The web portal Study in Greece is campaigning for the promotion and international visibility of Greek Universities and the comparative educational advantages of our country. In particular, the campaign focuses on the foreign language study programs that Greek Universities offer to Greek and international students. The initiative is supported by the General Secretariat of Higher Education of the Ministry of Education and Religious Affairs and the General Secretariat for Greeks Abroad and Public Diplomacy of the Ministry for Foreign Affairs. In this context, a number of educational programs and actions are presented in detail on a regular basis, such as undergraduate and postgraduate programs, summer schools etc, to inform international students about the many foreign language options offered by Greek Universities.

Study in Greece interviewed Professor Vasileios Kotsis, Director of the MSc in Cardiovascular Disease offered at the School of Medicine of the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, about the program, its features and what it has to offer to international students.

Dr Vasileios Kotsis is Professor of Professor of Internal Medicine, in the field of Arterial Hypertension, at the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki. From September 2020 to date he is the Director of the 3rd University Pathology Clinic of the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki and has been a member of the General Assembly of the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki Medical School.

Dr. Kotsis, please tell us about the Postgraduate Program in Cardiovascular Disease offered by the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki - the main teaching objectives and its scientific content.

This program is organized to offer theoretical, clinical and research knowledge regarding the Cardiovascular Diseases and specifically the main Cardiovascular Risk Factors, such as Hypertension, Diabetes Mellitus, Lipids and Obesity. As these Cardiovascular Risk Factors consist the new epidemic worldwide, their deeply knowledge is of major importance especially for general practitioners, internists and cardiologists. At the end of this program, the students will be confident to act independently in the treatment of these patients, but also to conduct research at this field. The lessons are online, and the physical attendance is limited to help students that are already working. Teaching sessions are during the weekend.

Given that the program is taught in English, and since we are in the application period, please tell us why an international student should choose it among others in Medicine?

There are many programs regarding cardiovascular diseases, but few combine all the main and well-known Cardiovascular Risk Factors extensively. We analyze cardiovascular risk factors from pathophysiology to clinical practice, treatment and target organ damages but also research in the field. Students have also the opportunity to attend the out-patient clinics dealing with Hypertension, Diabetes Mellitus and Lipidology. Greece and especially Thessaloniki is a place full of history and interesting to visit as it is one of the biggest Universities in the Balkans.

Do you believe that Greece and Greek institutions can advance medical knowledge and draw in more international students?

The answer is absolutely yes! During the last years, Greece and Greek institutions jumped as regards the privatization of medical school and its postgraduate programs for foreign students. This first step attracted already many students all over the world, making a great impression to those already came to study in Greece. Importantly, Greek medical academics are well recognized in Europe, with highly impact academic work and collaborations all over the world. Moreover, the bureaucracy procedure is easy and we are trying to make it as simple as possible. Of course, coming in Greece for studies could not only impact to their medical knowledge, but also to the knowledge of our rich history and culture. Importantly the level of knowledge that a student is gaining is high and the M.Sc. is recognized in all European countries with a competitive low fee compared to other countries.

Around 18 million people die from cardiovascular diseases each year, making them the top cause of death worldwide. What is the situation in our country, and since prevention saves lives, why do we have such a high mortality?

That’s exactly the point of this program. We already know the impact of cardiovascular disease on mortality and morbidity, but we do not act early according to the worldwide guidelines regarding the treatment and management of Cardiovascular Risk Factors to prevent diseases. Doctor’s inertia is the key in order to lower the huge percentages of patients out-of-therapeutic goals for cardiovascular risk factors prevention. We must be aware of the target organ damages as they predispose to the clinical disease, learn deeply the cardiovascular disease continuum and be able to treat our patients holistically.

How do you think technology and digital data could help more and more patients and doctors use digital tools and applications to better prevent, diagnose and care for cardiovascular diseases?

Especially in Greece, where many people live away from urban centers away from specialized healthcare providers, technology and digital tools can be a solution for their treatment, management and follow-up helping GPs to prevent diseases. Also, digital data can be used from experts to create new tools and applications in order to replace expensive machines and help the everyday clinical practice in both diagnosis and prevention.

Tell us a few things about the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, concerning its efforts for internationalization and its high-level scientific work.

Aristotle University of Thessaloniki showed its innovative aspect as it is the first University in Greece creating English speaking MSc programs in an open-minded effort to internationalization of the studies. This effort was well accepted by Greek academics working at Aristotle University of Thessaloniki but also by international faculty, as all lesson can be performed and attend online. Greek medical academics are well recognized in Europe, with highly impact academic work and collaborations all over the world.

Application deadline: September 10, 2023

Read also via Greek News Agenda: Students from 27 countries at the international program of AUTh Medical School; Greek Universities: English-taught undergraduate programs in Archaeology and Medicine attract foreign students; Study in Greece | Bachelor's Degree: Professor Christos Tsatsanis on the International Program in Medicine at the University of Crete

The post SiG Masters | MSc in Cardiovascular Disease at AUTh appeared first on Greek News Agenda.

The web portal Study in Greece is campaigning for the promotion and international visibility of Greek Universities and the comparative educational advantages of our country. In particular, the campaign focuses on the foreign language study programs that Greek Universities offer to Greek and international students. The initiative is supported by the General Secretariat of Higher Education of the Ministry of Education and Religious Affairs and the General Secretariat for Greeks Abroad and Public Diplomacy of the Ministry for Foreign Affairs. In this context, a number of educational programs and actions are presented in detail on a regular basis, such as undergraduate and postgraduate programs, summer schools etc, to inform international students about the many foreign language options offered by Greek Universities.

Study in Greece interviewed Professor Christos Tsatsanis, Coordinator of the International Program of Medicine offered at the University of Crete (UOC) about the program, its features and what it has to offer to international students.

Christos Tsatsanis is Professor of Clinical Chemistry at the Department of Laboratory Medicine of the University of Crete, where he coordinates of the undergraduate International Program in Medicine. He is also a Researcher at the Institute of Molecular Biology and Biotechnology, Foundation of Research and Technology Greece (FORTH) in the field of immunology, where he is a Group leader, with his lab analyzing mechanisms regulating activation and inactivation of macrophages at the level of signal transduction, cell metabolism and epigenetics.

Mr Tsatsanis, please present to us the brand new undergraduate International Program in Medicine offered by the University of Crete.

The University of Crete, School of Medicine, has been successfully training medical doctors for the last 40 years, reaching excellence in medical training and research. Over the years, the school of medicine has successfully prepared its students to become effective and reliable professionals internationally. This hard work is reflected in the rankings of the University of Crete School of Medicine. Based on this expertise, we have now launched a new, English-taught Program in Medicine, aiming to provide state-of-the-art medical training to students from all over the world.

Its structure is the same as the one of the Greek program that successfully runs to date. This is a 6-year curriculum, divided into 12 semesters. The program is organized in three study cycles, the basic science cycle (1st - 4th semester), the pre-clinical cycle (5th - 8th semester) and the clinical cycle (9th -12th semester), the latter solely focusing on clinical hands-on training.

The basic cycle includes courses such as anatomy, physiology, biochemistry, biology and other, which function as pillars to build upon the medical knowledge that will be further developed through the preclinical cycle courses. During this cycle, and as soon as the first year of studies, medical students have the opportunity to experience clinical practice through the course on Introduction to public health, where students receive their first clinical training in primary care centers.

Starting in the fifth semester, students enter the pre-clinical stage of the studies, which is the bridge between the basic and the clinical cycles. The first part of the pre-clinical cycle includes topics that offer knowledge and skills necessary for the clinical courses, such as Pathophysiology, Pharmacology, Laboratory Medicine, a course aiming to introduce students into solving clinical problems with the help of laboratory analyses using problem-based learning approach, and the introduction to Clinical Medicine, being the first hands-on clinical course on physical examination of the patient. 

The second part of the pre-clinical cycle includes most of the theoretical clinical subjects such as Internal Medicine, Surgery, Neurology, Radiology-Medical imaging, Pediatrics etc, providing the necessary foundation for the clinical clerkships.

In the final two years of the studies, medical students are immersed into the clinical cycle of the studies, which is based on clinical clerkships in all clinics of the University Hospital, a 700-bed University hospital that offers state of the art clinical care and training to students and residents. The first part, of the clinical training  comprises of the two core clinical clerkships in Internal Medicine and Surgery, each lasting 16 weeks (in semesters 9 and 10 respectively) followed by  the clinical clerkships in all other medical specialties during the 11th and 12th semesters.

A fundamental element of the Undergraduate Studies Program is the existence of the general prerequisite courses for entering the third cycle of studies, and of the targeted prerequisite courses for starting specific clinical rotations.  Mandatory requirements for all clinical clerkships reflect the school’s policy in providing the best possible preparation of the students to gain the most out of the clinical clerkships. In addition, successful completion of the clinical clerkships in Internal Medicine and Surgery is necessary to start the other clinical rotations.

In addition to the compulsory courses the program includes a large number of elective courses that provide knowledge and skills focused to a specific topic aiming to further expose students to specialized areas. The elective courses are allocated to each semester based on the current knowledge of the students, and aim to help them make more mature and goal-oriented choices.

In parallel, the Undergraduate Studies Program is enriched with courses (both compulsory and elective) that promote humanitarian values and enhance the development of the student’s personality based on the values of compassion and empathy, essential attributes of modern physicians.

The program has some additional unique features which stem from the fact that the Medical School of the University of Crete is strong in basic, translational and clinical research. The curriculum includes courses that focus on understanding the basis of the diseases at a molecular level. In the fifth semester a compulsory course on Molecular Medicine introduces students to the molecular basis of diseases, providing examples of the most up-to-date therapeutic targeting of molecular mechanisms in clinical practice. Several elective courses also provide insight in the pathogenetic mechanisms of diseases, reflecting current research at the different laboratories of the medical school. Another unique elective course in our curriculum is a hands-on laboratory training on Basic Science in Medicine, that gives the opportunity to students to actively participate in research being conducted at the Medical School laboratories.

This program is the first attempt by the University of Crete to offer a comprehensive foreign language bachelor degree. Tell us about this decision and why the field of Medicine was chosen.

