Contact Me By Email


What To Do When You're Stopped By Police - The ACLU & Elon James White

What To Do When You're Stopped By Police - The ACLU & Elon James White

Know Anyone Who Thinks Racial Profiling Is Exaggerated? Watch This, And Tell Me When Your Jaw Drops.


This video clearly demonstrates how racist America is as a country and how far we have to go to become a country that is civilized and actually values equal justice. We must not rest until this goal is achieved. I do not want my great grandchildren to live in a country like we have today. I wish for them to live in a country where differences of race and culture are not ignored but valued as a part of what makes America great.

Monday, October 02, 2023

How The mRNA Vaccines Were Made: Halting Progress and Happy Accidents - The New York Times

Halting Progress and Happy Accidents: How mRNA Vaccines Were Made

"The stunning Covid vaccines manufactured by Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna drew upon long-buried discoveries made in the hopes of ending past epidemics.

A 3D plaster model of a coronavirus spike protein in the office of Dr. Barney Graham, an immunologist and virologist recently retired from the Vaccine Research Center of the National Institutes of Health.
Johnathon Kelso for The New York Times

Thousands of miles from Dr. Barney Graham’s lab in Bethesda, Md., a frightening new coronavirus had jumped from camels to humans in the Middle East, killing one out of every three people infected. An expert on the world’s most intractable viruses, Dr. Graham had been working for months to develop a vaccine, but had gotten nowhere.

Now he was terrified that the virus, Middle East Respiratory Syndrome, or MERS, had infected one of his lab’s own scientists, who was sick with a fever and a cough in the fall of 2013 after a pilgrimage to the holy city of Mecca.

A nose swab came back positive for a coronavirus, seeming to confirm Dr. Graham’s worst fears, only for a second test to deliver relief. It was a mild coronavirus, causing a common cold, not MERS.

Dr. Graham had a flash of intuition: Perhaps it would be worth taking a closer look at this humdrum cold virus.

It was an impulse born more of convenience and curiosity than foresight, with little to no expectation of glory or profit. Yet the decision to study a colleague’s bad cold gave rise to critical discoveries. Together with other chance breakthroughs that seemed insignificant at the time, it would lead eventually to the mRNA vaccines now protecting hundreds of millions of people from Covid-19.

The shots were developed at record speed, arriving just over a year after a mysterious pneumonia surfaced in China, while so much else — political feuds, public distrust and botched government planning — went wrong.

They remain a marvel: Even as the Omicron variant fuels a new wave of the pandemic, the vaccines have proved remarkably resilient at defending against severe illness and death. And the manufacturers, Pfizer, BioNTech and Moderna, say that mRNA technology will allow them to adapt the vaccines quickly, to fend off whatever dangerous new version of the virus that evolution brings next.

Skeptics have seized on the rapid development of the vaccines — among the most impressive feats of medical science in the modern era — to undermine the public’s trust in them. But the breakthroughs behind the vaccines unfolded over decades, little by little, as scientists across the world pursued research in disparate areas, never imagining their work would one day come together to tame the pandemic of the century.

The pharmaceutical companies harnessed these findings and engineered a consistent product that could be made at scale, partly with the help of Operation Warp Speed, the Trump administration’s multibillion-dollar program to hasten the development and manufacture of vaccines, drugs and diagnostic tests to fight the new virus.

For years, though, the scientists who made the vaccines possible scrounged for money and battled public indifference. Their experiments often failed. When the work got too crushing, some of them left it behind. And yet on this unpredictable, zigzagging path, the science slowly built upon itself, squeezing knowledge from failure.

The vaccines were possible only because of efforts in three areas. The first began more than 60 years ago with the discovery of mRNA, the genetic molecule that helps cells make proteins. A few decades later, two scientists in Pennsylvania decided to pursue what seemed like a pipe dream: using the molecule to command cells to make tiny pieces of viruses that would strengthen the immune system.

The second effort took place in the private sector, as biotechnology companies in Canada in the budding field of gene therapy — the modification or repair of genes to treat diseases — searched for a way to protect fragile genetic molecules so they could be safely delivered to human cells.

The third crucial line of inquiry began in the 1990s, when the U.S. government embarked on a multibillion-dollar quest to find a vaccine to prevent AIDS. That effort funded a group of scientists who tried to target the all-important “spikes” on H.I.V. viruses that allow them to invade cells. The work has not resulted in a successful H.I.V. vaccine. But some of these researchers, including Dr. Graham, veered from the mission and eventually unlocked secrets that allowed the spikes on coronaviruses to be mapped instead.

In early 2020, these different strands of research came together. The spike of the Covid virus was encoded in mRNA molecules. Those molecules were wrapped in a protective layer of fat and poured into small glass vials. When the shots went in arms less than a year later, recipients’ cells responded by producing proteins that resembled the spikes — and that trained the body to attack the coronavirus.

The extraordinary tale proved the promise of basic scientific research: that once in a great while, old discoveries can be plucked from obscurity to make history.

“It was all in place — I saw it with my own eyes,” said Dr. Elizabeth Halloran, an infectious disease biostatistician at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle who has done vaccine research for over 30 years but was not part of the effort to develop mRNA vaccines. “It was kind of miraculous.”

A Wily Virus

Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, the top government scientist investigating H.I.V., gave a lesson on the biology of AIDS to President Bill Clinton and Vice President Al Gore at the White House in 1996.
NIAID

In December 1996, President Bill Clinton invited Dr. Anthony S. Fauci to the Oval Office to brief him on that era’s grave pandemic, AIDS, which by then had killed more than 350,000 people in the United States and six million more globally.

Dr. Fauci, the top government scientist investigating the virus, was feeling oddly hopeful. For the first time since the virus emerged, annual AIDS deaths in the country had fallen, thanks to several new drugs that were tested and approved after years of intense public pressure by patient activists.

But the most valuable tool remained missing from their arsenal: a vaccine. And the president was impatient.

As the men walked out to the Rose Garden, Dr. Fauci recalled, the president turned to him and said: “You’ve known about AIDS as a disease since 1981. How come you guys don’t have a vaccine yet?”

