HHS flags mask issue with fogging glasses in innovation challenge

 Like much of the rest of the world, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has just about had it with mask-induced acne and eczema, glasses fog, indecipherable conversations and stifled breathing.

In a last-ditch attempt to solve these societal ills, HHS’ Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority—known as BARDA, the specialized agency that typically takes on viral outbreaks, bioterrorist attacks and nuclear incidents—has put out the call for new mask designs that battle both discomfort and coronavirus-carrying droplets, with $500,000 in prizes.

With help from the equipment-certifying National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), the “Mask Innovation Challenge” is now accepting submissions for what can only be described as a miracle in face mask form.

They must be cheap and simple to mass-produce, while also being widely accessible and effective in blocking transmission of COVID-19. Bonus points go to those that solve the challenges of unreadable facial expressions, intelligible speech, incompatibility with glasses, irritating contact dermatitis, discomfort caused by prolonged wear and the feeling of being suffocated.

After the submission period closes April 21, the creative geniuses found to have invented “tomorrow’s mask” will move on to a “Shark Tank”-style pitch competition. Up to 10 finalists will receive up to $10,000 each, plus access to BARDA’s scientific expertise to build their prototypes.

Those finalists will then advance to testing in NIOSH labs, and up to five of the best designs will split a $400,000 grand prize.

“We know that properly and consistently worn face masks help reduce the spread of SARS-CoV-2 and other respiratory infections, but many people are reluctant to wear them for a variety of reasons,” Nikki Bratcher-Bowman, HHS’ acting assistant secretary for preparedness and response, said in a release. “With this mask challenge, we want to get people across the country involved in developing new masks that are both effective and comfortable.”

Crowdsourcing has been a popular method for creating masks that people will actually wear. In December, the XPrize Foundation closed a similar competition, which called on inventors between the ages of 15 and 24 to design “the next generation of face masks.”

The winning design, which was awarded $500,000 and was designed by a team of students from Arizona State University, features adjustable elastic straps around the ears and chin, an outer mesh layer that can be customized with different colors and patterns, and a dual-chamber design separating exhaled air from the face, preventing fogging and overheating.

https://www.fiercebiotech.com/medtech/still-looking-for-perfect-face-mask-hhs-new-mask-innovation-challenge-too

Biden's Infrastructure Package Is Designed to Boost Unions

 President Biden's $2.3 trillion plan to invest in infrastructure, clean energy and caregiving over the coming decade would be a boon for construction workers, truck drivers, electricians and home health aides.

Both critics and supporters of the initiative say it will also benefit another group: labor unions.

Some business groups, employment law experts and Republican lawmakers say provisions aimed at bolstering union membership and expanding labor protections could increase costs, limit the number of projects that can be completed with the proposed funding and reduce the gains in economic growth.

For Mr. Biden, those provisions are key to ensuring the package creates millions of "good-paying union jobs of the future." In 2020, just 10.8% of U.S. workers belonged to unions, half the share in 1983, but those workers earned a dollar for every 84 cents earned by nonunion workers.

"The president has made very clear that he wants to be the most labor-friendly president in history, and the steps that he's taking in many different ways are designed to accomplish that," said Michael Lotito, co-chairman of the Workplace Policy Institute at Littler Mendelson, an employment law firm based in San Francisco.

The Democratic administration's plan includes spending on an array of industries over eight years. The proposal includes $621 billion to modernize transportation infrastructure, $300 billion to boost the manufacturing industry, $213 billion on retrofitting and building affordable housing and $100 billion to expand broadband access, among other investments.

Many of the new jobs are likely to be union positions, because the plan targets sectors that already have high levels of union participation, said Greg Regan, president of the Transportation Trades Department, a coalition of unions in industries such as aviation and rail transit.

Even within those industries, a minority of workers are union members, including 20.6% of utility workers, 17% of transportation and warehousing workers and 14.3% of telecommunications workers, according to 2020 Labor Department data.

"There is a very glaring need for this type of big investment, and if done with the right policies -- in many ways, existing programs already have them -- that will not only improve our transportation systems across the board, but also build union jobs and middle-class jobs," Mr. Regan said.

Bill Spriggs, chief economist at the AFL-CIO, said implementation of the package, particularly for construction projects, should gravitate toward unions if the goal is to promote racial equity -- a stated priority for the Biden administration. Black workers are more likely to be represented by a union than other racial groups, according to Labor Department data.