The University of Crete has been committed to internalization and diversity, having a strong international exchange program and several English-taught graduate programs. The Medical School is the largest school of the University of Crete and has established a strong curriculum that was recently externally evaluated receiving outstanding scores in all sub-criteria. Having faculty that has been trained at top Universities and Hospitals abroad, many of which in the United States, and maintaining active collaborations with international Universities and Hospitals, the expertise was there, ready to be utilized. Establishing an English-taught international program was within the vision of the Medical School and something strongly suggested from all external evaluations of the School in the last fifteen years. Now that the legal framework allows the establishment of such programs, we embarked in organizing the International Program in Medicine.

Since the application period has just started, please tell us why an international student should choose this specific program.

The students who will join this program will receive training through a modern curriculum and become part of a school with a long successful tradition in training the future generation of medical doctors. A main advantage of our program is having a small class, which facilitates a personal approach in teaching. The program accepts 30 students, who will have the opportunity to be taught in the form of lectures, seminars and tutorials, including hands-on work in laboratories during the first years of studies and in the clinic, during clerkships. Having a small group of students, most courses are interactive utilizing a problem-based approach to facilitate clinical thinking and decision making. Personalized training will also be supported through tutorials. In addition, each student will have an academic advisor who will provide guidance throughout the studies.

The faculty of the Medical School have received training at top Universities and Hospitals throughout the world and are in position to offer high level training to the students. To further support internationalization, a large number of visiting faculty from Europe and the US, experts in their fields, will participate in teaching, sharing their expertise in particular topics.

The structure and content of the curriculum includes all knowledge required for the USMLE tests, to support preparation of students for continuing their career as medical residents in the US. A large number of the University of Crete Medical School alumni follow this path and pursue residency in hospitals outside Greece and our program provides them with the necessary knowledge and skills. The Medical School has already a bilateral agreement with Boston University for student exchange and a number of outstanding students are offered summer internships at BU, while BU medical students visit the University of Crete Medical School for training. Additional exchange opportunities are available to our students at Universities and Hospitals in the US and Europe.

Students who wish to participate in summer internships and exchanges will be supported financially through our program to cover part of their mobility costs. In addition, merit-based scholarships will be awarded to the students of the International Program in Medicine through the teaching assistantship program.

Students of the International Program in Medicine will have the opportunity to join an active academic community at the University of Crete, which is organized in a modern campus having all schools and facilities, such as gym with indoor swimming pool, library, student center as well as the University Hospital, within walking distance to each other. The collaborating Foundation for Research and Technology, an internationally recognized research center and the best in Greece, is located adjacent to the University Campus, also within walking distance.

Finally, becoming a student at the University of Crete will allow living on one of the most beautiful islands of the Mediterranean, offering mild weather throughout the year with an average of 300 days of sunshine a year and unique culture, being at a crossroad of civilizations. Heraklion is a very safe and vibrant city of approximately 180.000 people among which 18.000 are students, offering an exciting student life.

Which are your expectations in terms of attracting international students?

The International Program in Medicine abides by the values of the University of Crete, which are based on academic excellence, diversity and equality. We want to attract the best candidates from around the world, since we are going to invest in training them to become outstanding physicians, members of the University of Crete family and future ambassadors of our University. Our aim is to have a class of motivated students who will receive personal attention and training throughout their studies. Attracting candidates from very diverse backgrounds and countries will further support forming an academically strong group of students.

How do you believe that both the University as well as the local community of Heraklion would benefit by attracting international students?

Heraklion attracts more than 2 million tourists every year, creating an international environment, yet the University of Crete has a very small percentage of international students, primarily due to the language barrier. Establishing an English-taught program will enhance the international profile of the University and increase the diversity of the student population, who will have a lot to gain from the culture and experience brought from the international students. This diversity will be reflected to the local community, which already has a large international community from people working in research institutes and tourism.

This program demonstrates that the University of Crete strongly invests in extroversion by promoting innovation and research while pursuing an interdisciplinary approach to knowledge. Tell us about these initiatives.

The University of Crete has a strong focus on research, which requires international collaborations and extroversion. The University, together with the other academic establishments and research institutes in Crete, has invested during the recent years into creating hubs of excellence in specific scientific disciplines. Close collaboration with the adjacent Foundation of Research and Technology (FORTH) has resulted in creating a center for Precision Medicine and generated state of the art infrastructures for both basic and clinical research. The University of Crete and FORTH have strong departments of computer science which find applications in medicine. Another collaboration with the Hellenic Center for Marine Research has created infrastructure for identifying health promoting products from marine sources. Collaborations with the Hellenic Mediterranean University, research institutes and companies in Heraklion has also created the innovation hub on Agrofood, in which the medical school plays a key role. These are only few examples of the research and innovation taking place at the University of Crete, without mentioning the large number of European and other international research projects that are ongoing. The expertise that stems from research is readily reflected to the curriculum of the Medical School.  Students are exposed to research and several opportunities arise through these initiatives that allow students to participate.

Note that the applications deadline is on June 16.

Read also via Greek News Agenda: Greek Universities: English-taught undergraduate programs in Archaeology and Medicine attract foreign students; FORTH, the Foundation for Research and Technology in the island of Crete; Students from 27 countries at the international program of AUTh Medical School

The post Study in Greece | Bachelor’s Degree: Professor Christos Tsatsanis on the International Program in Medicine at the University of Crete appeared first on Greek News Agenda.

Greek News Agenda pays tribute to Greek physician and researcher Georgios Papanicolaou (May 13, 1883- February 19, 1962) to mark the 60th anniversary of his death. A pioneer in cytopathology and early cancer detection, Papanicolaou invented the famous "Pap smear” test that came to play a leading role in preventing uterine cancer, thus saving the lives of millions of women around the world.

A life devoted to humanity

Georgios Papanicolaou worked as a researcher in the United States for nearly 50 years. Many of Papanicolaou’s colleagues in the US, such as Dr. Charles Cameron, described his life as “a life devoted to mankind”. Actions spoke louder than words in Papanicolaou’s case, as he dedicated his life to science completely and through his revolutionary work succeeded in changing women’s health forever.

Background: studies and early career

Born in the coastal town of Kymi, Euboea, Georgios was one of the four children of Nikolaos Papanicolaou, a physician popular enough to be elected mayor and Member of Parliament. Showing a particular inclination towards medicine from an early age, Georgios succeeded in gaining entry at the School of Medicine of the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens in 1898 at the age of 15! After his graduation, he returned to his hometown, but was reluctant to practice medicine; instead, he decided to study philosophy and biology, being influenced, among others, by the theories of Kant, Nietzsche, Schopenhauer, and Goethe.

Following his father’s will, he continued his studies in Biology and Zoology in Germany, where he acquired his Ph.D. in 1910; it was during this “German period” of his life that Papanicolaou decided that research and biology would be the twofold purpose of his life. As he wrote in a letter to his family, “I quit being a dreamer. Science snatched me up from Nietzsche’s arms. I stand on solid ground”.

From Greece to the US: The road to Papanicolaou’s medical breakthrough

Following his return to Greece in 1910, Papanicolaou got married to the educated and open-minded Andromache Mavrogeni, a descendant of the legendary Mavrogenous family which played a pivotal role in the Greek War of Independence. Realizing that the ground in his home country was not, at the time, fertile for his scientific research, Papanicolaou and his wife immigrated to the United States in 1913. It is well worth noting that Andromache would serve as Papanicolaou´s research subject, especially in the initial phase of his work. As she had stated, “There was no other option for me but to follow him inside the lab, making his way of life mine.” In fact, she was so devoted to him that she decided not to have children in order to always be by his side, which she never regretted.

Papanicolaou’s career in the US developed rapidly. After overcoming initial hurdles, he landed a part-time research role in the department of pathology at the former New York Hospital and soon moved to a full-time research position at Cornell University Medical College in New York. There, he commenced his studies on cervical cancer, which, in the early 1900s was the leading cause of cancer deaths in women. In 1928, he introduced the world to a technique used to diagnose cervical cancer that he called “the Pap smear”.

However, it took around two decades for the medical community to accept his work. In 1952, he convinced the National Cancer Institute (NCI) to conduct a massive trial using his Pap smear technique. The NCI trials continued and eventually led to the Pap test, which saved countless women’s lives.

The diachronic value of Papanicolaou’s legacy

Papanicolaou’s bibliography consists of 158 articles and five scientific books, the most prominent being the famous Atlas of Exfoliative Cytology. The book is a milestone not only in the science of cytology but also in the medical bibliography of the 20th century as a whole. He was nominated twice for a Nobel Prize in Medicine but didn’t receive it as the committee would give the award to doctors who had discovered therapies and not to researchers who were engaged in the prevention of disease.

However, he was awarded many medical prizes, both in his lifetime and posthumously, the most notable being the Albert Lasker Award for Clinical Medical Research, bestowed by the American Public Health Association in 1950, and the Medal of Honor, given to him by the American Cancer Society in 1952. Additionally, he was conferred honorary membership to the Obstetrical and Gynecological Society of Athens and the New York Academy of Sciences. Moreover, the Cancer Research Institute in Miami, where Papanicolaou was a manager for a few months prior to his death, was renamed after him in recognition of his pioneering work. Last but not least, the National Kapodistrian University of Athens created, in his honor, a “Papanicolaou Museum” at the Laboratory of Descriptive Anatomy of its Medical faculty.

Papanicolaou’s contribution to medical research was game-changing. As Dr. Rema Rao (Assistant Professor of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine at the Weill Cornell Medical College, also working at the NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital) acknowledged in an interview: “The Pap test is one of the most important inventions in humankind because it was extremely challenging to prevent cervical cancer and the severity of it. The only answer was the Pap test.”To date, even after the introduction of HPV vaccination into clinical practice, Papanicolaou's method remains an essential component of the prevention strategy against cancer and has resulted in a 70% decrease in cervical cancer mortality in the USA over the last 70 years.  

More info & photos: Visit Dr Pap website | Read George N. Papanicolaou, M.D., Life and Career: The way to the Pap Test book, published by the Hellenic Medical Society of New York.

E.S. 

The post Georgios Papanicolaou | Paying Tribute to a medical pioneer and legend appeared first on Greek News Agenda.

Greece-based project EarlY WArning System for Mosquito-borne Diseases (EYWA) is the winner of the European Innovation Council- Horizon Prize for 'Early Warning for Epidemics' becoming a model of successful European partnership and excellence while demonstrating the Union’s capability of providing solutions to global challenges.

