Page 79 of 80 FirstFirst ... 29697677787980 LastLast
Results 1,171 to 1,185 of 1186

Thread: Coronavirus with an R0 of 3 or beyond

  1. #1171
    Super Moderator United States Dreamtimer's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th April 2015
    Location
    Patapsco Valley
    Posts
    12,986
    Thanks
    64,198
    Thanked 56,822 Times in 12,895 Posts
    This article from Wired is quite interesting. It goes into the history of how aerosols have been perceived in terms of infection. A standard developed which was not really well-founded.

    The 60-Year-Old Scientific Screwup That Helped Covid Kill

    Marr is an aerosol scientist at Virginia Tech and one of the few in the world who also studies infectious diseases. To her, the new coronavirus looked as if it could hang in the air, infecting anyone who breathed in enough of it. For people indoors, that posed a considerable risk. But the WHO didn’t seem to have caught on. Just days before, the organization had tweeted “FACT: #COVID19 is NOT airborne.” That’s why Marr was skipping her usual morning workout to join 35 other aerosol scientists. They were trying to warn the WHO it was making a big mistake.
    On the video call, tensions rose. At one point, Lidia Morawska, a revered atmospheric physicist who had arranged the meeting, tried to explain how far infectious particles of different sizes could potentially travel. One of the WHO experts abruptly cut her off, telling her she was wrong, Marr recalls. His rudeness shocked her. “You just don’t argue with Lidia about physics,” she says.

    Morawska had spent more than two decades advising a different branch of the WHO on the impacts of air pollution. When it came to flecks of soot and ash belched out by smokestacks and tailpipes, the organization readily accepted the physics she was describing—that particles of many sizes can hang aloft, travel far, and be inhaled. Now, though, the WHO’s advisers seemed to be saying those same laws didn’t apply to virus-laced respiratory particles. To them, the word airborne only applied to particles smaller than 5 microns. Trapped in their group-specific jargon, the two camps on Zoom literally couldn’t understand one another.

    That 5 micron baseline was the heart of the problem and the story follows Marr and others' odyssey uncovering it's origin and helping people to get past it's affect.

  2. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Dreamtimer For This Useful Post:

    Aragorn (9th June 2021), BeastOfBologna (9th June 2021), Wind (9th June 2021)

  3. #1172
    Super Moderator United States Dreamtimer's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th April 2015
    Location
    Patapsco Valley
    Posts
    12,986
    Thanks
    64,198
    Thanked 56,822 Times in 12,895 Posts
    Will mRNA vaccines be a platform to help prevent most future pandemics?


    Since the novel coronavirus first showed up in America in January 2020, the U.S. government has routinely impeded scientists, public health officials, and citizens from coping with the COVID-19 pandemic. Early on, the surgeon general admonished Americans for buying masks. As late as last August, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) was downplaying broad-based testing among asymptomatic people. It wasn't until this April—more than a year into the pandemic—that the agency finally acknowledged what had become clear only a few months in: COVID-19 is rarely spread by surface contact. It's primarily an airborne disease.

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) stood in the way as independent labs worked to quickly develop COVID-19 tests that would allow individuals to know if they were infected and should self-quarantine, and it wasn't until this spring that the agency finally approved an at-home test you could get without a prescription. The FDA also temporarily pulled Johnson & Johnson's vaccine from the U.S. market because one out of every 1.13 million recipients developed blood clots. Those are the same odds of being struck by lightning.

    The one clear policy victory—Operation Warp Speed, which promised payments to developers of coronavirus vaccines—was based on biomedical innovations such as "messenger RNA" vaccines—that were already underway before the novel coronavirus appeared. "The horrors of the last year have spurred humanity to quickly develop an unprecedentedly flexible and powerful toolkit that may well make COVID-19 the last true pandemic," writes Reason Science Correspondent Ronald Bailey in the May cover story for the magazine.

