Professor Julian Perry Robinson, Emeritus Professor at the Science Policy Research Unit (SPRU) and Sussex University passed away last week. Julian was a legend in CBRN arms control and was always insightful, generous and free with his time. He came from that generation of people that you needed to know nothing more of other than he was a 'gentleman.' He will be missed by me, and also our ex-Deputy Editor Steve Johnson.  

Below is a shortened version of the SPRU obituary, the full version can be found here: 

A trained chemist and patent lawyer, Julian possessed the ideal background to wrestle with the thorny issues regarding how to prevent chemical and biological warfare (CBW). Working at SIPRI in the late 1960s and early 1970s, Julian was the principal author of the six volumes on The Problem of Chemical and Biological Warfare, a work that remains a seminal source of historical, legal and scientific information on CBW and required reading for all those entering the field. He also produced ground-breaking reports on CBW for the United Nations and the World Health Organization. These were all essential inputs in the negotiation of the Biological Weapons Convention. It is notable that Julian’s webpage on the University of Sussex website states modestly:

“This work perhaps contributed to the successful conclusion of the 1972 Convention on the Prohibition of Biological Weapons and the 1993 Convention on the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons.”

Only Julian would have inserted the word ‘perhaps’!

The SPRU Military Technology and Arms Limitation Group and Harvard-Sussex Program

It was at SIPRI that Julian met and teamed up with Mary Kaldor. In 1971, they left to join the University of Sussex and subsequently SPRU, where they established and led the Military Technology and Arms Limitation (MTAL) Group and the Armament and Disarmament Information Unit (ADIU). Among those who have worked in the group before going on to illustrious careers elsewhere are William Walker, Jordi Molas-Gallart, Brian Balmer, Richard Guthrie and Daniel Feakes. In addition, Julian and Matthew Meselson set up and ran the Harvard-Sussex Program (HSP), with the two of them editing The CBW Conventions Bulletin (published quarterly from Sussex), the journal of record in the field. Together, they and their colleagues built up an unrivalled archive of publications, reports and grey literature on CBW and on military armament and disarmament more generally. For decades, the Harvard-Sussex Program and its archive was the ‘Mecca’ that brought a continuous stream of eminent visitors from government, academia, NGOs and elsewhere to SPRU for information as well as an opportunity to discuss issues with Julian and his colleagues. Indeed, such was the volume of the archive that, when SPRU moved into the new Freeman Centre in 2003, the building had to be constructed with a specially reinforced floor to take the considerable weight of the archive.

Julian, Matthew and their HSP colleagues worked continually with governments, international organisations and NGOs in the CBW field, providing wide-ranging benefits to CBW debates and policy. They provided rigorous evidence-based information and argument that has helped sustain work in the UK and elsewhere in negotiating and implementing the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC), maintaining the effectiveness of the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC), and sustaining the overall efficacy of the international regime against the misuse of biology and chemistry. HSP’s work helped shape perceptions of the key issues, the challenges to be faced and possible steps that could be taken to address those challenges. In particular, Julian is widely credited with coming up with the principal criterion for judging the worth of possible multilateral agreements on chemical weapons: not, ‘Is the agreement verifiable?’, but instead, ‘Will we as a state be better off inside the agreement than outside it?’

In 1984, the MacArthur Foundation awarded one of its fellowships to Matthew Meselson. Commonly known as the ‘Genius Grant’, these awards are restricted to citizens or residents of the United States, but in this case the Fellowship was undoubtedly a recognition of the outstanding collective contributions of Matthew and Julian to arms control. Subsequently, the MacArthur Foundation was the primary funder of HSP’s work over many years, a tribute to MacArthur's confidence in its importance and quality.  It also provided HSP with much needed continuity.