“My sincere congratulations to EYWA – the winner of the EIC Horizon Prize on Early Warning for Epidemics. The solution, based on Earth observation and other data, improves Europe’s preparedness to fight vector-borne diseases, also addressing the effects of climate change on human health, at home and abroad […]” said Mariya Gabriel, Commissioner for Innovation, Research, Culture, Education and Youth.

More specifically, fifteen European partners -six of which are Greek- collaborated under the umbrella of “EuroGEO Action Group Earth Observation for Epidemics of Vector-borne Diseases” led by the BEYOND Centre of Earth Observation Research and Satellite Remote Sensing of the National Observatory of Athens, Modern Greece’s first research center founded in 1842. The challenge was to develop a scalable, reliable, and cost-effective early warning system prototype to forecast and monitor vector-borne diseases (including malaria, Zika, dengue, or yellow fever) which - according to the World Health Organisation (WHO) - account for more than 17% of all infectious diseases in over 100 countries, causing more than 700 000 deaths annually.

Within this context – taking into account that the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development aims to end the epidemics of malaria and neglected tropical diseases by 2030- the EYWA becomes a key weapon in the arsenal to fight epidemics. It transforms scientific knowledge into a decision-making tool, contributing significantly to combatting and controlling the threat of mosquito-borne diseases. In particular, the unique solution developed by EYWA:

• enhances mosquito surveillance and control at various Spatio-temporal scales and in different climatic zones, and guides day to day prevention and mitigation actions
• significantly reduces the entomological risk and results in the aversion of human cases in thousands of villages where EYWA is employed
• implements the One Health and Eco-Health approaches by investigating arbovirus infections, while taking into account environmental and socio-economic resilience. 

The technological novelty of EYWA lies in the efficient handling of multiple data sources such as entomological, epidemiological, Earth Observation, crowd, and ancillary geospatial data, along with dynamic and data-driven models to generate knowledge on the mosquitoes’ abundance and pathogens’ transmission. Thanks to data provided by the satellites and Core Services of Copernicus (the EU's Earth observation program), EYWA reliably depicts the dynamics of mosquito habitats and breeding sites.

The BEYOND Centre of Excellence of the National Observatory of Athens (NOA) develops research in a number of thematic areas and provides disaster management services addressing priorities and needs in South-Eastern Europe, the Mediterranean, N. Africa, the Middle East, and the Balkans; its activity is being supported by a multidisciplinary team of experts comprising of more than 35 scientists. The NOA is one of the country’s Research Centres operating under the General Secretariat for Research and Innovation; founded in 1842, it is the first research center of Modern Greece and South-eastern Europe, thus counting more than 175 years of contribution to research and society.

EIC Horizon Prize Early Warning for Epidemics – Winner: EYWA | Dr Haris Kontoes, Research Director of National Observatory of Athens BEYOND Center

More info: visit the EYWA platform and BEYOND Center website

See also on GNA:

E.S. 

The post Greece- based project wins European Innovation Council Prize, contributing to the Global Fight Against Epidemics appeared first on Greek News Agenda.

Spyridon Vlachopoulos, is Professor of Public Law at Law School in the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens. His areas of interest are Constitutional Law, National and International Protection of Fundamental Rights, Political and Constitutional History et al. and he is the author of several scientific articles in the field of Public Law, especially Constitutional Law, Constitutional History Fundamental Rights, Civil and Social Rights. Since 1992 he is an attorney at Law, specialized in Public Law cases (e.g.: Protection of Fundamental Rights, Environmental Law, Public Procurement Law, Civil Servants Law), mainly before the Council of State (the highest Greek Administrative Court). He has been a member of several legislative Committees and he is member of the Greek Data Protection Authority and of the Academic Board of the “Academy of Transparency and Human Rights for Good Governance” of the European Public Law Organization. He is also the President of the Commission for the Assessment of the Quality of the Law-making Process.

Professor Vlachopoulos spoke to Greek News Agenda* about the impact of the coronavirus pandemic on individual rights and freedoms, particularly of the vulnerable groups, explaining the term constitutional “mithridatism”, illustrating also the opportunities and risks of digital technology posed in work and education. Professor Vlachopoulos also spoke about the role of the EU and international organizations in the fight against the pandemic.

The need to safeguard public health against the coronavirus pandemic has resulted in the restriction of fundamental rights and freedoms. In your opinion, what are the limits that should be set on these restrictions and what is the right balance between enforcement and a self-determined compliance of citizens with the measures that should be taken?

The protection of human life and public health is a constitutional obligation of the State and can therefore justify the restriction of our fundamental rights. However, there are limitations to these restrictions. That is to say, the legal order is not completely free in restricting our individual rights, but there are certain limitations based on the principle of proportionality. This means, firstly, that the restrictive measures should be appropriate to achieve a purpose, secondly, that these measures should be indispensable, meaning that there are no other less restrictive measures that can achieve the same purpose and thirdly, the restrictive measures should be proportionate in the strict sense of the term (stricto sensu proportionality). In other words, the benefits of restricting our individual rights should outweigh the negative consequences. We have always to keep in mind that our Constitution protects an individual not only as a biological human being, but also as a personality. The personality of an individual becomes meaningful through the possibility of exercising individual freedoms, since a person who is not free, is not in line with the constitutional model. Let's say this with an example: in the context of dealing with the pandemic, "smart" technological applications are not allowed to be used on our mobile phones, based on which all of our contacts will be tracked. Dealing with the pandemic cannot lead to the creation of a "Big Brother".

In your last book “Constitutional Mithridatism. Individual Freedoms in pandemic eras” you are using the term constitutional “mithridatism" to refer to the risk of addiction to the suspension of fundamental rights in times of crisis. Can you briefly analyze what exactly do you mean by this term? Are life and public health two "super-rights" that justify the development of constitutional "mithridatism"?

The term constitutional “mithridatism" was inspired by the story of Mithridates, the last king of the Hellenistic Pontus. Mithridates, in order to protect himself from being poisoned by his enemies, he was regularly taking small and increasing doses of poison with the aim of developing immunity. Eventually, of course, he fell victim to this tactic, as he failed to commit suicide in order to avoid falling into the hands of his enemies at the end of his life as he had developed immunity to poison. With the term constitutional "mithridatism", I tried to explain that although we should tolerate some temporary restrictions on our fundamental rights in order to fight against the pandemic, we should be aware of the seriousness of these restrictions. Also, we should not get used to these restrictions and take them for granted or consider them of little importance. Our individual rights were gained in their majority through long-lasting fights. We should, therefore, acknowledge that restrictions have to be only temporary, while we shouldn’t become addicted to the understanding that restrictions to our freedoms are justified at any time. Human life and health are not two "super-rights". As constitutionalists accept, all individual rights are of equal legal power and none is superior to the other a priori. What is particular about the right to life is that it is not subject to temporary restrictions, unlike all other rights. In other words, when someone loses his life, there is no return, there is no "come back". Therefore, the protection of human life may justify wider restrictions on other fundamental rights. But again, even when it comes to the protection of human life, there are limits to the restrictions. The protection of life and health is not a “blank check” for the State to impose any kind of restrictions. As I said before, the Constitution protects individuals as integrated personalities along with their freedoms and not just as biological human beings.

Do you consider that the human rights of vulnerable groups (minorities, refugees, children, unemployed, etc.) are more threatened by the pandemic and the taken measures, and how can this threat be prevented?

It is obvious that the human rights of vulnerable groups are more threatened by the pandemic and the taken measures. Minorities, refugees, the unemployed and children are more severely affected by the restriction measures. More generally, I would say that these measures have a greater impact on the lower social classes. Let me just explain this with a few examples: the ban on the operation of stores does not equally affect those businessmen who have bank deposits and those who do not. Someone who lives with his big family in a small apartment in the center of Athens is not experiencing the lockdown on the same terms with someone else who lives in the suburbs in a country house with a garden. Those who go to work in their private car and those who have to use the crowded public transport are not equally exposed to the coronavirus. A study has been published about Barcelona, showing that the coronavirus has a greater impact on people from the working-class districts of the city. The State should therefore be aware that restriction measures against the coronavirus affect more the lower social classes and thus it has to take all necessary measures to reduce the emerging social inequalities. This is not only a political but also a constitutional requirement, as the principle of equality is protected in all European Constitutions.

The opportunities offered by digital technology concerning teleworking, distance learning, e-economy and e-health have been particularly developed and used in the fight against the pandemic. As this trend seems to be strengthening, given the duration of the pandemic but also in general, do you think that social inequalities or labor rights issues etc could arise?

It has already become obvious from the above analysis that technological applications at work, in education and in the economy can lead to inequalities and raise labor rights issues. This is where the State has to intervene and address these risks. As distance learning, for example, necessitates access to computers, the legal system should ensure that all students have this possibility. Teleworking potential should not be a pretext or a reason for the violation of labor rights, nor for the surveillance of employees’ private life. Therefore, the legal system should be vigilant and establish the appropriate rules of law in order to deal with these risks, as well as strengthen controls where such risks exist.

The pandemic is undoubtedly a global phenomenon and many argue that global cooperation is needed in order to deal with it. Do you think that issues such as the development of vaccines, the regulation of the collection and surveillance of personal and biometric data or the financial support of the most affected countries, are issues that can be tackled more effectively at an international level and how do you think this could be done?

The problems caused by the pandemic can only be tackled effectively at an international level. Nowadays, that it is very easy for people to massively move from country to country, particularly due to the development of fast and cheap means of transport, anyone who thinks he can deal with the pandemic within the narrow borders of his country is deluding himself. It is also contrary to the achievements of modern human civilization if some countries want to keep the tools to fight the pandemic only for their citizens. This would not comply with the protection of all people, regardless of nationality, race, religion or any other characteristic. The non-discriminatory protection is enshrined in all modern human rights conventions. Therefore, international co - operation is essential at the level of international organizations as well as the conclusion of international conventions aiming at global protection against Covid 19, when necessary.

Is a common European health policy meaningful as well as a consequent binding policy adoptable by all member states or should the State remain the primary and sole administrator of public health issues?