    "The amazing thing is that we'll be able to forestall any further pandemics in the future because so many great advancements in vaccine treatments…have come out of that," he tells Reason TV. "Now you can just slip any piece of genetic information into that lipid and now you have a vaccine."
    Safe and effective COVID-19 vaccines were produced far faster than any expert expected. Yet almost all of the time that it took to bring the vaccines to market was due to safety testing and other governmental mandates that could have been sped up without endangering anyone. By January 13, 2020—only two days after the Chinese researchers shared the genetic sequence of the COVID-19 virus and before most Americans had heard of the disease—the biotech company Moderna had devised the formula for its vaccine. BioNTech launched its COVID-19 vaccine program in January and had partnered with Pfizer to manufacture it by mid-March of last year. The first volunteer was injected with Moderna's vaccine on March 16, 2020, yet it was only approved by the FDA last December 17th, a week after Pfizer's vaccine met the agency's approval. Had the agency been faster off the mark and used human-challenge trials and other innovative testing techniques, the vaccines could have been brought to market months earlier with no compromise in safety. That would have conceivably saved hundreds of thousands of lives globally.

    Will our government allow a vaccine based on this plug-and-play model to be deployed not within months, but in a matter of weeks, to stop the next pandemic in its tracks? "My answer is to let us deploy the technologies as quickly as possible, and then we won't have to make any of these trade-offs ever again," says Bailey. "If we have another pandemic and another failure [like with COVID-19], it will be a policy failure. Our bureaucracies need to get out of the way and let vaccines be deployed in an expeditious way."



    Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tn6b3pIjqEw


    It sounds nice when you say 'deploy technologies' but I'm not so sure 'as quickly as possible' is good.

    And the resistance to vaccines endures.

  4. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Dreamtimer For This Useful Post:

    Aragorn (10th June 2021), BeastOfBologna (9th June 2021), Chris (11th June 2021), Wind (11th June 2021)

  5. #1173
    Senior Member BeastOfBologna's Avatar
    Join Date
    3rd April 2017
    Posts
    8,336
    Thanks
    27,459
    Thanked 33,330 Times in 8,237 Posts
    Quote Originally posted by Dreamtimer View Post
    This article from Wired is quite interesting. It goes into the history of how aerosols have been perceived in terms of infection. A standard developed which was not really well-founded.

    The 60-Year-Old Scientific Screwup That Helped Covid Kill






    That 5 micron baseline was the heart of the problem and the story follows Marr and others' odyssey uncovering it's origin and helping people to get past it's affect.
    yes, a fatal problem in any scientific discipline ... hell, any human interaction ... bypassing. I see it happen all the time and have always been ready, willing, and able to make it known that I could see it happening ... and pissing people off, until it hit them what I was getting at.
    “But those who have been under the shadow, who have gone down at last to elemental things, will have a wider charity” - Herbert George Wells -

  6. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to BeastOfBologna For This Useful Post:

    Aragorn (10th June 2021), Chris (11th June 2021), Dreamtimer (9th June 2021), Wind (11th June 2021)

  7. #1174
    Senior Member Hungary
    Join Date
    10th July 2018
    Posts
    1,462
    Thanks
    3,634
    Thanked 7,109 Times in 1,456 Posts
    Finally, Mainstream Media is taking the possibility of not only lab leak theory, but bioweapons research and the trillions of dollars China could be on the hook for, seriously. Some important titbits on how the virus could have spread so quickly along the Metro Line, that serves the Wuhan Institute of Virology and the international airport, with connecting flights to many of the early International hotspots. Also, that nasty Furrin Cleavage sequence which appears wholly unnatural and is only normally found in HIV is mentioned, with the probability of it being a natural mutation calculated as only a billion to one.


  8. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Chris For This Useful Post:

    Aragorn (11th June 2021), BeastOfBologna (12th June 2021), Dreamtimer (12th June 2021), Wind (11th June 2021)

  9. #1175
    Super Moderator United States Dreamtimer's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th April 2015
    Location
    Patapsco Valley
    Posts
    12,986
    Thanks
    64,198
    Thanked 56,822 Times in 12,895 Posts
    More on the possibility of lab leak.


