|
|
|
Today, we look at new technologies to develop new antimicrobials (and how to fix the market) and one researcher’s thoughts on the EU’s proposed reform of its CRISPR regulation—plus, Summer Science Splash returns with what voters think about pandemic preparedness. (720 words, 3 minutes, 36 seconds) |
|
|
|
|
Battling AMR in the lab and in the market |
|
|
Antimicrobial resistance is “one of the biggest dangers for global health,” but we need to rethink antimicrobial development—and fix the market.
Why it matters: Globally, drug-resistant bacteria caused more than 1 million deaths in 2019, while AMR fungi caused 1.6 million deaths in 2021. And the problem’s only getting worse without new antimicrobials.
Scientists are rethinking antimicrobial discovery,says a recent report in Nature exploring new R&D technology.
Letting bacteria “talk” to each other by culturing them together, scientists at UMass are trying to isolate compounds naturally produced in reaction to pathogens.
“Bioinformatic prospecting” deployed by Rockefeller University scientists analyzes bacterial genetic clusters and uses algorithms to predict antibiotic compounds they might produce. Reproducing synthetic versions of these compounds, researchers already developed the antibiotic cilagicin, which outsmarts bacterial resistance.
AI can screen potential compounds for antibiotic qualities: “In the past, a large pharmaceutical company might screen a million compounds in search of a new antibiotic,” but AI can screen 110 million molecules in three days, Nature says.
But the antimicrobial market is broken,says a recent report by BIO (cited by Nature), as well as research from the London School of Economics and Nature—because antibiotics are used sparingly, making development “risky and relatively unprofitable.”
One solution: Nature recommends paying drug makers for the value of a new antibiotic instead of paying by volume—like the PASTEUR Act, which BIO supports. (Now, Congress needs to pass it.) |
|
|
|
|
Is the EU's CRISPR regulation reform enough? |
|
|
The European Union is rethinking its approach to gene-edited crops, but reform falls short, a researcher writes.
EU’s proposed change: The European Commission on July 5 released proposed relaxed regulations “on plants obtained by certain new genomic techniques” (NGTs) with more precise gene editing, such as through CRISPR.
How we got here: Europe’s strict regulation of genetically modified crops, established in 2001, was extended to gene editing by a 2018 court ruling, a major blow to the EU’s ability to compete in agricultural biotech. This proposed regulation would correct that ruling, Reuters says.
Why it matters: Gene editing can develop crops resistant to disease, less likely to cause allergies, climate resilient, and essential to achieving food security, plant scientist Devang Mehta writes in Nature.
But there’s more to do: The proposal says biotech crops made by altering fewer than 20 of the millions of base pairs of DNA in a plant’s genome could be treated as organic crops, while those with more alterations—for example, to resist multiple pathogens—face far greater regulation, says Mehta.
What they’re saying: “The EU can and should play a greater part in ensuring global food security. I urge both ministers and legislators to embrace science-guided definitions for NGTs, and resist calls to further limit this technology,” Mehta says. |
|
|
|
|
Voters want better pandemic preparedness—and that requires vaccination. |
|
|
The votes are in: Americans want better pandemic preparedness.
And the first step to making that happen is one of the easiest: leveraging a strong vaccination infrastructure and a well-vaccinated population.
According to a recent survey of 1,000 U.S. likely voters: - 95% believe “the federal government should prepare for a wide variety of potential public health emergencies.”
- 92% agree “the lessons learned from the last pandemic should be incorporated into our national preparedness efforts for the next public health emergency.”
- 90% agree “the federal government should expand long-term preventive measures to help avoid any future pandemics.”
By expanding access to vaccines and infrastructure for vaccination—as well as securing support for vaccine R&D—a huge piece of the pandemic preparedness puzzle can be locked into place.
A few positive steps are making that happen. The rapid development of mRNA technology allowed the COVID vaccines to come to market in record time. Now, the technology is being deployed to develop new influenza and RSV vaccines.
Legislation helps, too. The recently passed Helping Adults Protect Immunity (HAPI) Act and Protecting Seniors Through Immunization Act are closing gaps in adult vaccine coverage. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