‘Yellow rain’ and bee faeces

The HSP research had a number of specific impacts. One involved the ‘yellow rain’ controversy. In 1981, the U.S. Government accused the Soviet Union of supplying T-2 mycotoxin to communist states in Vietnam and elsewhere. Refugees described attacks supposedly involving sticky yellow liquid being dropped from planes or helicopters. However, work by Julian and other independent scientists revealed the ‘yellow rain’ was due to mass defecation of digested pollen by large swarms of bees, probably one of the very first examples of the debunking of fake news. Another example involves incapacitating agents, where HSP collaborated widely with civil society organisations and scientific communities in developing recommendations and pressuring governments on this controversial issue. More generally, through the HSP, Robinson introduced rigorous scholarship into public policy discussion and mentored generations of CBW researchers, policy shapers and policy makers from across the world. Many continue to work in related fields, meaning that Julian’s influence on preventing the misuse of chemistry and biology will last generations. As the respected authors Jeremy Paxman and Robert Harris acknowledge in their book on chemical and biological weapons, A Higher Form of Killing, all students in this field owe Julian Perry Robinson a debt.

Pugwash

For 40 years, Julian was a central figure in Pugwash, the international organization that, through its conferences on science and world affairs, brings together scholars and public figures to work towards reducing the danger of armed conflict and to seek solutions to global security threats. In his role on the steering committee for Pugwash’s Chemical Warfare Study Group between 1974 and 1992, Julian did much to advance the cause of a Chemical Weapons Convention. Under his guidance, the Study Group enabled useful and constructive dialogue between Western and East European ‘experts’. The Study Group’s pioneering work on the philosophy and design of on-site industry inspections allowed prominent figures in the chemical industry to become aware of the demands that CW disarmament would place on their corporations. This work eased the way for CWC negotiators when they later drew industry into their talks. The Group’s ‘learning by doing’ approach was also emulated by negotiators as they performed national trial inspections. After 1992, Julian retained his steering committee position when the group was reconstituted to become the Pugwash Study Group on Implementation of the CBW Conventions.

In addition, Julian served as an advisor or consultant to numerous national and international organizations, both governmental and non-governmental, including the World Health Organization (WHO), other parts of the United Nations system, the International Committee of the Red Cross, the UK National Authority for the Chemical Weapons Convention, and the Commission of the European Communities.

‘The David Attenborough of CBW’

In 2007, a celebration was held to mark Julian’s formal retirement, although he never really retired, continuing to work in recent years on the use of chemical weapons in Syria and on novichoks following the Salisbury poisonings.

DroneShield Ltd is pleased to announce the release of the next generation version of its body-worn drone detection device, RfPatrol MKII™.
 
The original RfPatrol™ was released in May 2019, having proven to be a well-regarded product, with purchases by a number of high profile customers around the world.
 
The device is completely passive (non-emitting), substantially broadening the range of customers to whom the product is lawfully available, and also appealing to use cases where the device cannot be detectable to the enemy forces due to having no emissions.
 
The next generation of the product is approximately 40% smaller in size, with a reduced weight of 800g (including battery), further ruggedization, as well as a range of further enhancements requested by the end users following last 12 months of in-field deployments.#

The product summary is available here and the RfPatrol MKII is available for purchase now to qualified customers.

DroneShield’s CEO Oleg Vornik commented, “RfPatrol MKII™ continues our successful RfPatrol™ product line, providing dismounted personnel a lightweight drone detection device. The product is future-proof, being compatible with additional drone frequency channels which will be enabled with future software releases. As with our other counterdrone products, customers receive regular software updates of threat databases which can be deployed on the devices remotely in the field in a secure manner. Further, in addition to being able to be used as a stand-alone, it is a perfect companion to our DroneGun™ product”.

The Ministry of Defence announced this month that the Russian Land Force is to receive the newest model of the RKhM-8 CBRN Reconnaissance Vehicle this year. 

"The Land Force is set to receive more than 1,500 combat vehicles … including the modern RKhM-6 and RKhM-8 CBRN vehicles," the MoD's press department said.

The RKhM-8 is the latest Russian CBRN vehicle and is based on the chassis of the AMN-233114 Tigr-M 4x4 armoured utility vehicle. The vehicle is said to be integrated with an automated command-and-control (C2) system. A spokeperson for the MOD said "The vehicle transfers gathered information via the C2 system and radio link to command posts."

