From the University of Cape Town comes some bad news for global warming alarmists, Malaria deaths may soon be a thing of the past and their attempts to link such deaths to global warming will evaporate if this cure holds up in clinical trials. Of course it never did anyway: Another alarming climate myth bites the dust – mosquito borne malaria does NOT increase with temperature
So if this is a real cure, no more cushy grants for Michael Mann to study Malaria and AGW then, see Mann’s 1.8 million Malaria grant – ‘where do we ask for a refund’? The most amazing part is the research is only 18 months old….so I expect it will be given an even more rigorous clinical review. (h/t to WUWT reader Jason) – Anthony
African research identifies strong candidate for possible single-dose malaria cure
28 August 2012
A compound discovered by a UCT drug discovery programme has been selected by MMV for its potent activity against multiple points in parasite’s lifecycle
 |
 |
| Big news: Prof Kelly Chibale (centre), here with Minister Naledi Pandor, speaks about the compound MMV390048 that he and international collaborators hope will lead to the development of a single-dose treatment for malaria. | Panel report: Dr Tim Wells, Prof Kelly Chibale, Minister Naledi Pandor, Dr Max Price and Dr Richard Gordon of the Technology Innovation Agency address the media at a press conference where they announced the development of the new compound. |
A recently discovered compound – named MMV390048 – from the aminopyridine class not only has the potential to become part of a single-dose cure for all strains of malaria, but might also be able to block transmission of the parasite from person to person, according to a research collaboration involving the Medicines for Malaria Venture (MMV), based in Switzerland, and the Drug Discovery and Development Centre (H3-D) at UCT.
This was announced at UCT today.
On the basis of initial results it was selected by MMV for further development – making it the first compound researched on African soil to enter preclinical development in partnership with MMV.
An African solution to save lives
Naledi Pandor, the Minister of Science & Technology, said: “This is a significant victory in the battle to alleviate the burden of disease in the subcontinent. Clearly the war on this disease is not yet won, but I am excited by the role that our excellent scientists have played in this milestone in finding a potential cure for malaria and possibly preventing its transmission. Congratulations to Professor Kelly Chibale and all involved. This is evidence of the world-class science being done in South Africa and the continent, and of the power of continental and international scientific collaboration in the multidisciplinary approaches that are essential in addressing the societal challenges of our time.”
Dr Max Price, the vice-chancellor of UCT, said: “H3-D was founded at UCT in 2010 for this very purpose: to develop African expertise towards solving the health problems that beset the developing world. We trust this clinical candidate is the first of many contributions Professor Chibale and his team will be making to the advancement of international medicine.”
H3-D identified a molecule, code named MMV390048, which was selected in July 2012 by MMV’s Expert Scientific Advisory Committee for further development. The promising new compound shows potent activity against multiple points in the malaria parasite’s lifecycle. This means it not only has the potential to become part of a single-dose cure for malaria but might also be able to block transmission of the parasite from person to person.
The aminopyridine series was initially identified by Griffith University scientists in Australia as part of MMV’s extensive malaria screening campaign of around 6 million compounds. A team of scientists from H3-D, led by UCT Professor Kelly Chibale, further scrutinised and explored the antimalarial potential of the series. With parasitological, pharmacological and contract chemistry support from the Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute (Switzerland), the Centre for Drug Candidate Optimization at Monash University (Australia) and Syngene (India) respectively, the H3-D team selected the most promising compounds from the series to be optimised and retested.
In just 18 months the team had identified and developed a candidate suitable for preclinical development.
Equipping the next generation of African scientists
“We are very excited that this promising compound, researched by African scientists, has been selected by MMV for further development,” said Chibale, the founder and director of H3-D. “This is truly a proud day for African science and African scientists. Our team is hopeful that the compound will emerge from rigorous testing as an extremely effective medicine for malaria – a disease that accounts for 24% of total child deaths in sub-Saharan Africa. What is more, H3-D and MMV achieved MMV390048 as a clinical candidate in record time. In the process we have developed a unique model for successful technology platforms, and generic modern pharmaceutical industry expertise and skills, to discover drugs in potentially any disease area in Africa.”
