Emily Conron

On May 16, with negotiations over fiscal year 2023 (FY23) appropriations underway on Capitol Hill, the Global Health Technologies Coalition (GHTC) hosted congressional staff and coalition members for a virtual briefing on the Supporting Innovative Global Health Technologies (SIGHT) Fund—a proposal for a new $250 million appropriations line in the FY23 State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs bill dedicated to global health research and development (R&D) at the US Agency for International Development (USAID).Emily Conron, senior US policy and advocacy officer for GHTC, kicked things off with a presentation on the basics of the SIGHT Fund and the challenges it is designed to solve. She noted how 15 years ago, USAID spent about 8 percent of its global health funding on innovation, but that while USAID’s global health budget has doubled in that time, spending on innovation has not kept pace, dropping to less than 5 percent as a share of global health investment. She also emphasized that the pace of global health progress in the future will depend on the reversal of these investment trends today, with more resources urgently needed for R&D: “Today's global health tools like antiretrovirals for HIV/AIDS, oral rehydration therapy to save lives from diarrheal diseases, vaccines that have dramatically reduced child mortality globally—these tools are the product of robust R&D investments begun decades ago….We need to invest proactively today to ensure continued progress in global health in the years to come, and establishing the SIGHT Fund with an initial investment of $250 million dollars—which I should note is a level of investment representing less than 3 percent of all current US spending on global health—could really catalyze the development of tools that accelerate progress against emerging and enduring global health challenges. This would save US taxpayer dollars, maximize the impact of our programs, and ultimately improve and save lives around the world.” Rachel Cohen, regional executive director of the Drugs for Neglected Diseases initiative (DNDi), North America, followed with the perspective of a leading global health product development partnership on why the SIGHT Fund could be transformative for global health innovation. She described previous R&D partnerships DNDi has had with USAID, but how budget limitations cut this promising work short—work that a new source of dedicated innovation funding could be tapped to continue. USAID’s disease-focused programs, with their limited funding, “shouldn't have to make these kinds of trade-offs—between critical funding for service delivery and funding for the next generation of lifesaving tools,” Rachel noted. “That's why DNDi is supporting the SIGHT Fund and why we need a mechanism that perhaps could be more crosscutting and catalytic.” She noted how the fund could complement work advanced by other US agencies, ensuring that promising innovations do not languish in the dreaded R&D “valley of death” when early-stage R&D funding often drops off: “One important example of this would be, for example, to take some of the funding that NIH, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, is funding for broad-spectrum antiviral drug discovery,” she shared. “Once those tools are perhaps ready for clinical trials, USAID could fund the development of broad-spectrum and spectrum antivirals for a range of viral pathogens of pandemic potential.” She also noted new R&D areas the fund could support, such as funding “in a more transformative way the R&D needs of infants and young children, ensuring gender-responsive R&D, or addressing the health consequences of the climate crisis.” Another innovator perspective was shared by Dr. Anand Anandkumar, co-founder and chief executive officer of Bugworks Research Inc. Anand shared background on the growing crisis of antimicrobial resistance (AMR), a global threat Bugworks is combatting through the development of novel broad-spectrum antibiotics designed to be affordable and accessible globally. “We all know from the experience of COVID that none of us is safe until everyone is safe—these are global problems requiring global solutions,” he reflected. “This [SIGHT Fund] could actually fill in a lot of key global gaps and make the United States a leader in connecting and finding solutions that are important globally.” He shared a helpful image of a triangle to describe three interconnected gaps in the current global innovation ecosystem he believes the SIGHT Fund could help address. “One axis of the triangle is support funding of clinical development for phase 2 and 3 with an eye on LMICs [low- and middle-income countries],” he said. “There are already fascinating programs like CARB-X that have created a good pipeline to phase 1, fascinating programs like GARDP out of DNDi that are trying to support phase 2 and phase 3, and AMR Action Fund, that are trying to support phase 2 and phase 3—but that valley is a complex valley. It needs more support.”