John Duah, Auburn University

A cluster of people talking on social media about their mysterious rashes. A sudden die-off of birds at a nature preserve. A big bump in patients showing up to a city’s hospital emergency rooms.

These are the kinds of events that public health officials are constantly on the lookout for as they watch for new disease threats.

Health emergencies can range from widespread infectious disease outbreaks to natural disasters and even acts of terrorism. The scope, timing or unexpected nature of these events can overwhelm routine health care capacities.

I am a public health expert with a background in strengthening health systems, infectious disease surveillance and pandemic preparedness.

Rather than winging it when an unusual health event crops up, health officials take a systematic approach. There are structures in place to collect and analyze data to guide their response. Public health surveillance is foundational for figuring out what’s going on and hopefully squashing any outbreak before it spirals out of control.

Tracking day by day

Indicator-based surveillance is the routine, systematic collection of specific health data from established reporting systems. It monitors trends over time; the goal is to detect anomalies or patterns that may signal a widespread or emerging public health threat.

Hospitals are legally required to report data on admissions and positive test results for specific diseases, such as measles or polio, to local health departments. The local health officials then compile the pertinent data and share it with state or national public health agencies, such as the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

When doctors diagnose a positive case of influenza, for example, they report it through the National Respiratory and Enteric Virus Surveillance System, which tracks respiratory and gastrointestinal illnesses. A rise in the number of cases could be a warning sign of a new outbreak. Likewise, the National Syndromic Surveillance Program collects anonymized data from emergency departments about patients who report symptoms such as fever, cough or respiratory distress.

Public health officials keep an eye on wastewater as well. A variety of pathogens shed by infected people, who may be asymptomatic, can be identified in sewage. The CDC created the National Wastewater Surveillance System to help track the virus that causes COVID-19. Since the pandemic, it’s expanded in some areas to monitor additional pathogens, including influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and norovirus. Wastewater surveillance adds another layer of data, allowing health officials to catch potential outbreaks in the community, even when many infected individuals show no symptoms and may not seek medical care.

Having these surveillance systems in place allows health experts to detect early signs of possible outbreaks and gives them time to plan and respond effectively.

Watching for anything outside the norm

Event-based surveillance watches in real time for anything that could indicate the start of an outbreak.

This can look like health officials tracking rumors, news articles or social media mentions of unusual illnesses or sudden deaths. Or it can be emergency room reports of unusual spikes in numbers of patients showing up with specific symptoms.

Local health care workers, community leaders and the public all support this kind of public health surveillance when they report unexpected health events through hotlines and online forms or just call, text or email their public health department. Local health workers can assess the information and escalate it to state or national authorities.

Public health officials have their ears to the ground in these various ways simultaneously. When they suspect the start of an outbreak, a number of teams spring into action, deploying different, coordinated responses.

Collecting samples for more analysis

Once event-based surveillance has picked up an unusual report or a sudden pattern of illness, health officials try to gather medical samples to get more information about what might be going on. They may focus on people, animals or specific locations, depending on the suspected source. For example, during an avian flu outbreak, officials take swabs from birds, both live and dead, and blood samples from people who have been exposed.

Health workers collect material ranging from nose or throat swabs, fecal, blood or tissue samples, and water and soil samples. Back in specialized laboratories, technicians analyze the samples, trying to identify a specific pathogen, determine whether it is contagious and evaluate how it might spread. Ultimately, scientists are trying to figure out the potential impact on public health.

Finding people who may have been exposed

Once an outbreak is detected, the priority quickly shifts to containment to prevent further spread. Public health officials turn into detectives, working to identify people who may have had direct contact with a known infected person. This process is called contact tracing.

Often, contact tracers work backward from a positive laboratory confirmation of the index case – that is, the first person known to be infected with a particular pathogen. Based on interviews with the patient and visiting places they had been, the local health department will reach out to people who may have been exposed. Health workers can then provide guidance about how to monitor potential symptoms, arrange testing or advise about isolating for a set amount of time to prevent further spread.

Contact tracing played a pivotal role during the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, helping health departments monitor possible cases and take immediate action to protect public health. By focusing on people who had been in close contact with a confirmed case, public health agencies could break the chain of transmission and direct critical resources to those who were affected.

Though contact tracing is labor- and resource-intensive, it is a highly effective method of stopping outbreaks before they become unmanageable. In order for contact tracing to be effective, though, the public has to cooperate and comply with public health measures.

Stopping an outbreak before it’s a pandemic

Ultimately, public health officials want to keep as many people as possible from getting sick. Strategies to try to contain an outbreak include isolating patients with confirmed cases, quarantining those who have been exposed and, if necessary, imposing travel restrictions. For cases involving animal-to-human transmission, such as bird flu, containment measures may also include strict protocols on farms to prevent further spread.

Health officials use predictive models and data analysis tools to anticipate spread patterns and allocate resources effectively. Hospitals can streamline infection control based on these forecasts, while health care workers receive timely updates and training in response protocols. This process ensures that everyone is informed and ready to act to maximize public safety.

