October 15, 2014 · By Jaclyn Schiff · No Comments
The Society, with generous support from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, offers these awards to qualified students, early career investigators and scientists who otherwise might not be able to attend the meeting.
Selected recipients enhance the overall scientific quality and learning potential and present abstracts at the meeting.
ASTMH began these “Travel Awards” in 1991 and over time with the addition of Gates Foundation funding, 500+ promising early career investigators have attended and participated in the Annual Meeting.
The Society is grateful to Travel Award Committee Chair Nirbhay Kumar, PhD, Tulane University School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, and the rest of the committee for their outstanding work this year.
The following individuals were selected this year:
Susan Adakun, Makerere University College of Health
Ben Andagalu, KEMRI Walter Reed Project, Kenya
Elhadji Ba, Institut de Recherche Pour le Developpment,
Alvaro Baeza Garcia, Yale University School of Medicine,
Elissa Butler, University of Minnesota Medical School,
Suwanna Chaorattanakawee, Armed Forces Research
Institute of Medical Sciences, Thailand
Herbert de Matos Guedes, Federal University of Rio de
Kebede Deribe, Brighton and Sussex Medical School,
Brighton, UK, Ethiopia
Bismarck Dinko, University of Health and Allied Sciences,
Alex Eapen, National Institute of Malaria Research (ICMR),
Kimberly Fornace, London School of Hygiene & Tropical
Medicine, United Kingdom
Fernanda Fortes de Araujo, Centro de Pesquisas Rene
Rachou - FIOCRUZ, Brazil
Michael Hawkes, University of Alberta, Canada
Danika Hill, Walter and Eliza Hall Institute, Australia
Taweewun Hunsawong, Armed Forces Research Institute of
Medical Sciences, Thailand
Rubona Joshua, RTI International, Tanzania
Elijah Juma, Vestergaard Frandsen (EA) Ltd, Kenya
Jean Paul Katsuva, Medecins d’Afrique, Democratic Republic
of the Congo
Stella Kepha, Makerere University/KEMRI, Kenya
Suresh Maddur Ganesan, Massachusetts Institute of
Technology, United States
Placide Mbala, Institut National de Recherche Biomedicale,
Democratic Republic of the Congo
Evaristus Mbanefo, Institute of Tropical Medicine, Nagasaki
Seleshi Mekonnen, Armauer Hansen Research Institute,
Dominic Mosha, Ifakara Health Institute, Tanzania
Randy Mungwira, Blantyre Malaria Project, Malawi
Sophie Namasopo, Jinja Regional Referral Hospital Ministry
of Health, Uganda
Jeremiah Ngondi, RTI International, Tanzania
Augusto Nhabomba, CISM, Mozambique
Rasaq Olaosebikan, University of Ilorin Teaching Hospital,
Frankline Onchiri, Kenya Medical Research Institute and
University of Washington, United States
Lynette Oyier, KEMRI-Wellcome Trust Research Programme,
Repon Paul, International Centre for Diarrhoeal Disease
Patricia Pavlinac, University of Washington, United States
Chandary Rang, Malaria Consortium, Cambodia
Stephen Rulisa, Central University Hospital of Kigali, Rwanda
Raul Saraiva, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public
Health, United States
Mwiche Siame, Macha Research Trust, Zambia
Maggy Sikulu, Ifakara Health Institute, United Republic of
Toolika Singh, Banaras Hindu University, India
Holger Unger, University of Melbourne, Australia
Rajesh Valanparambil, McGill University, Canada
Braulio Valencia, Institute of Tropical Medicine Alexander von
Tom Wingfield, Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia, Peru
Annual Meeting 2014
September 22, 2014 · By Jaclyn Schiff · No Comments
There were two hearings on Capitol Hill last week to address the challenges posed by Ebola in West Africa. Here we provide links to direct you to the videos of those hearings along with submitted remarks from witnesses.
The Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights, and International Organizations' held a hearing titled, "Global Efforts to Fight Ebola."
The Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions and the Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and Related Agencies, Committee on Appropriations jointly heald a hearing titled, "Ebola in West Africa: A Global Challenge and Public Health Threat." ASTMH did its own summary here.
September 18, 2014 · By Jaclyn Schiff · No Comments
The following report was written by Sumana Vardhan, ASTMH Communications Intern.
In a hearing on Tuesday, a panel of expert witnesses drew attention to the pressing need for a central authority to coordinate United States’ widespread efforts to thwart Ebola in West Africa.
At a joint hearing of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies and the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, specialists also testified that it would be beneficial for the U.S. to eventually create a version of the CDC in countries abroad so that proximate, trained professionals can respond immediately in case of future epidemics. The 3-hour long hearing broadly addressed the challenges of controlling the Ebola outbreak in West Africa.
ASTMH Member Dr. Beth Bell, Director of the National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases at the CDC, Dr. Anthony Fauci, Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) at the NIH, and Robin Robinson, Director of the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) testified about obstacles health workers are facing. The challenges run the gamut from isolation to cultural norms to how the outbreak is overburdening already fragile African health care systems.
Rising economic instability and the possible spread of the outbreak beyond West Africa led the hearing to explore the U.S. government’s response, which includes $100 million already pledged, an additional $75 million from USAID, and CDC’s proposal to Congress for another $88 million. Witnesses emphasized the essential need for funding not only in the midst of an emergency. Budget uncertainty and sequestration have affected research by creating disincentives for scientists to become involved, and may have hindered progress towards an Ebola vaccine, witnesses also noted.
A second pair of witnesses, Dr. Kent Brantly, former Medical Director of the Samaritan’s Purse Ebola Care Center in Monrovia and Ebola survivor, and Ishmeal Charles, Program Manager of Healey International Relief Foundation in Sierra Leone, gave genuine testimonies of living and serving in areas where fear of Ebola affects every facet of life. Both emphasized the need for greater response from all over the globe, both for funding and trained personnel. Quoting Dr. Joanne Liu of Medecins Sans Frontieres, Brantley said, “Comparing Ebola to a fire, this is not the time to run away. This is the time to put on our protective gear and run into the burning building."
A video of the hearing and written testimonies are available here.
Photo: Dr. Kent Brantly (L) testifies with Healey International Relief Foundation Sierra Leone Program Manager Ishmael Alfred Charles (R) during the hearing. (JIM WATSON AFP/Getty Images)
Activity & Partners
August 17, 2014 · By Jaclyn Schiff · No Comments
This month, the Society had the opportunity to check in with Timothy Brewer, MD, MPH, chair of the board at the Consortium of Universities for Global Health (CUGH). Brewer is the Vice Provost for Interdisciplinary and Cross-Campus Affairs at UCLA. CUGH is a valued partner of ASTMH. Our organizations share several members and leaders, including Michele Barry, MD, FASTMH, CUGH board member and past ASTMH president.
1) CUGH is a relatively young organization. For those who might not be familiar with the goals and mission, how would you describe it?
A university is a community of scholars, and since the founding of the University of Bologna in 1088 individuals have been coming together in communities to share and to advance knowledge. The Consortium of Universities for Global Health (CUGH), founded in 2008, is a community of universities. Our mission is to bring together faculty, students and administrators from diverse institutional settings so they may share and advance knowledge in global health training and practice. Capacity building, both within and between universities as well as with the greater community, is at the core of CUGH’s mission.
We achieve our mission through such activities as identifying and promulgating best practices for global health training, advocating for global health funding and standards, and establishing networking opportunities for persons and institutions interested in global health to come together and learn from each other.
2) One of the common threads between the Society and CUGH is the focus on training the future global health workforce. Students are eager to get international experience and program coordinators are keen to ensure project sites get the maximum benefit from young volunteers. What guidelines does CUGH recommend to ensure international experiences are valuable for both trainees and hosts?
In establishing international experiences, one needs to consider the needs and goals of everyone involved, including the sending institution, the student and the host (which may be an individual, an institution, an organization or a community).