  10. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Dreamtimer For This Useful Post:

    Aragorn (12th June 2021), Chris (12th June 2021), Wind (12th June 2021)

  11. #1176
    Senior Member BeastOfBologna's Avatar
    Join Date
    3rd April 2017
    Posts
    8,336
    Thanks
    27,459
    Thanked 33,330 Times in 8,237 Posts
    Quote Originally posted by Chris View Post
    Finally, Mainstream Media is taking the possibility of not only lab leak theory, but bioweapons research and the trillions of dollars China could be on the hook for, seriously. Some important titbits on how the virus could have spread so quickly along the Metro Line, that serves the Wuhan Institute of Virology and the international airport, with connecting flights to many of the early International hotspots. Also, that nasty Furrin Cleavage sequence which appears wholly unnatural and is only normally found in HIV is mentioned, with the probability of it being a natural mutation calculated as only a billion to one.
    Of course, what the scientist is saying makes sense, but he left out an important piece in favor of his conclusion:

    HIV did it, crossed species that were closely related but not normally trans reproducing. (e.g. monkeys, apes) The scientist didn't mention any specific examples of cross-Kingdom mutations. There is still the case of the miners that died from 'something'.
    “But those who have been under the shadow, who have gone down at last to elemental things, will have a wider charity” - Herbert George Wells -

  12. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to BeastOfBologna For This Useful Post:

    Aragorn (12th June 2021), Chris (12th June 2021), Wind (12th June 2021)

  13. #1177
    Senior Member BeastOfBologna's Avatar
    Join Date
    3rd April 2017
    Posts
    8,336
    Thanks
    27,459
    Thanked 33,330 Times in 8,237 Posts
    Quote Originally posted by Dreamtimer View Post
    More on the possibility of lab leak.
    Who lifted the ban in 2017?
    “But those who have been under the shadow, who have gone down at last to elemental things, will have a wider charity” - Herbert George Wells -

  14. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to BeastOfBologna For This Useful Post:

    Aragorn (12th June 2021), Chris (12th June 2021), Dreamtimer (13th June 2021)

  15. #1178
    Senior Member BeastOfBologna's Avatar
    Join Date
    3rd April 2017
    Posts
    8,336
    Thanks
    27,459
    Thanked 33,330 Times in 8,237 Posts


    19 December 2017
    Update 19 December 2017
    US government lifts ban on risky pathogen research
    The National Institutes of Health will again fund research that makes viruses more dangerous.
    Sara Reardon

    Anthrax spores in petri dish
    Experiments with deadly pathogens, such as the bacterium that causes anthrax infections in people, pose special risks.CREDIT: UIG/Getty

    The US government has lifted its controversial ban on funding experiments that make certain pathogens more deadly or transmissible. On 19 December, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) announced that scientists can once again use federal money to conduct ‘gain-of-function’ research on pathogens such as influenza viruses. But the agency also said that researchers’ grant applications will undergo greater scrutiny than in the past.

    The goal is to standardize “a rigorous process that we really want to be sure we’re doing right”, NIH director Francis Collins told reporters.

    The NIH announcement ends a moratorium on gain-of-function research that began in October 2014. Back then, some researchers argued that the agency’s ban — which singled out research on the viruses that cause flu, severe acute respiratory syndrome and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) — was too broad. The 21 projects halted by the policy included studies of seasonal flu and efforts to develop vaccines. The NIH eventually allowed ten of these studies to proceed, but three projects using the MERS virus and eight dealing with flu remained ineligible for US government grants — until now.

    Risk assessment

    While the ban was in effect, the NIH and other government agencies examined the costs and benefits of allowing gain-of-function research. In 2016, the National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity (NSABB) — an independent panel that advises the NIH’s parent, the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) — concluded that very few government-funded gain-of-function experiments posed a significant threat to public health.

    The new policy outlines a framework that the HHS will use to assess proposed research that would create pathogens with pandemic potential. Such work might involve modifying a virus to infect more species, or recreating a pathogen that has been eradicated in the wild, such as smallpox. There are some exceptions, however: vaccine development and epidemiological surveillance do not automatically trigger the HHS review.

    The plan includes a list of suggested factors for the HHS to consider, including an assessment of a project’s risks and benefits, and a determination of whether the investigator and institution are capable of conducting the work safely. It also says that an experiment should proceed only if there is no safer alternative method of achieving the same results.

