BackgroundIn recent years, much attention has been given to the spread of influenza around the world. With the continuing human outbreak of H5N1 beginning in 2003 and the H1N1 pandemic in 2009, focus on influenza and other respiratory viruses has been increased. It has been accepted for decades that international travel via jet aircraft is a major vector for global spread of influenza, and epidemiological differences between tropical and temperate regions observed. Thus we wanted to study how indoor environmental conditions (enclosed locations) in the tropics and winter temperate zones contribute to the aerosol spread of influenza by travelers. To this end, a survey consisting of 632 readings of temperature (T) versus relative humidity (RH) in 389 different enclosed locations air travelers are likely to visit in 8 tropical nations were compared to 102 such readings in 2 Australian cities, including ground transport, hotels, shops, offices and other publicly accessible locations, along with 586 time course readings from aircraft.ResultsAn influenza transmission risk contour map was developed for T versus RH. Empirical equations were created for estimating: 1. risk relative to temperature and RH, and 2. time parameterized influenza transmission risk. Using the transmission risk contours and equations, transmission risk for each country's locations was compared with influenza reports from the countries. Higher risk enclosed locations in the tropics included new automobile transport, luxury buses, luxury hotels, and bank branches. Most temperate locations were high risk.ConclusionEnvironmental control is recommended for public health mitigation focused on higher risk enclosed locations. Public health can make use of the methods developed to track potential vulnerability to aerosol influenza. The methods presented can also be used in influenza modeling. Accounting for differential aerosol transmission using T and RH can potentially explain anomalies of influenza epidemiology in addition to seasonality in temperate climates.

We examine self-experimentation ethics history and practice, related law, use scenarios in universities and industry, and attitudes. We show through analysis of the historical development of medical ethics and regulation, from Hippocrates through Good Clinical Practice that there are no ethical barriers to self-experimentation. When the self-experimenter is a true investigator, there is no other party to be protected from unethical behavior. We discuss the n-of-1 issue in self-experiments, and make suggestions for improving experiment design. We discuss real-world scenarios of self-experimentation: at universities, for independent single-subject investigators, investigator/employees at pharmaceutical firms, and nonscientist self-experimenters. Our survey of ethics committees regarding policy and review for self-experimenting investigators show that approximately one-third of ethics committee respondents had a policy regarding self-experimentation, and one-third did not require ethical committee review of proposed experiments. There was no relationship between having a policy and asking for review. We also surveyed member attitudes to, and experiences of, self-experimentation among members of the National Academy of Sciences, Royal Society, and European Academy of Sciences. To our knowledge, this survey is the first breakdown of self-experiments into impact-relevant type classifications, and represents an advance in the field. Half of our scientist respondents performed self-experiments, and roughly one-fifth had conducted serious self-experiments. Most responders thought self-experiments were valuable, however, biologics injections, radiation exposure, and surgical implants had negative ratings greater than positive. We conclude that self-experimenters should not have attempts made to terminate them, bar them from use of facilities, nor be barred from using themselves or their tissues except in exceptional circumstances. Organizational uncertainty over the ethical and regulatory status of self-experimentation, and resulting fear of consequences is unjustified and may be blocking a route to human experiments that practicing scientists widely consider appropriate, and which historical precedent has shown is valuable.

Background: This study was undertaken because of the accidental observation that a sample of 60+ beads was obtained by the instrument from a completely dry, unused well in a 96 well plate. Others have observed unexplained outliers in replicated wells. The problem was first observed on an older instrument, and replicated on a new instrument.

Background: EpiFlex is a flexible, easy to use computer model for a single computer, intended to be operated by one user who need not be an expert. Its purpose is to study in-silico the epidemic behavior of a wide variety of diseases, both known and theoretical, by simulating their spread at the level of individuals contracting and infecting others. To understand the system fully, this paper must be read together in conjunction with study of the software and its results. EpiFlex is evaluated using results from modeling influenza A epidemics and comparing them with a variety of field data sources and other types of modeling.

Background: Luminex suspension microarray assays are in widespread use. There are issues of variability of assay readings using this technology.