threats to human health .
Over time and repeated exposure , pathogens can build up resistance to the very drugs designed to treat them—especially with suboptimal use—eventually rendering them ineffective and the infections untreatable .
Unless done judiciously , the more these drugs are used , the sooner this is likely to happen .
Since the beginning of the pandemic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ against COVID-19 , the use of antibiotics to treat infected patients has been extensive .
This has raised fears that it could exacerbate the global spread of AMR , leading to more deaths from once treatable infections and in the process undermining our ability to fight the next pandemic .
That fact that there will be a next one is not up for debate .
The relentless nature of how viruses and bacteria mutate means that novel pathogens with pandemic potential will continue to emerge .
So , it ’ s not a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pandemic , but when .
Moreover , the same evolutionary forces that make this a certainty are also driving the spread of AMR .
This places us in a difficult position .
Antibiotics , a class of antimicrobial drug where resistance has been a growing problem , have an important role to play during viral outbreaks , for example when patients have bacterial co-infections or develop secondary bacterial infections .
During the 1918 flu pandemic , which killed 50–100 million people , 95 percent of those who died had these kinds of bacterial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of antimicrobials has reduced the risk of bacterial infections during viral outbreaks , and indeed at the beginning of COVID-19 , in the absence of any other known effective treatments , antibiotics have been commonly used as a frontline defense in treating hospitalized patients .
It is still unclear to what extent this was warranted .
Any clinician faced with a critically ill COVID-19 patient with the potential to develop a drug-resistant infection is naturally going to err on the side of caution and give them a broad spectrum of antibiotics .
However @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have contributed to COVID-19 morbidity and mortality is still emerging , with some studies suggesting that only 3.5 percent of patients in the U.S. had co-infections and just 14.3 percent went on to develop secondary infections .
And while this could partly be attributed to the prudent use of antibiotics , evidence suggests that in 72 percent of cases where COVID-19 patients in the U.S. received antibiotics , it was not actually clinically warranted .
In contrast , in many low- and middle-income countries , where many antibiotics are not available , either @ @ @ @ @ @ @ regulatory authority or are simply too expensive , countless COVID-19 patients will have developed bacterial infections that have gone untreated .
This can allow bacteria to continue to circulate and , if later treated suboptimally , increase the potential for resistance to develop .
The combination of inappropriate use of antibiotics when not needed , and not having access to them when they are , both help increase the spread of AMR .
So , even though some COVID counter measures , such as widespread physical distancing , have the potential to slow @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of drug-resistant bacteria and reducing viral infections inappropriately treated with antimicrobials , our response to this pandemic , implemented on a massive scale , is likely to actually accelerate its spread .
Before the pandemic , AMR was thought to be responsible for at least 700,000 deaths a year and on the rise .
However , in the wake of COVID-19 , this may well increase further .
Clearly , there is an urgent need for new antibiotics and antimicrobials to be developed , and adherence to established antibiotic stewardship programs need to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ midst of the current pandemic that may be challenging , when clinicians are struggling to save the lives of COVID-19 patients .
So , our best bet is to end the acute phase of this pandemic as quickly as possible through vaccination .
Under nonpandemic conditions , vaccines are already one of our most effective weapons against AMR .
There is clear evidence that vaccination not only prevents the spread of certain bacteria and prevents resistance from occurring , but it also significantly curtails the use , and misuse , of antibiotic drugs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ first place .
So , while COVID-19 vaccines will be essential to ending the pandemic , and in reducing the spread of AMR , vaccines against other diseases also have a role to play .
But as the race to make COVID-19 vaccines available continues , there is another way in which vaccination can help .
The speed at which the world has rallied to develop these vaccines , and make them equitably available , also provides a good global model for how we collectively tackle AMR , which hasn ’ t seen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ COVID-19 , despite being a rapidly escalating threat with the potential to cause the same kind of global devastation .
A similar collaborative approach could help provide a framework for the challenge of developing new antimicrobial drugs and making them equitably available too .
Because even though antibiotics have almost certainly saved thousands of lives during this pandemic , and even though a lack of access to antibiotics still kills more people than antimicrobial resistance , unless we develop new drugs that will almost certainly change .

There are plenty of reasons why we need to bring this pandemic to a swift end. With each day, thousands more people die, and hundreds of thousands more become infected, while the ongoing disruption to daily lives, business, trade and travel is costing countless people their jobs as more businesses go under and economies continue to sink. But another important and less talked-about reason why we need to end it sooner rather than later is that the longer this crisis continues, the weaker we will be when it comes to fighting the next one. Because with each day, this crisis is helping to fuel another, silent pandemic: that of antimicrobial resistance, or AMR.
Even before COVID-19, AMR was widely seen as one of the biggest threats to human health. Over time and repeated exposure, pathogens can build up resistance to the very drugs designed to treat them—especially with suboptimal use—eventually rendering them ineffective and the infections untreatable. Unless done judiciously, the more these drugs are used, the sooner this is likely to happen. Since the beginning of the pandemic, in the absence of effective treatments against COVID-19, the use of antibiotics to treat infected patients has been extensive. This has raised fears that it could exacerbate the global spread of AMR, leading to more deaths from once treatable infections and in the process undermining our ability to fight the next pandemic.
That fact that there will be a next one is not up for debate. The relentless nature of how viruses and bacteria mutate means that novel pathogens with pandemic potential will continue to emerge. So, it’s not a question of if there will be another pandemic, but when. Moreover, the same evolutionary forces that make this a certainty are also driving the spread of AMR.
This places us in a difficult position. Antibiotics, a class of antimicrobial drug where resistance has been a growing problem, have an important role to play during viral outbreaks, for example when patients have bacterial co-infections or develop secondary bacterial infections. During the 1918 flu pandemic, which killed 50–100 million people, 95 percent of those who died had these kinds of bacterial infections. Since then, the availability of antimicrobials has reduced the risk of bacterial infections during viral outbreaks, and indeed at the beginning of COVID-19, in the absence of any other known effective treatments, antibiotics have been commonly used as a frontline defense in treating hospitalized patients.
It is still unclear to what extent this was warranted. Any clinician faced with a critically ill COVID-19 patient with the potential to develop a drug-resistant infection is naturally going to err on the side of caution and give them a broad spectrum of antibiotics. However, the extent to which bacterial infections have contributed to COVID-19 morbidity and mortality is still emerging, with some studies suggesting that only 3.5 percent of patients in the U.S. had co-infections and just 14.3 percent went on to develop secondary infections. And while this could partly be attributed to the prudent use of antibiotics, evidence suggests that in 72 percent of cases where COVID-19 patients in the U.S. received antibiotics, it was not actually clinically warranted.
In contrast, in many low- and middle-income countries, where many antibiotics are not available, either because they are not registered with the regulatory authority or are simply too expensive, countless COVID-19 patients will have developed bacterial infections that have gone untreated. This can allow bacteria to continue to circulate and, if later treated suboptimally, increase the potential for resistance to develop. The combination of inappropriate use of antibiotics when not needed, and not having access to them when they are, both help increase the spread of AMR.
So, even though some COVID counter measures, such as widespread physical distancing, have the potential to slow the spread of AMR by reducing transmission of drug-resistant bacteria and reducing viral infections inappropriately treated with antimicrobials, our response to this pandemic, implemented on a massive scale, is likely to actually accelerate its spread. Before the pandemic, AMR was thought to be responsible for at least 700,000 deaths a year and on the rise. However, in the wake of COVID-19, this may well increase further.
Clearly, there is an urgent need for new antibiotics and antimicrobials to be developed, and adherence to established antibiotic stewardship programs need to be more closely observed. In the midst of the current pandemic that may be challenging, when clinicians are struggling to save the lives of COVID-19 patients. So, our best bet is to end the acute phase of this pandemic as quickly as possible through vaccination.
Under nonpandemic conditions, vaccines are already one of our most effective weapons against AMR. There is clear evidence that vaccination not only prevents the spread of certain bacteria and prevents resistance from occurring, but it also significantly curtails the use, and misuse, of antibiotic drugs every year by preventing infections in the first place. So, while COVID-19 vaccines will be essential to ending the pandemic, and in reducing the spread of AMR, vaccines against other diseases also have a role to play.
But as the race to make COVID-19 vaccines available continues, there is another way in which vaccination can help. The speed at which the world has rallied to develop these vaccines, and make them equitably available, also provides a good global model for how we collectively tackle AMR, which hasn’t seen anywhere near the kind of investment as COVID-19, despite being a rapidly escalating threat with the potential to cause the same kind of global devastation.
A similar collaborative approach could help provide a framework for the challenge of developing new antimicrobial drugs and making them equitably available too. Because even though antibiotics have almost certainly saved thousands of lives during this pandemic, and even though a lack of access to antibiotics still kills more people than antimicrobial resistance, unless we develop new drugs that will almost certainly change.