The spokesman also said that the vehicle detects gamma radiation sources and radiation directions, and identifies toxic agents in the air, on the field, and on military vehicles. The RKhM-8 is capable of express identification of biologically pathogenic agents. It would transport other chemically, and radiologically contaminated samples to specialised laboratories, said the spokesperson, noting that the vehicle has been fitted with an automatic meteorological sensor.

Argon Electronics (UK) Ltd. and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) have reached a two-year, $2.55 million Cooperative Research and Development Agreement (CRADA) that will facilitate the development of a game-changing, ultra-realistic radiation simulator tool for first responders.

The project, which has been funded by a Department of Energy Technology Commercialization Fund (TCF) grant, will combine LLNL's innovative Radiation Field Training Simulator (RaFTS) technology with Argon's widely respected track record in the creation of simulation software and hardware.

RaFTS provides a superior first responder training solution that can be used both to protect against acts of radiological or nuclear terrorism and to deal with their subsequent aftermath.

In contrast to other existing simulator training methods, the RaFTS technology produces a response within an actual radiation detector that exactly replicates all the physics of real-world usage.

The RaFTS hardware has been designed as an externally mounted device that interfaces directly with the circuitry of operational radiation detection systems.

The outputs are of sufficient quality to ensure that detection instruments behave exactly as they will against actual radioactivity, and the data that is collected offers a sufficient degree of realism to enable the energy-spectra-based identification, measurement and location of a radioactive source.

Commenting on the project, Argon's CEO Steven Pike, said: "We are delighted to have formalized our relationship with LLNL to develop, integrate and commercialize their RaFTS technology.

"Working in cooperation with LLNL and leading detector manufacturers, this project will provide spectroscopic instrument users with an unprecedented and life-like exercise capability to ensure responder training is maintained at the highest level."

LLNL nuclear chemist Steve Kreek explained: "If the RaFTS and Argon collaboration goes as envisioned, we will create a whole new ecosystem of training peripherals which will substantially raise the bar on emergency response preparedness.

"It is exciting to see something that we have been working on for more than a decade move into the licensing and commercialisation phase," Kreek said.

LLNL's business development executive, Annemarie Meike, has described the development of RaFTS as a "gamechanger" for first responders.

"This technology enables them to take a giant leap in the sophistication of the scenarios that they can pursue, and just as importantly, the attention to needs such as enhanced exercises.

"The goals of the TCF program are perfect for the commercialization stage and aims that the partners want to achieve," Meike added.

The RaFTS CRADA funding comprises $750,000 that comes to LLNL from the TCF grant, together with an estimated $1.8 million that will be provided through in-kind contributions from the company.

RaFTS was one of six LLNL projects that were successful in gaining funding during the latest round of TCF grants announced in July 2019.

The project's principal investigator is Lab computer scientist Greg White.

On April 21 a joint Air Force team, led by the Air Force Life Cycle Management Center and the Air Force’s CBRN Defense Systems Branch, delivered a rapidly developed containment system prototype that will enable as many as 28 COVID-positive patients to be transported aboard a C-17 in response to the United States Transportation Command's Joint Urgent Operational Need (JUON).

The Negatively Pressurized Conex (NPC) is designed specifially to fit inside of a C-17 aircraft, and enable the safe transport of patients, both ambulatory and litter, and teams of medical professionals to medical facilities around the globe. 

“The goal of the NPC is to help us keep infectious organisms contained, in order to prevent the aircrew, and medical professionals onboard the aircraft from being exposed,” said Capt. Alexis Todaro, NPC program manager. "The container is negatively pressurized; fans are continuously pulling the air from within the unit through high-efficiency particulate filters to prevent any exposure to the aircraft.”

The container includes an attached anteroom – also under negative pressure – where medical professionals can safely change into or out of their medical equipment in order to safely administer patient care, or exit the unit into the aircraft without risking contamination.