The idea of the European Union is, in my view, based on two pillars. One pillar is that of freedom and the other pillar is that of solidarity. Therefore, the member states of the European Union should activate solidarity and draw up a common line in dealing with the pandemic. This common line will include the support of states that are more affected by the pandemic. It will also include the establishment of common rules for dealing with the pandemic, because we should not forget that one of the fundamental freedoms of the European Union is the free movement of citizens. Thus, the pandemic cannot be effectively tackled within a single State and only by the adoption of national rules. It is therefore necessary to lay down rules within the European Union that will tackle effectively the pandemic for all member states of the European Union. Similar cooperation should occur in a general European and international environment, e.g. within the Council of Europe and other international organizations, such as the United Nations. If there is one thing we have learned from the painful experience of Covid 19, it is that we all live under one roof, that the earth is the home of all of us, and that anyone who thinks he is unscathed from contagious diseases is simply wrong.

*Interview by Ioulia Elmatzoglou

Read more on GNA:
The ending of the Greek Chairmanship, the first e-Chairmanship, of the Council of Europe
Chair of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, Greek Alternate MFA Miltiadis Varvitsiotis, on the pandemic, human rights and the project for a new European Declaration to be signed in Athens by the end of 2020
Greece assumes the Chairmanship of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe

I.E.

The post Rethinking Greece | Spyridon Vlachopoulos on the coronavirus pandemic and the impact on human rights appeared first on Greek News Agenda.

On 15 May 2020, Greece assumed the Chairmanship of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, and will be holding the office until 18 November 2020. Alternate Minister of Foreign Affairs of Greece, Miltiadis Varvitsiotis, whose portfolio includes European Union and Council of Europe affairs, took over as Chair of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe.

In an interview* with Greek News Agenda, Miltiadis Varvitsiotis spoke about the challenges posed by assuming his new role under the current difficult circumstances, the burning issue of human rights restrictions which has been raised following the restrictive measures taken by most governments in face of the pandemic and the main priorities and aspirations of the Greek Chairmanship of the Council of Europe.

The Greek Chairmanship takes place amidst an unprecedented pandemic. What are the additional tasks and duties that you have to address in these challenging times?

Let me stress first of all that the Greek Chairmanship could not turn a blind eye to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on our societies. Its effect was felt to various degrees through different countries, unfortunately with major human losses in many cases, but also economic, political, and legal complications. At the same time, we were fully aware since the beginning that the Greek Chairmanship would coincide with a turning point in the course of the Council of Europe, due to the 70th anniversary of the signing of the European Convention on Human Rights on 4 November 2020.

Thus, as the crucial nature of the juncture we were going through became clearer, we decided to seize the opportunity for increased synergies, policy coordination and new initiatives on a European level, with the aim of eventually achieving and signing a common Declaration in Athens in November that would emphasise the protection of individual rights of European citizens in the context of sanitary emergencies.

Needless to say, the Council of Europe is a pioneering intergovernmental organisation that has traditionally fomented European governance and democracy, establishing, diffusing, and safeguarding most of what we have come to share today as our common European legal and political culture. The Council’s leading role in the domain of democracy, rule of law and human rights makes it extremely topical in the case of the pandemic; far from a simple matter pertaining to budgetary management or epidemiological models, the COVID-19 pandemic raised some unavoidable questions as to the relation between states, citizens, quality of life, laws, and freedom. For example, the necessary restriction measures adopted by European governments in order to contain the pandemic are a challenge for democratic institutions since they could well be instrumentalised for other purposes, if taken out of the context of the pandemic; the same goes for the treatment of personal data by public and, most importantly, private sector medical facilities. The safeguarding of civil liberties in times of urgency is never an easy task and the creation of the Council of Europe right in the aftermath of the Second World War meant to show exactly that no crisis or social problem, as urgent as it may be, should be solved at the expense of freedom and democracy; instead, effective social policy and the protection of human rights should go hand in hand. At the same time, the Council of Europe has been consistently concerned with social rights and the welfare of European citizens since at least 1961, with the introduction of the European Social Charter. Its pioneering role, both in terms of individual and social rights, renders it a highly needed institutional pillar that can push towards new forms of policy making and ground-breaking initiatives.

Hence, the planned Declaration of Athens will stand first of all as a renewed commitment to the fundamental principles of the European Convention on Human Rights within a new, paradigm-shifting era; it aims to be the first of its kind in tending both to individual and health rights and to epitomise our explicit interest in the intricacies of health policy, individual rights, and quality of life –including environmental considerations and climate ethics. We have already started deliberating with counterparts from the other 46 member-states, but also parliamentarians, local authorities, civil society actors, and outstanding personalities, as has been the case with our open-access online "In discussion with…" series, which has hosted up to this day Greek epidemiologist Sotiris Tsiodras and French philosopher Bernard-Henri Lévy. We are working non-stop on the preparation of the agenda of the summit, in order for it to produce policy, not simply speeches.

As you just pointed out, during the pandemic, the legitimate restriction of fundamental rights became a much discussed topic. How does the Greek Chairmanship aim to contribute in the detection and prevention of abusive restriction measures and the infringement of rule of law?

The possibility of temporary limitations was something already inscribed in the European Convention on Human Rights, which, inter alia, included relevant clauses for reasons of public health. Hence, an epidemic does not absolve governments and public institutions from respecting rule of law and limiting themselves in the use of proportional measures, only for the absolutely needed amount of time, always in observance of the principles and provisions of the ECHR. Scrutiny and vigilant control over national governments evidently befalls to the citizens and democratic institutions in each country, but international treaties and organisations have created a further structured framework for the monitoring of any deviances, abuses, and lack of transparency. The Council of Europe and its bodies is the European framework par excellence upon which citizens rely for this highly-demanding, reflexive task. Moreover, the recent conjuncture of the COVID-19 pandemic made clear since the start the possible implications for human rights; this initiated an immediate response on behalf of the Council of Europe and its Secretary General, Marija Pejčinović Burić, who issued a specialised toolkit for member states titled "Respecting democracy, rule of law and human rights in the framework of the COVID-19 sanitary crisis". The European Council and the treaty that lies at its core, the ECHR, stand still as essential counterweights to any authoritarian drift in the context of the pandemic. Rights to property, justice, information, especially in their modern, digital, version are irrevocable and inalienable.

The Chairmanship does not aim to overlap with existing institutional jurisdictions and monitoring bodies, but is fully aware of its distinct and crucial role: to build on the significant momentum that is ever-pervasive in our societies and push for more coordinated initiatives in order to activate research, draw lessons, accumulate all sorts of knowledge, give voice to civil society throughout Europe and eventually distill and disseminate best practices through synergies and consensus achieved with all 46 other member states. Within this context, we can pinpoint three main concerns in relation to the pandemic: defining its implications at large, identifying lessons and best practices, and analyzing the conformity of any precautionary emergency measures with the human rights clauses of the European Convention on Human Rights.

Our initiative for a common declaration can be seen in light of this political will to address a decisive issue, and renew the topicality of the ECHR and ESC. It is in this context that the Greek Chairmanship fully supports the accession of the European Union to the European Convention on Human, as a significant step that would allow for an overall coherent protection of human rights throughout Europe.

One of the main priorities of the Greek Chairmanship is the protection of vulnerable groups. How do you define the term "vulnerable groups"? Why do you give particular emphasis to the protection of the rights of young people?

Every society is in the obligation to care for citizens that cannot provide for themselves and are in compelling need of welfare services due to their disadvantageous situation. This state of vulnerability might hinder their further social integration, as well as the full realisation of their individual, social, and political rights; vulnerable groups include Roma, persons with disabilities, the unemployed and, in particular, unemployed mothers, single-parent families, residents of remote mountainous areas or islands, to name some of the main categories. Access to basic social rights and provision of elementary welfare services to these populations becomes even more urgent in the case of the current sanitary crisis, where marginalisation or even discrimination could possibly take various new forms.

A particular duty has befallen upon Greece over the last years: the task of providing for thousands of unaccompanied migrant minors who by definition are vulnerable persons. Greece is therefore particularly sensitive to this issue and cannot ignore the traumas that these children have undergone in their countries of origin or transit, as well as their current needs, especially in the context of the sanitary crisis. Our stance towards these young newcomers might be an overall marker of the level of democracy, tolerance and cohesion of our society, and of Europe at large. It is up to us to do our best, institutionally, politically, but also in terms of everyday life gestures and solidarity. Furthermore, young people, Greek or foreign, are of the utmost importance for the future of all societies, and it is in difficult circumstances such as the pandemic that one realises the urgent need to provide the means for a normal social life to youth – from welfare services to proper access to information and protection against “fake news” or online extremism.

Greece has been a member of the Council of Europe since 1949. How do you judge its performance as a member state?

Greece is a member of the Council of Europe since 1949 and has steadily improved its relationships over the course of the last decades, since the fall of the authoritarian regime of the Dictatorship of the Colonels (1967-1974). Moreover, the exemplary approach that Greece has been following toward its minority and vulnerable populations has made our country a beacon of human rights and stability in an otherwise turbulent region of Europe where violence and hatred ruled for decades. However, there is always room for improvement, and there are always new conditions that may demand new initiatives. Such a case has been the massive flow of migrants and refugees through Greece.

Greece has been cooperating with the Council of Europe and its expert bodies in many fields, most notably in justice, the protection of human rights, and the refugee-migration issue. Of course, a crucial index of progress and institutional transparency are the rulings of European Court of Human Rights. The last five years have seen an exceptional improvement; at the same time, it is true that there are many appeals that are still pending against Greece, mostly in regards to procedural matters. The reform of the justice system in terms of transparency, less delays, and lower costs is an actual priority of Greece. The ECHR rulings are in fact a useful and much needed indicator for guiding member-states and opening further space for policy deliberation. This is our strength, as open societies, dealing reflexively with our shortcomings and striving collectively for a better future.

*Interview by Kostas Mavroidis

Read also via Greek News Agenda: Greece assumes the Chairmanship of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe

The post Chair of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, Greek Alternate MFA Miltiadis Varvitsiotis, on the pandemic, human rights and the project for a new European Declaration to be signed in Athens by the end of 2020 appeared first on Greek News Agenda.