No one knows what the next emerging disease will be. But public health workers are constantly scanning the horizon for threats and ready to jump into action.

John Duah, Assistant Professor of Health Services Administration, Auburn University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Vinny Negi, University of Pittsburgh

Diabetes develops when the body fails to manage its blood glucose levels. One form of diabetes causes the body to not produce insulin at all. Called Type 1 diabetes, or T1D, this autoimmune disease happens when the body’s defense system mistakes its own insulin-producing cells as foreign and kills them. On average, T1D can lead patients to lose an average of 32 years of healthy life.

Current treatment for T1D involves lifelong insulin injections. While effective, patients taking insulin risk developing low blood glucose levels, which can cause symptoms such as shakiness, irritability, hunger, confusion and dizziness. Severe cases can result in seizures or unconsciousness. Real-time blood glucose monitors and injection devices can help avoid low blood sugar levels by controlling insulin release, but they don’t work for some patients.

For these patients, a treatment called islet transplantation can help better control blood glucose by giving them both new insulin-producing cells as well as cells that prevent glucose levels from falling too low. However, it is limited by donor availability and the need to use immunosuppressive drugs. Only about 10% of T1D patients are eligible for islet transplants.

In my work as a diabetes researcher, my colleagues and I have found that making islets from stem cells can help overcome transplantation challenges.

History of islet transplantation

Islet transplantation for Type 1 diabetes was FDA approved in 2023 after more than a century of investigation.

Insulin-producing cells, also called beta cells, are located in regions of the pancreas called islets of Langerhans. They are present in clusters of cells that produce other hormones involved in metabolism, such as glucagon, which increases blood glucose levels; somatostatin, which inhibits insulin and glucagon; and ghrelin, which signals hunger. Anatomist Paul Langerhans discovered islets in 1869 while studying the microscopic anatomy of the pancreas, observing that these cell clusters stained distinctly from other cells.

The road to islet transplantation has faced many hurdles since pathologist Gustave-Édouard Laguesse first speculated about the role islets play in hormone production in the late 19th century. In 1893, researchers attempted to treat a 13-year-old boy dying of diabetes with a sheep pancreas transplant. While they saw a slight improvement in blood glucose levels, the boy died three days after the procedure.

Interest in islet transplantation was renewed in 1972, when scientist Paul E. Lacy successfully transplanted islets in a diabetic rat. After that, many research groups tried islet transplantation in people, with no or limited success.

In 1999, transplant surgeon James Shapiro and his team successfully transplanted islets in seven patients in Edmonton, Canada, by transplanting a large number of islets from two to three donors at once and using immunosuppressive drugs. Through the Edmonton protocol, these patients were able to manage their diabetes without insulin for a year. By 2012, over 1,800 patients underwent islet transplants based on this technique, and about 90% survived through seven years of follow-up. The first FDA-approved islet transplant therapy is based on the Edmonton protocol.

Stem cells as a source of islets

Islet transplantation is now considered a minor surgery, where islets are injected into a vein in the liver using a catheter. As simple as it may seem, there are many challenges associated with the procedure, including its high cost and a limited availability of donor islets. Transplantation also requires lifelong use of immunosuppressive drugs that allow the foreign islets to live and function in the body. But the use of immunosuppressants also increases the risk of other infections.

To overcome these challenges, researchers are looking into using stem cells to create an unlimited source of islets.

There are two kinds of stem cells scientists are using for islet transplants: embryonic stem cells, or ESCs, and induced pluripotent stem cells, or iPSCs. Both types can mature into islets in the lab.

Each has benefits and drawbacks.

There are ethical concerns regarding ESCs, since they are obtained from dead human embryos. Transplanting ESCs would still require immunosuppressive drugs, limiting their use. Thus, researchers are working to either encapsulate or make mutations in ESC islets to protect them from the body’s immune system.

Conversely, iPSCs are obtained from skin, blood or fat cells of the patient undergoing transplantation. Since the transplant involves the patient’s own cells, it bypasses the need for immunosuppressive drugs. But the cost of generating iPSC islets for each patient is a major barrier.

Stem cell islet challenges

While iPSCs could theoretically avoid the need for immunosuppressive drugs, this method still needs to be tested in the clinic.

T1D patients who have genetic mutations causing the disease currently cannot use iPSC islets, since the cells that would be taken to create stem cells may also carry the same disease-causing mutation of their islet cells. Many available gene-editing tools could potentially remove those mutations and generate functional iPSC islets.

In addition to the challenge of genetic tweaking, price is a major issue for islet transplantation. Transplanting islets made from stem cells is more expensive than insulin therapy because of higher manufacturing costs. Efforts to scale up the process and make it more cost effective include creating biobanks for iPSC matching. This would allow iPSC islets to be used for more than one patient, reducing costs by avoiding the need to generate freshly modified islets for each patient. Embryonic stem cell islets have a similar advantage, as the same batch of cells can be used for all patients.

