Daily Archives: February 9, 2022

I think the ethics and morals of genetic engineering are very complicated. It intrigues me.

Roger Spottiswoode

Genetic engineering can be defined as manipulation of an organisms genes with the help of biotechnology.

The first official genetic manipulation happened in 1972 by Paul Berg when he combined the DNA from a monkey virus with the lambda virus.

Genetic engineering is a very controversial topic in our society.

There are many pros and cons regarding this topic.

In the following, the advantages as wells as the downsides of genetic manipulation are examined.

In order to create a genetically modified organism, scientists first have to choose what gene they want to insert into the organism.

With the help of genetic screens, potential genes can be tested with the goal of finding the best candidates.

When a suitable gene has been determined, the next step is to isolate it.

The cell which contains the gene has to be opened and the DNA has to be purified.

After isolating the gene, it is ligated into a plasmid which is inserted into a bacterium.

Thus, whenever the bacterium divides, the plasmid is also replicated.

This leads to a vast number of copies of this gene.

Before inserting the gene into the target organism, it has to be combined with other genetic elements including a terminator and promoter region which end and initiate the transcription.

In the final step, the genetic material is inserted into a host genome.

After that, the genetic engineering process is finished.

Genetic engineering is often used by scientists to improve their understanding of how genetics actually work and how they affect our talents and our decisions.

From these findings, scientists can provide insights for medical purposes and thus increase the probability of curing serious diseases in the future.

There are many important areas in the field of medicine in which genetic manipulation could contribute to better treatment of diseases.

This also includes the invention of more effective drugs with fewer side effects.

Moreover, model animals can be genetically modified in the hope to get new insights on how these modifications would work on humans.

For this purpose, using mice in order to examine the effects of genetic manipulation on obesity, cancer, heart diseases and other serious conditions is common practice in nowadays scientific work.

Genetic engineering is also used in the field of agriculture in order to increase yields and also make plants more resistant to pests.

Moreover, even genetic experiments on livestock have been performed in the past.

Apart from the use for consumption, plants have also been genetically modified for medical purposes.

By changing the gene structure of plants, scientists want to examine if they could produce new drugs that can cure diseases more effectively.

Genetic manipulation is also a field of interest for industrial purposes.

Since through genetic engineering processes, all kinds of properties of animals and plants can be modified, this also comes down to a potential increase in revenue for firms if they are able to optimize the gene structure for their purposes.

An example of this is the use of genetically modified bacteria for making biofuels.

The rules and regulations for genetic engineering vary significantly across different countries.

However, there is some consensus on the level of danger genetic modification poses to humanity.

For example, the majority of scientists claim that there is no greater risk to human health from genetically modified crops compared to conventional food.

However, before making this genetically modified food available for public consumption, it has to be tested extensively in order to exclude any possibility of danger.

Moreover, some groups like Greenpeace or the World Wildlife Fund claim that genetically modified food should be tested more rigorously before releasing it for public consumption.

There are some severe diseases that we will likely never be able to fight if we do not use genetic engineering.

From only small manipulations of genes, it is expected that we can fight a significant number of deadly diseases.

Moreover, even for unborn babies, there could be genetic diseases detected.

The most prominent example of this kind of genetic disease is Down syndrome.

If our scientists get quite advanced, it is likely that we would be able to cure all genetic diseases, even that of unborn children.

Abortions because of the diagnosis of genetic diseases would no longer be necessary since we could ensure the babies health through genetic manipulation.

Since we can fight many diseases with genetic engineering, the overall life expectancy of people is likely to increase since the dangers of death due to these diseases decreases.

Moreover, if we are able to further improve our knowledge regarding genetic modification, diseases could be treated more effectively.

Especially in poor countries where some diseases can cause the death of many people, also the development of genetically modified plants for medical use could be a great measure in order to mitigate the issue.

We could also fight diseases which usually cause death for old people and thus prolong their lives.

Moreover, we can increase their life quality since old people do not have to suffer from these diseases anymore.

Thus, genetic engineering may lead to an increase in average life expectancy.

With the help of genetic manipulation, we could increase the variety of foods and drinks for our daily consumption.

Moreover, we could further improve the crop yields since we could create sorts of plants that are resistant to all kinds of pests.

Thus, we could supply enough food to all people worldwide and fight famine in an effective way.

Additionally, with the help of genetic engineering, it may be possible to create more nutritious food.

This would be especially beneficial in countries where people suffer from vitamin deficiencies.

If we are able to increase the level of these vitamins in crops or other foods, we could help people to overcome their vitamin deficiency.

If we are able to modify the genetics in a way that they naturally become resistant against pests, we will no longer have to use harmful chemical pesticides.

Thus, genetic engineering may also lead to a reduction in the use of pesticides.

With the help of genetic engineering, we may also be able to create certain medical foods which may also replace some of the common injections.

Medical foods may also help to prevent certain diseases.

Therefore, genetic engineering could also lead to an improvement in medical standards.

Through genetic engineering, it would be possible to create plant species that need less water than the plant species currently used in agriculture.

By replacing the natural species with genetically modified ones, farmers could save plenty of water.

This would be especially useful in regions where water shortage is a serious problem.

Water shortage will be a quite big issue in the future due to global warming.

If the average temperature increases, water scarcity is likely to also increase.

Thus, with the help of genetic modification, water can be saved and the problem of water shortages may be mitigated to a certain extent.

We may also be able to increase the speed of growth of plants and animals.

By doing so, we could produce more food in a given period of time.

This may quite important since our world population is growing and therefore the demand for food is increasing.

Through genetic modification, we may also be able to strengthen specific characteristics of plants.

This may include that plants are better able to adapt to the global warming problem or that they may become more resistant to changes in their natural conditions.

Many followers of religions are strictly against genetic engineering since they think playing god should not be a task performed by humans.

There are also ethical concerns if genetic manipulation should become a valid instrument for changing the course of our lives.

There is also the argument that diseases are a natural phenomenon and that they have a role in nature since they persisted over a quite long time horizon of evolution.

Moreover, there are many scientists who believe that the creation of designer babies could not be in the interest of humanity.

If perfected, parents could choose the eye color, hair color or even the sex of the baby.

This could lead to an optimization contest in our society which could also have vastly negative effects if pushed too far.

Genetic manipulation can also cause genetic problems if we do not handle it in a proper way.

Since science is still at an early stage in the understanding of genetics, manipulations of genes may even do more harm than good at our current state of genetic understanding.

Errors could even lead to the development of new diseases or to miscarriages.

Genetic engineering also poses a risk to human health.

For example, genetically modified food may lead to long-term health issues.

There is just not enough reliable data yet on how harmful genetic engineering really is in the long term.

Thus, it may pose serious health effects, some of them currently even unknown to scientists.

Genetic engineering may also lead to the development of allergies against certain food items.

Since the DNA-structure is altered in the genetic modification process, food that has former been uncritical for people could now cause allergic reactions.

Genetic engineering is also used to modify plants.

Specifically, some plant species have been developed which include their own pesticide which can protect them from animals and insects.

In this way, scientists hope to be able to increase crop yields.

However, this altering of genetic code in plants can lead to a resistance of certain insects to the pesticide.

This may pose big problems to the agricultural system since if insects or other pests become resistant against toxins, they are harder to fight.

Thus, in the short run, altering genetic material in plants may have its advantages.

However, in the long run, there may be severe issues when it comes to resistance of pest strains.

Some researchers are afraid that genetic engineering may also lead to resistance against antibiotics for humans.

This may lead to serious problems since the treatment of diseases with antibiotics will not be effective anymore.

Genetic engineering would also lead to a reduction in genetic diversity.

Since the process of gene manipulation would be quite expensive, only rich people would be able to afford it.

Thus, this would likely lead to human behavior which favors being rich over all other things in order to be able to afford genetic manipulation.

As a consequence, the variety of human behavior would be reduced.

Since genetically modified plants often contain own pesticides, they can be quite harmful to animals that are consuming these kinds of plants.

Animals can suffer severe diseases from these pesticides and even die.

This problem is especially severe for butterflies and other insects which usually rely on certain plants in their near surroundings.

See more here:
Genetic Engineering: 20 Pros & Cons You Have To Know - E&C

Experts from the UK and Singapore have suceeded in engineering common baker's yeast so that a primary ingredient for the treatment ofdementiacanbe produced.

(Photo : Marta Dzedyshko / Pexels)

By making some changes in the genome of yeast, researchers from Imperial College London and National University of Singapore (NUS) succeeded in changing the fungi into bio-factories so that achemical compoundknown as D-lysergic acid (DLA) can beproduced, as per Phys.org.