Dr. Achillefs Kapanidis is Professor of Biological Physics at the Department of Physics of the University of Oxford. Since the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic, Dr. Kapanidis has become known to the wider public, because his team has introduced a new method for coronavirus detection which only takes a few minutes, with a validation accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of more than 90 percent; efforts are now being made for this to be developed into a rapid diagnostic test to detect the coronavirus in respiratory samples.

Born in Thessaloniki, where he also completed his first degree, Achillefs Kapanidis continued his studies abroad and went on to hold research scientist positions at major institutions, eventually becoming a Senior Lecturer (2005) and then Professor (2003) at Oxford University, where he has been leading a group, known as the "Gene Machines" group, which studies machines of gene expression by observing single molecules of gene-expression machinery.

Dr. Kapanidis was interviewed by the Press & Communications Office at the Embassy of Greece in London regarding his team’s groundbreaking advancements in virus detection and his outlook on the Covid-19 pandemic, but also about his experiences living and working abroad and the role Greece still plays in his life.

Could you please introduce yourself to our readers? Tell us please about your studies, your academic and professional trajectory and how you have come to work in the University of Oxford, leading a team that conducts research on Covid-19.

I have been born and raised in Thessaloniki, where I also completed my first degree in Chemistry at the Aristotelian University of Thessaloniki. After completing a Master’s in Food Chemistry at Rutgers University (USA), I received my PhD in Biological Chemistry for work I completed at the Waksman Institute of Microbiology, also at Rutgers. After holding research scientist positions in single-molecule biological physics at Berkeley and UCLA, I became a Senior Lecturer at Oxford University in 2005, and a Professor of Biological Physics in 2013; I have also been a European Research Council (ERC) grant holder and I am currently a Wellcome Trust Investigator.

Since 2005, I have been leading a group of physical and biological scientists (which we informally call the "Gene Machines" group) which studies microbial biological machinery involved in gene expression and regulation, with a focus on gene transcription and DNA repair. Our main tool is advanced fluorescence microscopy based on the observation of single protein and DNA molecules, linked with sophisticated image/data analysis; the past few years, my group has also been working on rapid and ultrasensitive detection of antibiotic resistance and pathogenic viruses, including influenza and coronaviruses.

My work has been published in more than 100 papers and book chapters, as well as in several patent applications. My group has also been pursuing miniaturised single-molecule imaging, a project that culminated my co-founding of the Oxford Nanoimaging spin-out; for these contributions, I was co-awarded the 2019 Innovator of the Year Award from the UK Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC). Finally, I have been involved in the establishment of a new interdisciplinary institute at Oxford (to open in 2021) focusing on using cutting-edge physical approaches to study biological mechanisms in living cells.

How could your team’s research findings contribute to the efforts against Covid-19?

We have been working on understanding the replication mechanisms of the influenza (flu) virus since 2012, and more recently, we have been exploring ways to detect that virus rapidly. In November 2019, we published a method that uses calcium to bind small pieces of fluorescent DNA to enveloped virus particles and to fluorescently label them (Robb et al., Scientific Reports 2019); we can then observe labelled viruses on a sensitive fluorescence microscope, and assess their morphology and size. Our assay is extremely fast (takes just one minute), and works well on respiratory viruses such as influenza and RSV in clinical samples. Notably, the work on the clinical samples was a collaboration with the laboratory of Andreas Mentis at the Hellenic Pasteur Institute in Athens.

When coronavirus emerged in China, we reasoned that our assay should work with the new coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2. We thus obtained permission to continue working despite the closure of our Department, and indeed established that our assay can detect the presence of the virus; part of this work was done in collaboration with the CEMIPAI CNRS Institute at Montpellier, who had access to SARS-CoV-2 in high containment facilities. Further, in work led by an extremely talented graduate student from Cyprus, Nicolas Shiaelis, and Royal Society fellow Dr Nicole Robb, we have introduced a new method for coronavirus detection based on applying machine learning to images of labelled viruses; this method is currently tested on clinical samples in our local hospital. The assay takes only minutes, with a validation accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of >90%. In contrast, the standard virus-detection methods (using the method RT-PCR) requires ~3 hours from the time of swab receipt to result, and for community testing, transport to these facilities adds substantially to the turnaround time.

We are now working with clinicians on turning our method into a rapid and scalable diagnostic test to detect SARS-CoV-2 in respiratory samples. Such a rapid test can have substantial impact, since widespread testing will be absolutely crucial for disease surveillance and control, even if a safe vaccine becomes available in the next 18 months.

Dr. Kapanidis at the award ceremony of the BBSRC Innovator of the year 2019 award (May 15, 2019)

Pandemics cause unprecedented, incredible and to a certain extent irreparable social, economic, family and personal disruptions. Are pandemics however welcome by scientific and medical communities, as an opportunity for scientific research, technological advancement, testing of new scientific tools and experimenting on new, cutting-edge medical solutions?

A pandemic is never a welcome development; the devastation that it can cause to societies, families and individuals, and especially to the most vulnerable, is something all scientific and medical community is extremely concerned about. Hence the great efforts of scientists to suppress epidemics and prevent them from escalating into pandemics; the successful containment of the first SARS in 2003, Ebola in 2014, and MERS in 2015 were recent examples of these efforts.

The scientific community is also aware that containment will not always work and that we are never too far away from the next pandemic, so having the scientific tools and organisational structures to address a spreading pathogen is of paramount importance. The need to face pandemics with rapid and decisive action to preserve human life focuses the minds and efforts of the scientists in deploying existing defences against the new virus, in innovating to exploit the vulnerabilities of the microscopic enemy, and in repurposing their work to provide necessary material and intellectual support to other vital activities. International cooperation has also hugely important in our efforts to understand, monitor and control the virus.  

There is a sense of duty, public service and social responsibility that drives these contributions, along with the enormous satisfaction of the basic-science researchers to actually see their efforts making a difference in the short term, as opposed to the several years or even decades that it usually takes for fundamental discoveries to translate into tangible societal impact.

Pandemics, as other major events that dramatically reshape human activity, present also opportunities to deliver change for the better. There is no doubt that many of our scientific activities will be transformed for ever after the pandemic, either due to the shifting of our priorities as citizens and scientists, or to avert another ongoing disaster, that of climate change. For example, electronic means for scientists to meet and exchange ideas will help rationalise and minimise global travel for conferences; use of pre-print servers will expand to allow further dissemination of scientific information in a free and rapid manner; and (hopefully) international cooperation and innovation will boost our chances to control climate change.

You have worked also in the USA. How would you compare working in the USA to working in the UK as regards science, scientific research, quick exploitation of the scientific findings and interaction between universities, institutes and the market?

I have spent more than 10 years in the USA in early stages of my career, and this was an experience that shaped much of my approach to science; I was also fortunate to be in the USA during a large expansion of the scientific base and technological development both in academia and industry.

There is no question that US science was and remains extremely strong, powered by large number of research universities and diverse institutes, and there are many aspects to admire and enjoy about it. First and foremost, I enjoyed the vibrant culture of robust and constant questioning and debate about scientific questions and technological challenges (I guessed it satisfied part of my Greek nature!). In such debates, what mattered was whether an idea could survive scientific scrutiny; the status of the persons putting it forward or questioning it was not important. This flattened the hierarchy of “debating societies” and made people realise that they can contribute at any stage of their career, as long as their medium is logical reasoning.

I also liked the fact that the Universities and institutes are full of driven and adventurous young people from all over the world working together; I appreciated the large investment of institutions and the government in basic and applied research, which provided considerable resources to pursue difficult but worthy goals; the opportunity of people to be involved in research from a very young age (e.g., undergraduate research is highly promoted in US research universities); the encouragement of translation of scientific findings into companies and products, that in turn provide high-quality jobs and address societal needs. The PhD was also long enough to allow substantial work to be finished and converted in seminal publications.

On the more negative side, I felt that the overabundance of resources made individuals more wasteful and less focused in their efforts; the time spent in a PhD degree was often way too long, potentially leading to exploitation of some researchers. For academics, the prospect of not achieving tenure (i.e., the ability to stay in their position after very rigorous review) was very stressful and led to loss of work-life balance.

Do you think that Greece is currently in a position -as regards the research infrastructure, the scientific expertise and the human resources- to conduct significant research projects in general, as well as in this specific occasion?

Being away from Greece for a very long time, I can only offer an impression biased from my interactions with colleagues during visits to participate in conferences, from occasional collaboration and participations in reviewing bodies, and from visits to see scientist friends I met in the US and UK.

My impression is that Greece is definitely punching above its weight if you consider the perennial lack of funding and underinvestment in science and technology, and the structural constraints that limit the conduct and administration of science. The country has institutions of excellence such as the Institute of Molecular Biology and Biotechnology (IMBB) in Crete and the Biomedical Research Foundation of the Academy of Athens, where ground-breaking and pioneering advances have been made the past few years, showing that it is possible to perform research at the highest level in Greece, even during enormously challenging times such as the ones brought by the financial crisis of the past decade. However, there is a huge need to support science and technology much further to expand the network of excellent institutions and raise the profile of research in all institutions. Funding should be more extensive and regular, and should complement European funding; returning scientists should be given the resources to start successful labs that attract external funding; entrepreneurship should be encouraged and supported to drive the formation of dynamic spin-out companies in areas where Greece should be leading in innovation. Some of the funding should be strategic and long-term and should not be just the agenda of a single government, but should rise over politics: where can we build on existing strength? Where can we develop local solutions to local problems? Where can we develop our resources in a sustainable way respectful of our environment?

I also take heart from the herculean efforts of the Greek scientific and medical community during the Covid-19 crisis, which had shown that the country can rise to meet this enormous challenge by working in a methodical and committed fashion.

Dr. Achillefs Kapanidis with a collaborating postdoctoral fellow (Photo by Jun Fan)

What are your personal estimations on the developments for the Covid-19 pandemic? Do you expect a safe vaccine to be produced soon? Do you believe that this virus may trigger other diseases or open new medical and health challenges? Or do you expect that it will soon become another chapter in humanity’s medical history, like for ex. measles, chickenpox and mumps?

As most scientists, I am an optimist, weighing of course the facts and figures in any “guestimate”. Regarding the availability of a safe vaccine, I am optimistic that at least one (and possibly more) will become widely available by the end of 2021, and possibly significantly sooner. For example, the Oxford-led vaccine that is currently in clinical trials is supported by an excellent track record (including the production for vaccines for previous coronaviruses), and there are plans to produce it in billions of doses (even before it is proven to work) to ensure wide availability should the trials prove successful. There are also efforts that use radically new approaches, which may result in pleasant surprises – the important matter here is the diversity of routes to ensure that a few of them will eventually work.

