Experimental Infection of Culex Annulirostris, Culex Gelidus, and Aedes Vigilax With a Yellow Fever/Japanese Encephalitis Virus Vaccine Chimera (Chimerivax TM-JE)

Australian mosquitoes from which Japanese encephalitis virus (JEV) has been recovered (Culex annulirostris, Culex gelidus, and Aedes vigilax) were assessed for their ability to be infected with the ChimeriVax-JE vaccine, with yellow fever vaccine virus 17D (YF 17D) from which the backbone of ChimeriVax-JE vaccine is derived and with JEV-Nakayama. None of the mosquitoes became infected after being fed orally with 6.1 log(10) plaque-forming units (PFU)/mL of ChimeriVax-JE vaccine, which is greater than the peak viremia in vaccinees (mean peak viremia = 4.8 PFU/mL, range = 0-30 PFU/mL of 0.9 days mean duration, range = 0-11 days). Some members of all three species of mosquito became infected when fed on JEV-Nakayama, but only Ae. vigilax was infected when fed on YF 17D. The results suggest that none of these three species of mosquito are likely to set up secondary cycles of transmission of ChimeriVax-JE in Australia after feeding on a viremic vaccinee.

Privacy invasive geo-mashups : privacy 2.0 and the limits of first generation information privacy laws

Online technological advances are pioneering the wider distribution of geospatial information for general mapping purposes. The use of popular web-based applications, such as Google Maps, is ensuring that mapping based applications are becoming commonplace amongst Internet users which has facilitated the rapid growth of geo-mashups. These user generated creations enable Internet users to aggregate and publish information over specific geographical points. This article identifies privacy invasive geo-mashups that involve the unauthorized use of personal information, the inadvertent disclosure of personal information and invasion of privacy issues. Building on Zittrain’s Privacy 2.0, the author contends that first generation information privacy laws, founded on the notions of fair information practices or information privacy principles, may have a limited impact regarding the resolution of privacy problems arising from privacy invasive geo-mashups. Principally because geo-mashups have different patterns of personal information provision, collection, storage and use that reflect fundamental changes in the Web 2.0 environment. The author concludes by recommending embedded technical and social solutions to minimize the risks arising from privacy invasive geo-mashups that could lead to the establishment of guidelines for the general protection of privacy in geo-mashups.