Dr Tim Wells, MMV’s Chief Scientific Officer, said: “This is a great achievement and an excellent example of the quality of research that can be fostered in Africa. We look forward to seeing more exciting compounds emerge from Kelly’s team and are proud to be collaborating with H3-D; not only is it conducting excellent science today, but it is also providing world-class training for the next generation of African scientists.”
What is so unique and exciting about MMV390048
- It is very potent: it displayed a complete cure of animals infected with malaria parasites in a single dose given orally, and thus has the potential to cure millions of people.
- It is active against a wide panel of resistant strains of the malaria parasite.
- Developing the drug has made possible the training of more than 10 local scientists and cemented a strong relationship with an international partner.
- The clinical candidate is in line to enter clinical trials in late 2013.
View a video of Prof Kelly Chibale speaking about H3-D.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Re “Transmission of infectious parasites slows with rising temperatures, researchers find.”
See my post above. That study was done with the rodent malaria parasite, Plasmodium yoelii, which is known to transmit at lower temperatures than human malaria parasites. Researchers studying both human and rodent malaria parasite transmission to mosquitoes keep two insectories, one at a lower temperature. The data is valid, but comment on human malaria parasite transmission is not possible.
Les Johnson says:
August 31, 2012 at 3:51 am
DDT is still the most effective and cheapest form of vector control.
=============================================
I may agree on cheapest, but it is only effective if used against mosquitos which haven’t developed resistance to it yet – and if it is used carefully so that they don’t get chance to develop the resistance, too. It remains one of tools but it’s not the ultimate weapon anymore.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DDT#Effectiveness_of_DDT_against_malaria
There was another famous medicine with similar fate: penicillin. Yes, it’s still often used. But majority of bacteria types it was used against have already developed resistance to it, too.
“…what the Nature piece says…If there is any “vital error” the blame goes to the researchers and Nature for initially reporting it, not Anthony Watts.”
It would certainly be hilarious if Anthony believed everything that he reads in Nature. Skepticism should not be selective.
As Glenn Reynolds is wont to say, FASTER PLEASE.
From TomT on August 31, 2012 at 12:24 pm:
Here’s the paper:
Warmer temperatures reduce the vectorial capacity of malaria mosquitoes
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3367745/
Reading around, I find rodent malaria transmission to be a robust analogue to human malaria transmission, well respected with only limited exceptions. Your concept that work done with rodent malaria can’t be extended to human malaria is not valid, it’s even risible.
Further, I direct your attention to this earlier paper:
Influence of climate on malaria transmission depends on daily temperature variation
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2930540/
Basically, in the real world the temperature changes during the day. If you try to say X malaria transmits at Tx mean temperature while Y malaria transmits at Ty temperature, then say the mean temperature in this area is Ty so X will not be transmitting, you’re completely missing it when the daily temperature range includes both Tx and Ty.
The body temperature of a laboratory mouse is ~36.9°C (98.4°F). That’s close to the human temperature of 98.6°F although core temperature is higher. It thus follows that the difference in transmission temperatures must be small, with that amount well within the amount of expected daily temperature variation.
Thus while you may wish to claim that since the study used rodent malaria it is only applicable to the response of rodent malaria to global warming, it is manifestly obvious that the results extend to the response of human malaria as well.
TomT says:
August 31, 2012 at 11:07 am
Johanna, re: ‘Oh, and Tom T, I guess you have never seen the summer mosquito plagues in the high latitudes. Those suckers are enormous and come in swarms of thousands. It is not at all difficult to comprehend how malaria can be a major problem in these environments.”
Johanna, yes, mosquitoes in the high latitudes number in the billions. But, the parasite needs to complete the mosquito stage of its lifecycle (ie. gametocyte>gamete>ookinete>oocyst>sporozoite>salivary gland sporozoite) within the period of time of the first and second mosquito blood meals, and this is temperature dependent. This restricts the ability of the parasite to transmit at higher latitudes, hence, “indoor malaria” transmission.
——————————————————
Tom, it’s pretty simple. Malaria transmission needs two things: infected humans and anopheles mosquitoes. In the high latitudes, if you have infected humans and anopheles, it gets transmitted – and because of the vast numbers of mosquitoes in summer, it only takes a tiny percentage of them to go through the stages to transmit the disease.
