Speaker 1: HIV was one of the most important viruses of the
Speaker 1: past century. It caused profound suffering, It led to intense
Speaker 1: political and social confrontations and eventually transformations. And for scientists,
Speaker 1: HIV posed a complicated set of problems that still have
Speaker 1: not been entirely solved. On today's show, we're going to
Speaker 1: focus on the scientists and the science. I'm Jacob Goldstein,
Speaker 1: and this is Incubation, a show about viruses. In the
Speaker 1: first half of the show, we'll talk with a virologist.
Speaker 1: She was working at a hospital in the early nineteen
Speaker 1: eighties when the first patients began to show up with
Speaker 1: this deadly disease that no one understood. She was part
Speaker 1: of a team that rushed to identify the virus behind
Speaker 1: the disease. Then, in the second half of the show,
Speaker 1: we'll hear from a physician who's been working for over
Speaker 1: twenty years to develop an HIV vaccine. We're going to
Speaker 1: start today with my conversation with Christine Ruzu. Christine became
Speaker 1: part of a famous team that ultimately wound up in
Speaker 1: an international fight over who discovered HIV in nineteen eighty one.
Speaker 1: Christine was a young researcher in the virology lab at
Speaker 1: Bishaw Claude Bernard Hospital. It's a hospital in Paris that's
Speaker 1: dedicated to infectious diseases. Christine remembers when the first patients
Speaker 1: with this mysterious new illness started coming to the hospital.
Speaker 2: We start to see those patients. They were young, they
Speaker 2: were gay, and they had a lot of infections and
Speaker 2: they were dying.
Speaker 1: Like did you see yourself in them at all? Like
Speaker 1: here of just some young healthy person, suddenly they get
Speaker 1: sick and die.
Speaker 2: Yeah, we had patients with our age. I was thirty
Speaker 2: at the beginning. Those who were hospitalized died rapidly. They
Speaker 2: come to the hospital very late in the disease, and
Speaker 2: within the gay community, I could see progressively some of
Speaker 2: them with big lymphnods, some of them with the caposis
Speaker 2: are comma very difficult.
Speaker 1: And so what are you what are you thinking when
Speaker 1: these when these people start showing up with these strange symptoms.
Speaker 2: From the beginning, the sign of our infection was there.
Speaker 2: When you look at the number in blood of cells,
Speaker 2: you can make the difference between bacteria and virus. Is infection.
Speaker 2: And we we discuss with the different teams and we
Speaker 2: start with the ideas that could be a retrovirus, a
Speaker 2: very specific retrovirus.
Speaker 1: Why do you think retrovirus? We should say, by the way,
Speaker 1: retrovirus is a virus that use is RNA instead of DNA.
Speaker 1: Why do you think it's that?
Speaker 2: So how can I say it was vious.
Speaker 1: Alamodo alamode like it was sort of the fashionable virus.
Speaker 1: It was the it kind of virus, fashionable virus. Yes,
Speaker 1: you and your colleagues have this hypothesis, we think this
Speaker 1: is a retrovirus. What is the first thing you do?
Speaker 2: We went to see Luke Montagnier and Francos virus and
Speaker 2: you see in Pastor in.
Speaker 1: Situew Luke Montaigne worked with Francois Barressing. You see at
Speaker 1: the Pastor Institute, these two scientists who will become very famous.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, And we asked them, do you think that
Speaker 2: it's possible to try to isolate the virus retrovirus? And
Speaker 2: he said, that's a good idea. Maybe we can try. Maybe, Okay,
Speaker 2: we'll do the work. So we come back to the
Speaker 2: working group and we decide to take the lymph nodes
Speaker 2: because they were very big, and to take a blood
Speaker 2: in a nearly a symptomatic patients.
Speaker 1: Okay, So You're at the hospital seeing these patients sick
Speaker 1: with what you think might be a retrovirus, and you're
Speaker 1: taking samples from patients at what seemed like different stages
Speaker 1: of the disease and sending them to these academic researchers
Speaker 1: at the Pastor Institute.
Speaker 2: What happens next fifteen days after Luc Montaignefon and we
Speaker 2: have something. We have something, We have something.
Speaker 1: Front Soise Barre Snusi. That researcher who was working with
Speaker 1: Montagnier had discovered evidence that suggested a retrovirus was in
Speaker 1: fact the culprit for this mysterious disease. The team developed
Speaker 1: a blood test to identify patients with antibodies to this virus.