scientificamerican--2020-12-14--World's Largest Fusion Reactor Begins Assembly

Humans are an energy-hungry species , and our current sources of power are not cutting it .
Nuclear fusion , the process that fuels the sun , might offer the kind of clean , abundant energy we need—if only scientists can figure it out .
The International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor ( ITER ) is the biggest and most ambitious attempt yet to harness the energy produced by forcing two atoms to become one .
The $ 25-billion experiment in Saint-Paul-lez-Durance , France , is a joint project of the European Union , China , India , Japan , South Korea @ @ @ @ @ @ @ goal is to do what no fusion experiment has done before : produce more heat than it consumes .
The project has been stymied by delays and ballooning costs , and a critical independent assessment forced out the top leadership several years ago .
In some skeptics ' eyes , it will always be a boondoggle , a waste of too much time and money for an experiment that is aiming to be not even a working power plant but merely a proof of concept .
But ITER finally reached a long-sought milestone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of machine assembly—when scientists began joining the various components provided by the partner countries .
“ We have the same feeling as somebody who is supposed to run successive marathons , and you achieve the first one , but still you know there are many more to do , ” says Bernard Bigot , who took over as ITER director general in 2015 .
“ It gives us more confidence in the future , but we know that nothing is [ taken ] for granted.
” The challenge is to essentially build a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it .
The heart of the experiment is a 23,000-ton cylinder where intense superconducting magnets will try to keep a 150-million-degree-Celsius plasma contained long enough for fusion to occur .
Making the physics work out will be a huge challenge , but so will conquering the construction .
“ It is a large-scale international project where parts are made all across the world , and it has to fit together like a puzzle , and it has to work , ” says plasma physicist Saskia Mordijck of William & Mary , who is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Scientists hope to press the proverbial red button and turn on the reactor in 2025 , with the ultimate goal of running it at full power by 2035 .
If it succeeds , the payoff would be gigantic .
Fusion has the potential to release much more energy than burning coal or oil or even nuclear fission , which fuels traditional nuclear power plants .
Fusion produces no greenhouse gases or radioactive waste .
“ Fusion from my point of view is really the one option that complements reusable energy and could be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bigot says .
“ The next three or four years will be absolutely critical .
TEMPERATURE GRADIENT : ITER will include one of the hottest places in the universe—the vacuum vessel housing the 150-million-degree- Celsius plasma—as well as one of the coldest places in the universe ; the magnets that will confine and control that plasma must be kept at about four kelvins ( –269 degrees C ) .
Separating the two will be a beryllium-coated steel “ blanket ” to shield the sections from each other , which will attach to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stub keys , currently covered by yellow caps to keep off dust .
WORLD ’ S LARGEST : The tokamak chamber , seen from the top ( top ) and middle ( bottom ) , is a cylinder that will hold the ITER experiment .
The word “ tokamak ” is a Russian acronym for a “ toroidal chamber with magnetic coils ” —a concept first developed in 1957 by physicist Igor Golovin .
ITER ’ s tokamak will be the biggest ever built , twice the size of the largest currently operating @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lowered into the chamber in July 2020 , marking the beginning of the project ’ s assembly at the site in the south of France .
The site is funded by Europe , which is paying for nearly half of the total cost of the project ; Europe ’ s contribution is managed by Fusion for Energy .
EMPTY VESSEL : ITER ’ s vacuum vessel will be made of six segments , each built in South Korea or Italy .
The huge steel sections had to be shipped by boat to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they were transported by road 100 kilometers northeast to the ITER site .
Now that the first pieces have arrived , workers will connect them with magnets and thermal shields and then lower them into the tokamak chamber .
DEEP FREEZE : The superconducting magnets in the reactor can work only at supercold temperatures near absolute zero , which will be maintained by liquid helium circulating through cryogenic pumps .
Operators control the system via a complex set of hand valves ( top ) based on local readings of pressure , temperature and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ built by contractor Air Liquide ( bottom ) , will be the world ’ s largest helium-refrigeration unit .
MAGNETIC CAGE : ITER ’ s fusion plasma will be encased and contained by a nest of magnets , including six ring-shaped superconducting poloidal magnets ( shown here ) that will pile on top of one another horizontally to surround the plasma .
In addition , 18 toroidal field coils will encircle the machine vertically , and one large central solenoid will sit in the middle , forming the largest superconducting magnet system ever @ @ @ @ @ @ @ flow without resistance , enabling electrons to move freely to create intense magnetic fields .
MAGNET CONSTRUCTION : Made of niobium-tin and niobium-titanium , the poloidal magnets are the only ITER components manufactured on-site .
With diameters between 17 and 24 meters and weighing up to 400 metric tons each , they are too large to be built elsewhere and transported .
Poloidal Field Coil # 6 is shown here inside its cooling cryostat .

