It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
MB-003 was developed through a decade-long collaborative effort between private
industry and the U.S. government, with funding from the Defense Advanced Research Projects
Agency (DARPA), the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and the Defense Threat Reduction
Agency (DTRA).
“With no vaccines or therapeutics currently licensed to treat or prevent Ebola virus, MB-
003 is a promising candidate for continued development,” said collaborator Larry Zeitlin, Ph.D.,
president of Mapp Biopharmaceutical in San Diego, California.
On August 22–23, 2013, agencies within the United States Department of Defense (DoD) and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) sponsored the Filovirus Medical Countermeasures (MCMs) Workshop as an extension of the activities of the Filovirus Animal Non-clinical Group (FANG). The FANG is a federally-recognized multi-Agency group established in 2011 to coordinate and facilitate U.S. government (USG) efforts to develop filovirus MCMs. The workshop brought together government, academic and industry experts to consider the needs for filovirus MCMs and evaluate the status of the product development pipeline. This report summarizes speaker presentations and highlights progress and challenges remaining in the field.
A new Ebola virus study has shown promising preliminary results, preventing disease in infected nonhuman primates using monoclonal antibodies. The report recently available in the online edition of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), describes the use of a “cocktail” of monoclonal antibodies, or mAbs, to prevent lethal disease in rhesus macaques.1
All animals survived when the compound, known as MB-003, was administered one hour after infection, and two-thirds of them were protected, even when the treatment was administered 48 hours after infection.
“We were pleased to see how well the humanized mAbs of MB-003 performed,” said Larry Zeitlin, PhD, president of Mapp Biopharmaceutical and senior author on the study. “We also were pleasantly surprised by the superiority of the plant-derived mAbs compared to the same mAbs produced in traditional mammalian cell culture.”
The process is both cost- and time-efficient, according to the report.
“Our GMP facility can generate a new antibody lot in two weeks to rapidly address new threats and new outbreaks,” said Barry Bratcher, chief operating officer of Kentucky BioProcessing and co-author on the PNAS study.
originally posted by: Vasa Croe
So as early as 2012 they had a humanized version that had been tested and was impressive, AND they can rapidly generate a new antibody lot in 2 weeks.
Why are they now saying they are out and can't produce anymore for a while?
Figure 4 shows the dynamics of the population age for 1% and 5% w/v inoculum sizes and the subsequent prediction of antibody r14D9 accumulation. According to the model, we assumed that proliferating cells produce the recombinant protein. Expression of r14D9 began on the fourth day, when cell proliferation ends, continued up to the tenth day (1% inoculum size) or eighth day (5% inoculum size), and then abruptly decayed.
originally posted by: chrismarco
a reply to: Vasa Croe
How many people have died because this company did not release the vaccine...what a load of crap...I suspect it has been around for a while but then again I have no proof...sounds like a good stock to invest in if they are public..
originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Vasa Croe
Really? You can't see why the THREAT REDUCTION agency is working with companies that are working on the vaccine for a disease that could potentially be weaponized?
Just think about that for a second.
DTRA is the U.S. Department of Defense’s official Combat Support Agency for countering weapons of mass destruction. Our people are Subject Matter Experts on WMD, and we address the entire spectrum of chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear and high yield explosive threats
originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Vasa Croe
It didn't have to "wipe out a population". They brought back TWO PATIENTS to the US and look at the reaction it generated. If it was to get out there would be rioting to get food or supplies, and people going nuts over anyone they even THOUGHT had it.
A WMD doesn't have to be super uber destructive. All it has to do is create the FEAR that it is and people will do the rest. A high body count is great, but not necessary.
A dirty bomb is considered a WMD and it's not nearly as destructive as people think.
originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Vasa Croe
Because it has the potential to be used as a bio weapon even without being modified. Guess what bio weapons are. They're doing they're damn mission.
And if it was used as a weapon people would be screaming if they WEREN'T working on a treatment. Jesus, talk about damned if you do, damned if you don't.