    At the end of this assessment process, the HHS can recommend that the work go ahead, ask the researchers to modify their proposal or suggest that the NIH refuse funding. The NIH will also judge the proposal’s scientific merit before deciding whether to award grant funding.

    Ongoing discussion

    Scientists have long debated the merits of gain-of-function research and the new decision could reopen that discussion.

    NSABB chair Samuel Stanley, the president of Stony Brook University in New York, is pleased that the new rules do not ban gain-of-function research outright. "Basic research on these agents by laboratories that have shown they can do this work safely is key to global security," he said in a statement. But Stanley fears the changes came at a cost: the three-year moratorium may have delayed research and reduced interest in research on these pathogens. "I believe nature is the ultimate bioterrorist and we need to do all we can to stay one step ahead," he said.

    Yoshihiro Kawaoka, a virologist at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, whose work was affected by the moratorium, says the new framework is "an important accomplishment". Kawaoka, who studies how molecular changes in the avian flu virus could make it easier for birds to transmit to humans, now plans to apply for federal funding to experiment with live versions of the virus.

    But Marc Lipsitch, an epidemiologist at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health in Boston, Massachusetts, says that gain-of-function studies “have done almost nothing to improve our preparedness for pandemics — yet they risked creating an accidental pandemic”. He argues that such experiments should not happen at all. But if the government is going to fund them, Lipsitch says, he is glad there will be an extra level of review.
    “But those who have been under the shadow, who have gone down at last to elemental things, will have a wider charity” - Herbert George Wells -

  16. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to BeastOfBologna For This Useful Post:

    Aragorn (12th June 2021), Chris (12th June 2021), Dreamtimer (13th June 2021), Wind (12th June 2021)

  17. #1179
    Super Moderator United States Dreamtimer's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th April 2015
    Location
    Patapsco Valley
    Posts
    12,986
    Thanks
    64,198
    Thanked 56,822 Times in 12,895 Posts
    We have gain of function, off-label use of many medications, GMO which is a different kind of gain of function, and likely more.

    I'm not sure it's something that can be stopped. Other nations will continue. For better or worse.

  18. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Dreamtimer For This Useful Post:

    Aragorn (13th June 2021), BeastOfBologna (13th June 2021), Chris (13th June 2021), Wind (13th June 2021)

  19. #1180
    Senior Member Hungary
    Join Date
    10th July 2018
    Posts
    1,462
    Thanks
    3,634
    Thanked 7,109 Times in 1,456 Posts
    New revelations, that live bats were being used in the Wuhan lab to conduct gain of function research and that "humanised mice" were involved.

    The latter is almost too scary to contemplate, but Chinese scientists have been caught before, engaging in highly "unusual" genetic experiments. Presumably, humanised mice have been genetically manipulated to mimic certain genetic characteristics of humans, to make it easier to study how certain genetically modified bat viruses would infect human hosts.


  20. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Chris For This Useful Post:

    Aragorn (13th June 2021), BeastOfBologna (13th June 2021), Dreamtimer (13th June 2021), Wind (13th June 2021)

  21. #1181
    Senior Member BeastOfBologna's Avatar
    Join Date
    3rd April 2017
    Posts
    8,336
    Thanks
    27,459
    Thanked 33,330 Times in 8,237 Posts
    Quote Originally posted by Chris View Post
    New revelations, that live bats were being used in the Wuhan lab to conduct gain of function research and that "humanised mice" were involved.

    The latter is almost too scary to contemplate, but Chinese scientists have been caught before, engaging in highly "unusual" genetic experiments. Presumably, humanised mice have been genetically manipulated to mimic certain genetic characteristics of humans, to make it easier to study how certain genetically modified bat viruses would infect human hosts.
    Well, after listening for a while, I started wondering about this reporter's origins, if I was researching her I would start with Rupert Murdoch. My scientific instincts remain strong just like Bruce Lee's kung fu.
    “But those who have been under the shadow, who have gone down at last to elemental things, will have a wider charity” - Herbert George Wells -

  22. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to BeastOfBologna For This Useful Post:

    Aragorn (13th June 2021), Chris (14th June 2021), Dreamtimer (13th June 2021), Wind (13th June 2021)

  23. #1182
    Super Moderator United States Dreamtimer's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th April 2015
    Location
    Patapsco Valley
    Posts
    12,986
    Thanks
    64,198
    Thanked 56,822 Times in 12,895 Posts
    John Stewart makes the lab case.


  24. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Dreamtimer For This Useful Post:

    Aragorn (15th June 2021), BeastOfBologna (15th June 2021), Chris (15th June 2021), Wind (15th June 2021)

  25. #1183
    Senior Member Hungary
    Join Date
    10th July 2018
    Posts
    1,462
    Thanks
    3,634
    Thanked 7,109 Times in 1,456 Posts
    The recent revelations about Lab Leak, Gain of Function, the Culpability of Fauci and Daszak on the Joe Rogan Show.


  26. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Chris For This Useful Post:

    Aragorn (16th June 2021), Dreamtimer (Yesterday)

  27. #1184
    Senior Member BeastOfBologna's Avatar
    Join Date
    3rd April 2017
    Posts
    8,336
    Thanks
    27,459
    Thanked 33,330 Times in 8,237 Posts
    NIH Leadership

    The Office of the Director is the central office at NIH, responsible for setting policy for NIH and for planning, managing, and coordinating the programs and activities of all NIH components. The NIH Director, with a unique and critical perspective on the entire agency, is responsible for providing leadership to the Institutes and for constantly identifying needs and opportunities, especially for efforts that involve multiple Institutes. The NIH Director is assisted by NIH Deputy Directors including the Principal Deputy Director, who shares in the overall direction of the agency's activities.

    NIH Director Francis S. Collins, M.D., Ph.D.

    Francis S. Collins, M.D., Ph.D., was appointed the 16th Director of the National Institutes of Health by President Barack Obama and confirmed by the Senate. He was sworn in on August 17, 2009. On June 6, 2017, President Donald Trump announced his selection of Dr. Collins to continue to serve as the NIH Director. He is a physician-geneticist noted for his landmark discoveries of disease genes and his leadership of the Human Genome Project, served as Director of the National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI) at the National Institutes of Health from 1993-2008. Read Dr. Collins’ bio sketch.

    The NIH Director plays an active role in shaping the agency's activities and outlook. The Director has a unique and critical perspective on the whole of NIH. He is responsible for providing leadership to the Institutes and for constantly identifying needs and opportunities, especially for efforts that involve multiple Institutes. Read more about the role of the NIH Director

    Deputy Directors
    Lawrence A. Tabak, D.D.S., Ph.D.Principal Deputy Director, NIH
    Michael M. Gottesman, M.D.Deputy Director for Intramural Research
    Michael S. Lauer, M.D.Deputy Director for Extramural Research
    Alfred C. Johnson, Ph.D.Deputy Director for Management
    James M. Anderson, M.D., Ph.D.Deputy Director for Program Coordination, Planning, and Strategic Initiatives

    Chief of Staff
    John T. BurklowActing Chief of Staff

    Associate Directors

    Marie A. Bernard, M.D.Acting Chief Officer for Scientific Workforce Diversity
    Janine A. Clayton, M.D.Associate Director for Research on Women's Health
    Diane J. FrasierAssociate Director for Administration
    John I. Gallin, M.D.Associate Director for Clinical Research
    Roger I. Glass, M.D., Ph.D.Associate Director for International Research
    Maureen M. Goodenow, Ph.DAssociate Director for AIDS Research
    Susan K. Gregurick, Ph.D.Associate Director for Data Science
    Adrienne A. HallettAssociate Director for Legislative Policy and Analysis
    Lyric A. Jorgenson, Ph.D.Acting Associate Director for Science Policy
    Colleen A. McGowanAssociate Director for Research Services
    Renate H. MylesActing Associate Director for Communications and Public Liaison
    David M. Murray, Ph.D.Associate Director for Disease Prevention
    William (Bill) T. Riley, Ph.D.Associate Director for Behavioral and Social Sciences Research
    Neil K. ShapiroAssociate Director for Budget
    Daniel G. WheelandAssociate Director for Research Facilities