Speaker 1: Test allowed researchers to diagnose the virus not only in
Speaker 1: gay men, but also in IV drug users and hemophiliacs,
Speaker 1: But the illness was still a mystery, and in particular,
Speaker 1: even though they knew it was a retrovisvirus, no one
Speaker 1: had actually seen and correctly identified it. So now researchers
Speaker 1: around the world are in this race both to help
Speaker 1: patients and to find the virus. On the team, Christine
Speaker 1: was working with an electron microscopist a specialist in looking
Speaker 1: for things through an electron microscope, spent his days trying
Speaker 1: to find this virus.
Speaker 2: He said, for the first days, no, I can't see nothing.
Speaker 2: And then after three days he said, come and see.
Speaker 2: I'm sure there is something.
Speaker 1: What is the microscopycy happening in the cell?
Speaker 2: He sees the budding of the virus at the surface
Speaker 2: of the lymphosize.
Speaker 1: Uh huh, And so does that mean coming out, going in?
Speaker 1: What does budding mean?
Speaker 2: In that kind of budding is when the virus has
Speaker 2: been within the cells he has to get out, and
Speaker 2: he could see free virl particles and he could see
Speaker 2: also that those particles came from those infected cells. Budding
Speaker 2: is a Commondi budding.
Speaker 1: It's sort of exploding out of the cell or leaving the.
Speaker 2: Cell, exactly, the moment of leaving the cell.
Speaker 1: That's so this is like a big moment, right. You're
Speaker 1: not only seeing the virus, but you're actually seeing it
Speaker 1: as it's.
Speaker 2: Leaving the host cell exactly.
Speaker 1: Do you remember when you saw that image for the
Speaker 1: first time.
Speaker 2: Ah, yes, I remember very well, because at that time
Speaker 2: we say, oh, now what we have to do with that.
Speaker 2: We have to organize everything.
Speaker 1: So your response is not Wow, we did it, it's
Speaker 1: oh my god, We've got so much work to do.
Speaker 2: Yeah. You know, in France we say we have the
Speaker 2: nose in the bicycle, I mean.
Speaker 1: The steering the handlebars, just looking at not looking at
Speaker 1: your head down those to the handlebars.
Speaker 2: Yeah, exactly.
Speaker 1: And so that's the moment when you're basic saying we
Speaker 1: found it, we found the virus that is causing this
Speaker 1: mysterious disease.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and a paper with the publish in science.
Speaker 1: Meanwhile, in the United States there is another team working
Speaker 1: to study the disease. It's led by Robert Gallo, a
Speaker 1: famous virologist at the National Institutes of Health. And this
Speaker 1: is where a story of discovery becomes a story of
Speaker 1: a competition, of a fight over who really discovered the virus.
Speaker 1: But it didn't start out as a fight. It started
Speaker 1: out as a collaboration.
Speaker 2: Luke Montagne decided, because he knows very well Bob Gelou
Speaker 2: at that time, he decided to collaborate and to cooperate,
Speaker 2: and he sent samples with the virus to Bob Galu. Okay,
Speaker 2: can you imagine that?
Speaker 1: Well, that's like the ideal of science, right, They're not rivals.
Speaker 1: They're working together to increase humanity's understanding exactly.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Yeah. And then Bob Galou publish a discovery of
Speaker 2: AS virus.
Speaker 1: H huh, you're using air quotes as you say discovery.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, in April nineteen eighty four, and he said,
Speaker 2: we discovers the virus.
Speaker 1: Just from Gallo's point of view, what is his claim
Speaker 1: in eighty four of discovery.
Speaker 2: He claims that the virus was not completely identical to
Speaker 2: our virus, and he says mine is really AS virus
Speaker 2: in the United States.
Speaker 1: So Gallo was saying he discovered the AIDS virus in
Speaker 1: the United States. From your perspective, your lab already discovered
Speaker 1: the virus. What do you think when you read this paper?
Speaker 2: It was a very difficult period of time for us.
Speaker 2: And in France he said, you can't imagine. Of course,
Speaker 2: Bob Gallo is right and your virus is not the
Speaker 2: right one.
Speaker 1: Oh, I would not have guessed that. Wait, even even
Speaker 1: in France they said that. I am surprised.
Speaker 2: Even in France. You know, we were young frenchie. Yeah yeah,
Speaker 2: those little frenchie compared to the bag Gallo, it's not possible.