The overall fall in union membership is a sign of the decline in power of organized labor in the U.S. and reflects slower employment growth in traditionally more unionized industries, such as manufacturing, transportation and utilities, compared with healthcare and other services.

Economists have pointed to the decline as a reason why wage growth in the U.S. was relatively soft in the years leading up to the coronavirus pandemic, despite low unemployment and steady hiring. Median weekly pay for full-time union members was $1,144 last year versus $958 for nonmembers, the Labor Department said.

Mr. Regan said provisions in the package -- such as a measure that seeks to have more goods shipped on U.S.-flag vessels staffed by American workers -- would also be a boon for union positions.

The package proposes tying federal investments to prevailing wages, echoing existing law that requires federal contractors and subcontractors on public works projects to offer workers pay commensurate with local wages.

It also includes a provision that would require employers benefiting from the plan's investments "to follow strong labor standards and remain neutral when their employees seek to organize a union and bargain collectively."

"It's not just about getting people off the unemployment rolls, it's about getting people in good-paying jobs so they can raise their families," Labor Secretary Marty Walsh said in an interview with The Wall Street Journal on Friday.

Those provisions could benefit other sectors targeted in the proposal where union membership is slimmer, including among caregivers. Mr. Biden's plan would allocate $400 billion in funding for long-term care for the elderly and disabled.

Leslie Frane, executive vice president of Service Employees International Union, estimated the caregiving provision could create close to a million new jobs and improve the jobs of current home care workers, a total of 3.2 million jobs in 2020, according to the Labor Department. Those workers are the lowest paid among healthcare sector employees, with a median wage of $28,060 last year.

Low pay and lack of benefits are two reasons the rapidly growing sector faces a labor shortage, said Ms. Frane, who added the Biden plan would make it easier to unionize and subsequently attract new hires. The changes would especially benefit women and women of color, who make up the majority of home care workers, she added.

There are potential drawbacks to the labor provisions, detractors said. They will likely raise project costs, meaning the government can't build as much for a given dollar of spending, said University of Missouri professor Aaron Hedlund, who served as chief domestic economist for former Republican President Donald Trump's Council of Economic Advisers.

"If we don't build as much, that means we aren't going to get as much economic benefit out of it," Mr. Hedlund said.

Mr. Lotito said nonunion contractors may also be wary of bidding for projects that could open them up to a potential unionizing effort among their workers. "The big winners here are the union-building trades," he said.

The package also would include legislation that would make it easier for workers to unionize and toughen enforcement of the National Labor Relations Act. The bill, known as the Pro Act, passed the House on a near-party-line vote with nearly all Republicans voting against it and faces an uncertain future in the evenly divided Senate.

Many GOP lawmakers say the Pro Act would stifle business and empower union leaders. While most Democrats support it, some centrist Democrats, such as Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Sens. Kyrsten Sinema and Mark Kelly of Arizona, haven't signed on as co-sponsors.

The Biden package could also create some frictions in the labor market due to mismatches between the skills required for some of the new jobs and the skills of unemployed workers. The White House has proposed $100 billion in new training programs to help bridge the gap.

Ken Simonson, chief economist for the Associated General Contractors of America, said it was unlikely the package -- which could take most of the year to make its way through Congress -- would run up against an immediate worker shortage.

While construction employment hasn't fully recovered last year's losses, job growth in the sector has been much stronger than in most other industries, adding more than 100,000 jobs last month, and some construction firms report labor shortages. Training will be essential, Mr. Simonson said. For example, there are a limited number of tower crane operators who would be able to work on projects such as wind turbines.

It could take quite a while to find enough workers to do some of the jobs to be created by the package, Mr. Simonson said. "On the other hand, we think there will be a fairly long lead time to actually get these projects launched."

https://www.marketscreener.com/news/latest/Biden-s-Infrastructure-Package-Is-Designed-to-Boost-Unions--32882882/

Medicaid Expansion Under Reconsideration in Red States

 Some GOP-led states that previously declined to expand Medicaid are reconsidering that decision now that the $1.9 trillion pandemic-relief package has made billions of dollars available to enlarge the program.

The legislation passed by Congress last month boosts federal funding for two years to states that expand Medicaid, more than covering a state's cost for increasing eligibility for the program, which is currently used by almost 79 million low-income and disabled people.

The availability of more federal funds is putting pressure on Republican leaders in some of the 12 states that haven't expanded the program.