Do you dispute the massive outbreaks that occurred in places like Siberia and Finland?
If I understand this research correctly, it has the potential to eradicate the infectious pool of humans, which not only greatly improves their quality of life, but also breaks the infection cycle. The reason endemic malaria has not recurred in places like Canada is because the pool of infectious people is no longer there. The mosquitoes most assuredly are.
@Les Johnson – thanks for the links. Let me focus on
http://www.bmj.com/content/321/7262/670.full
a – nowhere near support for David M Hoffer’s “deaths from extreme cold (which outweigh deaths from extreme heat by hundreds to one or more)”. But I sincerely appreciate having hard data to discuss. Too bad David hasn’t substantiated his claims.
b – It is great the west Europeans are so well prepared for extreme weather. How about Bangladeshis? Extreme weather to them is a shifted monsoon pattern and severity. The idea that global warming means it gets 2 degrees C warmer everywhere is laughably simplistic.
c – as I tried to point out to Smokey, a strong effect of declining Arctic sea ice could be colder Northern Hemisphere winters and blocking highs bringing cold snaps such we had over Europe last winter. So concern about the effects of global warming is concern for higher deaths from extreme cold in the NH, which you demonstrate is a significant problem.
Thanks again.
Dvunk: Please read more carefully. Your
nowhere near support for David M Hoffer’s “deaths from extreme cold (which outweigh deaths from extreme heat by hundreds to one or more)”.
In the BMJ paper, they say this:
Numbers of heat related deaths were always much smaller than cold related deaths
More to the point, this paper, previously posted, states a lives lost to cold vs warm ratio of 121.4. This backs David’s claims.
Christidis, N., Donaldson, G.C. and Stott, P.A. 2010. Causes for the recent changes in cold- and heat-related mortality in England and Wales. Climatic Change 102: 539-553.
The literature is almost unanimous; cold kills more than heat, regardless of the country.
Admit your error. Move on.
Kasuha: your
I may agree on cheapest, but it is only effective if used against mosquitos which haven’t developed resistance to it yet – and if it is used carefully so that they don’t get chance to develop the resistance, too. It remains one of tools but it’s not the ultimate weapon anymore.
According to the WHO, the EDF and the Sierra Club, DDT is a vital weapon in the fight against malaria.
It is also the only pesticide that is effective against strains of mosquito that have resistance to the pesticide, by invoking an aversion response in the vector.
dvunk: your
b – It is great the west Europeans are so well prepared for extreme weather. How about Bangladeshis? Extreme weather to them is a shifted monsoon pattern and severity.
Strawman argument. But let me answer it anyway. There is no data to suggest that the monsoon has shifted during the latest warming.
These authors looked at the 135 year history of rain fall in India.
From the consluion:
“”for the whole of India, no significant trend was detected for annual, seasonal, or monthly rainfall.””
Kumar, V., Jain, S.K. and Singh, Y. 2010. Analysis of long-term rainfall trends in India. Hydrological Sciences Journal 55: 484-496.
Note that they also stated that the IPCC had suggested that there would a reduction in the amount freshwater, impactinng agriculture. The authors decided to use data, not models.
or this:
Rainfall extremes in India show no trend in number or intensity over the last 50 years. The spatial variablity has increased, but not the number or intensity.
http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate1327.html
or this:
Rainfall in India shows no trend over the last century.
http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2011/2010JD014966.shtml
Admit your errors, and move on.
dvunk: your
The idea that global warming means it gets 2 degrees C warmer everywhere is laughably simplistic.
I am not sure where this comes from, but, the IPCC states that in a warming world, most of the warming would occur in the mid to high latitudes. Very little warming will occur in the tropics.
Dvunk: your
c – as I tried to point out to Smokey, a strong effect of declining Arctic sea ice could be colder Northern Hemisphere winters and blocking highs bringing cold snaps such we had over Europe last winter. So concern about the effects of global warming is concern for higher deaths from extreme cold in the NH, which you demonstrate is a significant problem.