Speaker 2: Bob Gallo is very important in the nine i H
Speaker 2: compared to us. We are not professor, We were just
Speaker 2: assistant in labs. We are so young.
Speaker 1: What do you think when this is happening and people
Speaker 1: are saying this you personally, we.
Speaker 2: Thought that we had to go more rapidly for the
Speaker 2: demonstration of our RUS and with particularly with zero logical tests.
Speaker 2: I'm in the screening with my test.
Speaker 1: Yeah, you know, we.
Speaker 2: Were working and working and working publishing with US, with Italian,
Speaker 2: with CDC. We have to work more and more to
Speaker 2: show that we were right at that time. So we
Speaker 2: progress a lot with the number of patients which increased.
Speaker 2: That'side time everywhere.
Speaker 1: In nineteen eighty five, the Pastor Institute sued the United
Speaker 1: States government, claiming that Bob Gallo's team had used the
Speaker 1: French samples to isolate the virus and create an HIV
Speaker 1: blood test. The lawsuit was eventually settled, and in April
Speaker 1: nineteen eighty seven, Ronald Reagan, the President of the US,
Speaker 1: and Jacques Chirack, the Prime Minister of France, actually held
Speaker 1: a joint press conference where they announced that both countries
Speaker 1: would share the discovery. That same month, Bob Gallo and
Speaker 1: Luke Montagnier co published a paper explaining the sequence of
Speaker 1: events and sharing credit for discoveries.
Speaker 2: But maybe few years after we had the technology for
Speaker 2: genome sequencing, and you know, the story is the end
Speaker 2: of the story. Genetics sequencing of the virus from Bob
Speaker 2: Gallow's lab and from our LAMB show that the Bob's
Speaker 2: Gatherous lab was exactly the same that our virus.
Speaker 1: After that, genetic sequencing proved that the viruses were identical.
Speaker 1: Bob Gallow's lab said the whole thing was a kind
Speaker 1: of a mix up, the result of an accidental contamination.
Speaker 1: The final verdict in the fight over the discovery of
Speaker 1: HIV came decades later.
Speaker 2: And we waited until two thousand and eight against the
Speaker 2: Nobel price, and Bob Gallo did not receive the Nobel price.
Speaker 2: And the people from the Nobel Price, the jury of
Speaker 2: a Nobel Price, explain us they look for They looked
Speaker 2: at everything in Bob Gatherous lab, everything in Luc Montagni labs,
Speaker 2: and they understood very well as the story with a
Speaker 2: sequencing showing that the virus was our virus.
Speaker 1: Bob Gallo is still all credited with important research on
Speaker 1: the links between HIV and AIDS, and even when the
Speaker 1: Nobel was announced, Luke Montaigner was quoted as saying that
Speaker 1: the Gallo team deserved to share. How did you feel
Speaker 1: when you found out about the Nobel Prize?
Speaker 2: Very well satisfied because you know, we started with history
Speaker 2: in nineteen eighty three and it was a long time
Speaker 2: ago after, yeah, and it was very important to be
Speaker 2: recognized even later.
Speaker 1: Yes, I mean the Nobel Prize is legit recognition. It's
Speaker 1: for real, Like if you want to be vindicated in science,
Speaker 1: it's tough to beat the Nobel Prize.
Speaker 2: Yeah. After yeah, after fighting a lot with US people
Speaker 2: with even in France, it was a Greek moment in Stockholm.
Speaker 2: But we built a working group with the physicians, semanologist
Speaker 2: and self biologists in order to try to understand what
Speaker 2: I want with those patients. And that's a very important
Speaker 2: point of the story because we were a multidisciplinary working
Speaker 2: group and you know it's a listen learned. You can't
Speaker 2: do such a research alone, you can't.
Speaker 1: Wonderful, Thank you so much for your time. It was
Speaker 1: great to talk with you.
Speaker 2: Thank you very much.
Speaker 1: Christine, whoso has spent the last forty years studying HIV
Speaker 1: and AIDS, including work on preventing transmission of the virus
Speaker 1: from mothers to children. She's currently a professor of virology
Speaker 1: at Paris Descartes University. So can we talk about HIV?
Speaker 3: Sure, that would be wonderful.
Speaker 1: My guest for the second half of the show is
Speaker 1: Richard Koup. Richard is the Deputy director of the Vaccine
Speaker 1: Research Center at the National Institutes of Health. He has
Speaker 1: spent his career studying and testing HIV vaccines, and, as
Speaker 1: he explains, creating a vaccine against HIV is this extraordinarily
Speaker 1: hard problem that goes to the heart of why this
Speaker 1: virus is so insidious? Why did you become an infectious
Speaker 1: disease doctor?