In Georgia, advocacy groups such as Cover Georgia recently ran ads urging Gov. Brian Kemp to fully expand Medicaid because the state would receive more than $1 billion in new federal funds over two years. The governor "has already rolled out significant reforms aimed at expanding access," according to a statement from Mr. Kemp's office.

Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey's office has signaled she is open to discussing the funding for expansion.

A bill expanding Medicaid recently advanced in Wyoming. Gov. Mark Gordon "is still considering the long-term implications of the bill, but he understands the opportunities before Wyoming, including the new federal funding," his spokesman said.

The interest is raising hopes in the Biden administration, which is looking to expand Medicaid following the Trump administration's initiatives to curtail the program's spending. But the push to reboot Medicaid could falter because the administration is also rescinding Trump-era policies, such as Medicaid work requirements, which GOP-led states have sought in exchange for expansion, according to conservatives.

Biden administration officials declined to comment.

"The Biden administration is being pretty shortsighted here," said Brian Blase, who developed health policy as a special assistant in the Trump administration. "Many conservative states are concerned about federal overreach."

The Biden administration told Arkansas and New Hampshire last month that it would be withdrawing federal approval for their work requirements, which generally mandate that beneficiaries log 20 or more hours on a job, look for work, perform community service or take educational classes to get their Medicaid benefits. Both states expanded Medicaid but added the requirements on some beneficiaries.

The rescinded agreements are a blow to other Republican-led states that want work requirements or more local control of Medicaid as part of any future expansion.

Some Tennessee lawmakers who have opposed expansion have said they are open to discussing it now because of the new funding.

But they want the Biden administration to preserve a Trump administration agreement that lets Tennessee convert the open-ended funding for the program to a block grant, which would essentially cap the federal funding.

Democrats say the change would harm beneficiaries, while Republicans argue it gives the state more autonomy over Medicaid spending.

Tennessee Lt. Gov. Randy McNally, who is also speaker of the Republican-controlled state Senate, "believes the proposal is one that should be studied. While the broad strokes have been released, the details still need to be fleshed out," according to a statement from his spokesman.

The spokesman added: "Before the state can make any decision about how to proceed, more information about what flexibility would be offered and how an expansion would interact with our block grant is needed."

A spokesman for Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee, also a Republican, didn't respond to an email seeking comment.

The Biden administration released information in a recent call with state leaders about the total federal funding for expansion that is now available.

Under the $1.9 trillion relief package, states that hadn't expanded when the bill passed would be eligible for a 5-percentage-point increase in their traditional federal funding match for Medicaid for two years. States can opt to expand at any time.

That amount is in addition to the 6.2-percentage-point increase in the match rate provided under previous Covid-19 pandemic legislation.

Texas stands to get more $3.9 billion under the funding boost over two years and could see more than two million uninsured people become eligible for coverage, according to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Some state lawmakers who would have to approve any expansion have introduced bills to enlarge Medicaid, although the effort faces a tough road to passage, according to some Republicans.

Florida would reap more than $2.5 billion and expansion could provide healthcare to more than one million people, according to CMS.

"The governor remains opposed to the expansion of Medicaid in Florida," said Cody McCloud, a spokesman for Gov. Ron DeSantis.

Some Republican state leaders have also opted not to enlarge Medicaid because they oppose the Affordable Care Act, which set up Medicaid expansion. Others are concerned that federal expansion funding could eventually be reduced and leave states shouldering more costs.

Medicaid advocates are planning to push the remaining 12 states to expand Medicaid, saying it's essential for lowering the U.S. uninsured rate and improving healthcare.

"This is a change moment in history," said Joan Alker, executive director and co-founder of Georgetown University's Center for Children and Families, an advocacy group. "A lot of things are happening, and this is a very fast-moving environment. Having just lived through a pandemic, it's even harder now to argue against expansion."

https://www.marketscreener.com/news/latest/Medicaid-Expansion-Is-Under-Reconsideration-in-Red-States--32882953/

Amazon acknowledges issue of drivers urinating in bottles in apology

 

Amazon.com Inc has apologized to U.S. Representative Mark Pocan, admitting to scoring an "own goal" in its initial denial of his suggestion that its drivers were sometimes forced to urinate in bottles during their delivery rounds.

"We know that drivers can and do have trouble finding restrooms because of traffic or sometimes rural routes, and this has been especially the case during Covid when many public restrooms have been closed," the company said in a blog post.

Its admission came a week after the Democrat criticised Amazon's working conditions, saying in a tweet: "Paying workers $15/hr doesn't make you a 'progressive workplace' when you union-bust & make workers urinate in water bottles."