Alkaloid DLA is used in the treatment of dementia and Parkinson's disease, as well as migraines and other neurological diseases. The annual production of the chemical is estimated to be between 10 and 15 metric tons to meet the global demand for such medicines.

As of now, the only way to get DLA is through ergot extracts, which are derived from parasitic fungi that infect crops like wheat and rye with illness.

Industrial agriculture, which is a major source of carbon emissions, makes it impossible to grow ergot fungus for medical purposes. Yeast might be used to produce DLA in a proof-of-concept study published in Nature Communications, according to the study's authors.

Also Read:Researchers Create First-Ever 'Designer Chromosome' in Yeast [Video]

For thousands of years, yeasts have been utilized to manufacture ethanol and flavor-enhancing chemicals in alcoholic beverages like beer, wine, and even bread.

Researchers have also investigated microorganisms, and baker's yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) was one of the first cellular organisms to have its genome sequenced, making it a perfect model for genetic engineering to produce a variety of chemicals.

Imperial and NUS worked together on the initiative for two years, sending Ph.D. students to each other's campuses to collaborate on the strategy.

For the first time, researchers have successfully created a yeast cell capable of manufacturing DLA from the genome of baker's yeast by inserting a number of different DLA genes from ergot fungus.

(Photo : Mark Evans/Getty Images)

To generate DLA, these modified fungal factories adapted the same fermentation process that is used to make beer and bread, feeding on sugar and producing slightly under 2mg of DLA in a 1L reactor, according to Imperial College London.

In spite of the small volumes produced in this study, researchers say the method might be used to create tons of the substance each year if ramped up to industrial levels.

Co-principal Investigator and Professor Paul Freemont of Imperial College London's Department of Infectious Diseases stated that "yeast has been a key part of human civilization for thousands of years, helping us to make bread and brew beer.

But our relationship with this familiar microbe is evolving. Through this exciting collaboration we have been able to harness fungal cells to act as miniature factories to produce the raw compounds for medicines."

Freemont said this is an instance of how something that may seem small and less important has the capability of changing human lives by providing the drugs that can allow humans to age better and also curb the impact of industrial drug production.

Related Article:Yeast Drug: Biotechnologists Are Turning Yeasts into Micro Medicine Source

For more news, updates about yeast cells and similar topics don't forget to follow Nature World News!

More:
Scientists Engineered Baker's Yeast to Produce Treatment Drugs for Dementia - Nature World News

A century ago, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down a decision that legal scholars generally consider to be among the worst in its history. In the landmark case, Buck v. Bell, the court affirmed that states had the right to forcibly sterilize feebleminded and socially inadequate people to prevent them from having children. The decision bolstered Americas burgeoning eugenics movement, which proclaimed to improve humanity through selective breeding. In ruling against Carrie Buck, a young woman residing in a Virginia state mental institution, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., famously wrote three generations of imbeciles are enough.

That phrase is echoed in the title of Georgia State legal historian Paul Lombardos 2008 book, Three Generations, No Imbeciles, the first fully documented account of the Buck case. The work revealed how Buck was misrepresented in court and detailed how the decision influenced public attitudes and the law.

Most people think that eugenics is something from the distant past, but it has come back into the public conversation in a big way in the last 30 years, says Lombardo, Regents Professor and Bobby Lee Cook Professor of Law. Were still wrestling with questions about how we might manipulate heredity and how those impulses might mirror what the eugenics movement was driven by.

This month, Three Generations, No Imbeciles is being rereleased with a new afterword that identifies the role theBuckstory plays abortion laws. We spoke with Lombardo about why this nearly 100-year-old case continues to resonate today.

Many people today have a limited understanding of the eugenics movement. Can you talk about its legal significance?

Im a legal historian, and my focus has been trying to excavate and explicate the laws that were passed that relied on eugenic ideology. There are the sterilization laws, like the one highlighted in Buck v. Bell. There are the so-called racial integrity laws, which prohibited interracial marriage. There were also immigration laws. In 1924, same year that Virginia statute allowing sterilization was enacted, there was a national law that prohibited immigration by large groups of people from Eastern and Southern Europe. The eugenics movement generated a number of laws that impacted not only people with disabilities but also other groups.