Humans are an energy-hungry species, and our current sources of power are not cutting it. Nuclear fusion, the process that fuels the sun, might offer the kind of clean, abundant energy we need—if only scientists can figure it out. The International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) is the biggest and most ambitious attempt yet to harness the energy produced by forcing two atoms to become one. The $25-billion experiment in Saint-Paul-lez-Durance, France, is a joint project of the European Union, China, India, Japan, South Korea, Russia and the U.S. Its ultimate goal is to do what no fusion experiment has done before: produce more heat than it consumes.
The project has been stymied by delays and ballooning costs, and a critical independent assessment forced out the top leadership several years ago. In some skeptics' eyes, it will always be a boondoggle, a waste of too much time and money for an experiment that is aiming to be not even a working power plant but merely a proof of concept. But ITER finally reached a long-sought milestone in July 2020 with the official start of machine assembly—when scientists began joining the various components provided by the partner countries. “We have the same feeling as somebody who is supposed to run successive marathons, and you achieve the first one, but still you know there are many more to do,” says Bernard Bigot, who took over as ITER director general in 2015. “It gives us more confidence in the future, but we know that nothing is [taken] for granted.”
The challenge is to essentially build a miniature star inside a laboratory—and then control it. The heart of the experiment is a 23,000-ton cylinder where intense superconducting magnets will try to keep a 150-million-degree-Celsius plasma contained long enough for fusion to occur. Making the physics work out will be a huge challenge, but so will conquering the construction. “It is a large-scale international project where parts are made all across the world, and it has to fit together like a puzzle, and it has to work,” says plasma physicist Saskia Mordijck of William & Mary, who is not part of the ITER team.
Scientists hope to press the proverbial red button and turn on the reactor in 2025, with the ultimate goal of running it at full power by 2035. If it succeeds, the payoff would be gigantic. Fusion has the potential to release much more energy than burning coal or oil or even nuclear fission, which fuels traditional nuclear power plants. Fusion produces no greenhouse gases or radioactive waste. “Fusion from my point of view is really the one option that complements reusable energy and could be the solution for climate change,” Bigot says. “The next three or four years will be absolutely critical.
TEMPERATURE GRADIENT: ITER will include one of the hottest places in the universe—the vacuum vessel housing the 150-million-degree- Celsius plasma—as well as one of the coldest places in the universe; the magnets that will confine and control that plasma must be kept at about four kelvins (–269 degrees C). Separating the two will be a beryllium-coated steel “blanket” to shield the sections from each other, which will attach to the vacuum vessel’s interior wall via stub keys, currently covered by yellow caps to keep off dust.
WORLD’S LARGEST: The tokamak chamber, seen from the top (top) and middle (bottom), is a cylinder that will hold the ITER experiment. The word “tokamak” is a Russian acronym for a “toroidal chamber with magnetic coils”—a concept first developed in 1957 by physicist Igor Golovin. ITER’s tokamak will be the biggest ever built, twice the size of the largest currently operating. The base of the machine was lowered into the chamber in July 2020, marking the beginning of the project’s assembly at the site in the south of France. The site is funded by Europe, which is paying for nearly half of the total cost of the project; Europe’s contribution is managed by Fusion for Energy.
EMPTY VESSEL: ITER’s vacuum vessel will be made of six segments, each built in South Korea or Italy. The huge steel sections had to be shipped by boat to the port of Fos-sur-Mer near Marseille, where they were transported by road 100 kilometers northeast to the ITER site. Now that the first pieces have arrived, workers will connect them with magnets and thermal shields and then lower them into the tokamak chamber.
DEEP FREEZE: The superconducting magnets in the reactor can work only at supercold temperatures near absolute zero, which will be maintained by liquid helium circulating through cryogenic pumps. Operators control the system via a complex set of hand valves (top) based on local readings of pressure, temperature and flow. The finished cryogenic plant, built by contractor Air Liquide (bottom), will be the world’s largest helium-refrigeration unit.
MAGNETIC CAGE: ITER’s fusion plasma will be encased and contained by a nest of magnets, including six ring-shaped superconducting poloidal magnets (shown here) that will pile on top of one another horizontally to surround the plasma. In addition, 18 toroidal field coils will encircle the machine vertically, and one large central solenoid will sit in the middle, forming the largest superconducting magnet system ever built. Superconductors allow electric current to flow without resistance, enabling electrons to move freely to create intense magnetic fields.
MAGNET CONSTRUCTION: Made of niobium-tin and niobium-titanium, the poloidal magnets are the only ITER components manufactured on-site. With diameters between 17 and 24 meters and weighing up to 400 metric tons each, they are too large to be built elsewhere and transported. Poloidal Field Coil #6 is shown here inside its cooling cryostat.


scientificamerican--2020-12-14--These Drugs Might Prevent Severe COVID

These Drugs Might Prevent Severe COVID

In the year since the COVID pandemic began , glimmers of hope have come on the horizon .
Vaccines are on the way , and the percentage of patients who die has fallen in many places as doctors have learned how to save the sickest patients .
These successes are not enough—and they overshadow the more limited progress made toward developing drugs that could prevent mild cases of the disease from worsening .
Such treatments are urgently needed because many people will get sick with COVID until vaccines induce enough herd immunity in the population to keep the infections under @ @ @ @ @ @ @ early-stage illness could ideally prevent hospitalizations , shorten the duration of infectiousness and limit long-term complications from COVID .
They may also prove useful against other threatening coronaviruses in the future .
As of this writing , only two therapies for early COVID are available , and both of them come with major logistical challenges .
But many other potential treatments are being developed that could save people from the worst outcomes .
Regeneron ’ s monoclonal antibody combination for mild-to-moderate COVID , which was granted an emergency use authorization by the Food @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an hour-long intravenous infusion and another hour of monitoring for possible side effects .
A second drug , the antiviral remdesivir , has shown promise in newly infected patients , but it requires five days of intravenous therapy .
Demand for these medications , which were both administered to President Donald Trump and his allies during their illnesses , far outstrips current supplies .
What doctors need are safe and effective treatments for early cases that they can give in outpatient settings “ without overwhelming the health care system , ” says William @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of North Carolina School of Medicine .
Drug development efforts aimed at treatments to contain the novel coronarvirus , or SARS-CoV-2 , soon after infection are now ramping up .
Physicians have a limited window of opportunity to hit the virus while it continues to replicate .
Patients typically clear SARS-CoV-2 from their lungs and nasal passages within seven to 10 days , and after that , treatments aimed at curbing the pathogen become less effective .
Even as viral loads plummet , immune reactions against SARS-CoV-2 can , in some patients , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tissue .
At that point , treatment shifts toward drugs for severe COVID , such as dexamethasone , which ideally keep the inflammation in check .
In an interview with Scientific American , Anthony Fauci , director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases , described the desired characteristics of early COVID treatments .
“ My overwhelming preference is for direct-acting antiviral agents that can be administered orally ” and that suppress the virus completely within a week or less , he said .
“ That , to me , is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on differing paths to search for these drugs .
By using machine-learning algorithms , they can quickly scour chemical databases for compounds with structural properties that might work against SARS-CoV-2 .
Promising candidates will then move from computer-modeling studies to research in human cell lines and experimental animals .
Researchers are also using new protocols designed to shuttle drugs quickly from early- to late-stage clinical trials in outpatient settings .
This approach “ allows us to assess more compounds in a rapid , efficient way , though we are not rushing the scientific @ @ @ @ @ @ @ says Rachel Bender Ignacio , a physician-scientist at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle .
Some of those drugs are repurposed medications that were initially developed for other diseases .
Remdesivir , for instance , was targeted at Ebola and tested in human safety trials before being used later as a drug for COVID .
One of the current leading contenders for treating mild COVID is an antiviral pill that was previously developed for influenza .
At first called EIDD-2801 , the drug was found to protect mice from severe lung @ @ @ @ @ @ @ MERS-CoV .
These results were from a study by researchers at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill ( UNC ) and their colleagues that was published in April .
Based on those findings , a Miami-based company , Ridgeback Biotherapeutics , licensed EIDD-2801 , now called molnupiravir , for safety testing in people .
Ridgeback has since partnered with Merck on a mid- to late-stage clinical trial , expected to wrap up next year , to assess molnupiravir in nonhospitalized COVID patients .
Richard Plemper , a molecular virologist and biochemist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ working with the compound for years .
He recently published a study showing that molnupiravir blocks SARS-CoV-2 transmission in ferrets , animals scientists use to model human coronavirus exposures .
“ If the ferret data are indicative of what the drug can do in people , then it suggests we ’ ll be able to therapeutically interrupt human transmission chains in people , ” he says .
“ And that would be a real game changer.
” Repurposing existing drugs can also yield some surprises by finding ones that are not logical candidates @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a pill used for treating anxiety disorders , shows some promise in treating early COVID .
Researchers at Washington University in St. Louis randomized 152 patients to fluvoxamine or a placebo and reported in November that none of the 80 patients who got the drug experienced worsening symptoms .
By contrast , six patients in the placebo group became severely ill , and four were hospitalized .
Psychiatrist Angela Reiersen , a Washington University in St. Louis psychiatrist who conducted the study , explains that fluvoxamine acts on a protein called the sigma-1 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s inflammatory responses to viral infection .
She is now launching a larger trial across the U.S. and Canada .
“ We ’ d like to enroll people as soon as they have a positive test and some minor symptoms , ” Reiersen says .
“ The goal is treat before week two , which is when patients generally start to deteriorate.
” Utilizing therapies that were initially developed for other purposes is not the only strategy .
Drug designers have also come up with a computer-generated synthetic protein that disables SARS-CoV-2 before @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
At the University of Washington , researchers have devised from scratch proteins that bind to a spot on the virus ’ s spikelike protrusions .
These proteins—called mini binders—deflect the virus more effectively than antibodies in human cells , according to David Baker , a computational biologist who was senior author of the study .
Baker says that in unpublished research , mini binders protected hamsters against SARS-CoV-2 infection .
“ We see this as a prophylactic nasal spray that you could use , say , if you ’ re going to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a medical worker going into a risky situation , ” he says .
Baker predicts that mini binders could enter human clinical trials against SARS-CoV-2 within six months .
In his interview with Scientific American , Fauci said that a single broad-spectrum drug that protects against many kinds of viruses is probably “ a bridge too far.
” Yet what can be developed is a drug that works against multiple pathogens within the same viral family—perhaps one against multiple coronaviruses .
Virologist Ralph Baric and his team at UNC have spent years working @ @ @ @ @ @ @ research is devoted to screening compounds against severe acute respiratory syndrome ( SARS ) , Middle East respiratory syndrome ( MERS ) and SARS-like preepidemic bat coronaviruses in human cells and experimental animals .
“ When we started screening , we found some compounds that would only work against SARS and some that only worked against MERS , ” Baric says .
“ Then we found one that worked against both.
” That drug was remdesivir .
In follow-up research , Baric and his collaborator Timothy Sheahan of UNC showed the drug could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and engineered mice .
Yet remdesivir ’ s Achilles ’ heel , Baric says , “ has always been that it has to be given intravenously to people , which limits uses to hospitalized patients.
” In Baric ’ s view , that explains the drug ’ s inconsistent track record when it comes to speeding up COVID recovery rates : Doctors are often reluctant to admit people for treatment , he says , especially when beds are in short supply .
By the time treatments begin , the virus is cleared , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ late , ” Baric adds .
Remdesivir ’ s manufacturer , Gilead Sciences , is now developing an inhalable form of the drug that should be easier to administer in outpatient settings .
Baric contends that evidence that remdesivir , molnupiravir and other compounds are able to block multiple coronaviruses suggests that broad-based antivirals are feasible .
“ Imagine putting a concerted effort into developing inhibitors for the viral families most likely to cause pandemic disease outbreaks around the globe , ” he says .
“ If we had those drugs on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an outbreak setting , we could save a ton of lives.
” Read more about the coronavirus outbreak from Scientific American here .
And read coverage from our international network of magazines here .

