U.S. blocks funding for pandemic research group

Jocelyn Kaiser

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adq5967

IF: 56.9

2024-05-25

Science

Abstract:EcoHealth Alliance mishandled grant that helped fund virus studies in China, officials say

multidisciplinary sciences

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

US halts funding to controversial virus-hunting group: what researchers think

Mariana Lenharo

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-01460-3

IF: 64.8

2024-05-17

Nature

Abstract:Some scientists think the decision regarding EcoHealth Alliance is fair, while others say it might negatively impact virus surveillance. Some scientists think the decision regarding EcoHealth Alliance is fair, while others say it might negatively impact virus surveillance.

multidisciplinary sciences
Controversial virus-hunting scientist skewered at US COVID-origins hearing

Mariana Lenharo,Lauren Wolf

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-01305-z

IF: 64.8

2024-05-02

Nature

Abstract:Lawmakers interrogated Peter Daszak over his ties to China and whether his organisation, EcoHealth Alliance, has been a good steward of taxpayer dollars. Lawmakers interrogated Peter Daszak over his ties to China and whether his organisation, EcoHealth Alliance, has been a good steward of taxpayer dollars.

multidisciplinary sciences
Wisconsin bill would restrict pathogen studies

Jocelyn Kaiser

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.ado0972

IF: 56.9

2024-01-20

Science

Abstract:Efforts to ban "gain-of-function" research on viruses and bacteria worry scientists

multidisciplinary sciences
U.S. agency funding for climate and health research falls short

Meredith Wadman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.ads6027

IF: 56.9

2024-08-25

Science

Abstract:Interdisciplinary teams struggle to find a home in siloed federal grant-funding system

multidisciplinary sciences
US funders to tighten oversight of controversial 'gain-of-function' research

Max Kozlov

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-01377-x

IF: 64.8

2024-05-08

Nature

Abstract:New policy on high-risk biology studies aims to address criticism that previous rules were too vague. New policy on high-risk biology studies aims to address criticism that previous rules were too vague.

multidisciplinary sciences
Bill targeting Chinese firms worries U.S. researchers

Robert F. Service

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adt2248

IF: 56.9

2024-09-21

Science

Abstract:Biosecure Act could hinder science collaborations, limit sequencer purchases

multidisciplinary sciences
NIH director offers support for Asian researchers

Jocelyn Kaiser

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.ads6029

IF: 56.9

2024-08-25

Science

Abstract:Six years into agency's efforts to curtail foreign interference, some say it should apologize

multidisciplinary sciences
UK Scientists Criticize White House Ban on Studies That Increase Virus Potency or Transmissibility

N. Hawkes

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g6378

2014-01-01

BMJ

Abstract:UK scientists have criticized a ban by the US administration on studies that increase the potency or transmissibility of viruses, saying that such studies were needed to increase understanding of viruses and to improve vaccines against them.The ban, announced unexpectedly by the White House late last week, came after a voluntary moratorium on such studies that ended in 2013 without resolving the argument between those who said that generating “superstrains” of viruses was too risky and those who defended them as a valuable tool, as long as appropriate precautions against release were in place. The White House acted ahead of a meeting on 22 October of the National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity.Three UK scientists at a briefing in London on 20 October held at the Science Media Centre said that the two published studies into H5N1 flu that started the scare had already produced positive results, including a better understanding of why H5N1 spread easily in birds but …
US COVID-origins hearing puts scientific journals in the hot seat

Max Kozlov

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-01129-x

IF: 64.8

2024-04-17

Nature

Abstract:Politicians spar over whether academic publishers colluded with government scientists to suppress the lab-leak hypothesis. Politicians spar over whether academic publishers colluded with government scientists to suppress the lab-leak hypothesis.

multidisciplinary sciences
Research advocates see 'no good news for science'

Jeffrey Mervis

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adu5820

IF: 56.9

2024-11-18

Science

Abstract:Trump agenda and a Republican Congress point to funding cuts and policy shifts

multidisciplinary sciences
Coronavirus symptoms, research chief quits and Nature’s plan to join Plan S

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-01023-2

IF: 64.8

2020-04-15

Nature

Abstract:The president of Europe's most prestigious funding agency has <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-01075-4">resigned after three months in the post</a> — prompting fiery accusations from the organization's governing body that he largely neglected his responsibilities.

multidisciplinary sciences
Accelerating R&D for Emerging Infectious Diseases: Lessons Learnt from Ebola