You say that in the past 30 years, eugenics has moved back into the public conversation. Why?

In the 1990s, two major events prompted this conversation to reemerge. One was the commencement of the Human Genome Project, which aimed to map the complete set of human genes. By the late 1990s, this project was beginning to reach its milestones and raising a lot of questions about the ethics of genetic testing and genetic engineering. The second event was the 50th anniversary of the end of the Holocaust and the Nuremburg trials. The Nazis embrace of eugenics through every measure from sterilization to death camps has drawn a great deal of historical attention. Conversations today about how we treat people based on things like disabilities, race, gender or sexual orientation are all tied to eugenics and how it played out in both the U.S. and countries like Nazi Germany.

The book includes new discussion of how Buck relates to reproductive rights. Can you talk about those connections?

The debate over abortion and birth control and who is fit to be a parent has been a century-long discussion in this country. In the 1800s, America passed laws forbidding people with epilepsy to marry. There were laws passed saying you cant have children if you have a disability.

Although sterilization laws were later used dramatically against women, they were initially focused primarily on men who were involved in same-sex relationships and charged with crimes against nature. The chief complaint was essentially, dont let those people have children because theyll turn out just like them. The same argument was made to justify compulsory sterilization of incarcerated people, a practice that continues to this day.

These laws raise two fundamental questions: Who gets to decide whether you become a parent? And who gets to decide what is done or not done to your body? The question of whether the government can or should control your body and its reproductive functions is one of the main questions raised by eugenics history, and its one were still struggling with.

You have criticized Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas for his claim that the founders of the eugenics movement in America were really trying to justify the use of abortion. Is there merit to that argument?

Some people believe that the eugenics movement leaders were all closeted abortionists, but history shows that is false. Advocacy for abortion by the birth control movement and Margaret Sanger, who was a known supporter of eugenics, did not begin early in the 20th century. While many people in the eugenics movement were in favor of birth control, there were also many against it, and almost no one leading the movement between 1900 and roughly the beginning of World War II endorsed abortion. In fact, you could characterize them as pro-life because they used a lot of the same language used by the pro-life movement today.

What about the implications for laws regarding genetic testing or genetic manipulation?

We will continue to see these questions raised as new technologies emerge, whether its prenatal genetic testing or CRISPR gene editing. There will continue to be, and there should be, conversations about the potential benefits and drawbacks, such as how the use of technologies could lead to a devaluing of certain people.

As a society, we still exhibit dramatic prejudice towards people with disabilities. Thats clearly been on display during the pandemic. In the eugenics movement, some people would say those who were ill, old or had medical vulnerabilities were better off dead, and we still hear echoes of that argument. However, its important to understand that not every scientific advancement has a direct line to eugenics.

That brings up another issue, which is vaccine mandates and arguments over individual liberty versus government action to pursue the common good.

What is the balance between notions of physical autonomy and notions of common good? That has come up again and again during the pandemic. Interestingly, there has been a great deal of language borrowed by the anti-vaccine movement from the pro-choice movement around the notion of my body, my choice.

However, legally you must determine whether there is a difference between forcible vaccination and making it a condition of, say, employment or getting on an airplane. The metaphors that we use, publicly and politically, need to be evaluated based on those distinctions. If the hurricane is raging and you want to have a parade down Main Street, your legal right to free assembly might disappear in that emergency. Our legal reaction would likely be different if basic rights were curtailed every time it threatened to rain.

Whats the current state of the eugenics movement? Has it truly ended?

If youre talking about a well-organized and well-funded public campaign that reflected flawed notions of heredity branded as eugenics, then the answer is yes. But the laws passed by the eugenics movement were designed by opportunistic supporters who capitalized on ancient prejudices. Bigotry against people because of their race, disability, poverty or gender has always been with us, and it continues to be with us. And thats why these issues still loom large in our national discourse.

Many famous Americans were known eugenicists. How should we consider them and this Supreme Court case today?

No one in the country escaped the reach of these ideas, and when we point the historical finger, we should remember that there are an infinite number of targets. People have mixed motives, some of which are laudable while others are condemnable. Many U.S. Presidents signed laws that were aligned with the eugenics movement or endorsed the movement. Teddy Roosevelt was one of the biggest proponents of eugenics. The public health movement was initially infused with eugenic thinking.