“We acquired one system [NPC prototype], and will put it through a series of tests to make sure it contains bio organisms, meets the needs of the aeromedical evacuation teams, and that it’s safe to fly on the C-17,” Capt. Kerollous Marzouk, program test lead for the NPC said. “After we can provide those three things, we will provide this information to leadership for a procurement decision.”

The NPC prototype to include design and fabrication was awarded to a commercial team of UTS Systems, Highland Engineering Inc., and Delta Flight Products using an Other Transactional Authority (OTA) contract.  The program management team led by Todaro, and Joe Novick, NPC Deputy Program Manager (JPEO CBRND), with the support of Army Contracting Command, slashed a four month contracting award process to just seven days; with delivery of the prototype only 13 days after contract award.  All associated prototype and testing cost approximately $2 million.

Following the conclusion of testing scheduled for April 30, the United States Transportation Command, and Air Mobility Command leadership will make a decision on procurement of the NPC with the expected first delivery systems arriving for operations by the end of May.

“Our goal is to provide Airmen with protective capabilities at the speed of relevance and that’s what we are doing,” said Lt. Col. Paul Hendrickson, materiel leader within AFLCMC and NPC Lead. “The prototype has the potential to provide safe transport of our Airmen, dependents and anyone needing care, while ensuring the safety of aircrew and aeromedical staff.”

We’re in the middle of a (polymerase) chain reaction

Gwyn Winfield on what will happen to PCR post Covid-19

As distasteful as it is to state, Covid-19 will leave some people winners, and some people losers. The losers are pretty obvious, the families devastated by loss of loved ones, jobs and financial security, and the businesses wiped out, while the winners may take a while longer to ascertain. Clearly manufacturers of N95 masks will be short term winners, but looking further ahead another will be the capability to swift and efficient test and identify the pathogen on a mass scale. While we might yet see an effective antibody testing system become involved in worldwide testing, polymerase chain reaction (PCR) will be a certain winner. Now, I’ll assume you already know about PCR considering that it has been around for 30 + years… but if you don’t I’ll leave you in the capable hands of 

PCR Dance video

Yet while PCR is leading the diagnostic fight against Covid-19, it has also suffered from a series of problems. For such a well understood technique why are we seeing such failures, what is happening between humans and PCR to cause false negatives? Like many elements of the fight against Covid-19, there is no clear answer, but a lot of ideas (check out PCR Online for dedicated PCR/Covid-19 papers).

Firstly you have to realise that pressing the ‘run cycle’ button on the PCR is the final element in a chain of events. The first step is actually getting a sample from the individual. If you look at footage from South Korea or Germany you will see them using nasopharyngeal swabs, which are long swabs that go deep into the nose until the eyes water! It’s not the most pleasant of experiences but still does not offer 100% certainty of obtaining pathogen. Coronavirus sputum is another possibility, but since Covid-19 produces a dry cough this can be difficult to obtain. Some PCR companies have been looking at saliva, but this is heading into uncharted territory, and while it is a lot easier on the patient and sample taker, verification of the process will take a while. All this might not be uniform, however. Certain sampling methods may work better with different types of patient at difference stages of their illness, and these different samples will work better with certain PCR machines.

Having got the adequate sample onto the business end of swab it then needs to reach the lab. For that some kind of transport medium is required so the sample is kept alive until it is cycled and prepared for PCR. Not all viral transport media are the same, and with a shortage of correct transport media (and swabs for that matter) in the supply chain people are forced to experiment with what they can get. The problem with experimenting with the ‘wrong’ types of swab or medium is one of inhibition. PCR is a great technology when you treat it right, but if you start breaking from procedure and use calcium alginate swabs or the wrong formulation of Copan's Universal Transport Medium , then you won’t find the droids you’re looking for. Co-infection can also be a problem for some PCR devices and result in competitive inhibition. If you have a variety of pathogens in a sample/patient, and have sensitivity issues with your PCR, then you might find that one pathogen outperforms the Covid-19 element, and you start to lose the signal.