Yangmu Huang,Chao Li,Jingyi Chen,Jiyan Ma

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-42486/v1

2020-01-01

Abstract:Abstract Background Both China and the U.S. developed high-quality vaccines for the Ebola outbreak. This study compared the R&D activities of Ebola products in two countries, as a way to present the influential factors of R&D for emerging infectious disease (EID) and to provide suggestions for timely and efficient response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods R&D activities were analyzed in terms of research funding, scientific research outputs, R&D timeline, and governmental mechanisms. Quantitative analysis was performed using data retrieved from national websites, clinical trial registries and databases. Qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted to explore perspectives of key informants involved in Ebola product development. Results The funding gap between China and the U.S. was significant before 2014 and narrowed after the Ebola outbreak. Both research teams started basic studies prior to the outbreak; however, the U.S. got FDA approval for clinical trials 5 months earlier than China. The underlying gap reveals the lack of participation and support by private sectors, stagnant transformation platform, and inadequate government incentives in China. Conclusions R&D pre-planning and resource deployment mechanisms are crucial for EID preparedness and response. Building private and public collaboration, and strengthening government support for clinical trials may accelerate the translation of basic research.
Impact of the COVID-19 Epidemic on a Pan-Asian Academic Oncology Clinical Trial

Eva Segelov,Hans Prenen,Daphne Day,C. Raina Macintyre,Estelle Mei Jye Foo,Raghib Ali,Quanyi Wang,Xiaoting Wei,Gilberto de Lima Lopes,Kefeng Ding,Gong Chen,John Whay Kuang Chia,Han Chong Toh

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/go.20.00072

2020-01-01

JCO Global Oncology

Abstract:On January 30, 2020, the WHO declared a public health emergency of international concern for COVID19, an epidemic novel strain of coronavirus that first infected humans in Wuhan, China. Over the following days and weeks, governments in China and across Asia started to implement drastic public health control measures, and Western countries began reporting patients as well. Measures have included quarantine, travel restrictions, social distancing (such as closing schools and banning mass gatherings), and personal hygiene measures, including wearing masks, implementing hospital infection control, and use of the International Health Regulations. To our knowledge, the impact of the epidemic on the running of clinical trials has not been reported to date. We describe the consequences of the COVID-19 epidemic, based on our experience with the ASCOLT trial (ClinicalTrials. gov identifier: NCT00565708), an academic phase III study open in 41 sites across 9 Asian countries and regions (mainland China, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, South Korea, Sri Lanka, and Taiwan).
US Academic and NGO Engagement in Pandemic Preparedness and Response

Helene McOwen,Judith N. Wasserheit,Peter Rabinowitz

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1089/hs.2023.0103

2024-02-24

Health Security

Abstract:Health Security, Ahead of Print.

public, environmental & occupational health
Consolidation in a crisis: Patterns of international collaboration in early COVID-19 research

Caroline V Fry,Xiaojing Cai,Yi Zhang,Caroline S Wagner

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0236307

IF: 3.7

2020-07-21

PLoS ONE

Abstract:This paper seeks to understand whether a catastrophic and urgent event, such as the first months of the COVID-19 pandemic, accelerates or reverses trends in international collaboration, especially in and between China and the United States. A review of research articles produced in the first months of the COVID-19 pandemic shows that COVID-19 research had smaller teams and involved fewer nations than pre-COVID-19 coronavirus research. The United States and China were, and continue to be in the pandemic era, at the center of the global network in coronavirus related research, while developing countries are relatively absent from early research activities in the COVID-19 period. Not only are China and the United States at the center of the global network of coronavirus research, but they strengthen their bilateral research relationship during COVID-19, producing more than 4.9% of all global articles together, in contrast to 3.6% before the pandemic. In addition, in the COVID-19 period, joined by the United Kingdom, China and the United States continued their roles as the largest contributors to, and home to the main funders of, coronavirus related research. These findings suggest that the global COVID-19 pandemic shifted the geographic loci of coronavirus research, as well as the structure of scientific teams, narrowing team membership and favoring elite structures. These findings raise further questions over the decisions that scientists face in the formation of teams to maximize a speed, skill trade-off. Policy implications are discussed.
'America first' could affect health worldwide

Gretchen Vogel

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adu5822

IF: 56.9

2024-11-18

Science

Abstract:Scientists worry Donald Trump will leave WHO again and slash disease control programs

multidisciplinary sciences
Confronting and Governing the Public Health Emergency

Jianxing Yu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/23812346.2020.1744260

IF: 2.915

2020-01-01

Journal of Chinese Governance

Abstract:In January 2020, COVID-19, which struck Wuhan in Hubei Province, began spreading across China and then around the world. The outbreak of COVID-19 soon became a ‘Public Health Emergency of Internati...
Ethics and Responsibility of Scientific Researchers in a Pandemic Era