    Associate Deputy Director
    Courtney F. Aklin, Ph.D.Acting Associate Deputy Director
    “But those who have been under the shadow, who have gone down at last to elemental things, will have a wider charity” - Herbert George Wells -

  28. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to BeastOfBologna For This Useful Post:

    Aragorn (16th June 2021), Chris (Yesterday), Dreamtimer (Yesterday)

  29. #1185
    Senior Member BeastOfBologna's Avatar
    Join Date
    3rd April 2017
    Posts
    8,336
    Thanks
    27,459
    Thanked 33,330 Times in 8,237 Posts
    NIAID Legislative Chronology
    November 1, 1948 — The National Microbiological Institute was established under authority of section 202 of the Public Health Service (PHS) Act, as implemented by General Circular No. 55, Organization Order No. 20, dated October 8, 1948.

    December 29, 1955 — NIAID was established (replacing the National Microbiological Institute) under authority of the Omnibus Medical Research Act (P.L. 81-692, 64 Stat. L. 443) as implemented by PHS Briefing Memorandum of November 4, 1955, from the Surgeon General to the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare.

    November 4, 1988 — NIAID was provided with additional authorities under title II of the Health Omnibus Programs Extension Act of 1988 (P.L. 100-607), the first major law to address AIDS research, information, education, and prevention.

    August 14, 1991 — The PHS act (P.L. 102-96), the "Terry Beirn Community Based AIDS Research Initiative Act of 1991" reauthorized NIAID's Community Programs for Clinical Research on AIDS (CPCRA) for another 5 years.

    June 10, 1993 — The PHS act was amended by P.L. 103-43, the National Institutes of Health Revitalization Act of 1993. This comprehensive legislation required NIAID to include research on tropical diseases in its mission statement and directed the U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to ensure that individuals with expertise in chronic fatigue syndrome or neuromuscular diseases are appointed to appropriate NIH advisory committees.

    December 14, 1993 — The Preventive Health Amendments of 1993 were passed, which included provisions requiring the Director of NIAID to conduct or support research and research training regarding the cause, early detection, prevention, and treatment of tuberculosis. (The institute already had authority to conduct such research under its authorities in Title IV, PHS act.)

    October 7, 1998 — Rep. Anne Northup (Ky.), on behalf of herself and Rep. Bill Young (Fla.), introduced H.C.R. 335, a resolution recognizing NIAID's 50th anniversary. On October 9, Sen. Richard Durbin (Ill.), on behalf of himself and Sen. Connie Mack (Fla.), introduced a companion measure, S.C.R. 127. Both pieces of legislation were submitted to "demonstrate the support of the U.S. Congress for the NIAID, the NIH and all of the dedicated professionals who have devoted their lives to improving the quality of the Nation's health."

    October 17, 2000 — The Children's Health Act (P.L. 106-310) required the Directors of NIAID and the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases to expand and intensify the activities of their Institutes with respect to research and related activities concerning juvenile arthritis and related conditions.

    November 13, 2000 — The Public Health Improvement Act (P.L. 106-505) authorized the NIAID Director to establish a program of clinical research and training awards for sexually transmitted diseases.

    July 21, 2004 — The Project BioShield Act (P.L. 108-276) authorized the NIAID Director to provide grants for the modernization and construction of biomedical and behavioral research facilities and increased the Federal share of such NIAID-funded projects. The law also authorized the HHS Secretary to employ other procedures to respond to pressing needs in the research and development of countermeasures against biological, chemical, radiological, and nuclear threats, including expediting peer review procedures in certain instances, contracting with experts or consultants, and appointing professional and technical employees to positions at NIH.

    July 30, 2008 — The Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde United States Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-293) authorized the NIAID Director, acting through the head of the Division of AIDS and in accordance with the NIH peer-review process, to carry out research on, and development of, safe and effective methods for use by women to prevent the transmission of HIV, which may include microbicides.