Amazon initially issued a denial, saying in a tweet: "You don't really believe the peeing in bottles thing, do you? If that were true, nobody would work for us." But it subsequently walked back those comments.

"This was an own goal, we're unhappy about it, and we owe an apology to Representative Pocan," Amazon said in its blog post, adding that its previous response only referred to staff at its warehouses or fulfillment centers.

The company said the issue was industry-wide and it would look for solutions, without specifying what these might be.

Amazon's apology comes at a time when workers at an Alabama warehouse are waiting for a vote count that could result in the online retailer's first unionized facility in the United States and mark a watershed moment for organized labor.

Amazon has long discouraged attempts among its more than 800,000 U.S. employees to organize. Allegations by many workers of a grueling or unsafe workplace have turned unionizing the company into a key goal for the U.S. labor movement.

https://www.marketscreener.com/quote/stock/THE-WAREHOUSE-GROUP-LIMIT-6491364/news/Amazon-acknowledges-issue-of-drivers-urinating-in-bottles-in-apology-to-Rep-Pocan-32882883/

NY’s elderly COVID-19 vaccination rate lags

 New York lags way behind the rest of the country when it comes to inoculating people over age 65 against the coronavirus, according to the latest CDC statistics.

The Empire State ranks 44th in the country on the percentage of folks over 65 who have gotten at least one COVID-19 vaccination shot, according to CDC data.

Across the country, older people have been given vaccination priority, and 73 percent of Americans over 65 have now received at least one dose.

But in NY, the number of seniors with one dose under their sleeves is just 67 percent.

New York is doing a much better job at immunizing residents ages 18 to 65. The state ranks 9th in the union on that metric.

New York also comes in 24th out of 50 states for vaccinating its total adult population, the federal data shows.

The contrast is cause for concern, public policy experts contend.

“The disparity suggests that New York’s vaccination policies and procedures are giving younger people an advantage relative to other states,” Bill Hammond, Senior Fellow for Health Policy at Empire Center, said in a press release Friday.

The think tank speculates that the Cuomo administration’s vaccine prioritization of essential workers in December led to the disparity, as high-risk jobs like hospital workers tend to be filled with younger people.

“This may relate to the number of younger New Yorkers who were competing for limited slots at any given time, and the process for finding and scheduling an appointment, which gives an edge to the computer-savvy,” Hammond said.

The only older people who could get initially get a vaccination shot when they first became available were residents of long-term care facilities, under Albany’s guidelines.

As of Tuesday, every New Yorker in the state aged 16 and over will be able to get vaccinated.

https://nypost.com/2021/04/02/nys-elderly-covid-19-vaccination-rate-lags-behind/

Common Meds Contain Animal Byproducts – No FDA Regs to Alert Patients

More physicians and pharmacists are advocating for patients to be made aware of animal byproducts contained in common medications, according to new research in the Journal of Osteopathic Medicine. Common medications, including widely used blood thinners and hormones, are often derived from animal byproducts and prescribed without consulting the patient about their beliefs.

“Patients deserve to know what their medications are made of, yet this information is rarely shared,” said Sara Reed, student doctor at Lincoln Memorial University (LMU) DeBusk College of Osteopathic Medicine and an author of the paper. “Putting the patient first means communicating with them about the medicine recommended for their care, and in some cases, prescribing an alternative option.”

Common Animal-derived Medications

Heparinoids are a class of medication primarily derived from pigs. These drugs are routinely used as a blood thinner to prevent blood clots and are given in many settings, including following surgery, a heart attack, or to prevent the further development of clots.

Also common are conjugated estrogens, which may be used to treat moderate to severe hot flashes and other symptoms of menopause. They are equine-derived hormones.

“Generally, patients who are prescribed various hormone treatments may want to consult their physician regarding the contents,” said Mary Beth Babos, PharmD, professor of pharmacology at LMU, and lead author of the paper. “For example, there are no completely animal-free oral thyroid hormones on the market.”

Existing Guidelines

While the U.S. does not have formal recommendations, other nations have published guidelines to address pharmaceuticals of animal origin. The United Kingdom’s first guidelines were published in 2004 and Australia’s guidelines were published in 2007 and updated again in 2019. However, guidelines from the FDA remain unavailable.

Cultural Competency

Because some patients adhere to religious doctrine that recommends avoiding certain animal byproducts, the study authors reviewed prior medical research to identify the stated positions of leadership of the major world religions. According to their findings, many religions discourage the use of products derived from animals when not required to save human life.