Kyung-Hee Lee

DOI: https://doi.org/10.12717/DR.2021.25.4.321

Abstract:The purpose of this paper is to critique the links between science and scientific researchers, politics and capital surrounding vaccines and vaccination in a pandemic era. It also introduces standards for adapting ethical guidelines for research under public health emergencies to specific circumstances and contexts. It also introduces ethical standards to be applied to scientific research. that is, scientific relevance, social value, cooperative partnerships, reasonable risk-benefit costs, fair and voluntary participation, independent review, and equal moral respect for participants and affected communities. It also outlines the COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) pandemic-consent and other research procedure modifications proposed by Oregon Health and Science University (OHSU). We are on the lookout for powerful capital and hegemonic groups inseparable from politics and important decision makers in the pandemic era - that is, scientists, supporters, and scientific civic groups. It underscores the need for an independent and formal scientific advisory body with the right balance between science and politics.
We need a global framework for promoting safe handling of high consequence pathogens

Erik Albert Karlsson,Stuart Dean Blacksell,Dennis Carroll,David Ross Harper,Subhash Morzaria,Filip Claes

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.q1855

2024-08-25

BMJ

Abstract:The covid-19 pandemic has highlighted ongoing concerns regarding biosafety and biosecurity procedures in global pathogen research. This includes questions about any possible role of field and laboratory research into the emergence of the SARS-COV-2 virus.1 The $125m Discovery and Exploration of Emerging Pathogens-Viral Zoonoses programme, funded by the US Agency for International Development, researching new zoonotic viruses was recently cancelled partly because of these concerns.2 This has raised broader discussion about the risks and benefits of viral surveillance and research. Limiting funds for pathogen surveillance and research compromises long term preparedness for pandemics and leaves pathogen spillover threats unmonitored. Rather than restrict scientific surveillance and research, a global safety governance framework that spans the entire pathogen value chain must be urgently developed. This must cover the life cycle of pathogen research, including collection, transportation, and laboratory handling.Many safety concerns around pathogen research arise from the possibility of viral spillover caused...

medicine, general & internal
Transnational social spaces, guanxi, and resource mobilization in US-China collaboration on COVID-19-related research

John P Haupt,Morris Chen,Jenny J Lee,Die Hu,Wen Wen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3390002/v1

2023-01-01

Abstract:Abstract This study investigates the quality and intensity of collaborations between US and Chinese scientists. It examines differences in the self-reported roles and responsibilities of scientists across three groups: US Chinese, US non-Chinese, and China-based scientists, and the reasons why such differences may have emerged. The study employed a sequential exploratory mixed methods design, collecting interview and survey data from US-based and China-based scientists who co-published articles related to COVID-19. The findings generally showed that Chinese scientists in the US and China were more highly involved in research projects compared to their non-Chinese counterparts. Higher levels of involvement included greater intellectual contributions, more time and energy exerted, and more financial and material support provided. The findings also revealed that differences between the three groups of scientists can be explained by the US non-Chinese scientists’ limited involvement in many projects, by the US Chinese scientists’ transmigrant experiences and their embeddedness in transnational guanxi networks, and by the focus of many projects being on COVID-19 in China.

U.S. blocks funding for pandemic research group

US halts funding to controversial virus-hunting group: what researchers think

Controversial virus-hunting scientist skewered at US COVID-origins hearing

Wisconsin bill would restrict pathogen studies

U.S. agency funding for climate and health research falls short

US funders to tighten oversight of controversial 'gain-of-function' research

Bill targeting Chinese firms worries U.S. researchers

NIH director offers support for Asian researchers

UK Scientists Criticize White House Ban on Studies That Increase Virus Potency or Transmissibility

US COVID-origins hearing puts scientific journals in the hot seat

Research advocates see 'no good news for science'

Coronavirus symptoms, research chief quits and Nature’s plan to join Plan S

Accelerating R&D for Emerging Infectious Diseases: Lessons Learnt from Ebola

Impact of the COVID-19 Epidemic on a Pan-Asian Academic Oncology Clinical Trial

US Academic and NGO Engagement in Pandemic Preparedness and Response

Consolidation in a crisis: Patterns of international collaboration in early COVID-19 research

'America first' could affect health worldwide

Confronting and Governing the Public Health Emergency

Ethics and Responsibility of Scientific Researchers in a Pandemic Era

We need a global framework for promoting safe handling of high consequence pathogens

Transnational social spaces, guanxi, and resource mobilization in US-China collaboration on COVID-19-related research