Difference between revisions of "Team:Northwestern/Interviews"
| Line 66: | Line 66: | ||
<figure><center><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2017/0/0b/T-Nortwhestern--Mendalson4.png" border="0"> | <figure><center><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2017/0/0b/T-Nortwhestern--Mendalson4.png" border="0"> | ||
| − | + | <img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2017/0/0b/T-Nortwhestern--Mendalson4.png" border="0"> | |
</center></figure> | </center></figure> | ||
</body> | </body> | ||
Revision as of 17:20, 21 October 2017
Health and public policy
Scott Mahloch is a former member of the Navy and current FBI agent. After entering the FBI in 2008 and completing training, Mahloch was assigned to Milwaukee Division’s Kenosha Resident Agency, where he worked on a variety of cases. He is currently the Weapons of Mass Destruction Coordinator for the Chicago Division.
Although the topic of antibiotic resistance was not central in our discussion, Special Agent Mahlock, by referring to a number of examples from his career, emphasized the importance of being vigilant and aware of one's surroundings while working in a lab setting. SA Mahlock made it clear that the FBI is not a regulatory agency but does take measures to ensure that everything is working smoothly and safely.
Takeaway: SA Mahlocks presentation was informative and made us more aware of the dangers of biology and how it can potentially be used for nefarious acts. Unfortunately, there isn't much we can change about our project from Special Agent Mahloch's pretension. However, if we see something we will definitely say something!
Dr. Mendalson’s research revolves around Infectious diseases in countries with high rates of antibiotic resistance (AR). He focuses on models of antibiotic stewardship, antibiotic prescription and response, hospital collaborations and the use of antibiotics in surgical pathways. Most his work centers around international policy development for infectious diseases and antimicrobial resistance strategy.
We spoke to Dr. Mendalson about the standardization of the term “drug resistant infection.” He responded that everything has its own language in life; people in the field of research have scientific knowledge that doesn’t extend to the public. People don’t understand the term “antimicrobial resistance” or have never heard of it while “antibiotic resistance” is more readily understood.
We also asked Dr. Mendalson if he had any suggestions on engaging the public in the fight against antimicrobial resistance before it’s too late. “National action plans by the World Health Organization, education and awareness, politics to engage partnerships with public awareness and making non-specialists more aware help change behaviors while we wait for new antibiotic drugs to be developed” were some of his propositions.
Additionally, we asked for suggestions and things to consider when tailoring our project. Dr. Mendalson proposed that we carry out risk analysis to evaluate the chances of our therapeutic working and weighing the risks and benefits of this delivery system. He also advised us to be specific about what genes we are trying to target while remaining cautious. “Antibiotic Resistance isn’t just because of genes. Superbugs have multiple resistance mechanisms, disabling the genes doesn’t mean it’ll surefire die.”
Takeaway: Our conversation with Dr. Mendalson helped us be more considerate with the language we use when referring to antimicrobial resistance, he also convinced us to carry out risk analysis for our project.
