Injection-free vaccination technique could address global vaccine challenge for HIV, malaria

Injection-free vaccination technique could address global vaccine challenge for HIV, malaria

Tuesday, February 5, 2013

Scientists at King's College London have demonstrated the ability to deliver a dried live vaccine to the skin without a traditional needle, and shown for the first time that this technique is powerful enough to enable specialised immune cells in the skin to kick-start the immunising properties of the vaccine.

Funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and published today in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, researchers say although it is an early study this important technical advance offers a potential solution to the challenges of delivering live vaccines in resource-limited countries globally, without the need for refrigeration. A cheaper alternative to hypodermic needles, it would also remove safety risks from needle contamination and the pain-free administration could lead to more people taking up a vaccination. The researchers add that it could have an impact beyond infectious disease vaccination programmes, for example managing autoimmune and inflammatory conditions such as diabetes.

HIV, malaria and TB represent major global health challenges. Although promising research is underway to develop vaccines for these diseases, considerable stumbling blocks remain for countries where transporting and storing live vaccines in a continuously cold environment (around 2?C to 8?C or below) would not be possible. If a cold chain cannot be maintained for a live vaccine there is a high risk it could become unsafe and lose effectiveness.

The team at King's used a silicone mould developed by US company TheraJect to create a microneedle array ? a tiny disc with several micro-needles made of sugar which dissolve when inserted into the skin. The team formulated a dried version of a live modified adenovirus-based candidate HIV vaccine in sugar (sucrose) and used the mould to create the microneedle array. They found that the dried live vaccine remained stable and effective at room temperature.

To test the effectiveness of the microneedle array, they applied it to mice. Using imaging (in collaboration with Professor Frederic Geissmann, King's College London) they observed how the vaccine dissolved in the skin and were able to identify for the first time exactly which specialised immune cells in the skin 'pick up' this type of vaccine and activate the immune system. The researchers found the first evidence that a sub-set of specialised dendritic cells in the skin were responsible for triggering this immune response.

When compared with a traditional needle vaccine method, the immune response generated by the dried microneedle vaccine (kept at room temperature) was equivalent to that induced by the same dose of injected liquid vaccine that had been preserved at -80?C.

Dr Linda Klavinskis from the Peter Gorer Department of Immunobiology at King's College London, said: 'We have shown that it is possible to maintain the effectiveness of a live vaccine by drying it in sugar and applying it to the skin using microneedles ? a potentially painless alternative to hypodermic needles. We have also uncovered the role of specific cells in the skin which act as a surveillance system, picking up the vaccine by this delivery system and kick-starting the body's immune processes.

'This work opens up the exciting possibility of being able to deliver live vaccines in a global context, without the need for refrigeration. It could potentially reduce the cost of manufacturing and transportation, improve safety (as there would be no loss in potency), and avoids the need of hypodermic needle injection, reducing the risk of transmitting blood-borne disease from contaminated needles and syringes.

'This new technique represents a huge leap forward in overcoming the challenges of delivering a vaccination programme for diseases such as HIV and malaria. But these findings may also have wider implications for other infectious disease vaccination programmes, for example infant vaccinations, or even other inflammatory and autoimmune conditions such as diabetes.'

###

King's College London: http://www.kcl.ac.uk

Thanks to King's College London for this article.

This press release was posted to serve as a topic for discussion. Please comment below. We try our best to only post press releases that are associated with peer reviewed scientific literature. Critical discussions of the research are appreciated. If you need help finding a link to the original article, please contact us on twitter or via e-mail.

This press release has been viewed 31 time(s).

Source: http://www.labspaces.net/126627/Injection_free_vaccination_technique_could_address_global_vaccine_challenge_for_HIV__malaria

terrell owens neil armstrong little league world series us open tennis us open tennis Empire State Building shooting Republican National Convention

Married and have no close friends

Today, 08:59 AM ? #1 (permalink)

Registered User

?

Join Date: Feb 2013

Posts: 1

---

Married and have no close friends since.

