Michael Rosenthal

(5/2020) In the first year of these articles, I wrote about the importance of vaccines in preventing outbreaks of dangerous diseases, and of the success that we have achieved over the years with vaccines. Well, here we are again with a deadly and unexpected pandemic that badly needs a vaccine, COVID-19. Scientists worldwide are conducting some 30 clinical trials as potential treatments that might help patients infected with the coronavirus.

There is historical precedent for the development of vaccines, but ultimately a proposed vaccine either works or it doesn’t work. One of the early prospects is a substance named remdesivir, an antiviral substance that was developed by Gilead Sciences in California to combat Ebola. Another approach is to transfuse blood from recovered patients to boost the immune system. The choice of remdesivir is based on its effectiveness against other coronaviruses in animal studies. It is thought to work by inhibiting a virus’s ability to replicate in high numbers.

There is no guarantee that a "miracle drug" will be found. Only a small number of the known viruses that infect humans have approved treatments. Another drug, chloroquine, was a hopeful treatment, but it appears to foster heart irregularities. Viruses are particularly difficult to treat. Science, the publication of the American Association for Advancement of Science (AAAS) recently reported on clinical trials of two vaccines while many others are being rushed into the experimental stage.

The experimental vaccines are broadly spread across different researchers: biotech companies, academia, military researchers, and a few pharmaceutical companies. Johnson and Johnson has committed to what could be a $1 billion project. There is not likely to be a quick and easy solution. Anthony Fauci, director of the U.S, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) predicts that the development of a vaccine will take a year or more.

One procedure in dealing with such situations is to purposely infect volunteers. In 1796 Edward Jenner infected a boy with the smallpox virus after immunizing him with cowpox. Similar studies are still underway with dengue and cholera. There is hesitancy in this approach of deliberate infection since we know so little about the potential long-term effects of the virus.

Moderna, a prominent biotech firm, has developed an experimental vaccine that has not yet been brought to market. A Chinese firm, CanSino Biologics has also begun clinical trials of a vaccine. The goal is to see if they are safe, and to determine whether they can trigger immune responses.

For a more extensive technical discussion of the ongoing vaccine development, I recommend reading the April 3, 2020 issue of Science, starting on page 14.

________________________________

There are a number of recent developments on environmental issues. Though I was not trained as an environmental scientist, I developed an interest in the subject during my days as chemistry professor at Bard College in the Hudson Valley of New York. I was involved in many environmentally based activities in the community, as well as working with Bard students in the chemistry of a stream that flowed through the campus into the Hudson River. I have written before on various aspects of my 19 years of scientific and educational experiences there.

The current national administration has been very unsupportive of environmental regulation. The administration opted recently not to set stricter national air-quality standards in spite of a growing body of evidence that links air pollution to lethal outcomes from respiratory diseases, including COVID-19.

EPA staff scientists recommended last year that lowering particulate matter in air could save as many as 12,200 lives annually. In addition, regulatory rollbacks of other environmentally protective regulation have been supported by the federal government. The goal seems to be eliminating much of this regulation before the presidential election in November.

One of the regulations being implemented ends the EPA effort to improve auto and truck fuel efficiency, which would have required a steady 5 percent per year improvement in average fuel economy through 2025. The updated rules implemented by the current administration will allow one or more billion tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. This is equivalent to the pollution that would be caused by opening dozens of coal-fired power plants.

Another aspect of this policy direction is the allowing by EPA for regulated companies to skip routine pollution checks, testing, and training, if they can claim that such activities interrupt their operation. It is always a difficult balance between environmental regulation and supporting the business economy. I believe, however, it is critically important to look out for the health of the public and the future state of the planet, not just supporting the economic moment. We can expect to hear soon on revised environmental policy on rules regarding coal ash and mercury emissions.

How about some good news! We have written frequently about labeling of food, supplements, and medicines. The Food and Drug Administration has revamped the Nutrition Facts label and are in the process of implementing the revision. Here are the changes being implemented and some thoughts on them, with significant contribution from Consumer Reports.

The serving size on soft drinks, ice cream, bagels, cereal, and other foods has been increased to better reflect reality. The label must now show the nutrition information for one serving and for the full package.

On the label, Vitamin A and C information has been replaced by Vitamin D and potassium data in milligrams or micrograms. This change reflects the greater importance of Vitamin D and potassium in the diet.

There is a line now for total sugars, including both naturally occurring sugar and those added in processing, such as high-fructose corn syrup. This helps for those persons regulating their total sugar input.

The calorie count is emphasized by larger and bolder type. Consumer Reports emphasizes the point that calories from healthy foods are important to health.

My family and I are subscribers and great fans of Consumer Reports, which we feel is an honest and readable look at making good choices of all kinds, and not self-serving (and they didn’t pay me to say that!).

Growing up in Ohio, and exploring the outdoors, I was always fascinated by fireflies. I was fascinated by crossroads between biology, chemistry, and physics (which led me to my career in physical inorganic chemistry). Fireflies produce a chemical reaction inside their body called bioluminescence. In their bodies calcium and oxygen react with adenosine triphosphate and luciferin, in the presence of the enzyme luciferase, and energy is released in the form of what is known as "cold light," light with little heat. A version of the biochemistry for non-scientists can be found in a Scientific American article by Marc Branham of the University of Florida, from 2005, available through an online search.

To close, let’s take a look at the Potomac Edison Environmental Information for the year 2019.

Our energy locally was derived 36.50% from gas, 34.00% from nuclear, and 20.40% from coal. Smaller contributors are 2.90% wind, 1.35% hydroelectric, and a total of 9.1% from fuel cells, captured methane, solar, solid waste, and biomass.

Personally I’d like to see coal reduced in favor of nuclear, hydroelectric, wind, and solar sources. Air emissions still release a lot of carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide, and nitrogen oxides, which are bad things for the environment and bad things for our health.

Read other articles by Michael Rosenthal