Then there’s the assay, the ‘secret sauce’ of the PCR that is going to allow the potentially minute sample to be found among all the rubbish RNA/DNA that will be in the sample. In normal times the accuracy of the assay would be the making or breaking of a PCR company. Put out an assay with low accuracy and you can expect to be trolled by your peers for years. Now, with the suppliers of PCR machines, assays, transport media and swabs unable to meet demand, there’s of a ‘Wild West’ springing up. Individuals will sit at their computers and design a test, throw it against the databases, and that will be the limit of their inclusivity and exclusivity testing (remember that Covid-19 comes from a bigger family than SARS and MERS). They might get a little purified RNA from a bank of samples and then use that as their test for limits of detection. Previously if they submitted such results to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) they would have had their wrists slapped, but due to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) bungling its own testing regime the FDA has no real alternative to approving these things to try and meet the demand. Poor assays equals poor results.

If you are unsure about how much sample you have and the way the medium and swab react with the PCR, along with an ineffective assay, then it is no surprise that there have been reports of dissatisfaction with the technique. It is a global social experiment, with PCR at the heart of it, and in the interest of bringing this experiment to a swift conclusion people are following non-canonical paths.

This rather frantic period will, thanks to social distancing, come to an end sooner rather than later. Swabs and medium will eventually appear in satisfactory amounts for the devices. Maybe even more will be understood about the virus so that swabs can be taken from the right place at the right time, to ensure that there is sufficient pathogen for PCR to work efficiently. All this will allow the current generation of PCR to work properly… but what will the next generation of PCR look like? A lot of grant and venture capital money is sloshing around for improving these devices, so is there a chance we’ll see a revolutionary improvement in PCR?

I think that's unlikely for such a mature technology, but what we will see is an optimisation of PCR for this pandemic. Many of the PCR devices, like Biofire’s Film Array, are set up to test a range of agents from one individual, which is what we might consider normal diagnostics: someone’s turned up with a mystery ailment and the doctor needs to know what it is. Now, PCR needs to be set up to test for one pathogen, but from a range of individuals. The technology is the same, but the application is different. There will be a shift to high throughput platforms, like Bio Rad, dealing with volume processing. There is also some excitement about Cepheid’s new test which (like Biofire) offers the opportunity to bring cycle times down to under an hour, allowing swifter processing of individuals. Also market forces will bring some of the smaller, innovative companies into the orbits of the bigger ones. Thermo Fisher’s purchase of Qiagen has to be seen in the light of its QIAstat-DX test, as well as its other good work. This is likely to mean that whereas previously PCR companies could exist and proliferate selling one diagnostic device, now there will be fewer reputable suppliers selling a wider range of instruments.

That’s not to say that there won’t be a bloom of new PCR devices. Inevitably smart people in universities across the world will get funding to launch their own slight spins on PCR, though these are unlikely to see the light of day for dealing with the pandemic. PCR has been around long enough to be well understood so inevitably national champions will spring up in developing countries at a national price point and with a suitable delivery time. They might not work as well as Thermo Fisher and Roche devices, but they may work well enough to become regional champions and take root.

The financial wherewithal of the larger companies is also required to keep trialling and applying new things that we find out about the virus. Whereas the large companies are slow to adapt they understand how to navigate 510k clearance and meet large customer requirements, and have baseline studies on their panels and devices to enable expert users to appreciate what they can do. They often have the advantage of faster access to the virus and research than the smaller outfit do, are at the front of the line for spares and reagents, and have their reputations at stake.There’s a lot to be said for small and nimble, but in this response the volumes and duration of the pandemic is likely to give the rosette to the bigger boys.

The most likely benefit from the money that is now available for improvements, and some estimate there is $2.5bn, will be in the PCR infrastructure. Parts of the supply chain will become ruggedised, freeze dried reagents for example, there’ll be a massive increase in PCR technicians, and the whole process, including the device itself, will become faster and more practised. The other major benefit is that - hopefully - there will be enough PCR devices floating around that they will start to migrate out of hospitals and into general practitioners’ offices, meaning that post Covid-19 diagnosis of mundane conditions will become faster.