Dr. Fauci, taken aback, told the president that research efforts thus far had been largely uncoordinated. Then he made a bold pitch: a research facility where scientists from different disciplines could talk to one another and collaborate, with the goal of putting vaccines into arms rather than proving that their own discipline had the answers.

Mr. Clinton turned to his chief of staff, Leon Panetta. “You think we can do that?” he asked.

“You’re the president of the United States,” Mr. Panetta recalled saying. “You can do whatever the hell you want.”

Dr. Fauci figured they were flattering him. Vaccine research was hardly exciting science and had long taken a back seat to efforts to cure cancer and heart disease. But five months later, Dr. Fauci got a call from one of the president’s speechwriters. Mr. Clinton was going to give a commencement address at Morgan State University in Baltimore and wanted to announce the vaccine research center. Could Dr. Fauci supply a description? “I was completely shocked,” Dr. Fauci said.

Dr. Barney Graham in his home office in Smyrna, Ga.
Johnathon Kelso for The New York Times

One of the first scientists to be recruited to the new effort was Dr. Graham. A bearded virologist with a calm demeanor, who at 6-foot-5 towered over most of his colleagues at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, he had begun his career as a clinician. But in 1982, when he was just starting as chief resident at the hospital, he had a shattering experience.

A homeless man arrived in the emergency room with delirium, skin lesions and multiple infections in his lungs, liver and spleen. Looking at his chart, Dr. Graham was stunned at the collapse of the man’s immune system, and suspected a new virus that was spreading among drug users and gay men. He was right: The man had AIDS.

Soon patients with the same array of symptoms filled the hospital — often young men, skeletal and desperately ill, filling the staff with despair.

“It was scary — horrible,” Dr. Graham said. However mysterious the virus, he vowed to find a way to prevent it from spreading. “I want to be a virologist,” he told the head of an infectious disease department. “What do I do?”

The Vaccine Research Center opened its doors in 2000 at the National Institutes of Health’s campus in Bethesda, Md., with an annual budget of $43.9 million in today’s dollars and a staff of 56. Among them was Dr. Graham. It now has a staff of 444, with a budget of about $180 million.

To complement that research, the N.I.H. spent more than $1.5 billion over the same period on a network of clinical trial sites across the country for experimental H.I.V. vaccines. About 85 H.I.V. shots have been tested. None have worked.

H.I.V. Failures

A human T-cell, depicted in blue, under attack by H.I.V., in yellow.
NIAID

Vaccines protect people by giving the immune system a preview of an invading microbe so it can prepare a strong defense against the real thing.

But H.I.V. proved impossible to vaccinate against, for a long list of reasons. Other viruses might use one or another protective mechanism to evade the immune system. But H.I.V. seemed to use all of them, Dr. Graham said: “If we could figure out how to make an H.I.V. vaccine, all the problems with other viruses would be solved.”

Some of the researchers at the center decided to try a new, more theoretical approach, though it was a long shot. They would map the detailed atomic structure of H.I.V.’s spike, a protruding protein that allows the virus to invade human cells. They would then try to identify the part of the spike that was most vulnerable to antibodies, components of the immune system that recognize viruses and can block spikes from entering other cells. Ultimately, the goal was to make a vaccine that showed the body a harmless version of that same section of spike.

They knew it would be difficult. H.I.V. spikes constantly change shape, taking one form before invading a cell and a different one when the virus slips in. A vaccine would ideally use only the shape that elicited powerful antibodies against an initial form of the spike, to have the best shot at keeping the virus out. But the scientists struggled for years to determine which shape to choose. Mapping the spike was like trying to grab Jell-O.

In 2008, a 27-year-old named Jason McLellan from outside Detroit applied to join a group at the Vaccine Research Center working on just that problem. When he was growing up, his father managed a grocery store and his mother ran the home. He attended Wayne State University on a full scholarship, becoming the first in his family to earn a college degree.

He would go on to graduate school to study X-ray crystallography, the difficult and painstaking art of making tiny crystals of proteins and then blasting them with X-rays to figure out their three-dimensional structure.

But by the time he was hired by the center, Dr. McLellan had tired of chasing the shape of one molecule after another, never knowing what it added up to. He wanted to work on molecules that would matter to human health, like H.I.V.

Peter Kwong, chief of the structural biology section at the National Institutes of Health, studies the rare human antibodies that could attack H.I.V.
Shuran Huang for The New York Times

Within six months, though, Dr. McLellan was flummoxed by H.I.V. and wanted to apply its lessons to another pathogen.

So he approached his boss, Peter Kwong, with an unconventional proposal: Let’s start working on a more manageable virus.

It was time, Dr. McLellan said, to take aim at “something important, but something more tractable.”

Dr. Kwong was not keen on taking his eyes off H.I.V. With the virus killing more than one million people globally every year, Dr. Kwong believed that he had an obligation to stay focused.

Still, Dr. Kwong put his protégé’s proposal for pursuing other targets to a vote of his entire team, just as he did matters of whom to hire and what equipment to buy. The result was almost unanimous, Dr. Kwong recalled: “Try other things.”

Dr. McLellan didn’t have to look far. He had been working in a spillover area on another floor from Dr. Kwong’s lab, and was seated close to Dr. Graham, who for years had studied not only H.I.V., but respiratory syncytial virus, or R.S.V., a disease that can kill young children. They got to talking, and Dr. McLellan began studying the structure of a protein that helps the virus fuse with cells.

Over the next years, their success in stabilizing that protein opened the door to severalR.S.V. vaccines now in clinical testing.

And though they never expected it, their happenstance collaboration would prove critical for understanding the scary new virus that would emerge more than a decade later.

A Pipe Dream

Dr. Drew Weissman, third from right, and Dr. Katalin Karikó, third from left, in 2001.
via Katalin Karikó

In the 1950s, the molecule at the heart of the mRNA vaccines was cloaked in mystery. Midcentury biologists knew that blueprints for making proteins — DNA — resided in the middle of cells, and that other structures within cells, called ribosomes, actually produced the proteins. But they didn’t know how the genetic blueprints found their way to the cellular factories.

