Search

This article draws on a broadcast popular among the anti-vaccine community to map out six themes used by the broadcast to mislead viewers about COVID-19. The themes are the claim that "they" - government and pharma - are lying to you, claims that COVID-19 is an excuse to remove civil liberties, viewing everyone as an expert, claiming that science cannot save us, skewing the science, and a claim that "they" are out to harm the viewers. The article points out that similar themes are used to mislead followers with anti-vaccine information. It highlights the concern that these themes will not only mislead people who are already anti-vaccine about the pandemic, but may draw in people who are not anti-vaccine but are seeking information about COVID-19, and suggests some options for dealing with the misinformation. Scientists benefit from understanding these claims, as we are often tasked with providing rebuttals to this misinformation., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest TCS: No conflicts to disclose. DRR: Dorit Reiss’ family owns some regular stock in GSK., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS.)

Vaccine refusal is a serious public health problem, especially in the context of diseases with potential to spark global pandemics, such as Ebola virus disease in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. This article examines whether and when compelling vaccination through mandates and criminalization, for example, are appropriate. It argues that some legal approaches are ethical when they preserve social stability, trust in government, therapeutic research opportunities, or when they diminish disease severity., (© 2020 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.)

Rates of vaccine-preventable diseases have increased in the United States in recent years, largely due to parental refusals of recommended childhood immunizations. Empirical studies have demonstrated a relationship between nonvaccination rates and permissive state vaccine exemption policies, indicating that legal reforms may promote higher immunization rates. This article reviews relevant data and considers the legal landscape. It analyzes federal and state Constitutional law, concluding that religious and personal belief exemptions to school-entry vaccine mandates are not constitutionally required. It identifies public health, bioethical, and policy considerations relevant to the choice among legal approaches employed by states to promote parental compliance. The article describes a range of legal tools that may help promote parental cooperation with immunization recommendations.

This Article asks whether parents who choose not to vaccinate their child should be liable if that child, at higher risk of infectious disease than vaccinated children, transmits a vaccine-preventable disease to another. The Article argues that a tort remedy in this situation is both desirable and appropriate. It is desirable to assure compensation to the injured child and the family, who should not have to face the insult of financial ruin on top of the injury from the disease. It is appropriate to require that a family that chooses not to vaccinate a child fully internalizes the costs of that decision, and does not pass it on to others. This Article argues there should be a duty to act in the aforementioned situation, since the non-vaccinating parents create a risk. Even if not vaccinating is seen as nonfeasance, there are policy reasons to create an exception to the default rule that there is no duty to act. As an alternative, the Article suggests creating a statutory duty to act. This Article suggests that legal exemptions from school immunization requirements are not a barrier to liability, since the considerations behind those exemptions are separate from tort liability. It addresses the problem of demonstrating causation, and suggests in which types of cases showing causation would be possible, and when proximate cause is capable of extending from an index case to subsequent cases. The Article concludes by addressing potential counter arguments.

Dual orexin receptor antagonists (DORAs) are a potential treatment for insomnia that function by blocking both the orexin 1 and orexin 2 receptors. The objective of the current study was to further confirm the impact of therapeutic mechanisms targeting insomnia on locomotor coordination and ethanol interaction using DORAs and gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA)-A receptor modulators of distinct chemical structure and pharmacological properties in the context of sleep-promoting potential. The current study compared rat motor co-ordination after administration of DORAs, DORA-12 and almorexant, and GABA-A receptor modulators, zolpidem, eszopiclone, and diazepam, alone or each in combination with ethanol. Motor performance was assessed by measuring time spent walking on a rotarod apparatus. Zolpidem, eszopiclone and diazepam [0.3-30 mg/kg administered orally (PO)] impaired rotarod performance in a dose-dependent manner. Furthermore, all three GABA-A receptor modulators potentiated ethanol- (0.25-1.5 g/kg) induced impairment on the rotarod. By contrast, neither DORA-12 (10-100 mg/kg, PO) nor almorexant (30-300 mg/kg, PO) impaired motor performance alone or in combination with ethanol. In addition, distinct differences in sleep architecture were observed between ethanol, GABA-A receptor modulators (zolpidem, eszopiclone, and diazepam) and DORA-12 in electroencephalogram studies in rats. These findings provide further evidence that orexin receptor antagonists have an improved motor side-effect profile compared with currently available sleep-promoting agents based on preclinical data and strengthen the rationale for further evaluation of these agents in clinical development.

A series of 3-substituted aminocyclopentanes has been identified as highly potent and selective NR2B receptor antagonists. Incorporation of a 1,2,4-oxadiazole linker and substitution of the pendant phenyl ring led to the discovery of orally bioavailable analogues that showed efficient NR2B receptor occupancy in rats. Unlike nonselective NMDA antagonists, the NR2B-selective antagonist 22 showed no adverse affects on motor coordination in the rotarod assay at high dose. Compound 22 was efficacious following oral administration in a spinal nerve ligation model of neuropathic pain and in an acute model of Parkinson's disease in a dose dependent manner.

The epidemics of obesity and metabolic disorders have well-recognized health and economic burdens. Pharmacologic treatments for these diseases remain unsatisfactory with respect to both efficacy and side-effect profiles. Here, we have identified a potential central role for T-type calcium channels in regulating body weight maintenance and sleep. Previously, it was shown that mice lacking CaV3.1 T-type calcium channels have altered sleep/wake activity. We found that these mice were also resistant to high-fat diet-induced weight gain, without changes in food intake or sensitivity to high-fat diet-induced disruptions of diurnal rhythm. Administration of a potent and selective antagonist of T-type calcium channels, TTA-A2, to normal-weight animals prior to the inactive phase acutely increased sleep, decreased body core temperature, and prevented high-fat diet-induced weight gain. Administration of TTA-A2 to obese rodents reduced body weight and fat mass while concurrently increasing lean muscle mass. These effects likely result from better alignment of diurnal feeding patterns with daily changes in circadian physiology and potentially an increased metabolic rate during the active phase. Together, these studies reveal what we believe to be a previously unknown role for T-type calcium channels in the regulation of sleep and weight maintenance and suggest the potential for a novel therapeutic approach to treating obesity.