• Jewish and Muslim leaders agree that the use of products derived from pigs—normally prohibited by both religions—are acceptable only when needed to protect human life.
• The Hindu Council of Australia does not consider bovine products, including medications derived from cows, acceptable.
• Sikh leaders and leaders of the Hindu Vaishnav sect object to the use of medication or surgical dressing derived from animal sources, which is waived in emergency situations or in routine treatment where no alternative exists.
• Many Buddhists of the Theravada sect and Christians of the Seventh Day Adventist sect who practice vegetarianism as part of their faith may individually reject animal-derived medical products.
• Leaders of the Jehovah’s Witness sect emphasized that adherents to this faith would reject blood-derived products.

“In the absence of governmental guidance, we hope this research will help physicians and prescribers start the conversation with patients about whether they accept animal-derived products,” said Reed. “Ultimately, it is the patient who should determine if a medication is appropriate for their lifestyle.”

Reference: “Animal-derived medications: cultural considerations and available alternatives” by
Mary Beth Babos, Joseph D. Perry, Sara A. Reed, Sandra Bugariu, Skyler Hill-Norby, Mary Jewell Allen, Tara K. Corwell, Jade E. Funck, Kaiser F. Kabir, Katherine A. Sullivan, Amber L. Watson and K. Kelli Wethington, 8 March 2021, Journal of Osteopathic Medicine.

DOI: 10.1515/jom-2020-0052

https://scitechdaily.com/common-medications-contain-animal-byproducts-no-fda-regulations-to-alert-patients/

In Severe COVID-19, Cytokine 'Hurricane' in Lung Attracts Damaging Inflammatory Cells

 A cytokine “hurricane” centered in the lungs drives respiratory symptoms in patients with severe COVID-19, a new study by immunologists at Columbia University Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons suggests.

Two cytokines, CCL2 and CCL3, appear critical in luring immune cells, called monocytes, from the bloodstream into the lungs, where the cells launch an overaggressive attempt to clear the virus. 

Targeting these specific cytokines with inhibitors may calm the immune reaction and prevent lung tissue damage. Currently, one drug that blocks immune responses to CCL2 is being studied in clinical trials of patients with severe COVID-19.

Survivors of severe COVID-19, the study also found, had a greater abundance of antiviral T cells in their lungs than patients who died, suggesting these T cells may be critical in helping patients control the virus and preventing a runaway immune response.

The study, published online on March 12, 2021, in the journal Immunity, is one of the first to examine the immune response as it unfolds in real time inside the lungs and the bloodstream in patients who are hospitalized with severe COVID-19. 

Treatments for Severe COVID-19 Needed

In patients with severe COVID-19, the lungs are damaged, and patients need supplemental oxygen. The risk of mortality is over 40%.

“We wanted to look at the immune response in the lung in severe disease, because it’s those responses that are either protecting the organ or causing the damage,” says Donna Farber, PhD, professor of microbiology & immunology and the George H. Humphreys II Professor of Surgical Sciences in the Department of Surgery, who led the study. “Even though individuals are getting vaccinated, severe COVID-19 remains a significant risk for certain individuals and we need to find ways to treat people who develop severe disease.”

Numerous COVID studies have focused on identifying immune responses in blood; a few have looked at airway samples from a single time point or from autopsies. Few studies have examined the immune response to SARS-CoV-2 in the respiratory tract as the response unfolds, because obtaining such samples from patients is challenging. But the Columbia researchers learned several years ago that they can retrieve respiratory immune cells from the routine daily saline washes of the endotracheal tubes that connect intubated patients to a ventilator.

Paired Airway and Blood Samples Show Complete Immune Response in Real Time

In this new study, the researchers collected respiratory immune cells from 15 COVID-19 patients who had been intubated. Each patient spent four to seven days on a ventilator, and airway and blood samples were obtained daily.

All the samples were examined for the presence of cytokines and different types of immune cells. For four of the patients, the researchers measured gene expression in every immune cell to get a detailed picture of the cells’ activities.

“It seems obvious that the immune response in the respiratory tract would drive a disease caused by a respiratory virus, but we didn’t know what the processes were and how they worked together with systematic responses,” Farber says. “What’s new here is that we’ve been able to simultaneously sample both the respiratory tract and the blood over time and put together a more complete picture of the responses involved and how local and systemic responses work together.”