On April 15, 1960, at a frenzied and ecstatic meeting in an office at Cambridge University, half a dozen stars of the nascent field of molecular biology — including the future Nobel Prize winners Francis Crick and Sydney Brenner — had an epiphany. An elusive molecule known as X (pronounced “eeks,” because its name had been proposed by French scientists) was the messenger.

The scientists figured out that X carried copies of segments of the DNA code to ribosomes, cellular machines that could read the code and pump out its corresponding proteins. The scientists named the molecule messenger RNA, or mRNA.

But for all of their initial excitement, those heavyweights of the field didn’t do much more with mRNA. The molecule was nearly impossible to isolate from cells because it would fall apart as it was being removed.

“Molecular biologists were much more excited about DNA and proteins,” said Doug Melton, a Harvard biologist who in 1984 figured out how to make mRNA in a lab. “mRNA was just annoying because it was so easily degraded.”

For decades, few scientists paid attention to these delicate molecules. They might never have made it into the Covid vaccines if not for a chance meeting between two academics at a Xerox machine at the University of Pennsylvania.

A transmission electron microscope image of messenger RNA connecting ribosomes.
Omikron/Science Source

Dr. Drew Weissman, a physician and virologist so taciturn that his family liked to joke he had a daily word limit, was desperate for new approaches to an H.I.V. vaccine. Earlier in his career, he had spent years in Dr. Fauci’s lab at the N.I.H. testing a treatment for AIDS that turned out to be toxic.

One day in 1998, he was at the copy machine in Penn’s department of medicine when a woman approached him. Katalin Karikó, a 44-year-old scientist from Hungary, was as exuberant as Dr. Weissman was withdrawn. She had come to the United States two decades earlier when her research program at the University of Szeged ran out of money. But she’d been marginalized in American research labs, with no permanent position, no grants and no publications. She was searching for a foothold at Penn, knowing that she would be allowed to stay only if another scientist took her in.

Her obsession was mRNA. Defying the decades-old orthodoxy that it was clinically unusable, she believed that it would spur many medical innovations. In theory, scientists could coerce a cell to produce any type of protein, whether the spike of a virus or a drug like insulin, so long as they knew its genetic code.

“I said, ‘I am an RNA scientist. I can do anything with RNA,’” Dr. Karikó recalled telling Dr. Weissman. He asked her: Could you make an H.I.V. vaccine?

“Oh yeah, oh yeah, I can do it,” Dr. Karikó said.

Up to that point, commercial vaccines had carried modified viruses or pieces of them into the body to train the immune system to attack invading microbes. An mRNA vaccine would instead carry instructions — encoded in mRNA — that would allow the body’s cells to pump out their own viral proteins. This approach, Dr. Weissman thought, would better mimic a real infection and prompt a more robust immune response than traditional vaccines did.

It was a fringe idea that few scientists thought would work. A molecule as fragile as mRNA seemed an unlikely vaccine candidate. Grant reviewers were not impressed, either. His lab had to run on seed money that the university gives new faculty members to get started.

By that time, it was easy to synthesize mRNA in the lab to encode any protein. Drs. Weissman and Karikó inserted mRNA molecules into human cells growing in petri dishes and, as expected, the mRNA instructed the cells to make specific proteins. But when they injected mRNA into mice, the animals got sick.

“Their fur got ruffled, they hunched up, they stopped eating, they stopped running,” Dr. Weissman said. “Nobody knew why.”

For seven years, the pair studied the workings of mRNA. Countless experiments failed. They wandered down one blind alley after another. Their problem was that the immune system sees mRNA as a piece of an invading pathogen and attacks it, making the animals sick while destroying the mRNA.

Eventually, they solved the mystery. The researchers discovered that cells protect their own mRNA with a specific chemical modification. So the scientists tried making the same change to mRNA made in the lab before injecting it into cells. It worked: The mRNA was taken up by cells without provoking an immune response.

Their paper, published in 2005, was summarily rejected by the journals Nature and Science, Dr. Weissman said. The study was eventually accepted by a niche publication called Immunity. Just as mRNA itself had been ignored, no one cared that they could get cells to accept mRNA. It seemed of academic interest, at best.

Fatty Coats

Katalin Karikó of BioNTech. “I said, ‘I am an RNA scientist. I can do anything with RNA,’” she recalled telling Dr. Drew Weissman in 1998.
Hannah Yoon

Despite the naysayers, Drs. Karikó and Weissman believed their discovery could change the world. They now knew how to protect mRNA once it was inside a cell. But to work as a vaccine or a medicine, the fragile molecules would need to be shielded in the bloodstream to prevent degradation on their way to cells.

As it turned out, a team of biochemists in Vancouver had spent years quietly revolutionizing ways of ferrying genetic material into cells. It was a partnership as improbable as any that helped lead to mRNA vaccines.

The team’s ringleader was a lanky man named Pieter Cullis who had intended to become an experimental physicist, not a biochemist. But he came to feel that the biggest discoveries in physics had been made decades earlier, and went in search of emptier scientific pastures.

He found one in the field of biological membranes: the outer layer of fats, called lipids, that encases the trillions of cells in the body, separating the watery outside from the inside. Dr. Cullis wondered if he could design his own lipid membranes to encase drugs or genetic material and transport it to cells.

In the 1990s, mRNA-based medicines were on hardly anyone’s radar, but gene therapy was in vogue as a technique to modify certain genes to treat or cure disease. For those drugs to successfully deliver a new gene to a patient, they needed a FedEx package of sorts. And Inex, a firm co-founded by Dr. Cullis, set out to find one.

The project was grindingly difficult. He was working with fat globules one hundredth the size of a cell. Human cells had a system of elaborate defenses to prevent anything but food from entering. And some versions of his lipids were extremely toxic and had electric charges that could rip cell membranes apart.

The big breakthrough came when he and his team figured out how to manipulate the positive charge on the fatty coats, said Thomas Madden, who worked with Dr. Cullis at Inex. The fatty bubbles would be charged when scientists loaded DNA inside, but the charge and toxicity disappeared once they were injected into the bloodstream.

But technical challenges remained, and the Vancouver chemists decided there was more money to be made in other sorts of drugs. Dr. Cullis shifted focus, licensing the lipid technology for some applications to a new company, Protiva, whose chief scientific officer was a soft-spoken biochemist named Ian MacLachlan.

