Latest news with #BradleyMoss
Forbes
04-05-2025
- Health
- Forbes
NIH Lab Studying Deadly Pathogens Goes Offline Over Safety Issues. Is The Public At Risk?
On April 29, 2025, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases within the NIH put the brakes on research at its high containment lab (known as the Integrated Research Facility) at Fort Detrick, Maryland for a safety stand-down. The lab studies high consequence pathogens, such as Ebola virus and SARS-CoV-2. In a report from WIRED magazine, Bradley Moss, communication director for NIH's office of research services noted 'This decision follows identification and documentation of personnel issues involving contract staff that compromised the facility's safety culture, prompting this research pause.' The IRF's director, Dr. Connie Schmaljohn, an experienced scientist and expert on hantaviruses, was also placed on administrative leave. No further information on the cause of the safety stand-down has been reported by the NIH; however, Fox News subsequently cited an anonymous source, who stated the cause was a 'lover's spat' between facility researchers, where one individual poked holes in another's protective equipment. 'That individual has since been fired, the official indicated.' The NIH public affairs office did not respond to a query for more information. High consequence pathogens are 'serious and deadly agents that pose a substantial threat to domestic and global security.' Many are difficult to treat and frequently do not have a preventive vaccine. Consequently, they require specialized containment facilities to study them safely, because they are known to infect laboratorians. Some additional examples include Marburg and Lassa viruses and anthrax bacteria. These are some of the deadliest infectious pathogens on the planet, with death rates that can range from approximately 25 to 90%. Laboratories that work with human or animal samples are categorized at different 'biosafety levels,' from BSL-1 to BSL-4, with each increase in level corresponding to increasingly dangerous pathogens and concomitant increases in required safety measures. Most hospital microbiology labs work at the BSL-2 level, where deadly organisms can be worked on, such as staphylococcus, streptococcus, or even HIV, but those disease can be handled safely by working under a microbiology safety cabinet (or 'hood') with HEPA filtration, wearing gloves and a lab coat and washing your hands when you leave the lab. The biggest risk to the laboratorians would be through a splash or penetration of the skin with a sharp instrument or needle. At the BSL-3 level, we cross into a level where 'containment' measures are needed to protect the laboratorians. Pathogens at this level are known to infect through the air and therefore require specialized air handling and personal protective equipment, such as a respirator and gowns as well as decontamination measures upon exiting the lab. Organisms worked on at the BSL-3 level, although potentially deadly, such as plague or tularemia, usually have a specific vaccine or treatment. When we move into BSL-4, we are at maximum containment. At BSL-4, we separate the person from the pathogen by either a fully encapsulated 'space' suit or by working with the organism inside a glove box. Pathogens at this level are usually highly deadly and generally have limited or no vaccines or treatments. Viruses like Ebola, Lassa and Marburg are handled under BSL-4 precautions. There are many reasons to study these pathogens. Some are considered possible biological weapons threats. Others cause disease in endemic regions around the world, particularly in less-developed regions, such as Africa and South America. These pathogens are deadly and can cause outbreaks, so there has been a concerted effort in the military, at the NIH and academic institutions to 1) understand the ecology of where they exist in nature, 2) determine how they spread and cause disease and 3) develop countermeasures, including ways to diagnose, treat and prevent them. Whether the public is at risk largely depends on what the problem is. I've written previously that there are four basic ways a pathogen can 'escape' a lab: through the air, human exposure, hitching a ride on an animal or inanimate object and through deliberate release. The most likely is through human exposure from a lab accident, where a laboratorian becomes infected in the lab with something contagious and once they become ill, they can spread it to others. In this situation, the idea that a laboratorian would intentionally compromise a colleague's protective suit, thus putting them at potential risk of infection with a deadly agent is unconscionable and incredibly serious. Having said that, unless the individual whose protective suit was breached became infected, there is no risk to the public from a pathogen. In my own personal experience working in a containment laboratory and managing laboratory safety stand-downs, these can be mandated after a specific safety breach has been identified, a general attitude or 'culture' of the institution has been lax regarding safety procedures or even in response to a specific political issue or new safety mandate. Usually, the first thing that happens is an assessment of what the problem is and if anyone is at risk. If there are specific issues identified, either with safety protocols or how the workers are following them, then re-training of the individuals or the entire institute is undertaken. If there are mechanical problems with the facility, such as with the air handling systems, decontamination machinery, such as autoclaves or other methods to decontaminate instruments or other equipment, then those need to be fixed. Once any urgent issues are handled, it is in the best interest of the institute to provide more information on what led to the stand-down. Absent that, it is difficult to make a true assessment of public risk and also to reduce speculation as to the actual cause. A stand-down can cause significant disruption to ongoing experiments, especially if they include work with animals that have received a vaccine or that have been infected with a specific pathogen. The longer a stand-down lasts, the more damaging the disruption can be. Therefore, the key is to get to the root of the problem, fix it, restore the public trust and resume the important work as soon as feasible.