Two Cytokines Appear to Drive Lung Damage

Though the researchers found elevated levels of many cytokines in the blood, many more types of cytokines were present in the lungs and at highly elevated levels. 

“People refer to patients experiencing a cytokine storm in the blood, but what we’re seeing in the lungs is on another level,” Farber says. “The immune cells in the lung went into overdrive releasing these cytokines.”

No cytokines were found in the blood that weren’t also found in the lung, suggesting that the signals causing the severe inflammation are driven by lung cytokines rather than systemic ones. 

“It has been suggested that systemic cytokines are driving severe disease, but our results suggest that inflammatory processes that perpetuate disease are coming from the lungs,” Farber says.

CCL2 and CCL3 cytokines released by the lung appeared to be particularly important in severe disease, because the monocytes drawn into the lung expressed receptors for these molecules. “Normally, these cells never make it to the airway, but in severe COVID patients, they accumulate throughout the lung and clog up the alveolar spaces,” Farber says.

The findings also may explain why trials of other cytokine inhibitors, including tocilizumab, have shown variable efficacy. Tocilizumab inhibits the cytokine IL-6, which is elevated in patients with severe COVID but does not appear to be a major component of inflammation in the lung, Farber says. 

Survivors Have High Level of T Cells in Lung 

Of the study’s 15 patients, eight died and all survivors were under 60 years of age.

The lungs of those survivors had significantly more T cells, which are mobilized to the lung to clear virus, and a lower proportion of inflammatory macrophages and monocytes.

In general, younger people have a more robust T cell response while older people have a higher baseline level of inflammatory cells; both factors may help explain why older patients with severe COVID fare worse.

The cell differences between patients who lived and those who died could potentially lead to a way to predict which patients are more likely to develop severe disease, although the differences are only apparent in the lung, not the blood. Importantly, the predictive value of airway immune cell frequencies was better than standard clinical measurements of lung and organ damage.

“Our next step is to try to find a more accessible biomarker that predicts severe COVID so we can try to give treatments earlier to patients who are most at risk,” Farber says.

“Understanding the immune response in severe COVID is really critical at this point,” Farber adds, “because we could see this again with the next coronavirus outbreak. This is what coronaviruses do at their worst; this is their M.O.”

Reference: “Longitudinal profiling of respiratory and systemic immune responses reveals myeloid cell-driven lung inflammation in severe COVID-19” by Peter A. Szabo, Pranay Dogra, Joshua I. Gray, Steven B. Wells, Thomas J. Connors, Stuart P. Weisberg, Izabela Krupska, Rei Matsumoto, Maya M.L. Poon, Emma Idzikowski, Sinead E. Morris, Chloé Pasin, Andrew J. Yates, Amy Ku, Michael Chait, Julia Davis-Porada, Xinzheng V. Guo, Jing Zhou, Matthew Steinle, Sean Mackay, Anjali Saqi, Matthew R. Baldwin, Peter A. Sims and Donna L. Farber, 11 March 2021, Immunity.
DOI: 10.1016/j.immuni.2021.03.005

Other authors (all from Columbia unless noted): Peter A. Szabo, Pranay Dogra, Joshua I. Gray, Steven B. Wells, Thomas J. Connors, Stuart P. Weisberg, Izabela Krupska, Rei Matsumoto, Maya M.L. Poon, Emma Idzikowski, Sinead E. Morris, Chloé Pasin, Andrew J. Yates, Amy Ku, Michael Chait, Julia Davis-Porada, Xinzheng V. Guo, Jing Zhou (IsoPlexis Corporation), Matthew Steinle (IsoPlexis), Sean Mackay (IsoPlexis), Anjali Saqi, Matthew R. Baldwin, and Peter A. Sims.

The research was supported by the U.S. National Institutes of Health (grants AI128949, AI06697, R01AI093870, K23A1141686, and K08DK122130); a Chan Zuckerberg Initiative COVID-19 grant; a CRI-Irvington Postdoctoral Fellowship; and a Canadian Institutes of Health Research Fellowship. Research reported in this publication was performed in the Human Immune Monitoring Core, the Columbia Single Cell Analysis Core, and the Sulzberger Columbia Genome Center, which are supported by an NCI cancer center support grant P30CA013696.

Jing Zhou, Matthew Steinle, and Sean Mackay are employees of IsoPlexis.

https://scitechdaily.com/in-severe-covid-19-cytokine-hurricane-in-lung-attracts-damaging-inflammatory-cells/