“Number two, USAID, through the SIGHT Fund, can build clinical trial capacities on the ground in LMICs,” he noted. “You have patient population that have multidrug resistance, a very rich patient population—that’s the right place to do clinical trials, to find out how your drugs are going to work on the worst, difficult patients, but they [LMICs] don’t have capacities.” “And third and last point: a fund like SIGHT could actually bring regulators together, take lessons from COVID, and accelerate these highly needed treatments for unmet population,” he concluded. “So one vertex of the triangle is supporting clinical development to plug the phase 2, phase 3 gap, one vertex is creating clinical trial capacities where it matters the most in LMICs, and the third is regulatory harmonization.” The final intervention was made by Dave Milestone, former acting director of the USAID Center for Innovation and Impact, who shared what he experienced leading innovation activities during his tenure at USAID and why that has made him a supporter of the SIGHT Fund proposal today. “We know that there's a need for innovation,” Dave shared. “We're slowing our progress toward the achievement of our health SDGs [Sustainable Development Goals]. If we just go with sort of the status quo today, even if we deploy all the existing solutions that we have, there's a number of studies that say that we would still fall short. We need innovation. We need new local solutions. We need new partners, and we need to start with local problem solvers to make sure that we're identifying those right problems and then engaging the global R&D community to address those needs.” Dave described several successful innovation partnerships from his time at USAID, including Grand Challenges, which crowded in new thinkers and problem solvers to address leading challenges such maternal and child health, Ebola, and Zika. But he noted that many of these partnerships, while very successful, were short term and ad hoc. “USAID funding for R&D and innovation isn't institutionalized. It's not consistent. It's not long term,” he emphasized. “We should think about a more strategic, holistic approach,” which he noted includes, but is not limited to, the level of funding: “It's also about crowding in the right skill sets and mindsets to how we work with innovation…bringing in the sort of people who understand the practice of innovation, who have portfolio management expertise. These are new skill sets and mindsets that should come with the [establishment of the] SIGHT Fund at USAID.” He concluded with a strong call to action: “If our goal is to end the need for foreign aid, then we need to do this. The status quo isn't cutting it, and we need to be prepared to solve tomorrow's problems with tomorrow's solutions—and the SIGHT Fund is an important step in that right direction.”Jamie Bay Nishi, executive director of GHTC, finished the event by leading a question and answer session with the speakers, in which they emphasized the far-reaching impact that $250 million in new annual funding could have, how the fund could improve USAID’s responsiveness during health emergencies like COVID-19, and how it could advance not only discrete global health innovations, but also innovate the practice of R&D, strengthening the capacity of global partners to lead this work. On this last topic, Rachel offered an inspiring closing point: “If COVID has taught us nothing, it's that …this whole concept that ‘trickle-down innovation’ is going to work—I think we have all been disavowed of that myth. By that, I mean [the belief that] all the innovation happening in high-income countries…[will, with enough good will] eventually make their way to low- and middle-income countries.” She emphasized that “the model of the future needs to be—especially for diseases that are highly prevalent in low- and middle-income countries—driven by the incredible innovation capacity that exists in those countries. But that cannot happen if all the money is flowing only to organizations and academic institutions that are based in high-income countries. We just have to break that cycle…[and] make sure that the experts, the scientists, the clinicians, and the policymakers from low- and middle-income countries are helping to set the priorities, to make the decisions, to allocate the resources, and ultimately to drive the innovation agenda of the future.” You can watch the recording of the full session below, and learn more about the SIGHT Fund here. 