This is perhaps the major technological concern out of what comes next. States that invest in high throughput single agent/Covid-19 devices might deal with this pandemic fantastically… but not so much with the return to normality. Inevitably the capability will be mothballed and put aside for the next pandemic, which could be in five or 50 years, by which time a great deal of that capability (without regular maintenance) will be degraded. The inclusion of Covid-19 into the broad respiratory panels, like Qiagen or Biofire, is what will aid the community in the long run.

Covid-19 might not see a revolution in the technology, it is too mature for that kind of shift. Neither is the market ready for a new, untested technology – there are too many variables in the population/pathogen, the threat is too high and time too short. Improvements can be made in how the technology is used, and excellent case studies for this will soon be coming from South Korea and Germany, and this will be best short term win rather than any technological improvement.

Kromek, a worldwide supplier of detection technology focusing on the medical, security screening and nuclear markets, is delighted to announce that it has received a Queen’s Award for Enterprise in recognition of its outstanding contribution to International Trade.

The Queen’s Awards are the most prestigious awards for UK business, designed to recognise and encourage achievements in the fields of Innovation, International Trade, Sustainable Development and Promoting Opportunity (through social mobility).

Kromek has been recognised in the International Trade category for its outstanding growth in overseas sales. In the three years to 30 April 2019, Kromek’s non-UK sales grew by 52% to make up 84% of all sales. From its headquarters in Sedgefield, County Durham, Kromek exports its radiation detection technologies and products around the globe to over 40 countries in Europe, North America, Asia and Australasia.

Dr Arnab Basu, CEO of Kromek, said: “It is an honour to receive this prestigious award following a period of significant international growth for Kromek. We have secured contracts worth millions of pounds through our deepened relationships with governments and companies worldwide. This has been made possible by the fantastic achievements of our team based on their hard work, innovative skills and commercial focus. It is also recognition of the strength of our market-leading radiation detection products and technologies, which enable us to continue to successfully expand our footprint around the globe.”

Kromek, a worldwide supplier of detection technology focusing on the medical, security screening and nuclear markets, is pleased to announce that it intends to commence the manufacture and sale of medical ventilators in the UK and globally under license from Metran Co., Ltd (“Metran”), a Japan-based leading developer of medical ventilator products and technology, to support the COVID19 response.

Kromek expects to commence production of ventilators before the end of April 2020 and to produce up to 2,000 units within twelve weeks, with 1,000 units available within eight weeks. Following the signing of a license agreement, which is expected shortly, Kromek intends to sell the ventilators in the UK and globally.

For over 30 years, Metran has specialised in the development and manufacture of respiratory equipment, and it is Japan’s leading ventilator manufacturer. Its ventilators offer an effective solution to the current crisis where ventilators need to be manufactured rapidly to meet public health demands.

Dr Arnab Basu, CEO of Kromek, said: “We have been working through the British Embassy in Japan with substantial help from the Department of International Trade and are delighted to be progressing this technology transfer. By combining our existing manufacturing skills with Metran’s proven technology, we expect to commence the manufacture of these robust ventilators from next week and deliver in a rapid manner. Any procurement of this equipment from Kromek is expected to have the additional benefit of safeguarding and creating employment in the North East as well as contributing to this region’s fight against COVID-19. We look forward to the ongoing relationship with Metran.”

Dan Nitta, President of Metran, added: “We have seen an unprecedented demand for ventilation equipment in recent months. We realised at an early stage of this crisis that we needed to think beyond our in-house manufacturing capability if we were to make a substantial impact. Therefore, we reached out globally to find partners who could help us to expand our capacity, and we are pleased to form this relationship with Kromek. With a combination of Metran’s experience in the ventilation field and Kromek’s skill as a designer and manufacturer of advanced electronic equipment, we believe that we can make a substantial contribution to the fight against COVID-19.”