Speaker 3: You know, when I was in medical school and my training,
Speaker 3: I noticed that almost all of the different specialties in
Speaker 3: medicine dealt with chronic illness, and infectious disease was the
Speaker 3: one specialty where you didn't have to deal with chronic illnesses.
Speaker 3: What you actually did was you cured people. So people
Speaker 3: would come in with infections, you gave them antibiotics and
Speaker 3: they were cured, and that felt very good.
Speaker 1: Like Christine lose you. Richard Kaup started his career at
Speaker 1: the beginning of the AIDS epidemic, and over time HIV
Speaker 1: would in fact become a chronic disease, but that was
Speaker 1: in the future.
Speaker 3: What we knew then was the genetics of the virus,
Speaker 3: but we didn't really know much about the immune response,
Speaker 3: so we were just sort of mapping out what they
Speaker 3: were responding to.
Speaker 1: It was like we knew what the virus was, but
Speaker 1: we didn't really understand what it did, how it worked.
Speaker 3: Yeah, not really, And we knew that for most viruses,
Speaker 3: in a vaccine, you want to target the envelope protein,
Speaker 3: the protein that's on the surface of the virus that
Speaker 3: is used to enter cells, and so that's what most
Speaker 3: of the first vaccines were directed against.
Speaker 1: Which is like very reasonable, right, Like that's what scientists
Speaker 1: just did with COVID, and it's like that is sort
Speaker 1: of what's floating around in your body and it's what
Speaker 1: the immune system sees. So it seemed it's logical that
Speaker 1: you would want to do that. What happened when when
Speaker 1: you and other researchers tried that with HIV.
Speaker 3: Well, you generated an immune response, so you've got antibodies
Speaker 3: against the envelope protein.
Speaker 1: Seems good, that's what you want, Yeah.
Speaker 3: But those antibodies didn't do anything, they didn't neutralize the virus.
Speaker 1: What was the next thought, What was the next idea?
Speaker 3: The thought then was, well, what we should do is
Speaker 3: stimulate T cells, so T cells recognize virally infected cells
Speaker 3: and kill them. And there were there was a lot
Speaker 3: of data to suggest that people who were long term
Speaker 3: non progressors, so these are people who are infected with
Speaker 3: HIV but they don't progress to full blown AIDS, they
Speaker 3: had really good T cells that were attacking the virus.
Speaker 1: So basically there is this universe of people who have HIV,
Speaker 1: who are HIV positive, but who are not getting really sick.
Speaker 1: And this is an era when most people who get
Speaker 1: HIV get AIDS and die essentially right, get very sick.
Speaker 1: And so you look at these patients and you see
Speaker 1: that there is a particular kind of a cell in
Speaker 1: their immune system that seems to be fighting the disease.
Speaker 3: Is that right, That's absolutely correct. You hit the nail
Speaker 3: on the head there. And so with this insight, people said,
Speaker 3: what we should do is stimulate with a vaccine, not antibodies,
Speaker 3: but CD eight positive T cells.
Speaker 1: So basically, like the first idea was sort of a
Speaker 1: classic vaccine idea like let's create a vaccine based on
Speaker 1: antibodies that didn't work, and so then the second idea
Speaker 1: is to stimulate T cells, this particular part of the
Speaker 1: immune response that vaccines don't usually deal with.
Speaker 3: Instead, it was felt that those vaccines may not keep
Speaker 3: people from getting infected, but if they had the vaccine
Speaker 3: and the people got infected, that they may all become
Speaker 3: long term non progressors, so they wouldn't get sick.
Speaker 1: Which is actually what you care about, right, what you
Speaker 1: want is for people to live long, healthy lives.
Speaker 3: That's absolutely correct.
Speaker 1: So you do this trial and what do you find?
Speaker 3: It did not do what we had hoped it would do.
Speaker 1: And what year more or less is this.
Speaker 3: We've been doing this for twenty years of efficacy trials,
Speaker 3: and seven different trials have been done and none of
Speaker 3: them have shown really good protection.
Speaker 1: So a long time into the history of this disease.
Speaker 1: This is decades of work in and if you'll allow
Speaker 1: me this sort of dumb journaloius question, what was that like?