While often framed as service programs, most international electives involving health science students are at their core probably educational experiences. Understanding this primary purpose, having the necessary infrastructure in place at all sites, and making sure that potential risks are reasonable given the likely educational benefits are key steps in establishing suitable international student electives.
Another contributor to successful international programs is having well-defined sender, student and host responsibilities, for example determining educational objectives, activities and appropriate supervision in advance of a student’s arrival. Proper pre-departure training is valuable for faculty and students interested in participating in international experiences, particularly those persons going overseas for the first time. Setting realistic expectations all around also is important.
Though anecdotal, electives based on institutional relationships with long-term commitments to each other seem to be preferable to those based on individual relationships, but the central component for fruitful experiences is likely the presence of dedicated faculty at the sending and receiving organizations each of whom benefits from the relationship. Common sense also helps. An elective appropriate for a student who has previously been a Peace Corps volunteer in the country, speaks the language and knows the cultural norms may or may not be appropriate for another student who has never traveled internationally.
3) ASTMH and CUGH share other similarities, including a focus on education and research. What are some of the ways that our organizations can collaborate more in the future?
Around for just over 110 years, the American Society for Tropical Medicine and Hygiene has tremendous organizational experience facilitating international health research and educational partnerships. In particular, ASTMH members have long been at the forefront of health sciences research in low-resource settings, both basic and applied. This know-how is a terrific foundation on which to think about the emerging field of global health.
Though much younger, CUGH has strong roots in global health educational design and development, even more so since the merger between CUGH and the Global Health Educational Consortium (GHEC) in 2011. In addition, by focusing on universities, CUGH draws in non-health disciplines that are increasingly recognized as essential for addressing health inequity issues globally. The two sets of organizational assets are very complementary.
Across the spectrum of activities both organizations currently are involved in, opportunities for collaboration abound. Our members have a mutual stake in ensuring adequate federal funding for global health research and programs.
There are likely ways we could advocate more effectively together. Assisting in the development and promotion of educational guidelines and materials, establishing programmatic and ethical recommendations for international student elective partnerships and facilitating networking opportunities across the Societies also would be of substantial benefits to all our members. There are no doubt many other examples as well.
4) In global health, there is sometimes a gap between researchers and those involved with the delivery of clinical care. How can we integrate better?
Linking research to practice is a complex challenge, touching on such diverse issues as research question formation and study design, the setting of funding agency priorities, general public awareness of and comfort with science, knowledge translation and cultural change. Like most complex problems, breaking this issue into component pieces capable of being addressed with testable hypotheses should be helpful. Successfully solving this challenge will require social scientists, policy experts, humanists, political scientists, advocacy experts and others besides the more traditional health science researchers. In addition, we need to be communicating with each other, our colleagues in other fields, the general public and decision-makers better than has sometimes occurred previously. Scientists should be engaging clinicians and communities; educators need to be more creative about improving general science literacy.
While much work remains, there has been significant progress in the almost 30 years I have been involved in research and clinical care here and abroad.
5) Some readers might wonder if their universities are members of CUGH or if they should join. What unique value does CUGH provide for universities?
Interested individuals may check the CUGH web site to see if their university is a member. Regarding value, in the short span of 5 years, CUGH has gone from an informal gathering of 24 program directors to over 120 institutional members. CUGH membership offers almost unparalleled networking opportunities; the annual conference alone now attracts more than 1,400 participants from almost 60 countries.
We also continue to scale-up programs. One new offering is our mentorship program, where directors at the early stages of global health program development are partnered with more experienced program director mentors. Assistance may range from informal phone calls to site visits depending on the mentee’s needs.
Another unique area for CUGH is supporting university administrative capacity to undertake international global health activities. Through regional workshops created by our Enabling Systems Working Group, administrators learn best practices regarding the logistical aspects of undertaking internationally-based programs such as risk management, hiring personnel and contracting office space, and meeting government reporting requirements. The Educational Committee is harmonizing global health core competencies across the health sciences disciplines with the aim of expanding their work to non-health science disciplines as well. A trainee advisory group was recently created, and we look forward to working with trainees to establish programs particularly suited for their needs.