On November 19, the Global Health Technologies Coalition (GHTC) convened its first virtual Hill event of the COVID-19 pandemic, connecting a group of congressional staff with representatives from four organizations advancing COVID-19 innovations to meet global needs. Twelve staffers representing members serving on key committees participated in the virtual dialogue. GHTC hosted the conversation to continue educating allies on the Hill about the need for COVID-19 innovations designed for use in low-resource settings, and how the US Agency for International Development (USAID) could support that effort—if Congress appropriates sufficient emergency funding in the next COVID-19 relief bill. The organizations who participated have strong records of advancing innovations for health emergencies with USAID support and are poised to play an important role in the global response to COVID-19. The event began with a presentation by Dr. Rebecca Richards-Kortum, director of the Rice 360° Institute for Global Health, on the institute’s COVID-19 diagnostic tool. The simple-to-use, rapid point-of-care diagnostic offers results in 30 minutes or less, using a platform that is expected to cost less than US$5,000 per instrument and less than $2 per test. With USAID support, Rice is validating the test and plans to pursue emergency use authorization from the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The team hopes to scale the test quickly to countries in sub-Saharan Africa where they have research partners and infrastructure in order to make an impact in communities where trained laboratory personnel, basic hardware, and reagents are not readily available to support widespread testing using currently available COVID-19 diagnostics. Shift Labs' DripAssist device. Photo: Shift Labs Next, Dr. Beth Kolko, co-founder and CEO of Shift Labs gave an overview of its DripAssist IV device. This ingenious device, designed to be durable, portable, easy to assemble, and operable with minimal training, can help a clinician anywhere in the world give IV medication safely and effectively without the use of costly infusion pumps. DripAssist, which was developed with support from USAID through the Fighting Ebola and Saving Lives at Birth Grand Challenges, was widely used during the recent Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of the Congo—and even more recently was deployed in health care facilities in the United States facing a shortage of infusion pumps to address a surge in COVID-19 patients. “Designing for global needs gives engineers like our team a set of constraints that requires them to be more inventive,” Dr. Kolko noted, “And on the back end, you end up with a device that is more widely deployable,” including right here at home. Dr. Devin Sok, senior director of antibody discovery and development at GHTC member IAVI, followed with a presentation on IAVI’s COVID-19 antibody research efforts and how emerging antibody therapies could be a key tool to defeat COVID-19 globally. IAVI is focused on developing COVID-19 monoclonal antibodies both to treat individuals just exposed to the virus to stop progression to the severe form of the disease and also to prevent infection in individuals who might be at risk of exposure, like a temporary vaccine. While antibody therapies are typically expensive, Dr. Sok referenced the example of a low-cost monoclonal antibody product already on the market for rabies and noted that IAVI is proactively taking several steps in developing its product to drive down costs and ensure that it will be accessible and deployable in low-resource settings worldwide, even though this might delay product introduction. “We were aware from the beginning that we were not going to be first to market, but the priority was to be first to access,” he said. OraSure Technologies' rapid HIV self-test. Photo: World Health OrganizationFinally, Dr. Stephen Tang, president and CEO of OraSure Technologies, shared more about his company’s progress on developing a rapid antigen self-test for COVID-19, a tool with potential to dramatically simplify and expand access to COVID-19 testing in the United States and globally. Described by Dr. Tang as a “lab on a swab,” the test uses a self-collected nasal sample and delivers easy-to-read results at point of care without the need for additional instruments or laboratory analysis. OraSure’s history of designing diagnostics for global health needs has positioned the company well to support global access to COVID-19 diagnostic tools. It created the first rapid oral HIV self-test prequalified by the World Health Organization and the first FDA-approved rapid diagnostic test for Ebola, and it is now leveraging the same lateral flow platform these tests are built on for its COVID-19 diagnostic. Subject to receipt of an emergency use authorization by FDA, OraSure’s rapid self-test for COVID-19—developed with funding from the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority—could be deployed worldwide.  Reflecting on the lessons OraSure has drawn from its experience developing HIV diagnostics and what’s required to ramp up COVID-19 diagnostic testing to the massive scale the world requires, Dr. Tang emphasized several interrelated factors: instrument-free self-tests are ideal for countries with limited laboratory infrastructure; ease of use is key, particularly in countries with low literacy rates; experience counts when it comes to working with regulators, particularly during health emergencies; and the ability to scale manufacturing to meet demand is paramount for impact.  After the presentations, the congressional staff participants posed a range of thoughtful questions about the innovations as well as the innovators’ perspectives on what the United States can do support the global response to COVID-19—from how US military research capabilities can be leveraged to design COVID-19 products suited for austere settings, to how members of Congress who represent researchers and research institutions can better advocate for resources needed to support science, to the specific measures that must be taken to scale up COVID-19 diagnostic capacity in the United States and around the world. As we consider the challenges of delivering certain COVID-19 products—including the leading vaccine candidates—everywhere they are needed worldwide, GHTC will continue to connect policymakers and their teams with innovators working to design tools with global access in mind. We hope this dialogue creates the foundation for an enduring partnership between congressional champions for global health innovation and the researchers whose work is fueling progress against COVID-19 and other global health threats.

This week, months of tense negotiation between leaders in the Democratically-controlled US House of Representatives, the Republican-held Senate, and the White House concluded with the congressional passage of two massive spending packages encompassing all federal government spending for fiscal year (FY) 2020 —nearly three months behind schedule. Two continuing resolutions, passed by Congress to allow additional time for the process to play out after the start of the new fiscal year on October 1, have kept the government operating at FY19 levels, while from week to week, it was anyone’s guess whether the stalemate over funding levels and contentious items like border wall funding could be broken to avoid another government shutdown.A long process to produce two very long billsIn November, the appropriations “cardinals”—chairs and ranking members of both chambers’ Appropriation Committees—announced they had reached a deal on overall spending for each of the 12 appropriations bills, figures known as 302(b)s. This marked a critical step in the negotiations, given that at the time the House and Senate passed a two-year budget deal over the summer, each chamber had been working off of different overall blueprint funding envelopes: The House had already passed its appropriations bills assuming much higher funding levels than were ultimately included in the deal, while the Senate was developing its bills under the more modest final caps.Once the gulf was bridged and the 302(b)s were set, the leaders and their staff worked quickly to develop final compromise appropriations bills, which they grouped into two “minibus” funding packages released on December 16: a “national security appropriations” minibus and a “domestic priorities and international assistance appropriations” minibus, which included the bills for Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education (LHHS) and State and Foreign Operations (SFOPS).Funding increases included for several key accounts The later minibus encompassing LHHS and SFOPS was a mixed bag for accounts that support global health research and development (R&D). In the LHHS division of the minibus, overall funding for the National Institutes of Health (NIH) was boosted 6.7 percent from FY19 enacted levels—including increases of 6.7 percent for the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, 3.3 percent for the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, 3.4 percent for the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, and 3.4 percent for the Fogarty International Center. The joint explanatory statement accompanying the division also notes “an increase of no less than $25,000,000 over the fiscal year 2019 level for HIV and AIDS research” at NIH.The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) saw even greater overall growth than NIH, with an increase of 8.7 percent; however, GHTC-priority accounts that finance global health R&D were mostly flat-funded. While the Center for Global Health (CGH) received a 16.8 percent bump, the entirety of the increase went to Global Public Health Protection—which funds global health security activities—and a new Global Tuberculosis line—which represents level funding of an amount previously transferred annually from a domestic tuberculosis (TB) line to support global TB activities. All other CGH lines were flat-funded. The National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases got a modest 1.6 percent bump. The final GHTC priority account in the LHHS bill, the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), was flat-funded.The SFOPS division of the minibus increased overall funding for Global Health Programs at the State Department and US Agency for International Development (USAID) by 2.9 percent. This is slightly lower than what had been proposed in the Senate SFOPS bill earlier this fall and significantly lower than the House proposal to increase by 5.2 percent, but overall still a positive trend reflecting strong support for global health among appropriators, who were working under the constraints of a modest overall SFOPS allocation in the final agreement. At USAID, most health area-specific allocations were flat-funded or increased by about two to four percent—the big exception being the Global Fund for AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria, which was increased by 15.6 percent to reflect the higher pledge made by the US government at the Global Fund’s international pledging conference in October.Report language signals policy support for global health R&DGHTC successfully advocated for the inclusion of several sections of report language, included in the original House and Senate SFOPS bill reports, that will hold under the final agreement. Report language serves as guidance from Congress to US agencies on how it would like to see funding implemented. Language that will hold for FY20 includes GHTC-supported language on USAID’s important role in and reporting on health-related R&D and inter-agency collaboration and coordination on global health product development, as well as support for “CDC’s continued and enhanced work in research and development aimed at creating new tools to respond to health threats at home and abroad” and BARDA’s contributions to emerging infectious disease outbreaks and other naturally occurring threats.The “domestic priorities and international assistance minibus” not only included some positive funding increases and report language, but also advanced a bill supported by GHTC—the End Neglected Tropical Diseases (NTD) Act, which supports R&D activities by USAID to control and eliminate NTDs.The House passed both packages Tuesday afternoon, with the Senate following suit Thursday and now the bills are awaiting signature by the President. GHTC applauds Congress for their strong continued support for global health R&D evidenced by the final deal and looks forward to building on this foundation for our advocacy as we enter a new decade full of opportunities for global health innovation.