Rapiscan® Systems has announced that the ORION 920DX, 927DX and 928DX screening systems have qualified for the U.S. TSA's Air Cargo Screening Technology List (ACSTL).

The ORION® screening systems provide high-performance security imaging of baggage, parcels, and small cargo, and are now certified for use in both European and American airports. 

The Air Cargo Security Technology List (ACSTL) is the Transportation Security Administration’s (TSA) official list of certified, approved and qualified technologies that can be used for air cargo screening. To be deemed Qualified for screening operations devices must undergo a formal TSA-sponsored test and approval process. When procuring a device, the TSA requires parties subject to US regulation to select a device listed on the ACSTL.

The ORION systems offer high-performance scanning and imaging and are intended for baggage, parcels and small cargo checkpoints in aviation, transportation and logistics operations.

Baggage and parcel inspection: The 920DX is a High-Performance 640mm by 430mm tunnel dual view checkpoint screening system.

Large parcel and small cargo: The 927DX and 928DX are High-Performance 1010mm by 1010mm tunnel dual view screening systems. The 927DX has a standard conveyor height, while the 928DX has a low conveyor height.  

Running Target and NARCScan algorithms, the 920DX, 927DX and 928DX are designed to assist operators with their efforts to detect a wide range of explosives and narcotic types in real time during the scanning process.

Operators can view images in Classic 4-color format as well as a proprietary Spectrum 4-color (SP4) option, tools that allow operators to more easily identify baggage and parcels that may require additional inspection.  This provides a more efficient throughput of passengers and baggage – vital in busy airport environments.

Each is also capable of Remote Status Monitoring and Remote Archive Review, allowing operators to view real-time or previously-captured images from a secondary workstation, providing an additional layer of image analysis, threat identification and enhanced security.

The ORION® series meets the requirements for use of x-ray systems outlined in ECAC Document 30, as well as in European Union regulations for aviation security, including EC No. 300/2008, EC Implementing Regulation 1998/2015 and update 815/2017, EC Implementing Decision 8005/2015 and update 3030/2017. With the TSA ACSTL qualification, the ORION® series can now be used by the Air Cargo industry in both Europe and America

“We are very excited that TSA has qualified these products,” said Mal Maginnis, President, Rapiscan Systems. “Our teams work extremely hard to create exceptional products which use state-of-the-art technology to provide reliable and effective high-speed screening.  We’re very proud that our work meets some of the world’s most rigorous performance standards.”

For more information on Rapiscan Systems and its full suite of security and scanning solutions, click here. 

Sanofi and GSK today announce that they have signed a letter of intent to enter into a collaboration to develop an adjuvanted vaccine for COVID-19, using innovative technology from both companies, to help address the ongoing pandemic.

Sanofi will contribute its S-protein COVID-19 antigen, which is based on recombinant DNA technology. This technology has produced an exact genetic match to proteins found on the surface of the virus, and the DNA sequence encoding this antigen has been combined into the DNA of the baculovirus expression platform, the basis of Sanofi’s licensed recombinant influenza product in the US.

GSK will contribute its proven pandemic adjuvant technology to the collaboration. The use of an adjuvant can be of particular importance in a pandemic situation since it may reduce the amount of vaccine protein required per dose, allowing more vaccine doses to be produced and therefore contributing to protect more people. 

Paul Hudson, CEO Sanofi, said: “As the world faces this unprecedented global health crisis, it is clear that no one company can go it alone.  That is why Sanofi is continuing to complement its expertise and resources with our peers, such as GSK, with the goal to create and supply sufficient quantities of vaccines that will help stop this virus.”

Emma Walmsley, CEO GSK, said: “This collaboration brings two of the world’s largest vaccines companies together. By combining our science and our technologies, we believe we can help accelerate the global effort to develop a vaccine to protect as many people as possible from COVID-19.”

The combination of a protein-based antigen together with an adjuvant, is well-established and used in a number of vaccines available today. An adjuvant is added to some vaccines to enhance the immune response, and has been shown to create a stronger and longer lasting immunity against infections than the vaccine alone. It can also improve the likelihood of delivering an effective vaccine that can be manufactured at scale. 