CUGH is a dynamic, growing organization; I would strongly encourage any university-based global health program with questions about membership benefits to call the CUGH Secretariat and discuss how membership might help their individual program.
Activity & Partners
July 10, 2014 · By Jaclyn Schiff · No Comments
The following was submitted by Alexis Boyd, a active member of ACGH who helped coordinate this student-led webinar. Boyd has a PhD in Microbiology and Immunology from The George Washington University and has spent the past 7 years researching filarial parasites. She is currently exploring a new career opportunity as a fellow at the Food and Drug Administration.
ASTMH’s Committee on Global Health (ACGH) is focusing on creating opportunities for students and professionals at any career stage interested in global health to network and explore the various career opportunities in the field. To accomplish this goal, the committee is sponsoring a series of live webchats with global health experts and leaders where individuals can ask career-related questions and seek advice. The first webchat took place in June and featured former ASTMH President Peter Hotez, MD, PhD, founding dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine and president of the Sabin Vaccine Institute.
For this inaugural webchat, there were 17 participants and lively chat ensued with Dr. Hotez fielding questions on how he became interested in global health, what he considers his greatest accomplishment and how he balances the many demands on his time. Career related questions ranged from knowing what skills are important for global health advocacy to identifying potential roles that engineers can play in solving important global health problems. Dr. Hotez also provided keen insight on the importance of continued mentorship throughout a career and how to identify good mentors. Dr. Hotez encouraged the audience to stay true to their passions and find the strength to weather the crises of confidence that afflict even the most successful individuals.
The webchat with Dr. Hotez was not only informative, but also motivational, and was met with highly positive reviews from the participants. The Committee on Global Health is planning on having webchats quarterly with different global health experts.
For more information on these chats or to nominate a speaker, please e-mail me at firstname.lastname@example.org. You can also find additional answers from Dr. Hotez at the Sabin Vaccine Institute blog.
June 16, 2014 · By Jaclyn Schiff · No Comments
The following individuals joined the Society this May:
Amazing Grace Hospital, Ijebu Ode Ogun State
Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research
University of Maryland Baltimore
Haffkine Institute for training Research and Testing
University of Minnesota
University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center
Oregon State University
University of Minnesota Medical School
The Carter Center, Trachoma Control Program
University of Minnesota
University of Texas Medical School at Houston and MD
Iowa State University
SUNY Upstate Medical University
Dr. Michael Everson
University of California Riverside
Mercy Family Clinic Forest Park
Ball Memorial Hospital
University of Minnesota
The University of Southern Mississippi
UCSD Pediatrics Associates
University of Utah
Tropical Medecine Institute, Third Military Medical University
Sophia Mangala M.
Protestant University of Congo
University of Washington
University of North Carolina
Hennepin County Medical Center
University of Notre Dame
Joselyne Olga Talledo Rodríguez
Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia
Silvia Vilar Portugal
University of Iowa Hospital & Clinics
University of Maryland School of Medicine
Activity & Partners
June 16, 2014 · By Jaclyn Schiff · No Comments
ASTMH members are the best and the brightest in their field. Our
member interviews highlight our diverse and growing membership. To read
other member profiles, click here.
This month we speak with Lark Coffey, PhD, Assistant Professor, Center for Vectorborne Diseases, Department of Pathology, Microbiology and Immunology, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California, Davis. Coffey has been a member of ASTMH for 12 years and is actively involved with the American Committee on Arthropod-Borne Viruses (ACAV.)
1) You’re an active member of the Society, including the subgroup ACAV. With a busy life full of demands, why is this something you make time for?
I believe in the collaborative environment and emphasis on education and training promoted by ASTMH. The Annual Meeting and ACAV activities are a wonderful place to visit with colleagues and to hear about current research. The meeting provides a regular setting to maintain contact with and follow the evolving science of fellow scientists. The symposium talks by ACAV members are a regular source of inspiration. The Annual Meeting fuels my excitement for studying arboviruses.