In the year since the COVID pandemic began, glimmers of hope have come on the horizon. Vaccines are on the way, and the percentage of patients who die has fallen in many places as doctors have learned how to save the sickest patients.
These successes are not enough—and they overshadow the more limited progress made toward developing drugs that could prevent mild cases of the disease from worsening. Such treatments are urgently needed because many people will get sick with COVID until vaccines induce enough herd immunity in the population to keep the infections under control.
Antivirals and other drugs for early-stage illness could ideally prevent hospitalizations, shorten the duration of infectiousness and limit long-term complications from COVID. They may also prove useful against other threatening coronaviruses in the future. As of this writing, only two therapies for early COVID are available, and both of them come with major logistical challenges. But many other potential treatments are being developed that could save people from the worst outcomes.
Regeneron’s monoclonal antibody combination for mild-to-moderate COVID, which was granted an emergency use authorization by the Food and Drug Administration in November, requires an hour-long intravenous infusion and another hour of monitoring for possible side effects. A second drug, the antiviral remdesivir, has shown promise in newly infected patients, but it requires five days of intravenous therapy. Demand for these medications, which were both administered to President Donald Trump and his allies during their illnesses, far outstrips current supplies. What doctors need are safe and effective treatments for early cases that they can give in outpatient settings “without overwhelming the health care system,” says William Fischer, a pulmonologist at the University of North Carolina School of Medicine.
Drug development efforts aimed at treatments to contain the novel coronarvirus, or SARS-CoV-2, soon after infection are now ramping up. Physicians have a limited window of opportunity to hit the virus while it continues to replicate. Patients typically clear SARS-CoV-2 from their lungs and nasal passages within seven to 10 days, and after that, treatments aimed at curbing the pathogen become less effective. Even as viral loads plummet, immune reactions against SARS-CoV-2 can, in some patients, trigger out-of-control inflammation that destroys healthy lung tissue. At that point, treatment shifts toward drugs for severe COVID, such as dexamethasone, which ideally keep the inflammation in check.
In an interview with Scientific American, Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, described the desired characteristics of early COVID treatments. “My overwhelming preference is for direct-acting antiviral agents that can be administered orally” and that suppress the virus completely within a week or less, he said. “That, to me, is the highest priority.”
Scientists have begun on differing paths to search for these drugs. By using machine-learning algorithms, they can quickly scour chemical databases for compounds with structural properties that might work against SARS-CoV-2. Promising candidates will then move from computer-modeling studies to research in human cell lines and experimental animals. Researchers are also using new protocols designed to shuttle drugs quickly from early- to late-stage clinical trials in outpatient settings. This approach “allows us to assess more compounds in a rapid, efficient way, though we are not rushing the scientific process for any of them,” says Rachel Bender Ignacio, a physician-scientist at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle.
Some of those drugs are repurposed medications that were initially developed for other diseases. Remdesivir, for instance, was targeted at Ebola and tested in human safety trials before being used later as a drug for COVID.
One of the current leading contenders for treating mild COVID is an antiviral pill that was previously developed for influenza. At first called EIDD-2801, the drug was found to protect mice from severe lung disease caused by two other coronaviruses—SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV. These results were from a study by researchers at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC) and their colleagues that was published in April. Based on those findings, a Miami-based company, Ridgeback Biotherapeutics, licensed EIDD-2801, now called molnupiravir, for safety testing in people. Ridgeback has since partnered with Merck on a mid- to late-stage clinical trial, expected to wrap up next year, to assess molnupiravir in nonhospitalized and hospitalized COVID patients.*
Richard Plemper, a molecular virologist and biochemist at Georgia State University, has been working with the compound for years. He recently published a study showing that molnupiravir blocks SARS-CoV-2 transmission in ferrets, animals scientists use to model human coronavirus exposures. “If the ferret data are indicative of what the drug can do in people, then it suggests we’ll be able to therapeutically interrupt human transmission chains in people,” he says. “And that would be a real game changer.”
Repurposing existing drugs can also yield some surprises by finding ones that are not logical candidates to work against COVID-19. Fluvoxamine, a pill used for treating anxiety disorders, shows some promise in treating early COVID. Researchers at Washington University in St. Louis randomized 152 patients to fluvoxamine or a placebo and reported in November that none of the 80 patients who got the drug experienced worsening symptoms. By contrast, six patients in the placebo group became severely ill, and four were hospitalized. Psychiatrist Angela Reiersen, a Washington University in St. Louis psychiatrist who conducted the study, explains that fluvoxamine acts on a protein called the sigma-1 receptor, which dampens the body’s inflammatory responses to viral infection. She is now launching a larger trial across the U.S. and Canada. “We’d like to enroll people as soon as they have a positive test and some minor symptoms,” Reiersen says. “The goal is treat before week two, which is when patients generally start to deteriorate.”
Utilizing therapies that were initially developed for other purposes is not the only strategy. Drug designers have also come up with a computer-generated synthetic protein that disables SARS-CoV-2 before it gains a foothold in the body. At the University of Washington, researchers have devised from scratch proteins that bind to a spot on the virus’s spikelike protrusions. These proteins—called mini binders—deflect the virus more effectively than antibodies in human cells, according to David Baker, a computational biologist who was senior author of the study. Baker says that in unpublished research, mini binders protected hamsters against SARS-CoV-2 infection. “We see this as a prophylactic nasal spray that you could use, say, if you’re going to the airport or if you’re a medical worker going into a risky situation,” he says. Baker predicts that mini binders could enter human clinical trials against SARS-CoV-2 within six months.
In his interview with Scientific American, Fauci said that a single broad-spectrum drug that protects against many kinds of viruses is probably “a bridge too far.” Yet what can be developed is a drug that works against multiple pathogens within the same viral family—perhaps one against multiple coronaviruses.
Virologist Ralph Baric and his team at UNC have spent years working toward that goal. Much of the research is devoted to screening compounds against severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) and SARS-like preepidemic bat coronaviruses in human cells and experimental animals. “When we started screening, we found some compounds that would only work against SARS and some that only worked against MERS,” Baric says. “Then we found one that worked against both.” That drug was remdesivir.
In follow-up research, Baric and his collaborator Timothy Sheahan of UNC showed the drug could also inhibit SARS-CoV-2 in human lung cells and engineered mice. Yet remdesivir’s Achilles’ heel, Baric says, “has always been that it has to be given intravenously to people, which limits uses to hospitalized patients.” In Baric’s view, that explains the drug’s inconsistent track record when it comes to speeding up COVID recovery rates: Doctors are often reluctant to admit people for treatment, he says, especially when beds are in short supply. By the time treatments begin, the virus is cleared, “and then it’s too late,” Baric adds. Remdesivir’s manufacturer, Gilead Sciences, is now developing an inhalable form of the drug that should be easier to administer in outpatient settings.
Baric contends that evidence that remdesivir, molnupiravir and other compounds are able to block multiple coronaviruses suggests that broad-based antivirals are feasible. “Imagine putting a concerted effort into developing inhibitors for the viral families most likely to cause pandemic disease outbreaks around the globe,” he says. “If we had those drugs on the shelf and ready to use immediately in an outbreak setting, we could save a ton of lives.”
*This story was updated to specify that patients of Ridgeback Biotherapeutics were both nonhospitalized and hospitalized patients.
Read more about the coronavirus outbreak from Scientific American here. And read coverage from our international network of magazines here.


scientificamerican--2020-12-14--Stop Arguing over GMO Crops

Stop Arguing over GMO Crops

The election of Joe Biden and Kamala Harris as president-elect and vice president-elect of the United States has been celebrated as a win for the scientific community .
In his acceptance speech , Biden expressed that the American people have called on him and Harris as leaders , “ to marshal the forces of science and the forces of hope in the great battles of our time.
” Climate change and the COVID-19 pandemic have featured heavily in this presidential campaign and are without question two of the great battles we are currently facing that require scientific expertise .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ extend to all challenges where science is needed , including agriculture .
The Biden administration will undoubtedly listen to scientists when it comes to agricultural decision-making .
The public that voted in the name of science must do the same .
Agriculture is inextricably linked to many global challenges we are now facing .
Our current agriculture system is a major emitter of greenhouse gases ( about a quarter of total emissions ) while at the same time agriculture is dangerously vulnerable to harmful effects of the climate crisis .
Extreme temperatures , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all examples of harsh environmental conditions exacerbated by climate change that are increasingly threatening crops worldwide .
Amidst these pressures , the practice of deforestation to create new swaths of arable land must end in order to preserve biodiversity and maintain valuable carbon sinks .
In order for global agriculture to rapidly become more sustainable and climate resilient , we must have the power to responsibly use every tool at our disposal , including genetic engineering .
No single solution is a silver bullet , and successful strategies to improve agricultural sustainability will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ used together ; experts have been clear about the need to combine low-tech and high-tech approaches for years .
Current research in plant biotechnology focuses on developing plant traits related to climate resilience and sustainability such as drought tolerance , disease resistance and capturing carbon from the atmosphere .
How and when different methods need to be used is for experts to decide , but the public must be open to biotechnology as a part of sustainable solutions .
For too long the rhetoric on genetic engineering in agriculture has been polarized , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ instead of based on evidence .
There is fault on both sides for the existing antagonism .
Immensely successful marketing strategies have been based on inciting fear and distributing false information .
Large corporations have sewn mistrust .
Promises were made that were never realized .
But in 2020 , the “ GMO vs. organic ” debate is outdated and unproductive .
Plant genetics research and development today has advanced far beyond the early GMOs of the 1990s .
New technologies are redefining and revolutionizing genetic engineering in ways that couldn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ago .
Innovations will continue to emerge that do not fit old categories and old assumptions .
Meanwhile , modern large-scale organic agriculture has far more in common with conventional industrial practices than the quaint farm pictured on the grocery store packaging suggests .
Entrenched and misleading narratives on both GMO and organic production methods must be dismantled ; the divisive rhetoric hinders progress that is urgently needed in order to create a more sustainable future .
The vast majority of the scientific community agrees on the safety and potential of genetically engineered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an open letter supporting genetically engineered crops in 2016 that stated , “ Opposition based on emotion and dogma contradicted by data must be stopped.
” The American public can not have selective hearing when we say we will listen to scientists .
We need to fight for the facts on genetic engineering and for the validity of the experts in this field the same way we fight for data and truth on climate change .
We need to come together to focus on evidence to make decisions instead of letting old emotional @ @ @ @ @ @ @ President-elect Biden made a plea to a highly divided American people in his acceptance speech , “ It ’ s time to put away the harsh rhetoric .
To lower the temperature .
To see each other again .
To listen to each other again .
To make progress , we must stop treating our opponents as our enemy.
” The same message applies to the established factions in this nation regarding the use of genetic engineering in agriculture .
The stakes are too high to let the antagonism continue any longer .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ in which we voted—supportive of science and hopeful for a more sustainable and unified future .