The scale of medical and health challenges associated with the new coronavirus is immense, and uncertainty always forms part of the picture. Since this is a new virus, we don’t know what are the long-term effects of having had the virus and of experiencing a different spectrum of symptoms; we don’t know the effects of the various treatments, as well as any side-effects (long-term or otherwise) that the eventual vaccine will have, and of course we do not know how long any immunity (exposure-induced or vaccine-driven) will last. We will also have to deal with the effect of minimal (or no) health care for non-COVID conditions for an extended period of time, as well as the mental health effects of the lockdown and the “social-distant” world.

This is a traumatic episode in the story of human existence, much as the pandemic of Spanish flu in 1918 and the World Wars – but as with those painful episodes, we will adapt and bounce back, hopefully having have learnt lessons that improve ourselves, our societies, and crucially, our natural environment.

You have lived for many years abroad. What do you miss most about Greece? Is there anything that remains unchanged to a Greek living, even for a long period, abroad?

There are many wonderful things that I miss about Greece, but the most important is family and friends, feeling the warmth of being close to loved ones, experiencing together the joyful moments and being able to help in the difficult moments. Travelling to Greece (when it was straight-forward!) and conferencing technology surely helped keep in touch but there is no substitute for a hug and a relaxed chat over coffee!

What makes more palatable for me living away from Greece is the sizeable and vibrant Greek community at Oxford, which provides some "home" comforts locally. As examples, consider our singing group "Nostos" where for 7 years we sing traditional songs with a modern twist, and our theatre group "Praxis" that has staged 6 plays in modern Greek in the Oxford over the past few years; both efforts are linked with the Oxford University Greek Society. These efforts are in addition to the wonderful and well-attended social and cultural events organised by the Modern Greek Studies Programme of the University, the Greek student communities of both Oxford Universities, and the local Orthodox Church community. Sadly, everything is now on hold due to the pandemic, but we are looking forward to resuming these activities when it is safe to do so.

Living abroad clearly changes one’s attitudes, but I have never felt that my Greek "core" had changed substantially over the years. In fact, being abroad makes you much more aware of your identity and your origins; I believe that the first country you experience when moving away from Greece, is actually Greece itself, since your new home allows you to place your Greek experience in perspective - plus you have to explain to everyone else what the Greek state of mind is and what it is like living in Greece!      

Are you optimistic that, in the coming years or decades, there may be a reverse of the brain drain wave that was recorded in Greece in the past decade, or will, in your opinion, the emigration trend continue in the years to come?

I am indeed optimistic but much more needs to be done. There must be a compelling plan in place to attract back Greeks from abroad, and in fact, people who can contribute to the Greek society regardless of their origin. Greece can be a wonderful place to live, and nostalgic Greeks abroad are yearning to make the journey back "home" – but the risks of relocation need to be reduced to see reversal of the trend.

Judging from my experience at Oxford, we are seeing more people returning to Greece nowadays compared to a few years ago; this is a positive trend for Greece which I think will continue, although this may reflect Brexit-related dynamics and not a global trend. The effective and decisive response to pandemic (so far) by Greece can also be a factor, showing that the Greek state can indeed address formidable challenges. The ability of many workers in the digital economy to work remotely may mean that someone can relocate to Greece while working for companies abroad; further, there is a great opportunity to expand this sector in Greece. The government can do much more to attract talented individuals to Greece by helping the formation of new businesses, by providing more funding to attract and promote scientists to its Universities and institutes, and by encouraging the transformation of the industry sector into a more modern, diverse, and fair entity.

Read also via Greek News Agenda:Greek scientific and research community join forces to combat COVID-19; Greek initiatives at the EU vs Virus innovation hackathon to tackle COVID-19; Dr. Androula Nassiopoulou on Nanoscience and Nanotechnology in Greece; Meet “Demokritos” the biggest Research Centre of Greece

The post Dr. Achillefs Kapanidis: “We are working on a rapid diagnostic test for SARS-CoV-2” appeared first on Greek News Agenda.

The Plague of Athens (430-426 BCE) stands as a milestone in the development of world historiography; far from being the first case of a widespread or documented epidemic, its particular significance rather stems from the imposing description made by Athenian historian, politician and military general Thucydides (ca 465 BCE-400/395 BCE) in the context of his History of the Peloponnesian War between Athens and Sparta (431-404 BCE). Indeed, it is the detailed account of the epidemic outbreak, its physical manifestation onto the bodies of Athenian citizens and its social impact onto the city as a whole that rendered the Plague of Athens a major point of reference for historiographical accounts, but also for disciplines such as medical history or epidemiology in the following centuries. From a rhetorical and analytical standpoint, Thucydides used the Plague of Athens in order to reflect on war and social disintegration - the so-called anomia; the plague is credited with the defeat of Athens in the Peloponnesian War and its geopolitical decline in the following period. Thus, it is not surprising that the semantic registry of the plague would later hold such a particular place in the creative imagination of so many thinkers and writers, most notably in the case of Albert Camus and his work, The Plague.

The plague from the perspective of medical history

The account of Thucydides stands out for its minutious account of the clinical symptomatology of the epidemic that hit Athenians, who at the time were besieged by the Spartans. Thucydides, who would himself fall ill at some point, recounts the main symptoms of the highly-mortal disease, such as high fever, pustular rash, and diarrhea (Littman 2009). According to him, the disease had come from Ethiopia and had progressed through Egypt and Libya; it had first made its appearance in the port of Piraeus and very quickly reached Athens. Contrary to Attica, Sparta and the whole Peloponnese —both sparsely populated— were not struck by the plague. The disease was highly contagious in Athens and raged among medical professionals and those who took care of patients. The impact of the disease was particularly devastating; between 75.000 and 100.000 inhabitants perished (over a population of approximately 300.000 to 400.000, given the influx of rural refugees due to the Spartan siege); Thucydides documents various epidemic outbreaks having occurred as late as 426 BCE (Littman 2009).

Thucydides’ account is a clear testament to the author’s Hippocratic influences. The empirical observation of the progress of the disease, as recounted by Thucydides, was attributed by many researchers —either classicists, philologists, or medical doctors— to the Hippocratic School and the influence of Hippocrates’ work, from a methodological and terminological standpoint (Morgan 1994). It would even be tempting to assume that the two men might have possibly met earlier in Northern Greece (Gervais 1972) or take note of the legend according to which Hippocrates himself briefly tried to heal the epidemic on site, in Athens (Littman 2009). At the same time, on a more general note, the Hippocratic influence could be sought in the overall methodological and narrative choices of Thucydides, which echoed the empiricism of the Hippocratic School; after all, the century of Pericles was also the century of Hippocrates, as pointed out by Alice Gervais (1972). However, Thucydides did not limit himself to a simple reproduction of the Hippocratic precepts on epidemics; rather, he exceeded the theoretical limitations of Hippocratic thought by introducing a radically empirical and thus secular rationality (Jouanna 2001). His lack of purely medical education and his distances in regards to the dominant medical dogmas of the time (which attributed epidemics either to environmental factors or metaphysical causes), allowed him to seize the notion of contagion, which until then had eluded the adherents of Hippocratic medicine and Hippocrates himself as well (Jouanna 2001, Poole and Holladay 1979), a significant discovery that unfortunately was not picked up by specialists in the following centuries (Poole and Holladay 1979); Thucydides also explicitly established the acquisition of immunity by those who had survived the disease (Poole and Holladay 1979). As noted by David Morens, Gregory Folkers, and Anthony Fauci, Thucydides’ account is the first complete clinical-epidemiological description of an infectious disease; the latter took care to distinguish between signs, symptoms, complications, and varied clinical trajectories, while at the same time taking into account the collapse of health services, overcrowded populations in confined spaces, and war. His account would serve as a work of reference for medical students in the west and the middle-east and would deeply influence medical practice regarding infectious diseases until the 19th century (Morens, Folkers and Fauci 2008).

Thucydides refrained from inquiring into the medical cause of the epidemic; the purpose of his account was rather of another order. Nonetheless, the clarity of his observations spurred the interest of modern medical specialists, a great number of whom produced publications and studies on the matter, initially in terms of intellectual exercise but more recently as an object of epidemiological and paleopathological comparative research. Even though J. C. F. Poole and A. J. Holladay noted the heuristic limits of approaches that attempt to classify past epidemics under modern-day categories, given the evolution of microbes and viruses, we can nonetheless enumerate the various hypotheses that have been occasionally suggested in order to explain the outbreak and the specific medical nature of the so-called «plague» —meaning, epidemic— of Athens, based on Thucydides’ descriptions, as well as additional historical knowledge on that era: smallpox, bubonic plague, scarlet fever, measles, typhus fever, typhoid fever, or even ergotism  (Poole and Holladay 1979). J. C. F. Poole and A. J. Holladay consider more probable that the disease has either vanished nowadays or at least transformed to such an extent that it is unrecognizable (Poole and Holladay 1979). Similarly, Robert Littman summarized more recently the different hypotheses that dominated the medical literature of the 20th century; in the very end, three rather valid different hypotheses are retained: smallpox, typhus, or a typhus-like disease (Littman 2009). One should note that, next to these hypotheses built on the observations of Thucydides and complementary historical information, a new innovative methodological perspective came to be added in the 2000s: the analysis of microbial DNA (Littman 2009). Indeed, the discovery in 1994-5 in Kerameikos of an ancient communal grave that dated back to the epidemic, allowed a team of Greek researchers, under the supervision of Professor Manolis Papagrigorakis to apply a few years later DNA microbial analysis on the remains (precisely, the dental pulp) of three persons, who had apparently been buried hastily, in conditions that very much resembled those of the plague; the analysis allowed to conclude that the three persons were vectors of typhoid fever, which in fact could be the cause of the epidemic (Papagrigorakis et al 2006). It should be noted however that this disease could have been endemic and widespread in Athens well before and regardless of the epidemic, while the sample of three skeletons is limited; to this was added a further technical debate within the epidemiological and paleopathological community, which nonetheless considers in its whole the above-mentioned research of a decisive methodological importance (Littman 2009, Anastasiou and Mitchell 2013, Bos et al 2019). Today still, the medical cause of the Plague of Athens is a matter of academic debate.