    Biographical Sketch of NIAID Director Anthony S. Fauci, M.D.
    Anthony S. Fauci, M.D., Director of NIAID since 1984, oversees an extensive research portfolio devoted to preventing, diagnosing, and treating infectious and immune-mediated diseases. He received his medical degree from Cornell University Medical College and completed his internship and residency at The New York Hospital Cornell Medical Center. Dr. Fauci joined NIAID in 1968 as a clinical associate in the Laboratory of Clinical Investigation. In 1980, he became Chief of the Laboratory of Immunoregulation, a post he continues to hold. Dr. Fauci serves as one of the key advisors to the White House and Department of Health and Human Services on global HIV/AIDS issues, and on initiatives to bolster medical and public health preparedness against emerging infectious disease threats such as pandemic influenza. He was one of the principal architects of the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), which has helped save millions of lives throughout the developing world.

    Dr. Fauci has made many contributions to basic and clinical research on the pathogenesis and treatment of immune-mediated and infectious diseases, including human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) disease. He has received 38 honorary doctorate degrees from universities in the United States and abroad, as well as the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the National Medal of Science, the Mary Woodard Lasker Award for Public Service, the Robert Koch Medal, and other major awards. A member of the National Academy of Sciences and many other professional organizations, Dr. Fauci is the author, coauthor, or editor of more than 1,200 scientific publications, including several textbooks.

    Directors of NIAID
    Name In Office from To
    Victor H. Haas November 1, 1948 April 1957
    Justin M. Andrews April 1957 October 1, 1964
    Dorland J. Davis October 1, 1964 August 1975
    Richard M. Krause August 1975 July 1984
    Anthony S. Fauci November 1984 Present
    Research Programs
    NIAID is composed of 7 research divisions: the Division of AIDS; the Division of Allergy, Immunology, and Transplantation; the Division of Clinical Research; the Division of Extramural Activities; the Division of Intramural Research; the Division of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases; and the Dale and Betty Bumpers Vaccine Research Center. NIAID scientists conduct intramural research in laboratories located in Bethesda, Rockville, and Frederick, Maryland, and in Hamilton, Montana. More information on NIAID programs, committees, and initiatives can be found on NIAID's web site at www.niaid.nih.gov.

    Division of AIDS

    The Division of AIDS (DAIDS) was formed in 1986 to develop and implement the national research agenda to address the HIV/AIDS epidemic. Toward that end, the Division supports a global research portfolio on HIV/AIDS, its related co-infections, and co-morbidities. With the ultimate goal of creating an “AIDS-free Generation,” the Division continually develops and supports the research infrastructure and scientific expertise needed to enable innovative approaches aimed at: 1) halting the spread of HIV through effective and acceptable prevention strategies and a preventive vaccine; 2) treating and curing HIV infection; 3) establishing treatment and prevention strategies for the HIV co-infections and co-morbidities of greatest significance; and 4) partnering with scientific and community stakeholders to implement effective interventions. Carl W. Diffenbach, Ph.D. Director.

    Division of Allergy, Immunology, and Transplantation

    The mission of the Division of Allergy, Immunology, and Transplantation (DAIT) spans the acquisition of knowledge on the function of the immune system, and development of effective approaches for the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of infectious and immune-mediated diseases, including asthma and allergic diseases, autoimmune disorders, primary immunodeficiency diseases, and rejection of transplanted organs, tissues, and cells. To achieve this goal, DAIT promotes and supports basic research to increase understanding of the development and function of the immune system, the mechanisms of protective immunity, and the causes and mechanisms that lead to the development of immunologic diseases. DAIT’s clinical research activities apply this knowledge to the development and evaluation of new tolerogenic and immunomodulatory approaches for the diagnosis, treatment and prevention of immune-mediated diseases and transplant rejection. Daniel Rotrosen, M.D., Director.

    Division of Clinical Research

    The Division of Clinical Research (DCR) plays an integral role in facilitating the efficient and effective performance of NIAID research programs on both the domestic and the international level. This is accomplished through a multi-faceted approach to the provision and support of services vital to the research infrastructure that include oversight and management of intramural clinical research, program planning and management, regulatory monitoring and compliance, statistical consultation and research methodology, and clinical research capacity building. H. Clifford Lane, M.D., Director.