The election of Joe Biden and Kamala Harris as president-elect and vice president-elect of the United States has been celebrated as a win for the scientific community. In his acceptance speech, Biden expressed that the American people have called on him and Harris as leaders, “to marshal the forces of science and the forces of hope in the great battles of our time.” Climate change and the COVID-19 pandemic have featured heavily in this presidential campaign and are without question two of the great battles we are currently facing that require scientific expertise.
But this mandate to lead with science must extend to all challenges where science is needed, including agriculture. The Biden administration will undoubtedly listen to scientists when it comes to agricultural decision-making. The public that voted in the name of science must do the same.
Agriculture is inextricably linked to many global challenges we are now facing. Our current agriculture system is a major emitter of greenhouse gases (about a quarter of total emissions) while at the same time agriculture is dangerously vulnerable to harmful effects of the climate crisis. Extreme temperatures, floods, droughts and pest migrations are all examples of harsh environmental conditions exacerbated by climate change that are increasingly threatening crops worldwide. Amidst these pressures, the practice of deforestation to create new swaths of arable land must end in order to preserve biodiversity and maintain valuable carbon sinks.
In order for global agriculture to rapidly become more sustainable and climate resilient, we must have the power to responsibly use every tool at our disposal, including genetic engineering. No single solution is a silver bullet, and successful strategies to improve agricultural sustainability will likely involve a wide range of practices used together; experts have been clear about the need to combine low-tech and high-tech approaches for years. Current research in plant biotechnology focuses on developing plant traits related to climate resilience and sustainability such as drought tolerance, disease resistance and capturing carbon from the atmosphere. How and when different methods need to be used is for experts to decide, but the public must be open to biotechnology as a part of sustainable solutions.
For too long the rhetoric on genetic engineering in agriculture has been polarized, and reasoning has been clouded by emotion instead of based on evidence. There is fault on both sides for the existing antagonism. Immensely successful marketing strategies have been based on inciting fear and distributing false information. Large corporations have sewn mistrust. Promises were made that were never realized. But in 2020, the “GMO vs. organic” debate is outdated and unproductive.
Plant genetics research and development today has advanced far beyond the early GMOs of the 1990s. New technologies are redefining and revolutionizing genetic engineering in ways that couldn’t have been imagined even only 10 years ago. Innovations will continue to emerge that do not fit old categories and old assumptions. Meanwhile, modern large-scale organic agriculture has far more in common with conventional industrial practices than the quaint farm pictured on the grocery store packaging suggests. Entrenched and misleading narratives on both GMO and organic production methods must be dismantled; the divisive rhetoric hinders progress that is urgently needed in order to create a more sustainable future.
The vast majority of the scientific community agrees on the safety and potential of genetically engineered crops. Over 150 Nobel Laureates signed an open letter supporting genetically engineered crops in 2016 that stated, “Opposition based on emotion and dogma contradicted by data must be stopped.” The American public cannot have selective hearing when we say we will listen to scientists. We need to fight for the facts on genetic engineering and for the validity of the experts in this field the same way we fight for data and truth on climate change. We need to come together to focus on evidence to make decisions instead of letting old emotional battles divide us and block solutions.
President-elect Biden made a plea to a highly divided American people in his acceptance speech, “It’s time to put away the harsh rhetoric. To lower the temperature. To see each other again. To listen to each other again. To make progress, we must stop treating our opponents as our enemy.” The same message applies to the established factions in this nation regarding the use of genetic engineering in agriculture. The stakes are too high to let the antagonism continue any longer. We need to act in the manner in which we voted—supportive of science and hopeful for a more sustainable and unified future.


scientificamerican--2020-12-14--Fauci Explains How to End the COVID Pandemic

Anthony Fauci has led the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases for 36 years and has helped guide responses to a succession of viral epidemics : HIV/AIDS , severe acute respiratory syndrome ( SARS ) , Ebola and Zika , among others .
President-elect Joe Biden recently appointed Fauci as his chief medical adviser .
A voice of reason on the Trump administration ’ s novel coronavirus task force , the physician spoke to Scientific American about next steps in the response to the COVID pandemic .
During the discussion , Fauci highlighted an important gap in treatment options @ @ @ @ @ @ @ interventions are still needed for early cases of the disease—and , if successful , they could perhaps address future outbreaks that might be triggered by other emerging coronaviruses .
[ An edited transcript of the interview follows . ]
Coronavirus infections are surging exponentially .
Can we still get them under control ?
Yes , absolutely .
I ’ ve been saying this every day .
If we , uniformly throughout the country , implement public health guidelines—wearing masks , keeping physically distanced , avoiding crowded situations , doing things outdoors more than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will see an effect .
We know from experience that the states or cities or countries that have done this have always been able to blunt and mitigate the slope of a surging curve such as this one .
What are your near-term priorities going into 2021 ?
They extend from what I ’ ve been talking about all along : to get the outbreak under control by uniform adherence to fundamental public health measures and to push ahead with the development and implementation of the vaccine program .
I believe that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ together with public health measures , will be the mechanism that puts this outbreak to an end .
What are your major concerns with vaccine distribution ?
We hope to get the overwhelming majority of people in this country vaccinated .
We have the logistics under Operation Warp Speed and General Gustave Perna [ Operation Warp Speed ’ s chief operations officer ] to put vaccines into the trucks , trains , planes and whatever it is that gets them to where they need to go .
But then local public health officials @ @ @ @ @ @ @ distribute the vaccines in an equitable way .
It ’ s going to be a big task to vaccinate more than 300 million people—a very prodigious project .
Do you see large gatherings opening only to vaccinated people ?
I don ’ t want to make that determination now .
Policy decisions will be made after we get the vaccine program going , and I will likely be part of that discussion .
Do you think drugs for early COVID will be needed now that the vaccine is coming ?
And if so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ A lot of people will still be getting sick until we get a level of herd immunity from the vaccine to essentially eliminate this infection from society .
Until then , we ’ re going to need drugs for each and every stage of the infection : early , intermediate and late .
Those types of drugs might also be used against yet another pandemic coronavirus .
Remember , this is the third pandemic coronavirus we ’ ve dealt with in 18 years , starting with the SARS outbreak in 2002 , then @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ] outbreak in 2012 and now COVID-19 .
What sort of drug looks promising as a treatment for early COVID ?
My overwhelming preference is for direct-acting antiviral agents that can be administered orally .
We could give these drugs—likely in combination—for maybe five to six days or a week at most to completely suppress the virus .
That , to me , is the highest priority .
What about a broad-spectrum agent against viral illnesses , almost like an antibiotic ?
If you ’ re talking about an antiviral that protects against @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s a bridge too far .
But you could get a broad-spectrum antiviral that will be good against all strains of coronaviruses and then maybe a different one that works within another family of viruses .
An antiviral that worked against any manner or form of coronaviruses would be highly desirable .
If we took the problem of yet another emerging pandemic coronavirus off the table , that would be a major advance .
What measures should the U.S. pursue to prevent the next pandemic ?
We felt we were prepared for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ obviously , there has been a lot more suffering , infection and death than we might have anticipated .
So we need to do better .
We need global interconnectivity , a global health security agenda , and adequate resources and science .
A part of the pandemic preparedness that was very successful—and I think we should recognize that—was the investment put into the technologies now available in the field of vaccinology that allowed us to go from identifying a brand-new virus [ around early ] January to having a vaccine that ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ less than one year .
That is a pace of scientific advance that would have been unimaginable 10 years ago .
The implementation of some public health measures has obviously not been as successful .
The country has been so divided .
Do you think we can overcome our differences in confronting the pandemic next year ?
I don ’ t have an easy answer for that because there clearly is a considerable degree of divisiveness in society .
I think uniting people will be a challenge for the new administration .
I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because when it comes to public health , everybody needs to be pulling together .
Do you have plans for a memoir once the pandemic wraps up ?
[ Laughs ] Do I have plans for memoir ?
Yes , but I ’ m so busy right now , I can ’ t even get a good night ’ s sleep !
So I think that ’ s going to have to wait .
Read more about the coronavirus outbreak from Scientific American here .
And read coverage from our international network of @ @ @

Anthony Fauci has led the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases for 36 years and has helped guide responses to a succession of viral epidemics: HIV/AIDS, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), Ebola and Zika, among others. President-elect Joe Biden recently appointed Fauci as his chief medical adviser. A voice of reason on the Trump administration’s novel coronavirus task force, the physician spoke to Scientific American about next steps in the response to the COVID pandemic. During the discussion, Fauci highlighted an important gap in treatment options for newly infected people: more antiviral interventions are still needed for early cases of the disease—and, if successful, they could perhaps address future outbreaks that might be triggered by other emerging coronaviruses.
[An edited transcript of the interview follows.]
Coronavirus infections are surging exponentially. Can we still get them under control?
Yes, absolutely. I’ve been saying this every day. If we, uniformly throughout the country, implement public health guidelines—wearing masks, keeping physically distanced, avoiding crowded situations, doing things outdoors more than indoors and washing hands frequently—I believe we will see an effect. We know from experience that the states or cities or countries that have done this have always been able to blunt and mitigate the slope of a surging curve such as this one.
What are your near-term priorities going into 2021?
They extend from what I’ve been talking about all along: to get the outbreak under control by uniform adherence to fundamental public health measures and to push ahead with the development and implementation of the vaccine program. I believe that the vaccines that will soon become available, together with public health measures, will be the mechanism that puts this outbreak to an end.
What are your major concerns with vaccine distribution?
We hope to get the overwhelming majority of people in this country vaccinated. We have the logistics under Operation Warp Speed and General Gustave Perna [Operation Warp Speed’s chief operations officer] to put vaccines into the trucks, trains, planes and whatever it is that gets them to where they need to go. But then local public health officials will need the capability and resources to distribute the vaccines in an equitable way. It’s going to be a big task to vaccinate more than 300 million people—a very prodigious project.
Do you see large gatherings opening only to vaccinated people?
I don’t want to make that determination now. Policy decisions will be made after we get the vaccine program going, and I will likely be part of that discussion.
Do you think drugs for early COVID will be needed now that the vaccine is coming? And if so, why?
Oh, absolutely. A lot of people will still be getting sick until we get a level of herd immunity from the vaccine to essentially eliminate this infection from society. Until then, we’re going to need drugs for each and every stage of the infection: early, intermediate and late. Those types of drugs might also be used against yet another pandemic coronavirus. Remember, this is the third pandemic coronavirus we’ve dealt with in 18 years, starting with the SARS outbreak in 2002, then the MERS [Middle East respiratory syndrome] outbreak in 2012 and now COVID-19.
What sort of drug looks promising as a treatment for early COVID?
My overwhelming preference is for direct-acting antiviral agents that can be administered orally. We could give these drugs—likely in combination—for maybe five to six days or a week at most to completely suppress the virus. That, to me, is the highest priority.
What about a broad-spectrum agent against viral illnesses, almost like an antibiotic?
If you’re talking about an antiviral that protects against all viruses, then I think that’s a bridge too far. But you could get a broad-spectrum antiviral that will be good against all strains of coronaviruses and then maybe a different one that works within another family of viruses. An antiviral that worked against any manner or form of coronaviruses would be highly desirable. If we took the problem of yet another emerging pandemic coronavirus off the table, that would be a major advance.
What measures should the U.S. pursue to prevent the next pandemic?
We felt we were prepared for a pandemic before this one, and obviously, there has been a lot more suffering, infection and death than we might have anticipated. So we need to do better. We need global interconnectivity, a global health security agenda, and adequate resources and science. A part of the pandemic preparedness that was very successful—and I think we should recognize that—was the investment put into the technologies now available in the field of vaccinology that allowed us to go from identifying a brand-new virus [around early] January to having a vaccine that’s ready to administer to people in less than one year. That is a pace of scientific advance that would have been unimaginable 10 years ago. The implementation of some public health measures has obviously not been as successful.
The country has been so divided. Do you think we can overcome our differences in confronting the pandemic next year?
I don’t have an easy answer for that because there clearly is a considerable degree of divisiveness in society. I think uniting people will be a challenge for the new administration. I hope they succeed in doing that, because when it comes to public health, everybody needs to be pulling together.
Do you have plans for a memoir once the pandemic wraps up?
[Laughs] Do I have plans for memoir? Yes, but I’m so busy right now, I can’t even get a good night’s sleep! So I think that’s going to have to wait.
Read more about the coronavirus outbreak from Scientific American here. And read coverage from our international network of magazines here.


scientificamerican--2020-12-14--Wildfires Blast Smoke Corkscrews to the Top of the Atmosphere

Record-breaking wildfires in Australia at the start of the year caused an extraordinary weather phenomenon .
They spawned a spree of towering fire-induced thunderclouds , which catapulted smoke 20 miles into the atmosphere .
Almost 12 months later , some of that smoke is still drifting around the planet .
These “ pyrocumulonimbus ” events , or “ pyroCbs , ” are impressive but not uncommon .
They form when the heat from a wildfire strengthens currents of rising air in the atmosphere , generating large storm clouds and sending smoke spiraling skyward .
But the “ Australian New Year @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have dubbed it , is easily the largest on record .
Recent research suggests it launched a half-million metric tons of aerosol particles into the stratosphere .
That ’ s on the order of a moderate volcanic eruption , one recent study suggests—enough to potentially have a small effect on the sun ’ s radiation .
It ’ s about three times more than the previous record-breaker , a massive pyrocumulonimbus event that occurred during western Canada ’ s wildfire season in 2017 .
“ It exceeded this previously unprecedented event at almost @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a meteorologist with the U.S .
Naval Research Laboratory , at a news conference on pyroCb research , hosted Friday at the annual fall meeting of the American Geophysical Union .
“ So now we ’ re at a whole new level of pyroCb activity.
” Huge pyroCb events are at the cutting edge of wildfire research .
Scientists are investigating how exactly they form and whether climate change—which is driving bigger , more frequent wildfires across the world—might make them happen more often .
That ’ s important to watch , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ surrounding environments .
The smoke they inject into the atmosphere could potentially affect local climate and weather patterns , from thunderstorms to local temperatures to the jet stream movement .
It ’ s an area of research where scientists are just beginning to scratch the surface .
“ We are very much in the early stages of understanding the role that pyroCbs play in the climate system , ” Peterson said .
“ We ’ ve learned a lot about pyroCb activity itself in the past few years .
“ But in terms @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the climate system , and just how pyroCb activity may evolve in a changing climate , that ’ s very much in its infancy.
” Last year , scientists took a literal headfirst dive into the physics of pyroCb events .
A joint initiative by NOAA and NASA , known as the FIREX-AQ project , sent an aircraft into the heart of a fire-driven thunderstorm that formed over the Williams Flats in Washington state in the summer of 2019 .
The aircraft was equipped to measure the physical and chemical properties of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what we have from the sampling of this pyroCb are a whole set of brand-new science questions that we weren ’ t able to ask and answer before , ” said Laura Thapa , a doctoral student at UCLA , who participated in the project and also presented at the AGU conference .
The project gave scientists new insight into how pyroCbs form and how they launch smoke so high into the atmosphere .
It ’ s also helping scientists better understand the way wildfire smoke changes a cloud ’ s properties and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ patterns .
For now , there are a lot of theories and few answers .
But there are several ways experts believe large pyroCb events could affect the weather .
For one thing , huge clouds of smoke have the potential to block some of the sun ’ s radiation , temporarily cooling the Earth below—similar to a large volcanic eruption .
But this phenomenon requires an enormous , thick plume of smoke .
It ’ s still unclear whether even the Australian New Year ’ s event was big enough to affect @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on temperatures and pyroCb events is scant .
“ I think we know almost nothing , ” said Mike Fromm , another meteorologist at the Naval Research Laboratory , who also presented research at AGU .
There are other potential links to local weather patterns .
Some research suggests smoke particles could lengthen the lives of thunderclouds , Fromm noted .
And it ’ s possible—although not certain—that a large enough smoke plume could affect the flow of much bigger atmospheric patterns , such as the jet stream .
A big pyroCb event @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they move through the stratosphere—it happened with the Australian New Year ’ s event .
The heat from the wildfire causes the air to move this way .
It ’ s possible these spinning plumes can get caught up in large-scale atmospheric systems , such as the jet stream , creating a kind of vortex in the system as it moves along .
Satellite images from a 2015 event over western North America suggest it ’ s happened before , according to Fromm .
Large atmospheric systems like the jet stream help influence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Earth .
Models can help scientists better understand the way pyroCb events may influence the weather .
Wildfire smoke plumes involve a lot of complicated , fine-scale physics that often are challenging to simulate .
The same is true for clouds .
But researchers are working on better representing these events in weather and climate models .
At the same time , scientists are still questioning how these events might change—if at all—with continued global warming .
Climate change is driving bigger , more frequent wildfires in places such as Australia and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t sure what that means for pyroCbs .
Hot , dry , windy weather conditions often make it more likely a pyroCb will form over a wildfire , Fromm pointed out .
So if a fire-prone area gets hotter , drier or windier in the future , it ’ s a “ pretty safe bet ” that more of these events will happen , he said .
But Peterson cautioned that other weather variables also play a role in whether a thundercloud can form at all .
Data from projects like FIREX-AQ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ why these events form , he added .
“ I think combining what we ’ ve done in the past ... and what we have from these new observations , we can say a lot more going forward and have a lot better handle on being able to predict pyroCb in the future , ” he said .
Reprinted from Climatewire with permission from E & E News .
E & E provides daily coverage of essential energy and environmental news at www.eenews.net .