I am 26 and have been married for 4 years now. First of all, English is my second language so I apologize if my grammar isn?t correct ?. I was in a relationship with my husband ( before married) for about 2 years but we were in a long distance relationship. Then I move to different country ( his country) so that we both can live together. I live with him for 3 months and decide to married. I love him so much and we both love each other. But I want to share my story since I met him and how is my life have changed after I met him. I was humble and free, young, work hard, have a lot of friends. I always go out after finished work clubbing or just chill out in the bar with my friends when I live at my home country. But since me and him entered relationship, he didn?t allowed me to go out at nite club anymore, he didn?t like me to hang out with my male friends too. I was too stupid and in love with him too much that I didn?t realized what this problem could affect my life RIGHT NOW after married with him and being together for more than 5 years. I did told him that I wasn?t happy and want to divorce but he said he will change. I love him so much right and I dont want to lose him, but He make my life so hollow. I feel like I don?t live my life and he control it.. I am feeling kinda depressed that I don't have any friends in this new country that I have lived for 4 years already. I have made a few friends at work but nobody that I can be close to and hang out with outside of work. They always busy when I ask them to hang out just not reliable. I never had a problem making friends when I was growing up but now that I am an adult it is like you can't find a normal person that can relate to your life. I feel like living with him is just make me depressed because his insecure problem, his jealousy and his controlling my life. I really want to be free but I love him so much and cant imagine how my life will be like without him. Sometimes I?m thinking to suicide but I don?t want to hurt him and leave him. I have nothing exciting in my life as my family in my home country don?t even care about me here. I Need serious help on trying to make a close friend and decide to change my life but I don?t know how. I really love my husband but in the other hand I want to be free. I want to have a balance life. I?m stuck.

?

Source: http://talkaboutmarriage.com/anxiety-depression-relationships/66852-married-have-no-close-friends.html

Shakira iOS 6 bank of america Yunel Escobar Eye Black Cruel Summer Endeavor shaun white

Burger King Admits to Horse Meat; UK Beef Supply May Be Tainted

Source: http://www.thehollywoodgossip.com/2013/02/burger-king-admits-to-horse-meat-tainting-beef-supply-scandal-ro/

game of thrones season 2 trailer sag award winners girl scout cookies screen actors guild royal rumble results sag awards 2012 kyra sedgwick

The risks of aiming low in deficit reduction

Some on the left are defining successful deficit reduction too modestly, Penner writes,?threatening to leave future fiscal policy perilously constrained.

By Rudy Penner,?Guest blogger / February 2, 2013

The American flag flies on top of the East Front Plaza of the US Capitol in Washington. Sovereign debt crises occur at all manner of debt-GDP ratios, Penner writes, and are impossible to predict, but it is hard to believe that a higher ratio does not increase the risk to some degree.

Ann Hermes/The Christian Science Monitor/File

Enlarge

In one of the more dangerous fiscal developments of recent months, some on the left are defining successful deficit reduction as merely stabilizing the federal debt at about 70 percent of Gross Domestic Product by 2022. While there is no magic target, this one is far too modest and threatens to leave future fiscal policy perilously constrained.

Skip to next paragraph TaxVox

The Tax Policy Center is a joint venture of the Urban Institute and Brookings Institution. The Center is made up of nationally recognized experts in tax, budget, and social policy who have served at the highest levels of government. TaxVox is the Tax Policy Center's tax and budget policy blog.

Recent posts

' + google_ads[0].line2 + '
' + google_ads[0].line3 + '

'; } else if (google_ads.length > 1) { ad_unit += ''; } } document.getElementById("ad_unit").innerHTML += ad_unit; google_adnum += google_ads.length; return; } var google_adnum = 0; google_ad_client = "pub-6743622525202572"; google_ad_output = 'js'; google_max_num_ads = '1'; google_feedback = "on"; google_ad_type = "text"; google_adtest = "on"; google_image_size = '230x105'; google_skip = '0'; // -->

Subscribe Today to the Monitor

Click Here for your FREE 30 DAYS of
The Christian Science Monitor
Weekly Digital Edition

Under current assumptions this goal can be achieved with combined reductions in spending growth and/or increases in taxes of $1.4 trillion over the 2014-2022 period, far less than the?total deficit reduction?provided by the 2011 Budget Control Act (BCA), which resolved the 2011 debt ceiling debate, and the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2013 (ATRA), which recently avoided the fiscal cliff.

Richard Kogan of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, supported by Martin Wolf? of the?Financial Times??makes the case?for more modest deficit reduction. The editorial page of the?Washington Post?shares my concern?that their goals are dangerously modest.

Imagine facing the next recession with a debt-GDP ratio already above 70 percent. It is almost certain that we shall have another slump before 2022.? If not, it will be the longest period without a decline?in the recorded history of U. S. business cycles. Add a modest stimulus to the??recession-driven reduction in tax revenues and increases in social spending and the debt-GDP ratio would top 100 percent in the blink of an eye. But it is harder to argue for a ?stimulus with the debt already soaring, and without one, a future ?recession would be more severe than necessary.?

Biden: US would hold direct talks if Iran serious

MUNICH (AP) ? The United States is prepared to hold direct talks with Iran in the standoff over its nuclear ambitions, Vice President Joe Biden said Saturday ? but he insisted that Tehran must show it is serious and Washington won't engage in such talks "just for the exercise."

Washington has indicated in the past that it's prepared to talk directly with Iran, and talks involving all five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council plus Germany have made little headway. Several rounds of international sanctions have cut into Iran's oil sales and financial transactions.

Last month Iran, in a defiant move ahead of a new round of talks expected soon with the six powers, announced plans to vastly increase its pace of uranium enrichment. That can be used to make both reactor fuel and the fissile core of warheads.

Biden told an international security conference that "there is still time, there is still space for diplomacy backed by pressure to succeed." He did not specify any timeframe.

He insisted that "the ball is in the government of Iran's court" to show that it's negotiating in good faith.

Asked when Washington might hold direct talks with Tehran, Biden replied: "when the Iranian leadership, the supreme leader (Ayatollah Ali Khamenei), is serious."

The U.S. has long made clear that it is prepared to meet directly with the Iranian leadership, he added ? "that offer stands but it must be real and tangible and there has to be an agenda that they're prepared to speak to."

"We're not prepared to do it just for the exercise," Biden told the Munich Security Conference.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, whose country is a key player in the six-nation talks with Iran, said he "would strongly support what Vice President Biden said about the need for incentives to be clearly shown to Iran."

"We have to convince Iran that it is not about the regime change," he said.

Iran insists it does not want nuclear arms and argues it has a right to enrich uranium for a civilian nuclear power program, but suspicion persists that the real aim is nuclear weapons. The Islamic Republic hid much of its nuclear program until it was revealed from the outside more than a decade ago. And defying U.N. Security Council demands that it halt uranium enrichment, Iran has instead expanded it.

"Iran should not wait any longer to take up the willingness Vice President Biden has stressed to hold substantial negotiations on its nuclear program," said Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle of Germany, whose country has been one of those trying to resolve the issue. He added that 2013 would be "decisive" for hopes of a diplomatic solution.

"From our point of view, announcing an accelerated expansion of uranium enrichment in Iran is the wrong signal," Westerwelle said.

Biden underlined that "our policy is not containment ? it is to prevent Iran acquiring a nuclear weapon."

The conference ? an annual gathering of top security officials ? also gave Biden an opportunity to address the civil war in Syria. He planned to hold separate meetings with Lavrov, international peace envoy Lakhdar Brahimi, and Syria's top opposition leader, Moaz al-Khatib. Russia is a longtime ally of Syrian President Bashar Assad.

Biden stressed the conviction of the U.S. and many others that "President Assad ? a tyrant hell-bent on clinging to power ? is no longer fit to lead the Syrian people and he must go." He said that "the opposition continues to grow stronger."

Despite differences, "we can all agree on the increasingly deep plight of the Syrian people and the responsibility of the international community to address that plight," he told an audience that included Lavrov.

But Lavrov fired back that "there are a lot of question marks about the Western approaches to those developments," in the region, asking whether supporting antigovernment protesters justified terrorists, and questioning when it is "permissible to cooperate with regimes and when is it legitimate to argue for their removal."

"We are all interested in the stability of the Mideast and the African continent," and for governments to be democratic and peaceful, Lavrov said. "If we agree on these common objectives we could probably agree on some transparent and common rules for all actors to follow."

Lavrov also suggested Biden's statement that Assad must go was counterproductive.

"The persistence of those who say that priority number one is the removal of President Assad ? I think it's the single biggest reason for the continued tragedy in Syria."

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/biden-us-hold-direct-talks-iran-serious-095444961.html

Groundhog Day 2013 groundhog day Harbaugh brothers What Time Is The Superbowl nfl nfl Caleb Moore

Healthier schools: Goodbye candy and greasy snacks | The Salt ...

FILE - In this Sept. 12, 2012 file photo, side salads, apple sauce and plums await the students of Eastside Elementary School in Clinton, Miss. The government for the first time is proposing broad new standards to make school snacks healthier, a move that would ban the sale of almost all candy, high-calorie sports drinks and greasy foods on campus. (AP Photo/Rogelio V. Solis, File)

Washington ? Goodbye candy bars and sugary cookies. Hello baked chips and diet sodas.