There is also a risk of tumors forming from these stem cell islets after transplantation. So far, lab studies on rodents and clinical trials in people have rarely shown any cancer. This suggests the chances of these cells forming a tumor are low.

That being said, many rounds of research and development are required before stem cell islets can be used in the clinic. It is a laborious trek, but I believe a few more optimizations can help researchers beat diabetes and save lives.

Article updated to clarify that Type 1 diabetes causes the body to not produce insulin.

Vinny Negi, Research Scientist in Endocrinology and Metabolism, University of Pittsburgh

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Nicholas Money, Miami University

Mold growth in your home can be unsettling. Blackened spots and dusty patches on the walls are signs that something is amiss, but it is important to distinguish between mold growth that is a nuisance and mold growth that may be harmful.

There are more than 1 million species of fungi. Some are used to produce important medications. Others can cause life-threatening infections when they grow in the body.

Microscopic fungi that grow in homes are a problem because they can trigger asthma and other allergies. In my work as a fungal biologist, however, I have yet to encounter robust scientific evidence to support claims that indoor molds are responsible for other serious illnesses.

What are molds?

Molds are microscopic fungi that grow on everything. This may sound like an exaggeration, but pick any material and a mold will be there, from the leaves on your houseplant to the grain in your pantry and every pinch of soil on the ground. They form splotches on the outside of buildings, grow in crevices on concrete paths and roads, and even live peacefully on our bodies.

Molds are important players in life on Earth. They’re great recyclers that fertilize the planet with fresh nutrients as they rot organic materials. Mildew is another word for mold.

Fungi, including molds, produce microscopic, seed-like particles called spores that spread in the air. Mold spores are produced on stalks. There are so many of these spores that you inhale them with every breath. Thousands could fit within the period at the end of this sentence.

When these spores land on surfaces, they germinate to form threads that elongate, and they branch to create spidery colonies that expand into circular patches. After mold colonies have grown for a few days, they start producing a new generation of spores.

Where do indoor molds grow?

Molds can grow in any building. Even in the cleanest homes, there will be traces of mold growth beneath bathroom and kitchen sinks. They’re also likely to grow on shower curtains, as well as in sink drains, dishwashers and washing machines.

Molds grow wherever water collects, but they become a problem in buildings only when there is a persistent plumbing leak, or in flooded homes.

There are many species of indoor molds, which an expert can identify by looking at their spores with a microscope.

The types of molds that grow in homes include species of Aspergillus and Penicillium, which are difficult to tell apart. These are joined by Cladosporium and Chaetomium, which loves to grow on wet carpets.

Stachybotrys is another common fungus in homes. I’ve found it under plant pots in my living room.

When does mold growth become a problem?

Problematic mold growth occurs when drywall becomes soaked through and mold colonies develop into large, brown or black patches. If the damaged area is smaller than a pizza box, you can probably clean it yourself. But more extensive mold growth often requires removing and replacing the drywall. Either way, solving the plumbing leak or protecting the home from flooding is essential to prevent the mold from returning.

In cases of severe mold growth, you can hire an indoor air quality specialist to measure the concentration of airborne spores in the home. Low concentrations of spores are normal and present no hazard, but high concentrations of spores can cause allergies.

During air testing, a specialist will sample the air inside and outside the home on the same day. If the level of spores measured in indoor air is much higher than the level measured in the outdoor air, molds are likely growing somewhere inside the home.

Another indication of mold growth inside the home is the presence of different kinds of molds in the outdoor and indoor air. Professional air sampling will identify both of these issues.

Why are indoor molds a problem?

Indoor molds present three problems. First, they create an unappealing living space by discoloring surfaces and creating unpleasant, moldy smells. Second, their spores, which float in the air, can cause asthma and allergic rhinitis, or hay fever.

Finally, some molds produce poisonous chemicals called mycotoxins. There is no scientific evidence linking mycotoxins produced by indoor molds to illnesses among homeowners. But mycotoxins could cause problems in the most severe cases of mold damage – usually in flooded homes. Irrespective of mycotoxin problems, you should treat mold growth in these more severe situations to prevent allergies.

The mold called Stachybotrys has been called the toxic black mold since its growth was linked to lung bleeding in infants in Cleveland in the 1990s. This fungus grows on drywall when it becomes soaked with water and produces a range of mycotoxins.

Black mold spores are sticky and are not blown into the air very easily. This behavior limits the number of spores that anyone around will likely inhale, and it means that any dose of the toxins you might absorb from indoor mold is vanishingly small. But the developing lungs of babies and children are particularly vulnerable to damage. This is why it is important to limit mold growth in homes and address the sources of moisture that stimulate its development.

Knowing when indoor molds require attention is a useful skill for every homeowner and can allow them to avoid unnecessary stress.

Nicholas Money, Professor of Biology, Miami University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.