Record-breaking wildfires in Australia at the start of the year caused an extraordinary weather phenomenon. They spawned a spree of towering fire-induced thunderclouds, which catapulted smoke 20 miles into the atmosphere.
Almost 12 months later, some of that smoke is still drifting around the planet.
These “pyrocumulonimbus” events, or “pyroCbs,” are impressive but not uncommon. They form when the heat from a wildfire strengthens currents of rising air in the atmosphere, generating large storm clouds and sending smoke spiraling skyward.
But the “Australian New Year’s event,” as scientists have dubbed it, is easily the largest on record. Recent research suggests it launched a half-million metric tons of aerosol particles into the stratosphere.
That’s on the order of a moderate volcanic eruption, one recent study suggests—enough to potentially have a small effect on the sun’s radiation. It’s about three times more than the previous record-breaker, a massive pyrocumulonimbus event that occurred during western Canada’s wildfire season in 2017.
“It exceeded this previously unprecedented event at almost every level,” said David Peterson, a meteorologist with the U.S. Naval Research Laboratory, at a news conference on pyroCb research, hosted Friday at the annual fall meeting of the American Geophysical Union. “So now we’re at a whole new level of pyroCb activity.”
Huge pyroCb events are at the cutting edge of wildfire research. Scientists are investigating how exactly they form and whether climate change—which is driving bigger, more frequent wildfires across the world—might make them happen more often.
That’s important to watch, as these events also could influence their surrounding environments. The smoke they inject into the atmosphere could potentially affect local climate and weather patterns, from thunderstorms to local temperatures to the jet stream movement.
It’s an area of research where scientists are just beginning to scratch the surface.
“We are very much in the early stages of understanding the role that pyroCbs play in the climate system,” Peterson said. “We’ve learned a lot about pyroCb activity itself in the past few years.
“But in terms of what these large plumes mean for the climate system, and just how pyroCb activity may evolve in a changing climate, that’s very much in its infancy.”
More questions than answers
Last year, scientists took a literal headfirst dive into the physics of pyroCb events.
A joint initiative by NOAA and NASA, known as the FIREX-AQ project, sent an aircraft into the heart of a fire-driven thunderstorm that formed over the Williams Flats in Washington state in the summer of 2019. The aircraft was equipped to measure the physical and chemical properties of the smoke it passed through.
“So what we have from the sampling of this pyroCb are a whole set of brand-new science questions that we weren’t able to ask and answer before,” said Laura Thapa, a doctoral student at UCLA, who participated in the project and also presented at the AGU conference.
The project gave scientists new insight into how pyroCbs form and how they launch smoke so high into the atmosphere. It’s also helping scientists better understand the way wildfire smoke changes a cloud’s properties and what that might mean for local weather patterns.
For now, there are a lot of theories and few answers. But there are several ways experts believe large pyroCb events could affect the weather.
For one thing, huge clouds of smoke have the potential to block some of the sun’s radiation, temporarily cooling the Earth below—similar to a large volcanic eruption. But this phenomenon requires an enormous, thick plume of smoke. It’s still unclear whether even the Australian New Year’s event was big enough to affect local temperatures.
In general, research on temperatures and pyroCb events is scant.
“I think we know almost nothing,” said Mike Fromm, another meteorologist at the Naval Research Laboratory, who also presented research at AGU.
There are other potential links to local weather patterns. Some research suggests smoke particles could lengthen the lives of thunderclouds, Fromm noted.
And it’s possible—although not certain—that a large enough smoke plume could affect the flow of much bigger atmospheric patterns, such as the jet stream.
A big pyroCb event can generate smoke plumes that spin as they move through the stratosphere—it happened with the Australian New Year’s event. The heat from the wildfire causes the air to move this way.
It’s possible these spinning plumes can get caught up in large-scale atmospheric systems, such as the jet stream, creating a kind of vortex in the system as it moves along. Satellite images from a 2015 event over western North America suggest it’s happened before, according to Fromm.
Large atmospheric systems like the jet stream help influence local weather patterns as they flow around the Earth.
Models can help scientists better understand the way pyroCb events may influence the weather. Wildfire smoke plumes involve a lot of complicated, fine-scale physics that often are challenging to simulate. The same is true for clouds. But researchers are working on better representing these events in weather and climate models.
At the same time, scientists are still questioning how these events might change—if at all—with continued global warming.
Climate change is driving bigger, more frequent wildfires in places such as Australia and western North America. But scientists aren’t sure what that means for pyroCbs.
Hot, dry, windy weather conditions often make it more likely a pyroCb will form over a wildfire, Fromm pointed out. So if a fire-prone area gets hotter, drier or windier in the future, it’s a “pretty safe bet” that more of these events will happen, he said.
But Peterson cautioned that other weather variables also play a role in whether a thundercloud can form at all.
Data from projects like FIREX-AQ will help scientists better understand how and why these events form, he added.
“I think combining what we’ve done in the past ... and what we have from these new observations, we can say a lot more going forward and have a lot better handle on being able to predict pyroCb in the future,” he said.
Reprinted from Climatewire with permission from E&E News. E&E provides daily coverage of essential energy and environmental news at www.eenews.net.