2) Some of your work concerns host specialization in arboviruses. To that end, what is one of that most interests you in that area of study right now?
Arboviruses that cycle between vertebrate and invertebrate hosts are subjected to unique evolutionary constraints by having to infect two disparate types of hosts. Historically, arbovirus genetics has only focused on understanding the phenotypic role of the consensus (average) viral genome in a mixed population. This approach vastly underrepresents the actual population diversity of RNA viruses, which exist as a swarm of closely related genomes that may express different host-specific phenotypes.
I am interested in better understanding the nature and function of viral genetic diversity in the swarm as it relates to arbovirus host specialization, dual-host cycling, and cross-species transmission. Recent technological advances now enable population sequencing at great depth to allow us to better study virus populations.
3) Also, on the topic of virus evolution, is there a mentor or person who has most influenced your thinking?
My Ph.D. mentor, Dr. Scott Weaver, played a fundamental role teaching me about arbovirus evolution propelling me into a career in the field. He also introduced me to the ASTMH and encouraged my annual attendance at meetings. Through his support, I was able to gain broad experience doing arbovirus ecology and genetics at tropical field sites and in laboratory settings.
4) A question for the non-science audience: why is the work you and your colleagues do important on a national and global scale?
Arboviruses are a scourge on human and veterinary health and we lack tools to prevent infection or treat illnesses most arboviruses cause. Epidemics caused by West Nile virus and the recent expansion of chikungunya virus in the Western Hemisphere highlight the need to better understand their ecologies, transmission cycles, and emergence. Uncovering the evolutionary dynamics of these pathogens, will allow us to develop novel mechanism to prevent and mitigate infections.
5) Congratulations on your tenure-track position. What guidance or advice helped you get to this point that up-and-coming researchers might find useful?
First, find a niche in a topic that really interests you and focus on generating good science. Second, let fellow scientists know what you are up to – the ASTMH Annual Meeting is an excellent avenue for networking, promoting your research, and finding job opportunities. Third, once you find a job posting, maximize your success by showing the search committee you are a “good fit” in the department and institution. This can be accomplished by identifying institutional partners as future collaborators.
In my own experience, I think the search committee at UC Davis appreciated my willingness to maintain and promote the continued development of the great body of excellent arbovirus research in California conducted previously by Bill Reisen, Aaron Brault, and others.
6) Now for the fun question. You get the opportunity to go back in time. You can either have a conversation with any scientist who has ever lived OR observe a moment of scientific history. What would you choose and why?
I would love to have been present to witness Dutch scientist Antonie van Leeuwenhoek using handcrafted magnifying glasses as microscopes in the 1600s to study biological fluids. van Leeuwenhoek was not the first to make microscopes, but he used them to discovered bacteria, free-living and parasitic microscopic protists, sperm and blood cells, microscopic nematodes and rotifers. It must have been amazing to realize for the first time that there was minute life-termed “animalcules” by van Leeuwenhoek-inside humans and animals.
June 14, 2014 · By Jaclyn Schiff · No Comments
Victoria McGovern, PhD, FASTMH, ASTMH Councilor and Associate Program Chair for Media Relations and Special Initiatives, provides the following update:
This year, the Annual Meeting is trying something new: adding more career content and opportunities to talk with senior members about how to build a life in tropical medicine, global health, or research. Though ASTMH has been around since 1903, many of the things we—the individual members— want remain the same as they were back then: we want to improve health; we want to understand the principles underlying threats to health; and because our concerns cross science, medicine, public health, and health delivery, we want to know one another across disciplines.
Coming together face to face is still the best way to do this, so the Annual Meeting is one important way that our Society serves us. But the world is just bigger now than it was 101 years ago. Back then, a newcomer quickly came to know everyone, and could hope to hear about opportunities for opening up new work and advancing. One hundred and one years later, it’s gotten harder to get introduced and to learn (beyond working hard and well on problems that matter) how to succeed.