    Division of Extramural Activities

    The Division of Extramural Activities (DEA) serves NIAID's extramural research community and the Institute in several key areas: overseeing policy and management for grants and contracts; managing NIAID's research training, small business, and international programs; and conducting initial peer review for funding mechanisms with Institute-specific needs. In addition to providing broad policy guidance to Institute management, DEA also oversees all of NIAID's chartered committees, including the National Advisory Allergy and Infectious Diseases Council; disseminates information to its extramural community through its large Internet site; and develops extramural staff training and communications through the NIAID intranet. Matthew Fenton, Ph.D., Director.

    Division of Intramural Research

    The Division of Intramural Research (DIR) is composed of 21 laboratories and 3 branches that conduct biomedical research programs covering a wide range of disciplines relating to immunology, allergy, and infectious diseases. This includes the subdisciplines of virology, microbiology, biochemistry, parasitology, epidemiology, mycology, molecular biology, immunology, immunopathology, and immunogenetics. In addition, DIR supports a large clinical effort to conduct patient-centered research in allergy, immunology, and infectious diseases. Steven M. Holland, M.D.​, Director.

    Division of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases

    The Division of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (DMID) supports extramural research to control and prevent diseases caused by virtually all human infectious agents except HIV. DMID’s portfolio includes a wide variety of projects on bacterial, viral, parasitic, and prion diseases. DMID-supported research spans the spectrum from basic biology of human pathogens and their interaction with human hosts, through translational and clinical research toward the development of new and improved diagnostics, drugs, and vaccines for infectious diseases. DMID supports basic research on organisms on the NIAID Category A to C list of priority pathogens for biodefense and emerging and re-emerging infectious diseases, as well as translational and clinical research to develop medical countermeasures for diseases caused by these agents. Emily Erbelding, M.D., M.P.H.​, Director.

    Dale and Betty Bumpers Vaccine Research Center

    While the core research focus of the VRC remains the development of an effective vaccine for prevention of HIV-1/AIDS, VRC capabilities informed by its work on HIV have led to significant contributions to vaccine development for other high-burden diseases such as influenza, RSV and malaria, as well as for biodefense threats and emerging infectious diseases including Ebola, Chikungunya, alphavirus encephalitides, SARS, and MERS. The VRC’s programmatic framework encompasses basic bench research, antigen discovery, comprehensive immune assessment, vaccine production capability, and conduct of clinical trials. The technology advances of the VRC in numerous areas, including antigen discovery, vaccine vector development, modulation and measurement of immunity, adjuvant use, manufacturing optimization, pre-clinical testing, efficient regulatory and clinical evaluation, and analysis of human immune responses, all have translated into opportunities for associated advances in immune modulator discovery, development, and implementation for other diseases.

    VRC Programmatic Cores include: Virology and Humoral Immunology Cores (translation of basic scientific knowledge into vaccine or other immune modulator products for clinical studies); Immunology and Flow Cytometry Cores (definition and quantification of immunological responses; studying correlates of immunity, development of reagents, and optimization of assays for both human and NHP studies); Genome Analysis Core (bioinformatics; advanced sequencing technologies); Structural Biology and Bioinformatics Cores (application of advanced technologies and atomic-level information to design vaccines and other immune modulators); Translational Research Cores (animal models; preclinical testing in NHP, including mucosal sampling and processing); Vaccine Production Program (process development and manufacture of controlled quality materials for human clinical studies); and Clinical Trials Program (clinical trial protocol development; study design and analysis; maintenance of regulatory standards; and screening/recruitment of healthy adults into clinical trials). John R. Mascola, M.D., Director.
    Last edited by BeastOfBologna, Yesterday at 13:51.
    “But those who have been under the shadow, who have gone down at last to elemental things, will have a wider charity” - Herbert George Wells -

  30. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to BeastOfBologna For This Useful Post:

    Aragorn (Yesterday), Chris (Yesterday), Dreamtimer (Yesterday)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •