Search

Stress and general anesthesia have an impact on the functional response of the organism due to the detrimental effects on cardiovascular, immunological, and metabolic function, which could limit the organism's response to an infectious event. Animal studies have formed an essential step in understanding and mitigating infectious diseases, as the complexities of physiology and immunity cannot yet be replicated in vivo. Using animals in research continues to come under increasing societal scrutiny, and it is therefore crucial that the welfare of animals used in disease research is optimized to meet both societal expectations and improve scientific outcomes. Everyday management and procedures in animal studies are known to cause stress, which can not only cause poorer welfare outcomes, but also introduces variables in disease studies. Whilst general anesthesia is necessary at times to reduce stress and enhance animal welfare in disease research, evidence of physiological and immunological disruption caused by general anesthesia is increasing. To better understand and quantify the effects of stress and anesthesia on disease study and welfare outcomes, utilizing the most appropriate animal monitoring strategies is imperative. This article aims to analyze recent scientific evidence about the impact of stress and anesthesia as uncontrolled variables, as well as reviewing monitoring strategies and technologies in animal models during infectious diseases.

Abstract Background Event-based social media monitoring and pathogen whole genome sequencing (WGS) will enhance communicable disease surveillance research and systems. If linked electronically and scanned systematically, the information provided by these technologies could be mined to uncover new epidemiological patterns and associations much faster than traditional public health approaches. The benefits of earlier outbreak detection are significant, but implementation could be opposed in the absence of a social licence or if ethical and legal concerns are not addressed. Methods A three-phase mixed-method Delphi survey with Australian policy-makers, health practitioners and lawyers (n = 44) was conducted to explore areas of consensus and disagreement over (1) key policy and practical issues raised by the introduction of novel communicable disease surveillance programmes; and (2) the most significant and likely risks from using social media content and WGS technologies in epidemiological research and outbreak investigations. Results Panellists agreed that the integration of social media monitoring and WGS technologies into communicable disease surveillance systems raised significant issues, including impacts on personal privacy, medicolegal risks and the potential for unintended consequences. Notably, their concerns focused on how these technologies should be used, rather than how the data was collected. Panellists held that social media users should expect their posts to be monitored in the interests of public health, but using those platforms to contact identified individuals was controversial. The conditions of appropriate use of pathogen WGS in epidemiological research and investigations was also contentious. Key differences amongst participants included the necessity for consent before testing and data-linkage, thresholds for action, and the legal and ethical importance of harms to individuals and commercial entities. The erosion of public trust was seen as the most significant risk from the systematic use of these technologies. Conclusions Enhancing communicable disease surveillance with social-media monitoring and pathogen WGS may cause controversy. The challenge is to determine and then codify how these technologies should be used such that the balance between individual risk and community benefit is widely accepted. Participants agreed that clear guidelines for appropriate use that address legal and ethical concerns need to be developed in consultation with relevant experts and the broader Australian public.

Unconventional animal models, host-pathogen interactions, treatment targets, in vivo studies, infectious disease research Keywords: unconventional animal models; host-pathogen interactions; infectious disease research; treatment targets; in vivo studies EN unconventional animal models host-pathogen interactions infectious disease research treatment targets in vivo studies 1 3 3 10/29/21 20211026 NES 211026 Beyond an I in vitro i setting, the use of a biological system is considered imperious to unravel the enigma of host-pathogen interactions, particularly those eventuating in an infectious disease scenery. [Extracted from the article]

Background: Event-based social media monitoring and pathogen whole genome sequencing (WGS) will enhance communicable disease surveillance research and systems. If linked electronically and scanned systematically, the information provided by these technologies could be mined to uncover new epidemiological patterns and associations much faster than traditional public health approaches. The benefits of earlier outbreak detection are significant, but implementation could be opposed in the absence of a social licence or if ethical and legal concerns are not addressed.Methods: A three-phase mixed-method Delphi survey with Australian policy-makers, health practitioners and lawyers (n = 44) was conducted to explore areas of consensus and disagreement over (1) key policy and practical issues raised by the introduction of novel communicable disease surveillance programmes; and (2) the most significant and likely risks from using social media content and WGS technologies in epidemiological research and outbreak investigations.Results: Panellists agreed that the integration of social media monitoring and WGS technologies into communicable disease surveillance systems raised significant issues, including impacts on personal privacy, medicolegal risks and the potential for unintended consequences. Notably, their concerns focused on how these technologies should be used, rather than how the data was collected. Panellists held that social media users should expect their posts to be monitored in the interests of public health, but using those platforms to contact identified individuals was controversial. The conditions of appropriate use of pathogen WGS in epidemiological research and investigations was also contentious. Key differences amongst participants included the necessity for consent before testing and data-linkage, thresholds for action, and the legal and ethical importance of harms to individuals and commercial entities. The erosion of public trust was seen as the most significant risk from the systematic use of these technologies.Conclusions: Enhancing communicable disease surveillance with social-media monitoring and pathogen WGS may cause controversy. The challenge is to determine and then codify how these technologies should be used such that the balance between individual risk and community benefit is widely accepted. Participants agreed that clear guidelines for appropriate use that address legal and ethical concerns need to be developed in consultation with relevant experts and the broader Australian public. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aware of the risk to human development from public health emergencies, governments and international organisations have adopted regulatory measures designed to prepare for and mitigate the risk of global pandemics. However, as the development of the Australian Defence Trade Controls Act 2012 Cth reveals, choices in regulatory measures can have profound effects on the delivery of public health and the practice of medical research. Introducing a new regulatory regime for researchers engaged in dual-use research, the Defence Trade Controls Act 2012 Cth (DTCA) seeks to control a variety of research and teaching activities. This article uses the DTCA as a case study of the securitization of infectious diseases, the mechanisms by which biosecurity rules are becoming globalised and the clash of principles that can arise for public health researchers. With the DTCA scheduled for a legislated review in 2018, an awareness of the wider constellation of international and domestic rules restricting dissemination of research findings with national security implications is imperative for public health researchers.