In 2004, Dr. MacLachlan’s team made another crucial step forward: He encased the genetic material inside fatty coats in a way that would allow drug companies to increase production, and changed the ratios of lipids to keep more of the precious cargo from escaping. The team also worked to ensure that cells did not simply break up the genetic material as soon as it arrived.

Seeing those advances as critical to making mRNA-based medicine, Dr. Karikó tried to convince Dr. MacLachlan twice over the coming years to work together.

But business disputes got in the way. The first time, she cornered him at a conference and begged him for his lipids. He said no because her university insisted on getting the rights to Protiva’s intellectual property, Dr. MacLachlan said. The second time, around when Dr. Karikó began working for BioNTech, Dr. MacLachlan flew to their offices in Mainz, Germany, to try to make a deal. Dr. Karikó visited Vancouver, too. But Dr. MacLachlan said the company’s offer was not serious. “Our shareholders would’ve crucified us,” he said.

Protiva was also engaged in an intellectual property fight with a new firm co-founded by Dr. Cullis. Disenchanted, Dr. MacLachlan quit the company and bought a motor home to travel with his family.

Eventually it was Dr. Cullis’s teams that worked with vaccine makers on wrapping an mRNA shot in lipids — a major departure from the scientists’ original goals. “We were not going in that direction at all,” Dr. Cullis said.

Wobbly Spikes

Jason McLellan of the University of Texas at Austin, whose expertise is studying the shape of proteins.
Sergio Flores for The New York Times

The work on mRNA and the lipid coats were two pieces of the puzzle that came together in 2020 in the Covid vaccines. But the third component was figuring out the precise mRNA code that would direct cells to make the most effective version of the coronavirus’s spike protein.

And that crucial bit of information came out of the longstanding collaboration between Drs. McLellan and Graham, who had been working together ever since their days sitting near each other at the Vaccine Research Center.

As Dr. McLellan prepared to open his own lab at Dartmouth in 2013, he and Dr. Graham discussed what the new lab should focus on. His mentor had a surprising answer: coronaviruses. It was a class of viruses that usually caused nothing worse than a cold, attracting scant interest from funding bodies. Devoting a lab to them would be a gamble.

But MERS had recently begun spreading in camel barns and slaughterhouses in the Middle East. Only 11 years earlier, another deadly coronavirus, SARS, had emerged in Southern China. And for a young researcher trying to make his mark, the lack of attention to coronaviruses meant less direct competition for research grants and signature findings.

“As we were talking about it, it seemed like we were maybe on a 10-year clock for new spillover events,” Dr. McLellan said.

MERS, like all coronaviruses, had a curious feature reminiscent of the shape-shifting proteins on H.I.V.: squirmy spikes on its surface that latch onto human cells. They had thwarted all efforts to make a vaccine. The MERS spike was especially fearsome, so much so that the scientists struggled to reproduce and isolate it in the lab. It was large, covered in a thick bush of sugars and highly unstable.

“It was pretty much a nightmare,” Dr. McLellan said.

Making matters more difficult, Dr. Graham had failed to secure samples from anyone infected with MERS in the Middle East.

After years of Western scientists parachuting into lower-income countries for studies that excluded local researchers, especially during the AIDS crisis, governments had “become very protective of their samples,” Dr. Graham said.

When a young Lebanese-American flu researcher in his lab, Hadi Yassine, recovered from an illness after a trip to Mecca, Dr. Graham thought he might have been infected with MERS. But it turned out to be a cold virus known as HKU1.

It was then that Dr. Graham had his insight: The world’s most boring coronaviruses may hold critical lessons about the most dangerous ones.

Like other coronaviruses, HKU1 had the dreaded spike — and, with some modifications, it held steadier than the one on the MERS virus. Within a few years, the team — which now included Andrew Ward, an expert, at the Scripps Research Institute, in freezing proteins to hold them still under an electron microscope — had published intricate images of the HKU1 spike in Nature. It was the first time scientists had visualized a human coronavirus spike protein in the initial form it took before latching onto cells.

“You can consider it luck,” Dr. Yassine said recently of his long-ago cold, “or you can consider it a blessing.”

Now, the team set out to use what they had learned about the spike on the common cold virus to steady the proteins on their real adversary, MERS. Making a vaccine depended on it.

A MERS coronavirus particle.
NIAID

The trouble was, any spikes they made in the lab — by adding genetic instructions to mammalian cells in a flask — were rarely stable and kept changing shape, making them much less effective for use in a vaccine.

The scientists needed to lock the spike in place. It was a complex task, so Dr. McLellan turned to the map he had built of the cold virus spike for clues.

Working alongside Dr. McLellan on that problem in his Dartmouth lab was Nianshuang Wang, a postdoctoral fellow from China, who believed that SARS and MERS presaged worse coronavirus outbreaks to come.

Dr. Wang’s job, like those of many junior scientists in American research labs, was to put in the lonely hours at the lab bench needed to realize his boss’s improbable ideas. The biggest discoveries often depended on those researchers, many of them ambitious students from outside the United States, who work on launching their own careers even as they play background parts in someone else’s.

In this case, Dr. Wang was working on a virus he knew well. The son of peasant farmers from a small village in eastern China, he as a child had become interested in the scientific concepts behind animal life, and later helped a Chinese team make crucial discoveries about MERS. Having read about Dr. McLellan’s R.S.V. research, Dr. Wang applied to join his Dartmouth lab, and was soon assigned the task of holding the MERS virus’s ungainly spike proteins still.

Part of what made them so prone to shape shifting was that they had pockets of empty space. So Drs. McLellan and Wang first tried filling them with a molecular glue — “cavity filling,” Dr. McLellan called it. Next they tried inserting two molecules that, when close enough, formed a bond, cementing a moving part of the spike to a steadier one. But both of those methods failed.

A third approach produced excellent results. Using their map of HKU1 as a rough guide, they zeroed in on a particularly loose joint of the spike and added two stiff amino acids. Those changes made the entire thing more rigid.

By the time they refined the method, however, the MERS epidemic was long over, and interest in coronaviruses had faded. Rejected by five prestigious scientific journals, the study ended up buried in a less prominent publication and a 2017 patent filing.