Faces of Innovation—a new GHTC project that features scientists on the front lines of research and development on new global health tools and technologies—profiles Dr. James Mutunga, who we met at the American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene (ASTMH) Annual Conference, who does research on developing and testing new methods of controlling vector-borne diseases as well as pathogen surveillance in arthropod disease vectors at the US Army Medical Research Directorate-Africa in Kisumu, Kenya. My Name: James Mutunga, PhDWhere I work: US Army Medical Research Directorate-Africa in Kisumu, KenyaI’m funded by: US DoDThe views I express here are my own and do not and are not to be construed as official, or as reflecting true views of the Department of the Army or the Department of Defense. My research: I work on surveillance for vectors—that is, arthropod disease vectors. I work in the Entomology lab in Kisumu. Under the surveillance program, we do collection of field samples of mosquitoes, ticks, mites, fleas, any arthropod that we can imagine, sandflies included—we bring them to the lab and we do pathogen testing to detect diseases that they may carry. We also do morphological and molecular identification of these vectors. Eventually, what we create is a heat map of potential pathogens in circulation and the areas they are circulating so we can advise on the areas that are high-risk and therefore give this information to the US Army for deployment purposes, and protection. The vectors we currently mostly target are mosquito vectors. These transmit malaria, dengue, Zika, chikungunya, and many other different diseases. Motivation: A couple of years ago, I worked for a research institution that primarily researches on arthropod vectors called the International Center for Insect Physiology and Ecology, based in Nairobi, Kenya. And from there, my passion for mosquito research transitioned to what I undertook for my masters and my PhD. I undertook my PhD at Virginia Tech here in the US, and I worked on developing new carbamate molecules and testing them for malaria control. So that kind of invoked my passion, given that it is a disease [with] a broad burden [in] the world. That still is the focus of the work that I do, and I enjoy it.Why federal support is critical: The work we do, and the many years that the US government has invested in vector-borne disease research and control, is commendable. We still do not want to relent. We are facing challenges in vector control. We are having problems [with] insecticide resistance, we are having problems of changing vector behavior, and therefore, the investment in terms of financial support for researchers in the US—and all over the world—is more than needed. We are having challenges with the issues of climate change and habitat change—places that never used to have disease transmission are actually now having active indigenous transmission and therefore there is a need to continue investing and ensuring that policies that are being made to support this research.When I’m not in the lab: I spend time with family, friends. I like traveling, doing road trips. I also like charity work.