Beyond medical hypotheses: the narrative of the epidemic as social analysis

Thucydides’ description of the Plague of Athens stands first and foremost as a narrative masterpiece, that aimed to fulfill dramatic purposes (Morgan 1994, Horstmanshoff 1993) and function as an actual political argumentation beyond a mere empirical observation of an epidemic; Thomas Morgan suggests that Thucydides’ aim was to show by way of his crude descriptions the harmful consequences of war, especially through contrasting the description of the plague with Pericles' celebratory discourse which had preceded the disease by a few months and had outlined an idealised city, at the peak of its power, fully able to take care of its dead and its moral laws (contrary to what would ensue); apparently, the dramatic effect of the description of the Plague cannot be dissociated from Pericles’ oration, himself a victim of the plague in 429 BCE (Morgan 1994). Moreover, Herman Horstmanshoff notes that Thucydides wanted to establish a link between the plague and the moral disintegration that ensued by sketching the dramatic and incoherent reactions of Athenian masses. The depiction of disaster and the identification of the epidemic with a total social disorder will appear as a recurring theme in many descriptions of future epidemics; at the same time, it might well reflect the elite social position of Thucydides and his own narrative bias against the Athenian populace and its supposedly inherent weaknesses (1993). In any case, Thucydides was the one to use the term of anomia in order to describe what he foresaw as social disintegration within Athenian society, preceding Emile Durkheim’s concept of anomie by 24 centuries. Donald Nielsen applied retrospectively the durkheimian sociological problematic onto Thucydides’ work and underlined the fact Thucydides possibly used both Pericles’ oration and the horrifying description of the plague in order to show that Athens was in fact already a city in latent crisis and in excess of power and individualism, which was what exactly prevented her from successfully dealing with the epidemic (Nielsen 1996).

There is no doubt that the epidemic itself had an unprecedented impact onto Athenians and cultural production of the time; that is the case in tragedies such as Oedipus Rex, Hippolytus, or even The Trachiniae, where diseases are a recurring and highly charged theme, as noted by Robin Mitchell-Boyask; moreover, it is suggested that theater gradually acquired a civic therapeutic role within a deeply scarred Athenian society, as attested in plays such as Herakles or Philoctetes (2009).

However, Thucydides’ account left its mark through time; most notably, the theme of the plague will be picked up by poets Lucretius, Virgil and Ovid, and later, historians Lucian and Procopius (Morgan 1994). Furthermore, the crude and detached narrative style of Thucydides seems to have set the norm for any description of epidemics through time, as noted by Herman Horstmanshoff in the case of byzantine emperor and historiographer Kantakouzenos, who provided an account of the 1347/8 plague in Byzance; even though the latter lost his son to the epidemic and fell ill himself, he retained a phlegmatic narrative style (1993). Moreover, Alice Gervais has stressed that Thucydides created an archetype —that is the epidemic as a test of the humanity and cohesion of a given society (1972). These two elements —a particular narrative technique and social questioning— are evidently ubiquitous in Albert Camus’ masterpiece, The Plague, a political allegory in the aftermath of WWII. The image of a society that falls prey to the plague, as recounted by a detached narrator, can be directly attributed to the classical influences of Albert Camus, who, when embarking on the preparation of his novel, was already in knowledge of the Plague of Athens and Thucydides through the writings of Lucretius, while later on he had the chance to read Thucydides’ work. As noted by Paul Demont, Albert Camus was actually considering of including in The Plague a professor of Greek and Latin, Philippe Stephan, a character who would thus emphasize the literary and historical antecedents of the Camusian epidemic. The eventual disappearance of Philippe Stephan and of all related classical references from the final version of The Plague might point to an attempt by Albert Camus to break away with the fatalism of classical narratives, in favour of a more determined vision of active and conscious struggle against modern plagues (Demont 1996, 2009).

Dimitris Gkintidis

*Intro painting: Plague in an ancient city (ca 1652) by Michael Sweerts (1618-1664) (Source: Wikimedia Commons/ Los Angeles County Museum of Art).

D.G.

The post The Plague of Athens as told by Thucydides: a timeless analysis of an epidemic appeared first on Greek News Agenda.

Katerina Gardikas, associate professor in Modern Greek History, received her degree from the Faculty of History and Archaeology of the University of Athens and her PhD in Modern Greek History from King's College, University of London. She worked as a researcher at the Centre for Modern Greek Research of the National Hellenic Research Foundation and taught at the Democritus University of Thrace and the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki. She taught at the University of Athens since 2001 and retired in 2016. Her research interests include the social history of health, spatial history and the history of state building. Her recent book, Landscapes of disease: malaria in modern Greece, was published by Central European University Press in 2018. She is now moving on to her next project on the history of midwifery. Greek News Agenda* had the opportunity to interview Katerina Gardikas on the social history of malaria, its management and eradication in modern Greece, as well as the impact of pandemics on regional and global history.

Your monograph Landscapes of Disease: Malaria in Modern Greece provides an insightful account of the different ways in which malaria interacted with the social realities of modern Greece, which you describe as having once been the most malarious country in Europe. Can you elaborate on the great variety of human responses throughout this period, as well as their interplay with environmental factors and the disease itself?

Greece suffered from malaria more than any other country in Europe; furthermore, it had a greater prevalence of its lethal form, falciparum malaria. Like in Subsaharan Africa today, children under the age of five were particularly vulnerable and died in great numbers. Although malaria was primarily encountered in the countryside, cities also experienced their share of the disease. Draining swamps both to relieve the peasantry from fevers and to reclaim land for agriculture was an ancient practice of proven, yet limited consequence. For instance, Muslim landowners in the Ottoman period would see that their estates were drained from floodwater. In fact, until quinine became available to the Greeks in the nineteenth century, draining was the only effective means of malaria control. The authorities of the Greek state, however, saw drainage primarily as a means of clearing land for agriculture. Ecological responses to malaria besides draining, such as spraying water surfaces with whatever chemicals were recommended by sanitary engineers,  became a practice after malaria transmission was associated with the Anopheles mosquito, i.e. after 1897, in effect in the twentieth century, but were a highly costly measure that was practiced selectively. The vast majority of the Greeks relied on their quinine, which became a very popular means of protection and treatment, largely considered as a citizen’s right.  Its widespread use often made it the subject of extensive adulteration.

As far as the effect of environmental factors on the spread of malaria is concerned, this is an issue that lies at the centre of my recent book. Environmental factors are directly related to the causes that affect the increase and decrease of mosquito populations, as demonstrated by British epidemiologist George Macdonald in the late 1950s. These factors varied greatly throughout Greece on account of the fragmented nature of the country’s geography. Owing to the particular ecological features, different areas were suitable for specific species of Anopheles that were capable of transmitting malaria in all its forms that had been endemic in Greece for millennia, namely vivax, quartan and falciparum malaria. Moreover, malaria was prevalent, not only in the plains and swamps; mountainous areas and islands were by no means free from the disease.

The fragmented nature of the Greek lands produces an extremely variable rainfall regime, a feature that resulted in the unpredictable behaviour of the disease within a year and from one year to the next. As a result, immunity to malaria was not easy to attain except in the most malarious marshlands, where the population suffered continuous and multiple infections. This situation of erratic protection from malaria greatly affected the disease experience of the Greeks. Nonetheless, around 1900, a period when malaria prevalence in Greece was at its peak, one in every three or four Greeks contracted malaria each year.

It was virtually impossible to escape its grip; the peasant was exposed to it in his every daily activity in the field and in the pasture lands. So was the refugee in the camp, the settler in his new town, plane or rail tracks, the merchant in his travels and the soldier on the front or in the barracks. Indeed, the first malaria statistics were compiled by military doctors in the 1880s.

To what degree did Greek scientific personnel participate in the specialized international community that was formed since the 19th century and helped shape the contours of antimalarial struggle?

Most foreign-trained Greek doctors had studied at Italian, French or German medical schools and retained their connections to their respective scientific communities after their return to medical practice in Greece. Furthermore, the first Greek governments were very serious about training medical personnel locally; thus, the first medical school was created in 1835, two years before the establishment of the University of Athens. Medical innovation, however, still entered the country through European medicine, albeit without much delay, particularly in fields such as malariology, which was of prime interest to Greek doctors and society owing to its widespread prevalence. Indeed, when Ronald Ross, the British doctor who had established the connection between malaria and the Anopheles mosquito in the transmission mechanism of malaria, toured the country in 1906 at the invitation of the British Copais Company, he was accompanied by Ioannis Kardamatis, the country’s leading malariologist.

Another source of knowledge transfer in the same field was Italian malariology. Italy, which, like Greece, suffered a severe malaria burden, but, unlike the Greek case, had a long-standing tradition in medicine and also had imperialist aspirations, was a leader in the field. The Greek Society for the Control of Malaria was created in 1905 and modelled on its Italian counterpart. Similarly, in the early twentieth century, different methods of malaria control advanced in Italy became the subject of debate among Greek malariologists. Therefore, Greek physicians became eclectic in their sources of scientific knowledge. By that time, the influence of both Italy and Britain tended to replace that of France in this particular field.

Your monograph retraces different methods in the medical and social management of the disease. How did we finally come to eradicate malaria in Greece and what was the contribution of international cooperation in these endeavors?

Drainage as a means of fever control had been practiced since antiquity. In the early days of Greek statehood, however, drainage was perceived more as a means of reclaiming land for the benefit of agriculture. In fact, quite often large drainage and land reclamation schemes, such as the drainage of lake Copais, left the drained areas with an equally serious malaria problem as before. Furthermore, the widespread planting of eucalyptus trees, a species native to Australia, in places of high human concentration as a “natural” method of malaria control, may be dated to the turn of the century, although it had begun earlier.

At various stages of the country’s state-building process, the contribution of foreign aid and influence was critical. Thus, the initial state sanitary institutions of the 1830s, the ones that first tackled its health problems, were set up by the Bavarian regents and the Greek, foreign-trained physicians who manned these institutions. They were the ones who explored the prevalent diseases and uncovered the widespread nature of malaria. Subsequently, failure to adequately fund sanitary institutions left the health situation of the country, particularly that of infectious diseases and malaria, primarily, in an extremely critical state that was further exacerbated by wars and the frequent influx of refugees. The few responses to this situation originated from the mobilisation of civil society, mostly wealthy Greeks within the country and abroad.