That was Dr. Wang’s only first-author journal article to come out of some three years of work — far short of what he needed for the prestigious academic job in the United States that he craved.

The lack of recognition stung, Dr. Wang said: It had been punishing, often boring work that had starved him of time with his wife and young daughter and left the family without much money.

But any lingering resentment disappeared when, in early 2020, a few months before leaving Dr. McLellan’s new lab at the University of Texas at Austin for a pharmaceutical company, Dr. Wang helped unearth his old findings to make a coronavirus vaccine.

“A small little thing can actually change the field, and even change the world,” Dr. Wang said. “That was the first thought for me.”

‘Back in the Saddle’

Building 40 of the Dale and Betty Bumpers Vaccine Research Center in Bethesda, Md.
NIAID

At 5:30 a.m. on Dec. 31, 2019, Dr. Graham, who regularly started his days before dawn, was working in his home office when he saw a news release from ProMed, a listserv for infectious disease experts around the world. A new pneumonia was spreading in Wuhan, China. At 5:54, he sent an email to his lab group: “We should keep an eye on this.”

A week later, he heard that the frightening new disease was caused by a coronavirus, the same class of pathogen that he had trained his focus on years earlier when most other scientists were ignoring them.

He called his old collaborator Dr. McLellan, whose lab had been splitting time between coronaviruses and other pathogens. When his cellphone rang, Dr. McLellan was browsing in a ski shop in Park City, Utah, while waiting for his snowboarding boots to be heat-molded. When he saw the caller ID, he thought Dr. Graham was calling to wish him a belated Merry Christmas.

Instead Dr. Graham told Dr. McLellan the grim news. “We need to get back in the saddle,” he said. “This is our time.”

Dr. McLellan texted his lab to let them know the news. Several days later, when Chinese researchers posted the virus’s genetic sequence online, they got to work.

Using what they had learned working on Dr. Yassine’s cold virus and MERS, the team zeroed in on the spikes and came up with genetic sequences within days, incorporating the crucial cementing technique that Drs. McLellan and Wang had refined.

And on Feb. 15, Dr. Graham and Dr. McLellan published a paper detailing the spike’s structure on a website for scientific manuscripts. The study was later published in Science.

“That meant a lot,” Dr. McLellan said. “Because we published where to put the stabilizing mutations, other companies could use it.”

The team’s stabilizing technique was crucial to the mRNA vaccines made by BioNTech (which by then had partnered with Pfizer) and Moderna, as well as certain non-mRNA vaccines.

Once Moderna and BioNTech scientists had genetic sequences for the spike, they then synthesized the mRNA molecules in their labs, applying the same chemical tweak that Drs. Weissman and Karikó had learned 15 years earlier. They wrapped their genetic cargo in protective fatty coats like those first dreamed up by the Canadians. They poured the resulting clear liquid into tiny glass vials and shipped them off for the first human tests.

From left: Dr. Graham, President Biden, Dr. Francis Collins and Kizzmekia Corbett. The scientists were explaining the role of spike proteins to Mr. Biden during a visit to the Viral Pathogenesis Laboratory at the N.I.H. last year.
Pete Marovich for The New York Times

For Moderna’s all-important clinical trials, the government once again relied on its past investments in H.I.V. On March 3, 2020, as the coronavirus was spreading, Dr. Fauci called Dr. Larry Corey, a virologist at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center and the director of the government’s 21-year-old network of clinical trial sites for testing H.I.V. vaccines. “It’s time to pivot,” Dr. Fauci said.

At about 100 sites, the program would simultaneously test four vaccines: the mRNA shot from Moderna, as well as non-mRNA formulations from Johnson & Johnson, AstraZeneca and Novavax. (Pfizer decided to test the BioNTech vaccine on its own.)

“We wanted them all to succeed,” Dr. Corey said.

The team recruited 30,000 volunteers, a daunting task. It required enrolling 2,000 people a day — far more, Dr. Corey said, than had ever been attempted for a trial.

By November, the first results were in from the trial of Pfizer-BioNTech’s mRNA vaccine.

It was the culmination of decades of fundamental discoveries that had once been shrugged off as uninteresting. To get here, hundreds of researchers had tried, failed, reversed course and made incremental progress in different fields, never knowing for sure that any of their efforts would ever pay off.

If these Covid vaccines worked, Dr. Graham knew, they could pave the way for other new shots against diseases as varied as the common cold, flu and cancer — and even against that most elusive virus, H.I.V.

He was in his home office on the afternoon of Nov. 8 when he got a call about the results of the study: 95 percent efficacy, far better than anyone had dared to hope.

“It works!” he told his wife. Two of his grandchildren, 5 and 13, approached his office desk and hugged him from the front. His wife and son hugged him from the back. And the virologist began to sob.

Gina Kolata writes about science and medicine. She has twice been a Pulitzer Prize finalist and is the author of six books, including “Mercies in Disguise: A Story of Hope, a Family's Genetic Destiny, and The Science That Saved Them.” More about Gina Kolata"


How The mRNA Vaccines Were Made: Halting Progress and Happy Accidents - The New York Times

Nobel Prize Awarded to Covid Vaccine Pioneers

Nobel Prize Awarded to Covid Vaccine Pioneers

“The physiology or medicine prize for Katalin Karikó and Drew Weissman recognized work that led to the development of vaccines that were administered to billions around the world.

Katalin Karikó and Drew Weissman, dressed in formal attire and wearing white masks, holding prizes.
Katalin Karikó and Drew Weissman at an awards ceremony in 2022 in Japan.Pool photo by Eugene Hoshiko

Katalin Karikó and Drew Weissman, who together identified a chemical tweak to messenger RNA, were awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine on Monday. Their work enabled potent Covid vaccines to be made in less than a year, averting tens of millions of deaths and helping the world recover from the worst pandemic in a century.

The approach to mRNA the two researchers developed has been used in Covid shots that have since been administered billions of times globally and has transformed vaccine technology, laying the foundation for inoculations that may one day protect against a number of deadly diseases like cancer.