Faces of Innovation—a new GHTC project that features scientists on the front lines of research and development on new global health tools and technologies—profiles Dr. Peter Hotez, who we met at the American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene (ASTMH) Annual Conference, who does research to develop vaccines for neglected tropical diseases as professor and Dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine at the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, Texas. My name: Peter Hotez, MD, PhDWhere I work: National School of Tropical Medicine at the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, TexasI’m funded by: National Institutes of Health, Department of DefenseMy research: At the National School of Tropical Medicine, we established what’s called the Texas Children’s Hospital Center for Vaccine Development, which is a non-profit—what’s sometimes called a product development partnership, a PDP. These are non-profit agencies that use industry practices to make stuff—in our case, it’s vaccines. So we’re making vaccines for neglected tropical diseases, the most common afflictions of the world’s poor. We have vaccines for hookworm and schistosomiasis in clinical trials now, and hopefully soon a new Chagas vaccine will go into the clinic. This is co-directed by myself and my science partner for twenty years, Dr. Maria Elena Bottazzi. We like to say that we develop the vaccines that no one else will make. Motivation: I have an unusual story in that ever since I was a teenager, I wanted to study tropical diseases. And then I went to Yale as an undergraduate specifically to work at a lab on African sleeping sickness, and then I did the MD-PhD program at Rockefeller-Cornell, the medical scientist training program, where I got started on developing a hookworm vaccine in the laboratory of Anthony Cerami, who let me bring hookworms into the lab. So, this is a lifelong passion and calling, and I think you’ll find that for a lot of researchers, especially here at the American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene.Why federal support is critical: In terms of federal agencies that support us, we have support, of course, from the NIH, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, which has been a stalwart supporter of our vaccine development program, but also, the Department of Defense is now supporting our leishmaniasis vaccine program through CDMRP [Congressionally Directed Medical Research Program]. We’re extremely grateful for our federal support. We’d be nowhere without it.…[From] 2015-2016, I was in the Obama Administration—I served as US Science Envoy. There’s a few things going on with that. One, in one of my books, Blue Marble Health, we found that most of the world’s poverty-related neglected diseases are not necessarily in the poorest, most devastated countries of Africa and Asia as many people think, but actually, it’s the poor living among the wealthy in G20 countries, the Group of 20 countries. So, for instance, we now estimate that there are 12 million Americans living in extreme poverty with a neglected tropical disease. [Research] on these diseases is not only helping people abroad, it’s actually helping the poorest Americans. So that’s a very important aspect. Another is—I think in my time as US Science Envoy, one of the things that I kept on seeing is the admiration for America, not because of our military prowess, but because of our research universities and our research institutes. This is why people love America: We’re a science horsepower; the fact that we use our science towards bettering the world, developing new technologies for global health. This is one of the things that makes America great—this is what I tell policymakers and leaders on both sides of the aisle.When I’m not in the lab: One of the things that’s my new passion is—I’ve become a writer. Since moving to Texas Children’s Hospital and Baylor College of Medicine, I’ve written and published three books, and now about to work on my fourth. So, writing has become a new passion of mine, and it reaches a different audience than scientific papers. It helps to explain why science is important and do that public engagement, and that’s so critical, especially in this time now when we’re seeing this rise in anti-science, anti-vaccine movements. More than ever, we need to do public engagement. That’s why GHTC is so important. It’s a key component of that public engagement.

GHTC co-sponsored a congressional briefing on Tuesday organized by the American Society for Tropical Medicine and Hygiene (ASTMH) in conjunction with the Senate Malaria and Neglected Tropical Diseases Caucus to highlight the essential role of the US Department of Defense (DoD) in the fight against malaria. Most Americans think of malaria as a disease that only threatens people in far-off nations. But with American military personnel deployed in countries all around the globe, malaria remains an ongoing threat to the health of our servicemembers and, by extension, our military readiness.  In fact, the battle against this parasite has been a persistent feature of US military history. Malaria has affected almost every US military deployment since the American Civil War and has caused more lost person-days than bullets during all military campaigns fought in malaria-endemic regions in the twentieth century. During World War II, General Douglas MacArthur famously complained to Dr. Paul Russell, then the Army's top malaria expert, “Doctor, it's going to be a very long war if for every division I have facing the enemy, I have one sick in hospital and another recovering from this dreadful disease.”  