We can even look back at the Supreme Court opinion in Buck with a quantum of charity. The Court can certainly be faulted for the illogic and cruelty of its decisions, but we cant expect it to focus on evidence not in the record it receives. The Justices had to make a decision based only on what they knew, while Ive made a career out of demonstrating what they didnt know in some cases.

The lesson of history is that we cant escape the fact that our knowledge and understanding is limited and comes to us through blinders based on our biases and experiences. Thats why we should have some measure of humility particularly when were deciding how other peoples lives should work or who gets to become a parent.

Portrait by Meg Buscema

Read the original:
Wrestling with the Legacy of Eugenics - Georgia State University News

As the ongoing coronavirus pandemic has demonstrated, new mutations in viral genetic sequences can impact significantly on viral transmissibility and damage to the host. This potential has long been a concern for HIV-1. A research team headed by scientists at University of Oxfords Big Data Institute has now discovered a new, highly virulent HIV strain that has been circulating in the Netherlands for the last few decades. According to their newly reported study, a cluster of more than 100 individuals infected with the VB (virulent subtype B) variant showed exceptionally high viral loads, rapid CD4 T cell decline, and increased infectivity.

The study results suggest that after starting treatment, individuals infected with VB variant show similar immune system recovery and survival compared with individuals with other (non-VB) HIV variants. However, the researchers stressed that because the VB variant causes a more rapid decline in immune system strength, it will be critical to diagnose individuals early and start treatment as soon as possible. And while the findings show that the HIV lineage likely arose de novo around the turn of the millennium, extensive changes in its genome make it hard to discern the mechanisms that underlie elevated virulence.

Lead author Chris Wymant, PhD, from the University of Oxfords Big Data Institute and Nuffield Department of Medicine, said, Before this study, the genetics of the HIV virus were known to be relevant for virulence, implying that the evolution of a new variant could change its impact on health. Discovery of the VB variant demonstrated this, providing a rare example of the risk posed by viral virulence evolution.

Wymant and colleagues reported their findings in Science, in a paper titled A highly virulent variant of HIV-1 circulating inthe Netherlands.

The risk posed by viruses evolving to greater virulence has been extensively studied in theoretical work, yet, as the authors acknowledged, there have been just a few population-level examples. One example of note, they pointed out in their new paper, is the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2, which demonstrates increased transmissibility, as well as a reported increase in probability of death. However, outside of recent studies on SARS-CoV-2 variants, an understanding of the evolution of virulence in viruses beyond theoretical analyses is lacking.

RNA viruses have long been a particular concern, the investigators continued, as error-prone replication results in the greatest known rate of mutationand thus high potential for adaptation. For many years there have been concerns that such mutations may arise in HIV-1. Continued monitoring of HIV virulence is important for global health: 38 million people currently live with the virus, and it has caused an estimated 33 million deaths, the authors stated, citing data from UNAIDS.

The newly characterized VB variant of HIV-1 was first identified by the team in 17 HIV-1-positive individuals from the BEEHIVE ((Bridging the Epidemiology and Evolution of HIV in Europe) project, an ongoing study which collects samples from across Europe and Uganda. These individuals demonstrated highly elevated viral loads. And since 15 of the 17 people were part of the ATHENA study in the Netherlands, the researchers then analysed data from a cohort of over 6,700 HIV-positive individuals in the ATHENA study. They identified an additional 92 individuals with the VB variant, all from Netherlands, bringing the total number of people infected with the VB subtype to 109.

The teams analyses of the data indicated that individuals with the VB variant had a viral load of between 3.5 times and 5.5 times higher than individuals with a non-VB variant. When replicating the BEEHIVE test with the ATHENA data, we again observed a large rise in viral load in individuals with this viral variant In addition, the rate of CD4 cell decline, which represents a hallmark of immune system damage by HIV, occurred twice as fast in individuals with the VB variant, placing them at risk of developing AIDS much more rapidly. Individuals with the VB variant also showed an increased risk of transmitting the virus to others.

Reassuringly, after starting treatment, individuals with the VB variant did show similar immune system recovery and survival to those with other HIV variants. However, the team estimated that, without treatment, males diagnosed with the VB variant at the age of 30-39 years would progress to advanced HIVCD4 cell counts below 350 cells per cubic millimetre with long-term clinical consequenceswithin only 9 months from the time of diagnosis, compared with 36 months for individuals diagnosed with non-VB variants. Advanced HIV is reached even more quickly in older age groups, and there is considerable variation between individuals around these expected values, the scientists noted. Many individuals could therefore progress to advanced HIV by the time they are diagnosed, with a poorer prognosis expected thereafter in spite of treatment.