The slow and methodical research that made the Covid shots possible has now run up against a powerful anti-vaccine movement, especially in the United States. Skeptics have seized in part on the vaccines’ rapid development — among the most impressive feats of modern medical science — to undermine the public’s trust in them.

But the breakthroughs behind the shots unfolded little by little over decades, including at the University of Pennsylvania, where Dr. Weissman runs a lab.

Dr. Weissman said that he found out about the prize at 4 a.m. when Dr. Karikó texted him, asking if he had heard from Thomas yet. “No. Who’s Thomas?” he replied. Dr. Kariko told him that Thomas was from the Nobel committee. He was looking for Dr. Weissman’s phone number.

Dr. Karikó, the 13th woman to win the prize, languished for many long years without funding or a permanent academic position, keeping her research afloat only by latching on to more senior scientists at the University of Pennsylvania who let her work with them. She was forced to retire from the university a decade ago, she said, and remains only an adjunct professor there while she pursues plans to start a company with her daughter, Susan Francia, who has an M.B.A. and was a two-time Olympic gold medalist in rowing.

The mRNA work was especially frustrating, she said, because it was met with indifference and a lack of funds. She said she was motivated by more than not being called a quitter; as the work progressed, she saw small signs that her project could lead to better vaccines. “You don’t persevere and repeat and repeat just to say, ‘I am not giving up,’” she said.

She and Dr. Weissman had their first chance meeting over a copy machine at the University of Pennsylvania in 1998.

Dr. Karikó, the daughter of a butcher who had come to the United States from Hungary two decades earlier when her research program there ran out of money, was preoccupied by mRNA, which provides instructions to cells to make proteins. Defying the decades-old orthodoxy that mRNA was clinically unusable, she believed that it would spur medical innovations.

At the time, Dr. Weissman was desperate for new approaches to a vaccine against H.I.V., which had long proved impossible to defend against. A physician and virologist who had tried and failed for years to develop a treatment for AIDS, he wondered if he and Dr. Karikó could team up to make an H.I.V. vaccine.

It was a fringe idea that, when they began their research, seemed unlikely to work. The mRNA was delicate, so much so that when it was introduced to cells, the cells instantly destroyed it. Grant reviewers were not impressed. Dr. Weissman’s lab instead relied on seed money that the university gives new faculty members to get started.

“We saw the potential and we weren’t willing to give up,” Dr. Weissman said.

For years, Dr. Weissman and Dr. Karikó were flummoxed. Mice injected with mRNA became lethargic. Countless experiments failed. They wandered down one dead end after another. Their problem was that the immune system interprets mRNA as an invading pathogen and attacks it, sickening the animals while destroying the mRNA.

But eventually, the scientists discovered that cells protect their own mRNA with a specific chemical modification. So they tried making the same change to mRNA synthesized in the lab before injecting it into cells. It worked: The mRNA was taken up by cells without provoking an immune response.

The discovery “fundamentally changed our understanding of how mRNA interacts with our immune system,” the panel that awarded the prize said, adding that the work “contributed to the unprecedented rate of vaccine development during one of the greatest threats to human health in modern times.”

At first, other scientists were largely uninterested in taking up that new approach to vaccination. Their paper, published in 2005, was rejected by the journals Nature and Science, Dr. Weissman said. The study was eventually accepted by a niche publication called Immunity.

But two biotech companies soon took notice: Moderna, in the United States, and BioNTech, in Germany, where Dr. Karikó eventually became a senior vice president. The companies studied the use of mRNA vaccines for flu, cytomegalovirus and other illnesses. None moved out of clinical trials for years.

Then the coronavirus emerged.

Almost instantly, Drs. Karikó and Weissman’s work came together with several strands of disparate research to put vaccine makers ahead of the game in developing shots. That included research done in Canada that allowed fragile mRNA molecules to be safely delivered to human cells, and studies in the United States that pointed the way toward stabilizing the spike protein that coronaviruses used to invade cells.

By late 2020, less than a year into a pandemic that would eventually kill at least seven million people globally, regulators had authorized strikingly effective vaccines made by Moderna and by BioNTech, which partnered with Pfizer to produce its vaccine. Both used the modification Dr. Karikó and Dr. Weissman discovered.

About 400 million doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine and 250 million doses of the Moderna vaccine have been administered in the United States. Hundreds of millions more have been given around the world. The use of mRNA has enabled both vaccines to be updated against new variants.

Dr. Karikó referred in an interview published by the University of Pennsylvania on Monday to her many years of clinging to the fringes of academia. In the interview, Dr. Karikó said that every October, her mother used to tell her, “I will listen to the radio that maybe you will get the Nobel Prize.” Dr. Karikó said she would answer: “Mum, you know, I never even get a grant.”

Dr. Karikó is the 13th woman to be awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine since 1901, and the first since 2015. Women represent a small fraction of the total of 227 people who have been awarded the prize, a reflection of how women are still largely underrepresented in the field of science and scientific awards, including the Nobel Prizes.

Vaccines using mRNA technology are now being developed against a number of diseases, including influenza, malaria and H.I.V., which remains difficult to inoculate against. Personalized cancer vaccines have also showed promise. They use mRNA tailored to an individual patient’s tumor to teach the person’s immune system to attack proteins on the tumor.

Drs. Karikó and Weissman’s discovery, scientists said, remained critical in allowing mRNA vaccines to escape destruction by patients’ immune systems and to trigger the efficient production of vaccine proteins.

“What is now recognized as a transformative technology required dedicated scientists to carry out fundamental research over many years to reach the position it was in 2020 when its rapid deployment as a vaccine technology was made possible by global collaboration,” Brian Ferguson, an immunologist at the University of Cambridge, said. “The work of Katalin Karikó and Drew Weissman in the years prior to 2020 made this possible, and they richly deserve this recognition.”

Who won the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 2022?

The prize went to Svante Pääbo, a Swedish scientist who produced a complete Neanderthal genome and helped create the field of ancient DNA studies.

When will the other Nobel Prizes be announced?

The prize for physiology or medicine is the first of six Nobel Prizes that will be awarded this year. Each award recognizes groundbreaking contributions by an individual or organization in a specific field.

  • The Nobel Prize in Physics will be awarded on Tuesday by the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences in Stockholm. Last year, John Clauser, Alain Aspect and Anton Zeilinger each won for independent works exploring quantum weirdness.