So, which is it? Cold does not kill, or it does? You ignore the numbers I posted on the ratio of cold to warm mortality, then you suggest that global warming will bring cold events, which will increase mortality. Please try to be consistent.
As for your argument? Gloabl Warming conditions have been known for a long time to bring zonal circulation to the jet stream. Cooling would bring meridonal circulation. Now, post facto, it is suggested that a warming climate, especially in the arctic, also brings meridonal circulation. It has become unfalsifiable. It would be more beliveable if this was suggested before hand, and did not conflict with existing theory.
Note the similarities in this article, to today.
http://www.sciencenews.org/view/download/id/37739/name/CHILLING_POSSIBILITIES
TomT: your
Re DDT. I agree that it is fantastic. My comment was that it was discontinued in the 1960s for several reasons. Respectfully, you should read histories that don’t have a modern political bent.
DDT was discontinued in the 70s, not the 60s, and for political reasons only. Even the EPAs in house investigation recommended against the ban. Rucklehaus, as head of the EPA, banned it anyway. Since then, millions of people have died, that did not need to. Most of them children and pregnant women.
Respectfully, you should read histories that don’t have a modern political bent, or that try to put a positive spin on the deaths of millions. You can buff that turd all you want, but it won’t get shiny.
yeah, thats what I thought….
Les, I was talking about DDT and malaria control campaigns, the decisions in the 1960’s were complex.
Odd that I am the skeptic on a supposed skeptic blog.
Kadaka, I work on Plasmodium yoelii. I study the molecular and cellular biology of malaria parasite transmission to the mosquito. The rodent malaria parasite model is great for many things, the reason that many labs use it as a model, including my own, but fact remains that its departure from the human malaria parasites regarding temperature and transmission necessitates confirmation with P. falciparum. The authors said as much in the manuscript. Argue with me if you like, that is the beauty of the internet.
I think that it is odd that I am the skeptic, on a blog devoted to skepticism.
Johanna, at high latitudes mosquitoes of course live outside, but you should read about “indoor malaria”‘; specifically, mosquitoes transmitting malaria are living indoors.
It is an interesting subject, and worthy of future research regarding climate and malaria transmission.
TomT: your
Les, I was talking about DDT and malaria control campaigns, the decisions in the 1960′s were complex.
Odd that I am the skeptic on a supposed skeptic blog.
1. DDT was banned in the 70s, not the 60s. Please pay attention.
2. You are not a skeptic. A skeptic would admit he was wrong on there being no endemic malaria outbreaks in northern Europe. You steadfastly ignore this.
3. Kadaka quotes from the paper. You provide no reference at all.
4. Indoor malaria is the prevalent form of transmission, in the tropics or mid-latitudes. That is why DDT is so effective. Even in DDT resistant mossquito, they are less likely to stay indoors as they are DDT averse.
5. You have also not commented on the night time summer warmth in mid-latitude regions. Indoor malaria is moot.
6. Tens of Millions are dead because DDT was banned. Yet you defend the ban. Interesting.
If this breakthrough is true it will be a great achievement. I worked in the southern region of Africa for 7 years in the 80’s and 90’s and saw the debilitating effects of malaria in my co-workers and in myself when I contracted it twice. Some of the comments regarding this article were amazingly uninformed regarding the implications of this break through. The commenters seem to think that people being able to function more effectively will lead to starvation because there will be more mouths to feed. I assume they believe that African people have no ability to produce food more effectively, work harder, or think more clearly when they are not ill with devastating ilnesses like malaria.
People seem to be unaware that the continent is 3 times the size of the contiguous U.S. with about the equivalent population. There is fertile land there and there are hard working creative people.
My experience there leads me to be much more optimistic. This break through, if true, could contribute significantly to helping the inhabitants of Africa go to the next level of development in a much more accelerated fashion.
Les, in the tropics malaria is a disease of poor people. There is no heating, nor windows, and the inside temperature is the same as the outside. You “steadfastlessy ignore this”.
Kadaka quoted from the paper, and so did I: the authors stated that their studies needed to be confirmed with the human malaria parasite. Yet you “steadfastly ignore this”. Why do the authors qualify but you and Anthony do not?