This year, we’re building new things-- just a step beyond what we’ve done in the past-- into the meeting to try to change that:
- The Young Investigators Awards, competitive awards for work presented just before the start of the annual meeting, recognize one’s early work. This year, as part of the competition day, participants will have lunch with senior members explicitly to talk about where the Young Investigators want their careers to take them.
- The Trop Stop has been a lounge for trainees. This year, it will host featuring topics like how to build your CV, how to apply for postdoctoral fellowships, and more.
- The Subgroups provide a good way to get closer to people working in your area of interest. Last year, the Global Health subgroup tried “Speed Dating” to introduce many people to one another in a quality way in a short time. This was a very popular session, so they’re doing it again in 2014! The other subgroups will be trying other approaches, so stay tuned!
May 28, 2014 · By Jaclyn Schiff · No Comments
This post is courtesy of our partners at the ACT Consortium:
Artemisinin based malaria drugs are viewed as safe, but animal
safety studies raised concerns over their potential to cause damage to
parts of the brain involved in hearing and balance. A group of
scientists reviewed safety studies in humans and found a worrying lack
of data from young children, the most vulnerable group. The results were published today in the American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene.
Artemisinin-based combination therapies (or ACTs) are highly
effective antimalarials that have saved many lives and are the
first-line treatment recommended by the WHO for uncomplicated malaria.
Their safety is based on trials where treatment was given only once or
twice, in adults and older children.
But in many parts of Africa – where safety is rarely monitored –
younger children are at greater risk of getting malaria and may receive
ACTs three or more times a year.
[Read more →]
April 14, 2014 · By Jaclyn Schiff · No Comments
In advance of World Malaria Malaria Day,
ASTMH asked some of our malaria expert members and colleagues to
reflect on the global fight against the disease and to peer into their
crystal balls and let us know what might be on the horizon. Other interviews in this series include: Admiral Tim Ziemer of the President's Malaria Initiative, ASTMH President Alan J. Magill, ASTMH Councilor Laurence Slutsker of the CDC, Judith E. Epstein of the Naval Medical Research Center and Kent Kester of Sanofi Pasteur.
See all interviews in our World Malaria Day 2014 series here.
Jessica Taaffe (@JessicaTaaffe), PhD, Global Health and Science Consultant
Why are you drawn to malaria research?
I was (and still am) drawn to malaria research because of its global impact. Although we don’t have to really worry about it in the United States, it’s
responsible for so much disease in many parts of the world, and a huge killer of young children, who are the most susceptible to it.
I did my graduate thesis work on HIV for several years, specifically focusing on immunology in monkey models. There’s a lot of work being done in this area
for HIV, but less so for malaria, and I saw a niche for me in malaria research. I knew I wanted to continue working on a disease with huge global impact,
and one that I felt that my research efforts and experise could really make a difference and address a gap in knowledge. There’s still so much to learn
about what provides immunological protection from malaria infection and disease, or how the immune resonse contributes to the latter, and malaria monkey
models are a great way to start exploring these areas.
As we approach World Malaria Day, what is the biggest challenge with this disease?
I think setting priorities in the fight against malaria and balancing both programatic and reserach and development efforts is the biggest challenge. In a
funding climate that is becoming limited for both global health and science, choosing which programs or research to fund is become increasingly important,
and we must be very careful in these decisions, choosing interventions WE KNOW will work and the most promising technology and research to address problems
and challenges in the field. The balance is imperative - I would argue for more money for R&D, but I wouldn’t want to take away from measures like bed
net distribution, that are also important tools in our fight against malaria.
Where do you see the most promise?
I see the most long-term promise in investing in R&D for malaria, especially basic science. Both malaria infection and its causative agent are incredibly complex and there is still so much to learn about them. A better understanding of both natural or induced correlates of immunologic protection against malaria will lead to better malaria vaccines, and more research on the parasite itself could lead to novel drugs to treat malaria infection. In the near and long-term future, we will need these biomedical tools as we continue our fight against this global disease.
World Malaria Day 2014