  • The Nobel Prize in Chemistry will be awarded on Wednesday by the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences in Stockholm. Last year, Carolyn R. Bertozzi, Morten Meldal and K. Barry Sharpless shared the prizes for work on “click chemistry.”

  • The Nobel Prize in Literature will be awarded on Thursday by the Swedish Academy in Stockholm. Last year, Annie Ernaux earned the prize for work that dissected the most humiliating, private and scandalous moments from her past with almost clinical precision.

  • The Nobel Peace Prize will be awarded on Friday by the Norwegian Nobel Institute in Oslo. Last year, the prize was shared by Memorial, a Russian organization; the Center for Civil Liberties in Ukraine; and Ales Bialiatski, a jailed Belarusian activist.

  • Next week, the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences will be awarded on Monday by the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences in Stockholm. Last year, Ben S. Bernanke, Douglas W. Diamond and Philip H. Dybvig shared the prize for work that helped to reshape how the world understands the relationship between banks and financial crises.

All of the prize announcements will be streamed live by the Nobel Prize organization.

Emma Bubola contributed reporting.“

Trump Civil Fraud Trial Trial Will Be the First of Several That Trump Will Face This Year

Trump Civil Fraud Trial Trial Will Be the First of Several That Trump Will Face This Year

“The former president, accused in a lawsuit of inflating his net worth to win favorable terms on loans, has arrived at a Manhattan court. The civil trial is set to begin at 10 a.m.

Security officers in front of Trump Tower in Manhattan.
The trial, set to begin at 10 a.m., could end with Donald J. Trump losing some signature properties, including Trump Tower in Midtown.Todd Heisler/The New York Times

Pinned

After decades of exaggerating with impunity about the value of his properties, former President Donald J. Trump will go on trial Monday in New York to face a lawsuit that accuses him of inflating his riches by billions of dollars and crossing the line into fraud.

The trial, set to begin at 10 a.m. in State Supreme Court in Manhattan, will be the first of several government trials that Mr. Trump will face in the coming year, a procession of high-stakes courtroom battles that coincide with his third White House run.

Oct. 2, 2023, 9:59 a.m. ET8 minutes ago

One of Mr. Trump’s lawyers, Alina Habba, spoke on steps of the courthouse, saying that her client is being persecuted for his politics: “What we are witnessing is election interference of somebody who is leading in the polls the more they hit him. So keep hitting him, because he’s going to keep fighting.”

Letitia James, the New York attorney general, wearing a navy blue top.
Letitia James, the New York attorney general, has made a habit of taking on powerful men.Caitlin Ochs/Reuters

Letitia James was sworn in as the New York attorney general on Jan. 1, 2019. Two months later, her office opened an investigation into Donald J. Trump.

That investigation — prompted by congressional testimony from Michael D. Cohen, Mr. Trump’s former fixer, about Mr. Trump’s pattern of inflating the value of his assets in his financial statements — became a lawsuit. And on Monday, the lawsuit will become a trial that could exact a heavy price from Mr. Trump.

Kate Christobek
Oct. 2, 2023, 9:40 a.m. ET26 minutes ago

There is enhanced security at the courthouse in preparation for Mr. Trump’s appearance today. Reporters had to go through two metal detectors to enter into the courtroom. The courtroom itself, courthouse hallways and the exterior of 60 Centre Street are also flooded with Secret Service agents.

William Rashbaum
Oct. 2, 2023, 9:49 a.m. ET17 minutes ago

Court officials have said that routine business in the courthouse, which is nearly a century old and was built in classical style, will continue despite the heavy security inside and out. The building, with its 10 towering columns and sweeping stone steps, likely will look familiar to many people as it is the backdrop for the opening scene of “Law and Order.”

Benjamin Protess
Oct. 2, 2023, 9:38 a.m. ET28 minutes ago

The trial is scheduled to last until Christmas, but most people close to the case expect it to end sooner. Last week, in a crucial pretrial ruling, the judge overseeing the case found Trump liable for fraud, deciding that no trial was needed to determine the claim at the core of the attorney general’s lawsuit. The ruling that could shorten the trial significantly.

Jonah Bromwich
Oct. 2, 2023, 9:38 a.m. ET28 minutes ago

Mr. Trump’s legal team has entered the courtroom. His lead lawyer, Christopher M. Kise, is smiling resolutely. Clifford S. Robert, who represents Eric and Donald Trump Jr., also defendants, looks more apprehensive.

Jonah Bromwich
Oct. 2, 2023, 9:36 a.m. ET30 minutes ago

The attorney general, Letitia James, accused Trump of exaggerating his net worth by as much as $2.2 billion in some years. The trial should offer some look at his actual net worth in the years in question — 2011 to 2021 — and home in on his most emphatic hyperbole. The judge has already determined that Trump used his financial statements fraudulently: The question that remains is, by just how much did he stretch the truth?

Kate Christobek
Oct. 2, 2023, 9:34 a.m. ET32 minutes ago

Letitia James just walked into the courtroom. She shook hands with several people before sitting down in the first reserved row behind her attorneys.

Oct. 2, 2023, 9:33 a.m. ET33 minutes ago

Donald Trump is en route to the courthouse from Trump Tower. Meanwhile, Letitia James, the attorney general, delivered a statement outside: “Donald Trump and the other co-defendents have committed persistent and repeated fraud. Last week, we proved that in our motion for summary judgment. today, we will prove our other claims. My message is simple: No matter how powerful you are, no matter how much money you may have, no one is above the law.”

Kate Christobek
Oct. 2, 2023, 9:21 a.m. ET45 minutes ago

Around 8:30 a.m., about a half a dozen anti-Trump protesters gathered across Centre Street, chanting “Trump lies all the time” and holding signs saying “lies have consequences.” They were quickly broken up by police officers and moved to Foley Square. The crowd has since grown in numbers and hung a large banner on the police barricades saying “no one is above the law.”