Since World War II, DoD has been a world leader in the research and development (R&D) of new tools to prevent, diagnose, and treat malaria. While these efforts have always been focused foremost on protecting the health and readiness of US servicemembers, they have also benefitted communities around the world.”  For instance, earlier this year, pilot introductions of the world’s first malaria vaccine, RTS,S—which was developed with research support from DoD’s Walter Reed Army Institute of Research (WRAIR)—were launched in three sub-Saharan African countries. WRAIR remains a leader in malaria vaccine research, in partnership with the Naval Medical Research Center (NMRC), which is co-located on the same research campus and brings unique research capabilities. Amazingly, WRAIR and NMRC have also contributed to the development of every single malaria prevention drug approved by the US Food and Drug Administration, including all five available today. In 2018, a new single-dose treatment was approved for a strain of malaria that sickens around 8 million people annually—including US servicemembers. This treatment stems from research conducted at DoD and military research centers, research that has also led to the use of this compound as a drug for malaria prevention.  These are just a few of the most recent examples that demonstrate the invaluable impact that DoD research has had on the global fight against malaria. The briefing, held in the Russell Senate Office Building with congressional staff and members of the malaria research and advocacy community in attendance, was a special opportunity to hear from some of the top malaria experts in the US military, including Colonel Deydre Teyhen, commander of WRAIR; Lieutenant Colonel Mara Kreishman-Deitrick, director of Experimental Therapeutics at the WRAIR Center for Infectious Disease Research; Colonel Viseth Nguay, director of the WRAIR Malaria Vaccine Branch; Colonel Philip Smith, director of the WRAIR Center for Enabling Capabilities; and Captain Eileen Villasante, head of the Malaria Department at NMRC.  In her opening remarks, Colonel Teyhen highlighted that, whereas most Americans might think a shark is the most dangerous animal they could encounter, mosquitoes pose a far greater threat. She emphasized that DoD’s investments in malaria R&D are critical as both military strategy and the malaria parasite evolve. .⁦@wrair⁩ COL Teyhen: forget sharks, mosquitoes are what we should really be afraid of! @astmh #mosquitowranglers pic.twitter.com/AlZBM40EjC— Karen A Goraleski (@goraleskik) September 24, 2019 According to COL Teyhen, commander @WRAIR, as military teams get smaller and more specialized, the health of each team member is vital—this is why enduring biologic solutions against threats like #malaria are critical, and “we’re not there yet.” pic.twitter.com/JeVeLGJhjn— GHTC (@GHTCoalition) September 24, 2019 @WRAIR and @NavalMedicalRC have led the research charge against #malaria 🦟 with astounding progress. But with malaria always evolving, investment in new #globalhealth technologies are always needed. @ASTMH pic.twitter.com/nkTfsj0MBz— GHTC (@GHTCoalition) September 24, 2019 Senator Chris Coons (D-DE) stopped by after Colonel Teyhen spoke to share his deep personal commitment to the fight against malaria and commend DoD for its important work. He also received a fashionable malaria-themed tie.  So pleased to have ⁦@ChrisCoonsforDE⁩ at @astmh senate briefing in DoD work in malaria. TY Sen Coons and ⁦@SenatorWicker⁩ for your deep and personal commitment to end the scourge of malaria and NTDs. #malariadelendaest pic.twitter.com/wsffksQxpS— Karen A Goraleski (@goraleskik) September 24, 2019 What was once unthinkable is now a common goal that we are working together to achieve. I plan to continue to fight every step of the way as we seek to achieve Alan Magill’s bold vision of a world without malaria.— Senator Chris Coons (@ChrisCoons) September 24, 2019 "There is very little that would make a more lasting impact than eradicating malaria." @ChrisCoons at @ASTMH briefing on work of @DeptofDefense in the fight against #malaria. Thank you, @WRAIR, & @DTeyhen for your leadership in protecting our service members deployed globally. pic.twitter.com/xgGGzJnf5K— Nothing But Nets (@nothingbutnets) September 24, 2019 .@astmh Pres-elect Joel Breman takes off his malaria tie and gifts it to ⁦@ChrisCoons⁩. Fashion meets science meets a Senator. pic.twitter.com/ETx713JK74— Karen A Goraleski (@goraleskik) September 24, 2019 After Senator Coons’ remarks, the panel continued with an overview of DoD’s prolific contributions to malaria R&D, sharing more fascinating facts and insights.  Did you know investments by @WRAIR in #malaria #research has generated over 3,000 biomedical publications, making it one of the top four US contributors to #malaria #research — @ASTMH briefing— GHTC (@GHTCoalition) September 24, 2019 According to Dr. Eileen Villasante, head of malaria research @NavalMedicalRC, the #malaria parasite is not only outsmarting 💊 but also diagnostics. More 🔬 is needed — @ASTMH briefing— GHTC (@GHTCoalition) September 24, 2019 The briefing was an excellent opportunity for congressional staff, researchers, and advocates to gather, learn, and discuss DoD’s historic role in malaria R&D and the opportunities for continued US leadership in this area of vital importance for our troops and communities around the world.