And, in practice, there is still considerable variation in the delay between initial infection, to the start of therapy, which makes the VB variant a particular concern even in the high-awareness and highly monitored context of the Dutch HIV-1 epidemic, the investigators stated. In contexts with less awareness and monitoring, in which diagnosis often occurs later in infection, the probability of reaching advanced HIV before diagnosis would be even greater.

The VB variant is characterized by many mutations spread throughout the genome, meaning that a single genetic cause cannot be identified at this stage. By analysing the patterns of genetic variation among the samples, the researchers estimate that the VB variant first arose during the late 1980s and 1990s in the Netherlands. Genetic sequence analysis suggests that this variant arose in the 1990s from de novo mutation, not recombination, with increased transmissibility and an unfamiliar molecular mechanism of virulence. It spread more quickly than other HIV variants during the 2000s, but its spread has been declining since around 2010.

The research team believes that the VB variant arose in spite of widespread treatment in the Netherlands, not because of it, since effective treatment can suppress transmission. The individuals identified with the VB variant showed typical characteristics for people living with HIV in the Netherlands, including age, sex, and suspected mode of transmission. This indicates that the increased transmissibility of the VB variant is due to a property of the virus itself, rather than a characteristic of people with the virus. The increased virulence is a property of the virus rather than a confounding property of individuals in this transmission cluster, the team stated.

Further research to understand the mechanism that causes increased transmissibility of the VB variant and faster damage to the immune system could reveal new targets for next-generation antiretroviral drugs.Senior study author Christophe Fraser, PhD, from the University of Oxfords Big Data Institute and Nuffield Department of Medicine, commented, Our findings emphasise the importance of World Health Organization guidance that individuals at risk of acquiring HIV have access to regular testing to allow early diagnosis, followed by immediate treatment. This limits the amount of time HIV can damage an individuals immune system and jeopardise their health. It also ensures that HIV is suppressed as quickly as possible, which prevents transmission to other individuals.

Excerpt from:
Highly Virulent HIV-1 Variant That Causes Rapid T Cell Decline Discovered in the Netherlands - Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology News

According to a Unicef statement, the actions of this collaboration are aimed at guaranteeing human security in times of pandemic, by supporting the health system, the vaccination campaign and health education.

The initiative is currently going through the process of purchasing equipment and supplies worth more than two million dollars, to contribute to strengthening the technical capacities of health institutions and two science centers belonging to the BioCubaFarma business group, linked to the development of anti-Covid-19 immunogens.

The support will benefit 253 polyclinics in the provinces of Pinar del Ro, Havana, Matanzas, Camagey, Granma, Santiago de Cuba, Guantnamo and Isla de la Juventud Special Municipality.

It will also strengthen the institutional capacities of 14 hospitals in Havana linked to maternal and child care, as well as the Center for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology and the Finlay Institute of Vaccines.

It is estimated that it will benefit a total population of 6.6 million people, including more than one million 271 thousand children.

The resources in the process of acquisition consist of equipment to strengthen the cold chain, supplies for vaccination, personal protection equipment and means to guarantee adequate hygiene conditions.

Accessories for oxygen therapy, high-performance ultrasound equipment for pediatric and gynecological hospitals, an ambulance equipped for life support, among others, will also be obtained.

The agreement will be implemented with the support of the Ministry of Foreign Trade and Foreign Investment, the Ministry of Public Health, Provincial Directorates of Health, BioCubaFarma and the United Nations Population Fund.

Regarding the important donation, the UNICEF Representative in Cuba, Alejandra Trossero, expressed that this joint effort of collaboration between the government, people of Japan and her entity will strengthen the actions carried out by Cuba to face the pandemic and ensure the well-being of boys, girls, adolescents and their families.

Said project, presented and approved by the Government of Japan, is aligned with the National Response Plan of the Government of Cuba for the control and containment of Covid-19 and the Unicef Emergency Response Plan for the health sector.

ef/ode/cdg

Link:
UNICEF and Japan will support Cuba's response to Covid-19 - Prensa Latina