The government for the first time is proposing broad new standards to make sure all foods sold in schools are more healthful, a change that would ban the sale of almost all candy, high-calorie sports drinks and greasy foods on campus.

?

What foods are in, what foods are out

Some examples of what could be in and out under the proposed new rules, provided the items meet or don?t meet all of the requirements:

WHAT?S IN

Baked potato chips

Granola bars

Cereal bars

Trail mix

Dried fruits

Fruit cups

Yogurt

Whole grain-rich muffins

100 percent juice drinks

Diet soda (high schools)

Flavored water (high schools)

Lower-calorie sports drinks (high schools)

Unsweetened or diet iced teas (high schools)

100 percent juice popsicles

Baked lower-fat french fries

Healthier pizzas with whole grain crust

Lean hamburgers with whole wheat buns

WHAT?S OUT

Candy

Snack cakes

Most cookies

Pretzels

High-calorie sodas

Many high-calorie sports drinks

Juice drinks that are not 100 percent juice

Most ice cream and ice-cream treats

Greasy pizza and other fried, high-fat foods in the lunchroom

Under new rules the Department of Agriculture proposed Friday, school vending machines would start selling water, lower-calorie sports drinks, diet sodas and baked chips instead. Lunchrooms that now sell fatty "a la carte" items like mozzarella sticks and nachos would have to switch to healthier pizzas, low-fat hamburgers, fruit cups and yogurt.

The rules, required under a child nutrition law passed by Congress in 2010, are part of the government?s effort to combat childhood obesity. While many schools already have made improvements in their lunch menus and vending machine choices, others still are selling high-fat, high-calorie foods.

Under the proposal, the Agriculture Department would set fat, calorie, sugar and sodium limits on almost all foods sold in schools. Current standards already regulate the nutritional content of school breakfasts and lunches that are subsidized by the federal government, but most lunch rooms also have "a la carte" lines that sell other foods. And food sold through vending machines and in other ways outside the lunchroom has not been federally regulated.

"Parents and teachers work hard to instill healthy eating habits in our kids, and these efforts should be supported when kids walk through the schoolhouse door," said Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack.

Most snacks sold in school would have to have less than 200 calories. Elementary and middle schools could sell only water, low-fat milk or 100 percent fruit or vegetable juice. High schools could sell some sports drinks, diet sodas and iced teas, but the calories would be limited. Drinks would be limited to 12-ounce portions in middle schools, and 8-ounce portions in elementary schools.

The standards will cover vending machines, the "a la carte" lunch lines, snack bars and any other foods regularly sold around school. They would not apply to in-school fundraisers or bake sales, though states have the power to regulate them. The new guidelines also would not apply to after-school concessions at school games or theater events, goodies brought from home for classroom celebrations, or anything students bring for their own personal consumption.

The new rules are the latest in a long list of changes designed to make foods served in schools more healthful and accessible. Nutritional guidelines for the subsidized lunches were revised last year and put in place last fall. The 2010 child nutrition law also provided more money for schools to serve free and reduced-cost lunches and required more meals to be served to hungry kids.

Iowa Sen. Tom Harkin, a Democrat, has been working for two decades to take junk foods out of schools. He calls the availability of unhealthful foods around campus a "loophole" that undermines the taxpayer money that helps pay for the healthier subsidized lunches.

story continues below

"USDA?s proposed nutrition standards are a critical step in closing that loophole and in ensuring that our schools are places that nurture not just the minds of American children but their bodies as well," Harkin said.

Last year?s rules faced criticism from some conservatives, including some Republicans in Congress, who said the government shouldn?t be telling kids what to eat. Mindful of that backlash, the Agriculture Department exempted in-school fundraisers from federal regulation and proposed different options for some parts of the rule, including the calorie limits for drinks in high schools, which would be limited to either 60 calories or 75 calories in a 12-ounce portion.

The department also has shown a willingness to work with schools to resolve complaints that some new requirements are hard to meet. Last year, for example, the government relaxed some limits on meats and grains in subsidized lunches after school nutritionists said they weren?t working.

Schools, the food industry, interest groups and other critics or supporters of the new proposal will have 60 days to comment and suggest changes. A final rule could be in place as soon as the 2014 school year.

Margo Wootan, a nutrition lobbyist for the Center for Science in the Public Interest, says surveys done by her organization show that most parents want changes in the lunchroom.