I am commenting on DDT and malaria, yet you “steadfastly” comment on the ban on DDT with respect to agriculture. “Interesting”.
I state that my profession is malaria research, yet you ” steadfastly” think that you have nothing to learn from me and will argue with me until th cows come home. That is the beauty of the internet, the great equivicator. Interesting.
I state that there is much to be learned, yet you “steadfastly” think that all cases are closed.
Be a student, Les, always.
TomT: your
Les, in the tropics malaria is a disease of poor people. There is no heating, nor windows, and the inside temperature is the same as the outside. You “steadfastlessy ignore this”.
I assume you mean “steadfastly”? I don’t ignore this. I lived in West Africa for a decade, and I am well aware of the demography of malaria. As stated several times, if DDT is present, the mosquito will not rest indoors, and continue the cycle. You ignore this. Repeatedly. You also ignore the nighttime warmth present in mid-latitude during the summer. If ACs are needed at night, the parasite can obviously develop outdoors.
Kadaka quoted from the paper, and so did I:
This is a fib. You said “The authors said as much”. That is as close to a quote as you have come. Post a reference, or admit you are wrong.
I am commenting on DDT and malaria, yet you “steadfastly” comment on the ban on DDT with respect to agriculture. “Interesting”.
This is the first time you have brought up the term “agriculture”. Interesting. But DDT was still banned in the 70s, not the 60s, as you have stated twice. Admit the error.
I state that my profession is malaria research, yet you ” steadfastly” think that you have nothing to learn from me and will argue with me until th cows come home. That is the beauty of the internet, the great equivicator. Interesting.
You attribute to me motives and motivations without proof. Interesting. On the contrary, I learn in nearly discussion I am in, as I research new material, and confirm the older.That is the beauty of the internet, the great equalizer
FYI : equivocator = Someone who speaks unclearly or ambiguously in order to avoid having to commit to a decision, answer, or course of action.
Though it appears that your use of the word fits you like a glove. I have also noticed that when people use inappropriate words, it is usually the case when the uneducated are trying to appear educated. But, sometimes, a cigar is just a cigar.
I state that there is much to be learned, yet you “steadfastly” think that all cases are closed.
Again, attribution without proof. Poor methodology for a “researcher”.
Be a student, Les, always.
I always am, TomT, I always am.
Still no comment from you, on the 10s of millions of children and pregnant women, who died because of the ban on DDT.
Lee, sure, I could have used the word “equalizer”, but I chose “the great equivocator” as a paraphrase of the Porter in Macbeth. If you still have a problem with it then let me know.
DDT was banned by the EPA, led by Ruckelshaus in 1972. In the USA. But, the problems with the WHO malaria eradication program, globally, was in the 1960’s. The program ended in 1969. You can keep talking about the USA ban on DDT in the 1970’s, but the discussion of DDT and malaria, globally, begins in the 1960s.
“This is a fib.”
Relax, Lee.
Here is the quote from Paaijmans: “Our experiments used a rodent malaria and one species of mosquito and there is clearly a need to extend investigations to human malaria species and to other important vectors.” Biol. Lett. 8:465 (2012).
Tim: No problem. Glad to see you are able to quote. Kind of.
Give a source on the WHO, malaria eradication, DDT and the 1960s. According to the Nobel Insitutue, while the WHO program was ended in 1969, it mostly political:
Although technical difficulties such as mosquito and parasite drug resistance have played a part, the main failure to reduce the disease is probably due to social and political factors preventing efficient application of control measures.
My emphasis.
Nice back pedal on the “equivocator”, too. Of course, it makes absoutely no sense in that context.
And still, no comment on the 10s of millions of needless deaths of women and children. That is a bit cynical, no?
Tim: your
“Our experiments used a rodent malaria and one species of mosquito and there is clearly a need to extend investigations to human malaria species and to other important vectors”
Now, quote the rest:
Nonetheless, the A. stephensi–P. yoelii system is considered a biologically realistic model [14] and there is no reason to believe that the temperature sensitivity of vector competence and the cumulative distribution in parasite development times are unique to this system.