Speaker 3: It's terribly disappointing. You know, you put a lot of
Speaker 3: effort into this, your hoping that finally something will work
Speaker 3: against this illness. And when it doesn't work at all,
Speaker 3: you're really back to square one. So it's extremely disheartening.
Speaker 1: Why is it so hard to vaccinate against HIV?
Speaker 3: So unlike most viruses, most viruses enter cells of your body,
Speaker 3: they use the machinery of those cells to replicate, and
Speaker 3: then they leave your body and they're gone. They leave,
Speaker 3: and you're no longer sick. When they're not there.
Speaker 1: You get a cold and then you get better.
Speaker 3: Right, and there's no cold virus left in the cells
Speaker 3: of your.
Speaker 1: Body because your immune system destroys all the virus, right.
Speaker 3: And so with a vaccine, all you need to do,
Speaker 3: actually you don't need to prevent the infection. All you
Speaker 3: have to do is knock down the amount of virus
Speaker 3: it's replicating to decrease your symptoms until the virus goes away.
Speaker 1: Okay.
Speaker 3: HIV is different in that it infects certain cells of
Speaker 3: your body and it actually integrates its genome into the
Speaker 3: genome of those cells and it never goes away.
Speaker 1: Huh.
Speaker 3: I like to think of it like playing whack a mole.
Speaker 3: So it's basically hibernating in those cells, and then the
Speaker 3: virus will will pop out every now and then, and
Speaker 3: you need to try and knock it down, and our
Speaker 3: antiretroviral therapy that we give to individuals doesn't do anything
Speaker 3: to the virus that's sitting there hibernating. It's only when
Speaker 3: when it reactivates and pops itself up that the antiretrovirals
Speaker 3: have any effect.
Speaker 1: This is why the antiretrovirals can keep you from getting sick,
Speaker 1: but they cannot cure you per se.
Speaker 3: Yeah, because it it'll never get rid of all of
Speaker 3: those hibernating viruses.
Speaker 1: Uh huh. So what does that mean from the point
Speaker 1: of view of developing a vaccine.
Speaker 3: That means that you have to block every single infection
Speaker 3: from occurring.
Speaker 1: That seems wildly difficult. Tell me, give me some hope.
Speaker 1: Now I am here sitting here thinking there is no way.
Speaker 1: You know, but I don't know anything. Tell me why
Speaker 1: there is a way.
Speaker 3: So certain individuals who are infected with HIV develop what
Speaker 3: we call broadly neutralizing antibodies. So these are antibodies that
Speaker 3: can neutralize seventy eighty ninety ninety five percent of hivs
Speaker 3: that are circulating in the world.
Speaker 1: These are just patients who have HIV who have this
Speaker 1: particularly robust natural immune response absolutely.
Speaker 3: So we know two things. One that there is a
Speaker 3: way that the immune system can develop these types of antibodies.
Speaker 3: The other thing that we know is that these antibodies
Speaker 3: target multiple different sites on the HIV envelope protein. So
Speaker 3: there are multiple targets on the HIV envelope that can
Speaker 3: be used in the vaccine to stimulate these types of antibodies.
Speaker 3: And we have actually done a clinical trial called the
Speaker 3: AMP trial, where we took one of these broadly neutralizing
Speaker 3: antibodies and we gave it to people who were at
Speaker 3: risk of HIV infection, and at a certain level, those
Speaker 3: individuals were protected against infection.
Speaker 1: And as I understand it, that technique works to protect
Speaker 1: people against some strains of HIV, but not all, right,
Speaker 1: And so what percentage of strains were people protected against
Speaker 1: in that trial.
Speaker 3: For this antibody, It was it was about thirty percent
Speaker 3: of viruses.
Speaker 1: Okay, so that not that broadly neutralizing in that instance.
Speaker 3: No, but this was one of the very first broadly
Speaker 3: neutralizing antibodies that we had that we did this trial with.
Speaker 3: There are much broader and better neutralizing antibodies that are
Speaker 3: available now. But what this is also showing us is
Speaker 3: the roadmap of if we can develop a vaccine that
Speaker 3: will recapitulate the development of these broadly neutralizing antibodies in
Speaker 3: people through immunization rather than through infection. If we can
Speaker 3: get that level of antibody high enough, then we know
Speaker 3: that they should be protected.
Speaker 1: So the basic idea is, like, we have these antibodies
Speaker 1: that seem to work, let's develop a vaccine that can
Speaker 1: induce people to develop these antibodies.