"Parents aren?t going to have to worry that kids are using their lunch money to buy candy bars and a Gatorade instead of a healthy school lunch," she said.

The food industry has been onboard with many of the changes, and several companies worked with Congress on the child nutrition law two years ago. Major beverage companies have already agreed to take the most caloric sodas out of schools. But those same companies, including Coca-Cola and PepsiCo, also sell many of the non-soda options, like sports drinks, and have lobbied to keep them in vending machines.

A spokeswoman for the American Beverage Association, which represents the soda companies, says they already have greatly reduced the number of calories kids are consuming at school by pulling out the high-calorie sodas.

Copyright 2013 The Salt Lake Tribune. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Source: http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/world/55753802-68/schools-foods-drinks-calorie.html.csp

eric holder eric holder carole king crystal renn matilda cab calloway melissa gilbert

Even a Non-Profit Startup Needs a Revenue Model

A common misconception I often hear in the startup world is that non-profits are easy and safe, since they don?t have to pay taxes, and they don?t have to make a profit for their shareholders. In reality, from the feedback I get from non-profit executives, exactly the opposite is true.

Technically speaking, in the United States, a non-profit corporation or association is one which has been exempted from Federal income taxes by meeting the criteria set out Section 501(c) of the Internal Revenue Code, most notably religious, educational, and charitable entities. Other countries have similar exemptions for similar organizations.

Yet even a non-profit has to make a profit on everything it sells, in order to cover operating expenses (salaries, offices, equipment, research, travel, etc.), unless it relies wholly on donations. Even then, the business and leadership efforts to solicit and manage donations cost real money, and may be more difficult than the marketing and sales jobs of most startups.

Here are the common reasons I hear that make starting and running a non-profit actually more difficult than starting and running a conventional business:

1. Creating a non-profit 501(c) business is a long and arduous process. You can start an LLC for-profit in less than a month, often for less than $100. A non-profit 501(c)(3) status requires filing IRS Form 1023. The form must be accompanied by an $850 filing fee, and may take as long as two years to complete successfully.

2. Investors are not interested in non-profits. Even non-profits usually require startup funds for facilities, people, and inventory. But because they can?t project excellent returns on investment, no investors will likely be interested. Also, they can?t sell shares on the stock exchange to raise money, even though both the NYSE and Nasdaq are non-profits. That means they need to grow organically, or find a philanthropist.

3. Reputable non-profits need to keep their operating expenses low. This usually means keeping wages low, and no fancy facilities. Thus it?s hard to attract top-notch talent, premium locations, and first-class marketing campaigns. Managing volunteers, and running any organization with these constraints is a challenge.

4. Results are always subject to public scrutiny. Most startups, as private companies, don?t have to disclose their salaries and spending habits to anyone other than the IRS. Non-profits have to answer to watchdog organizations like Charity Navigator for how much of their proceeds actually make it to the causes they proclaim to support.

5. Some laudable non-profit missions are hard to sell to supporters. A common complaint from many non-profits is that both government and private funders would rather spend their dollars on ?sexy? causes such as children?s charities, cancer, and heart disease, rather than long-term causes like global warming and erasing hunger in Africa.

Unfortunately, misuse scenarios, like the lavish lifestyles of leaders and scams, have given the non-profit environment a bad name, making things even tougher. Even reputable organizations, supporting veterans, the police, firefighters or children, often raise eyebrows, with alarming real data like these from the 10 Inefficient Fundraisers report from the Charity Navigator website:

• Cancer Survivors' Fund ? 91% of donations spent on fundraising
• The Committee for Missing Children ? 89% spent on fundraising
• Firefighters Charitable Foundation ? 87% spent on fundraising
• Children's Charity Fund, Inc. - 86% spent on fundraising
• Disabled Police Officers Counseling Center ? 86% spent on fundraising

These numbers vividly show that non-profits with good causes can fail to achieve satisfying results, in the same way that for-profit startups often fail, even with good products. Despite these challenges, my advice is still to follow your heart and your passion when starting a business.

You shouldn?t choose a non-profit, or a for-profit, because one seems easier, or one can make more money. Do it because you love the cause, the service, or the product, and the challenges will get lost in the satisfaction and results you achieve along the way.

Marty Zwilling

Source: http://blog.startupprofessionals.com/2013/02/even-non-profit-startup-needs-revenue.html

cotton bowl Fiscal cliff deal kathy griffin jadeveon clowney orange bowl Rose Parade 2013 rex ryan