The companies plan to initiate phase I clinical trials in the second half of 2020 and, if successful and subject to regulatory considerations, aim to complete the development required for availability by the second half of 2021. 

As previously announced by Sanofi, development of the recombinant-based COVID-19 vaccine candidate is being supported through funding and a collaboration with the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), in the US. The companies plan to discuss funding support with other governments and global institutions prioritising global access.

BARDA Director, Rick A. Bright, Ph.D., said: “Strategic alliances among vaccine industry leaders are essential to make a coronavirus vaccine available as soon as possible. Development of the adjuvanted recombinant-based COVID-19 vaccine candidate holds the potential to lower the vaccine dose to provide vaccine to a greater number of people to end this pandemic, and help the world become better prepared or even prevent future coronavirus outbreaks.”

The companies have set up a Joint Collaboration Task Force, co-chaired by David Loew, Global Head of Vaccines, Sanofi and Roger Connor, President Vaccines, GSK. The taskforce will seek to mobilise resources from both companies to look for every opportunity to accelerate the development of the candidate vaccine.

Considering the extraordinary humanitarian and financial challenge of the pandemic, both companies believe that global access to COVID-19 vaccines is a priority and are committed to making any vaccine that is developed through the collaboration affordable to the public and through mechanisms that offer fair access for people in all countries.

This new collaboration marks a significant milestone in Sanofi’s and GSK’s ongoing contributions to help fight COVID-19. The companies have entered into a Material Transfer Agreement to enable them to start working together immediately.  Definitive terms of the collaboration are expected to be finalised over the next few weeks.

A revolutionary decontamination system is being installed at Camp Murray, WA, which will be able to clean and sterilize up to 80,000 N95 respirator masks every day. This system is being called an exciting breakthrough that could help solve the shortage of masks for health care professionals fighting the COVID-19 pandemic.

The process, called the Critical Care Decontamination System, uses four retrofitted shipping containers joined together, and so far, it’s the only one of its kind anywhere on the West Coast. 

The system- which was quickly invented and refined by the Ohio-based science and technology company Battelle- uses vaporized hydrogen peroxide and alcohol to clean and sanitize used masks that would have otherwise been tossed in biohazard bags after a single use. It received a rush “emergency” approval from the Food and Drug Administration after it was proven to be effective in sanitizing a single mask up to 20 times after use in contaminated conditions.

There are only four of them in the country now, and they’re expected to help or even end the shortage of masks for health care workers on the front lines of the COVID-19 pandemic. “The decontamination procedure is about 3 1/2 hours, followed by several hours of aeration to get to a level where staff can reenter that space,” said Will Richter, principal scientist at Battelle.

NTI, working with three major partners and a slew of experts from around the country, have launched COVID-local.org, a guide for state, city, and local leaders to answer these and other related questions. This tool offers a strategic decision-making framework for local officials as they struggle to reduce the near-term impact of the pandemic.

NTI is doing what they can to support leaders on the front lines of this pandemic. Would you like to learn more about the guide? Watch this recording of a live webinar that they hosted last week. Seattle Mayor Jenny Durkan, who has been on the frontlines of COVID-19 in Washington state, joined NTI Co-chairs Sam Nunn and Ernest J. Moniz, as well as NTI | bio lead Beth Cameron and partners from the Georgetown Center for Global Health Science and Security and the Center for Global Development to discuss COVID-local.org and responses to COVID-19.

During the webinar, Mayor Durkan shared actions that had helped in her city and told fellow leaders who joined the discussion: “If I had one word to people it would be: ACT. Act now, act boldly.”

This guide is informed by existing guidance from U.S. and global authorities, public health research findings, and lessons observed from countries that have been battling COVID-19 since January 2020. It is intended to complement, but not in any way supplant, advice and guidance from global, federal and local public health and other authorities.

NTI would also like your feedback on the the guide, to be incorporated as the pandemic contiunes. VIsit COVID-local.org to see the guide and find out more.