Speaker 3: Yes, that's exactly it. So there's still many big hurdles
Speaker 3: to get over, but the initial studies have shown that
Speaker 3: we can actually get the immune cells in the body
Speaker 3: to start producing the correct type of antibodies.
Speaker 1: These broadly neutralizing antibodies that we want.
Speaker 3: Well, they're sort of the precursors of the broadly neutralizing anivites.
Speaker 1: They're on the JV team. With some work, they can
Speaker 1: make the varsity.
Speaker 3: We need to shepherd them along, mentor them, tutor them,
Speaker 3: and get them to be broadly neutralizing.
Speaker 1: So still a long way away. Clearly, it's a profoundly
Speaker 1: difficult virus to vaccinate against. Drug treatment for HIV, on
Speaker 1: the other hand, has been quite successful, right, and now
Speaker 1: you can do prophylaxis with drugs, which is great. Obviously,
Speaker 1: it reduces human suffering a tremendous amount. Do we need
Speaker 1: vaccines less because the drugs work so well.
Speaker 3: It gives us a bit of a breather in that
Speaker 3: we know that there are other ways to protect people
Speaker 3: who are at risk of HIV infection. But there's a
Speaker 3: lot of healthcare delivery that would need to go into
Speaker 3: protecting the world against HIV in the absence of a vaccine,
Speaker 3: and you need the infrastructure to do that, And in
Speaker 3: parts of the world it's hard to get to the
Speaker 3: people to actually give the medications that frequently. A vaccine
Speaker 3: just makes it much easier to provide that protection.
Speaker 1: And it seems like there is at least some correlation
Speaker 1: between parts of the world where it's hard to get
Speaker 1: people HIV drugs all the time and places where kind
Speaker 1: of suffering from HIV is high.
Speaker 3: Absolutely.
Speaker 1: It's interesting how science generally is more often than not
Speaker 1: the story of things not working. Right. We tend, you know,
Speaker 1: in the media, say to focus on things that work,
Speaker 1: but I feel like in the aggregate, science is things
Speaker 1: not working. And I'm curious, you have spent a lot
Speaker 1: of time working on things not working. Sort of what
Speaker 1: have you learned from working on such a hard project.
Speaker 3: The most difficult problems are the most interesting to work on.
Speaker 3: For all the work we've done on HIV vaccines, we
Speaker 3: don't have anything that's really working yet, but we learned
Speaker 3: so much that actually helped with the development of the
Speaker 3: RSV vaccine, with the development of the COVID vaccine, and
Speaker 3: so we see these other successes that have come out
Speaker 3: of our hard work on HIV, and so that really
Speaker 3: helps us to say, well, we may not have gotten
Speaker 3: there for HIV yet, but we've helped in other ways
Speaker 3: and for other diseases are Do you.
Speaker 1: Feel like you're generally an optimistic person.
Speaker 3: I hope so. I don't think I I'm as optimistic
Speaker 3: as some people I know, But you know I'm not
Speaker 3: a Debbie downer.
Speaker 1: Yes, you know.
Speaker 3: I think if I were on my own trying to
Speaker 3: do this, it wouldn't work. But the community of the
Speaker 3: HIV vaccine researchers sort of keep each other optimistic and
Speaker 3: moving forward.
Speaker 1: Thanks very much for your time. I really appreciate it.
Speaker 3: It was my pleasure.
Speaker 1: Thank you very much. Richard Taut has been researching HIV
Speaker 1: for thirty five years and working on vaccines for twenty
Speaker 1: five He's the Deputy director at the Vaccine Research Center
Speaker 1: at the National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Disease at
Speaker 1: Anahe thanks to both my guests, Christine Rouziu and Richard
Speaker 1: Kaup next week. There's lots of mosquitoes in the world,
Speaker 1: and not all of them are welly good at spreading disease,
Speaker 1: butadies Agypty is one of the best mosquitoes viruses and
Speaker 1: the history of the world. Incubation is a co production
Speaker 1: of Pushkin Industries and Ruby Studio at iHeartMedia. It's produced
Speaker 1: by Kate Ferby and Brittany Cronin. The show is edited
Speaker 1: by Lacey Roberts. It's mastered by Sarah Brigueire, fact checking
Speaker 1: by Joseph Friedman. Our executive producers are Lacey Roberts and
Speaker 1: Matt Romano. I'm Jacob Goldstein. Thanks for listening.