New York Attorney General Letitia James speaks in front of a Manhattan Courthouse.
The civil case was brought by Letitia James, the New York attorney general, in 2022.Ahmed Gaber for The New York Times

When a New York judge ruled on Sept. 26 that Donald J. Trump had committed fraud by inflating his assets, he was effectively saying that the facts at the heart of the case against Mr. Trump would not be subject to debate during a trial that begins Monday.

The civil case was brought by Letitia James, the New York attorney general, in 2022, and accuses the former president and his family business of lying to lenders and insurers about the value of their properties in order to secure more favorable terms. In a so-called summary judgment days before the trial, Justice Arthur F. Engoron of State Supreme Court in Manhattan found that they had done so — and that Mr. Trump was liable.

Thumbnail of page 1

Read the Judge’s Ruling in the Trump Fraud Case

The decision by Justice Arthur F. Engoron is a major victory for Attorney General Letitia James in her lawsuit against Mr. Trump, effectively deciding that no trial was needed to determine that he had fraudulently secured favorable terms on loans and insurance deals.

Read Document
Former President Donald J. Trump faces federal and state investigations in New York, Georgia and Washington.
Ahmed Gaber for The New York Times

Former President Donald J. Trump has been facing a wave of legal scrutiny, at both the state and federal levels, into matters related to his business and political careers.

Those investigations have now led to Mr. Trump’s being indicted in four cases in four months: two brought by the special counsel Jack Smith, one by the Manhattan district attorney and the latest coming from local prosecutors in Georgia.“

Sunday, October 01, 2023

Biden worries ‘extreme’ supreme court can’t be relied on to uphold rule of law | US supreme court | The Guardian

Biden worries ‘extreme’ supreme court can’t be relied on to uphold rule of law

"Trump installed three conservative justices, tilting the court 6-3 to the right, which delivered significant victories for conservatives

US supreme court.
US supreme court. Photograph: Mariam Zuhaib/AP

Joe Biden worries that the “extreme” US supreme court, dominated by rightwing justices, cannot be relied upon to uphold the rule of law.

“I worry,” the president told ProPublica in interview published on Sunday. “Because I know that if the other team, the Maga Republicans, win, they don’t want to uphold the rule of law.”

“Maga” is shorthand for “Make America great again”, Donald Trump’s campaign slogan. Trump faces 91 criminal charges and assorted civil threats but nonetheless dominates Republican polling for the nomination to face Biden in a presidential rematch next year.

In four years in the White House, Trump nominated and saw installed three conservative justices, tilting the court 6-3 to the right. That court has delivered significant victories for conservatives, including the removal of the right to abortion and major rulings on gun control, affirmative action and other issues.

The new court term, which starts on Tuesday, could see further such rulings on matters including government environmental and financial regulation.

ProPublica reporting has stoked a growing ethics scandal concerning Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, two older rightwing justices, and their ties to rich rightwing donors with business before the court.

Biden is a former chair of the Senate judiciary committee, who in 1991 presided over Thomas’s hugely controversial confirmation amid accusations of sexual harassment.

He told ProPublica: “I do think at the end of the day, this court, which has been one of the most extreme courts, I still think in the basic fundamentals of rule of law, that they would sustain the rule of law.”

But regarding the brewing ethics scandal, the president said: “The idea that the constitution would in any way prohibit or not encourage the court to have basic rules of ethics that are just on their face reasonable is just not the case.”

Alito and Thomas deny wrongdoing in not declaring gifts from rich donors.

Supreme court justices are nominally subject to the same ethics rules as other federal judges but in practice govern themselves.

John Roberts, the chief justice, has resisted calls to testify on ethics matters. Democrats in the Senate have advanced ethics reform but it stands little chance of success, given Republican opposition.

Nonetheless, calls for meaningful action are growing. This week, more than 40 watchdog groups wrote to Roberts, demanding he take action.

Caroline Ciccone, president of Accountable.US, which coordinated the letter, said: “While a full-blown ethics crisis looms and public trust hits record lows, the supreme court is set to take up a slew of consequential cases in its new term.

“It’s far past time that Chief Justice Roberts clean up his court – and it’s the very least the justices can do to restore some semblance of credibility and integrity.”


Biden worries ‘extreme’ supreme court can’t be relied on to uphold rule of law | US supreme court | The Guardian

Gaetz Says He Will Move to Oust McCarthy for Working With Democrats - The New York Times

Gaetz Says He Will Move to Oust McCarthy for Working With Democrats

(All MAGA Republicans want to do is create chaos.  Throw the bums out)

A day after the Republican speaker turned to Democrats for help passing a stopgap spending bill to avert a shutdown, the far-right congressman promised to try to remove him from his post.

Representative Matt Gaetz walking away from a group of reporters.
Representative Matt Gaetz at the Capitol on Saturday.Kent Nishimura for The New York Times

Representative Matt Gaetz, the far-right Republican from Florida, said on Sunday that he would move this week to remove Speaker Kevin McCarthy from his leadership post, promising to follow through on weeks of threats to oust him for working with Democrats to keep the government funded.

Mr. Gaetz’s announcement came the day after Mr. McCarthy, in a stunning reversal, steered around Republican opposition to a stopgap spending plan and turned to Democrats to help him push legislation through the House to avert a shutdown. The California Republican said he knew he was putting his speakership at risk by doing so, and dared his detractors to try ousting him.

In an interview that aired on CNN on Sunday, Mr. Gaetz, Mr. McCarthy’s main tormentor, said he would do just that. By bringing up a measure called a “motion to vacate,” he can call a snap vote on whether to keep Mr. McCarthy in his post.

“I think we need to rip off the Band-Aid,” Mr. Gaetz said. “I think we need to move on with new leadership that can be trustworthy.”

Mr. Gaetz had long threatened to oust Mr. McCarthy if he failed to bend to Republican hard-liners’ demands for spending cuts. In the interview, he accused Mr. McCarthy of lying to his G.O.P. members during negotiations, and making a “secret deal” with Democrats concerning future funding for Ukraine, which he and dozens of other conservative Republicans have opposed.

“Nobody trusts Kevin McCarthy,” he added, predicting that the only way Mr. McCarthy would remain speaker by week’s end is “if Democrats bail him out.”

This is a developing story. Please check back for updates."


Gaetz Says He Will Move to Oust McCarthy for Working With Democrats - The New York Times