Yahoo
01-05-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Top secret US research lab studying SARS-CoV-2 shut amid safety concerns
A top-secret US research facility that studies Sars-CoV-2, Ebola and other deadly pathogens has been shut down by the Trump administration amid safety concerns. The Integrated Research Facility (IRL) – which is located at a US Army base in Fort Detrick, Maryland – was told by email to stop all experimental work by 5pm on April 29 and its director was placed on administrative leave. The high security facility, which was once the centre of the US biological weapons program, is believed by many in China to have sparked the Covid-19 pandemic. Until Tuesday, when its doors were locked, the lab conducted research for the prevention and treatment of 'high consequence' diseases including Ebola, Sars-Cov-2 Lassa fever, Marburg and Eastern equine encephalitis. Bradley Moss, the communications director for the US National institutes for Health (NIH), told WIRED magazine that the lab had been closed amid safety concerns. 'NIH has implemented a research pause – referred to as a safety stand-down – at the Integrated Research Facility at Fort Detrick. This decision follows identification and documentation of personnel issues involving contract staff that compromised the facility's safety culture, prompting this research pause,' he said. 'During the stand-down, no research will be conducted, and access will be limited to essential personnel only, to safeguard the facility and its resources.' An email seen by WIRED, further revealed that the facility's director had been placed on administrative leave, while the freezers in the facility's biosafety-level-4 (BSL4) labs padlocked shut. There are only around a dozen BSL4 labs in North America studying the world's most dangerous diseases, but the IRF facility is also one of just a handful globally that is able to perform medical imaging on animals infected with high consequence diseases. It has 168 employees and is part of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases – which Dr Anthony Fauci led for 38 years. In August 2019, its germ research operations were temporarily shut down following serious safety violations – an unfortunate fact that has enabled the Chinese authorities to magnify un-evidenced conspiracy theories about the lab's role in the Covid-19 pandemic. While the consensus among scientists globally is that Covid-19 most probably had natural origins, a leak from a high security lab remains a possibility. The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and its labs have been under scrutiny since Robert F Kennedy, President Donald Trump's controversial pick to lead the Department of Health and Human Services, assumed office. The department has since announced that 10,000 people would lose their jobs – including those at the NIH, the Food and Drug Administration, and the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention – as Mr Trump and Elon Musk's attempt to reduce government spending. But there are concerns that overnight funding cuts could be a major setback for research. 'The sustained attacks on collaborative US biomedical science and public health are already destroying disease surveillance systems and game-changing clinical trials that will result in avoidable deaths and morbidities for years to come in some of the poorest countries,' said Prof Stuart Neil, head of the department of infectious diseases at King's College London. 'These aren't on-off switches that you restore with a flick of a finger if someone on high changes their minds. This is wilful vandalism of research and treatment programmes that have taken years to establish – things that you could legitimately say made America great,' he told the Telegraph. This week, Nature also reported that an upcoming NIH policy will at least temporarily stop funding to laboratories and hospitals outside the US. While the final text has not yet been agreed, it could have major ramifications on international partnerships. In 2023, about 15 per cent of NIH grants had at least one 'foreign component' – mostly in the UK, Canada, Germany and Australia – on projects ranging from cancer to Aids, Ebola to child health. 'These decisions will have tragic consequences,' Prof Francis Collins, who led the NIH for 12 years, told Nature. He added that when combined with the dismantling of USAID – which also funded research into diseases including malaria and tuberculosis – it means 'more children and adults in low-income countries will now lose their lives because of research that didn't get done'. The Telegraph has contacted Mr Holbrook and the NIH press office. Protect yourself and your family by learning more about Global Health Security Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Telegraph
01-05-2025
- Health
- Telegraph
Top secret US research lab studying SARS-CoV-2 shut amid safety concerns
A top-secret US research facility that studies Sars-CoV-2, Ebola and other deadly pathogens has been shut down by the Trump administration amid safety concerns. The Integrated Research Facility (IRL) – which is located at a US Army base in Fort Detrick, Maryland – was told by email to stop all experimental work by 5pm on April 29 and its director was placed on administrative leave. The high security facility, which was once the centre of the US biological weapons program, is believed by many in China to have sparked the Covid-19 pandemic. Until Tuesday, when its doors were locked, the lab conducted research for the prevention and treatment of 'high consequence' diseases including Ebola, Sars-Cov-2 Lassa fever, Marburg and Eastern equine encephalitis. Bradley Moss, the communications director for the US National institutes for Health (NIH), told WIRED magazine that the lab had been closed amid safety concerns. 'NIH has implemented a research pause – referred to as a safety stand-down – at the Integrated Research Facility at Fort Detrick. This decision follows identification and documentation of personnel issues involving contract staff that compromised the facility's safety culture, prompting this research pause,' he said. 'During the stand-down, no research will be conducted, and access will be limited to essential personnel only, to safeguard the facility and its resources.' An email seen by WIRED, further revealed that the facility's director had been placed on administrative leave, while the freezers in the facility's biosafety-level-4 (BSL4) labs padlocked shut. There are only around a dozen BSL4 labs in North America studying the world's most dangerous diseases, but the IRF facility is also one of just a handful globally that is able to perform medical imaging on animals infected with high consequence diseases. It has 168 employees and is part of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases – which Dr Anthony Fauci led for 38 years. In August 2019, its germ research operations were temporarily shut down following serious safety violations – an unfortunate fact that has enabled the Chinese authorities to magnify un-evidenced conspiracy theories about the lab's role in the Covid-19 pandemic. While the consensus among scientists globally is that Covid-19 most probably had natural origins, a leak from a high security lab remains a possibility. The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and its labs have been under scrutiny since Robert F Kennedy, President Donald Trump's controversial pick to lead the Department of Health and Human Services, assumed office. The department has since announced that 10,000 people would lose their jobs – including those at the NIH, the Food and Drug Administration, and the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention – as Mr Trump and Elon Musk's attempt to reduce government spending. But there are concerns that overnight funding cuts could be a major setback for research. 'Wilful vandalism' of research programmes 'The sustained attacks on collaborative US biomedical science and public health are already destroying disease surveillance systems and game-changing clinical trials that will result in avoidable deaths and morbidities for years to come in some of the poorest countries,' said Prof Stuart Neil, head of the department of infectious diseases at King's College London. 'These aren't on-off switches that you restore with a flick of a finger if someone on high changes their minds. This is wilful vandalism of research and treatment programmes that have taken years to establish – things that you could legitimately say made America great,' he told the Telegraph. This week, Nature also reported that an upcoming NIH policy will at least temporarily stop funding to laboratories and hospitals outside the US. While the final text has not yet been agreed, it could have major ramifications on international partnerships. In 2023, about 15 per cent of NIH grants had at least one 'foreign component' – mostly in the UK, Canada, Germany and Australia – on projects ranging from cancer to Aids, Ebola to child health. 'These decisions will have tragic consequences,' Prof Francis Collins, who led the NIH for 12 years, told Nature. He added that when combined with the dismantling of USAID – which also funded research into diseases including malaria and tuberculosis – it means 'more children and adults in low-income countries will now lose their lives because of research that didn't get done'. The Telegraph has contacted Mr Holbrook and the NIH press office.