When, however, Greece received more than one million refugees from the Caucasus, Asia Minor and the Pontus in the aftermath of the First World War and the country’s defeat in 1922, the crisis became unmanageable. As, indeed, malaria thrives in such situation, international bodies stepped in to assist also on the malaria front. The most serious impact, however, was that of the League of Nations Health Organisation and the Rockefeller Foundation in the 1930s. The latter, in particular, set up experimental stations throughout the country, studied the disease, inaugurated malaria control modern measures and offered training to young Greek doctors. These interventions may not have solved the country’s malaria problem at the time, but they created the groundwork for the future and paid dividend after World War II.

Malaria control through ecological management was expensive. For instance, Paris Green, a chemical compound that was developed in the mid 1920s by Rockefeller Foundation scientists, needed to be sprayed on water surfaces every two weeks. Therefore, the labour cost made its widespread application a challenge for sanitary authorities. Eventually, it was the use of DDT that was introduced to Greece by the sanitary engineers of UNRRA in 1945, after the end of the German occupation, that provided a cheap and effective means to control the Anopheles. Indeed, in the aftermath of the Second World War, UNRRA’s sanitary section, which was largely staffed by Rockefeller Foundation physicians and engineers, inaugurated a vigorous DDT spraying programme. The spraying of DDT, particularly aerial spraying, helped reduce malaria prevalence to 10% over its first year of application and became immensely popular, despite its high toxicity. The disease was finally eradicated in the mid 1970s after a methodical and sustained strategy of control and surveillance, under the guidance of the World Health Organisation, thanks partly to foreign aid but also thanks to the general prosperity, which Greece was able to achieve in the 1950s and 1960s.

On a wider note, there is an ongoing historiographical debate as to the importance of epidemics in world history. What is your stance on this topic?

My own approach has been very much influenced by William McNeill’s Plagues and Peoples and his concept of disease pool. This concept helps us analyse and understand the connections between infectious diseases on the one hand and communications spheres on the other. In this sense, one may look at the spread of new diseases along the same routes as those traveled by trade, armies, ideas, large and small species. Interestingly, a recent study of the spread of the plague in fourteenth-century Europe suggests that the spread is traceable along the ports on the navigable rivers and canals, that is along the maritime and river trading routes.

After their first encounter with a pathogen and the lethal epidemics it produces, societies go on to build up their immune responses through the mechanisms of natural selection. Thereafter, the new disease gradually becomes less lethal killing ever fewer people and enters the disease pool within the broad geographical range defined by the communications regime of its time. Therefore, as important as epidemics are in world history, they should be historicised in relation to other defining features of entire civilisations. Consequently, the current crisis cannot be understood independently from the broader economic and environmental realities that plague our world today (pardon the pun). The immediate effects of epidemics may be important in significant ways, for instance the demographic depletion of Europe owing to the Black Death impacted subsequent labour relationships; the establishment of quarantine was effective in controlling the spread of epidemics before the introduction  of germ theory; the control of the cholera outbreak contributed to the victory of the Greek army over the Bulgarians in 1913; the instances are countless, not to mention the impact of pathogens affecting other species, for instance the impact of the potato blight on the history of Ireland. However, today, as the survival prospect of humanity reaches a critical balance point, one should not lose sight of the role of pathogens in the broader patterns of historical change.

What would be a historian’s analytical and comparative perspective on the global Covid19 pandemic we are currently going through?

This is the first time in our lifetime that we witness the effective spread of a new and dangerous disease among our globalised society. Clearly, this uniqueness offers an historian an insight into what societies must have experience upon their first encounter with the virulent unknown. Influenza in its various strains is a virus with which humanity has become familiar, particularly after the 1918 pandemic; AIDS has spread more gradually and other dangerous new epidemics, such as ebola, have so far  been contained before reaching the West. For humans, Covid19 is totally new. Some have termed this as the first modern pandemic, and, although this is not exactly true, it certainly has important unique features. What I believe is markedly different from earlier such occasions is the speed of its spread along with the speed and universal nature of the response of humanity. The international community was politically unprepared for the pandemic, despite the fact that the warnings from scientific experts had been issued clearly for several years; there had even been scientific centres dedicated to the study of possible suspect pathogens. Yet, the spread of SARS-CoV-2 in the northern hemisphere occurred before the scientific community had time to fully understand how the virus functions. Global lack of preparedness, in turn, brought on urgent and abrupt socio-economic government responses, such as lockdowns, with secondary socio-economic consequences of yet unknown severity and hardship.

This is clearly a failure of the political institutions to anticipate and mount an effective defense in advance. Scientific networks and international organisations, however, are currently performing with the speed of the digital age, and to a large degree (with powerful and ominous exceptions), with a sense of community.

Notwithstanding the broader picture, on a micro-historical level, it is interesting to observe the way the disease is experienced by individual social and cultural groups of people, by particular age groups; or the ways we perceive, reward or condemn demonstrations of solidarity or selfishness and antagonism.

On a broader level, we are faced with pending questions for the future: what institutions will the pandemic leave behind; how will it affect the ideas and institutions of global governance; how will societies, states and institutions deal with the widening inequality gap that will result from the pandemic; and, most importantly, will the pandemic make us any wiser with regard to our own lethal ecological impact. Interestingly, the forerunner of the World Health Organisation, the Health Organisation of the League of Nations emerged out of the Epidemics Commission that the League had set up to control the epidemics outbreaks, primarily of typhus, that the large waves of displaced populations triggered  throughout East and Central Europe in the aftermath of the First World War. On the subject of internationalist ideas and global governance, particularly on the way conflicting interests affect the shaping of international institutions Mark Mazower’s, Governing the World is an important work worth reading in these circumstances.

*Interview by Dimitris Gkintidis. 

The post Rethinking Greece | Katerina Gardikas on malaria and epidemics appeared first on Greek News Agenda.

Wishing to contribute to the global effort to combat and contain the COVID-19 pandemic, the Greek scientific and research community have already been working hard to this end. Improving understanding of the newly identified virus and its possible future evolution as well as developing precise diagnostics and treatment is a top priority within medical and research communities. Scientific information is also an important tool for policy and decision-makers so as to make evidence-based decisions to control the outbreak or prevent a future one. Reliable information about scientific facts is also encouraging citizens to act more responsibly debunking misinformation.

Within this scope, a “Flagship Action to address the SARS-CoV-2 crisis” was recently launched in Greece concerning the funding of an epidemiological study in the country with € 2.475 m, as part of the overall strategy implemented by Greece in response to the pandemic crisis. The Action, which involves research in extensive testing for virus and antibody detection, viral genome sequencing and genetic analysis of patients, will be supervised by the General Secretariat for Research and Technology (GSRT) and is funded under the Ministry of Development & Investment public investments programme (PIP).

The Greek research and academic community will have a pivotal role and is eager to combine efforts to respond to the present health, as well as economic and social, crisis being at the forefront of the international effort to study Covid-19 and generating new knowledge to address the health crisis. Along with the international scientific and research community Greek researchers will try to develop reliable molecular and immunological techniques for the identification and characterization of the virus, an accurate description of the epidemiological characteristics of coronavirus disease, understanding the pathophysiology of Covid-19 infection, identifying treatment goals, and developing a vaccine and effective antiviral drugs.

The epidemiological study is expected to provide answers to the following questions:

1. Given the global spread of the virus and the possible shortage of reagents, will Greece be able to respond successfully to the increased demand for virus detection tests as well as antibody tests, particularly as containment measures are gradually lifted?
2. Despite identification of high-risk groups (seniors and people with underlying conditions), predictability of outcome for individual patients remains relatively low. Are there factors like genetic susceptibility which could help in this regard?
3. Which are the transmission patterns of the virus and which are the predominant virus strains among the Greek population?
4. Which will be the immunity levels of the population and of each patient after the pandemic?

Research Centers, University Laboratories and the medical community in Greece will join their forces, so as to understand and fight against this major global public health issue achieving the following:  

• Promotion of research to understand the SARS-CoV-2 infection;
• Development of predictive models and identification of therapeutic goals with a view to developing effective antiviral treatments through combined effort by the research/academic community and the pharmaceutical industry;
• Contribution to shaping public health policies;
• Participation of Greece in international flagship initiatives on genomics;
• Promotion of computer science and bioinformatics;
• Practical implementation of study findings in the fields of medical biotechnology, biomolecular diagnostics as well as information science and artificial intelligence;
• Enhanced international visibility for the Greek scientific community;
• Development of innovative entrepreneurship in the fields of life sciences and computer science.

The Action will be implemented by four Higher Education Institutions and six Research Centres and namely:

  1. National and Kapodistrian University of Athens | Department of Medicine 
  2. Aristotle University of Thessaloniki | School of Medicine
  3. University of Crete | School of Medicine
  4. University of Ioannina
  5. Biomedical Research Foundation (BRFAA) of the Academy of Athens
  6. Centre for Research and Technology-Hellas (CERTH) |Institute of Applied Biosciences (INAB)
  7. Hellenic Pasteur Institute
  8. Biomedical Sciences Research Center (BSRC) “Alexander Fleming”
  9. Foundation for Research and Technology –Hellas (FORTH)
10. National Centre for Scientific Research (NCSR) “Demokritos”

Greece participated in the international initiative Coronavirus Global Response in a on line pledging event chaired by the European Commission in May 4, in response to calls by the World Health Orgabization and other global health organisations to accelerate the development, production and equitable access to vaccines, diagnostics and therapeutics.

Greece offered 3 million euros to this joint effort, beyond the Greek institutions and private foundations that have already made significant donations in the fight against Covid-19. The Greek PM Kyriakos Mitsotakis during the pledging marathon stressed that the vaccine should be a “global public good” ensuring that all countries have equal access to the fight against the pandemic.

The marathon, that reached the initial target of €7.5 billion with the participation of governments and International Organizations, will continue, giving the civil society and people worldwide the opportunity to join this global effort.

IE

The post Greek scientific and research community join forces to combat COVID-19 appeared first on Greek News Agenda.