The Daily Dose: Contaminated turkey warning and OA pushback

Contaminated Turkey Warning: The CDC updated and renewed its warning regarding a multistage outbreak of Salmonella reading infections that have been linked to raw turkey products on the market. So far, 164 people from 35 states have fallen ill with 64 of them needing hospitalization. The contaminated turkey products have been traced to a single, common supplier but has not been identified.

Needs Improvement: Xinhua News, China’s state-run press agency, tossed their hat into the AI deep fake conversation with the introduction of a virtual news anchor. While it’s still a long way from being convincing, the field is growing by leaps and bounds. That’s without even mentioning believability is beside the point when the anchor will be disseminating government approved news. Does this mean news anchors will be the next high tech victims pushed into obsolescence?

Promising Cancer Drugs in the Pipeline: The annual Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer conference is underway in Washington D.C. Much anticipated data for Merck’s anti-LAG-3 candidate MK-4280 and anti-TIGIT drug MK7684 are still in early clinical stages but have shown promise, particularly acceptable safety profiles. Immunotep’s anti-LAG-3 Drug, eftilagimod alpha has started phase 2 trials and will be presenting as well.

The Future of Organ Donation: 3D printed organs may still be a ways off but a printed cornea might not be. In October, bioprinting startup Precise BIo announced that it was moving forward with its research. According to the company, “We plan to put our printers in eye banks. Physicians can use tissues that are printed, not taken from donors.”

The Empire Strikes Back: Hundreds of reactionary scientists are pushing back against Plan S, a plan launched by 11 of Europe’s major funders, to ceased funding hybrid journals that draw revenue from fees incurred in order to provide Open Access to research and from subscriptions. According to the statement, “Effectively Plan S would block access to exactly those journals that work with a valuable and rigorous peer-review system of high quality.” Maybe more Open Access studies into bias and the inefficiencies of the peer-review process are in order then?

IMAGE SOURCE: Creative Commons

The Scientific Inquirer needs your support. Please visit our Patreon page and discover ways that you can make a difference.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: