The One Health Institute works at the interface of animals, people, plants, and the environment to solve complex problems that impact health and conservation around the world. The institute is part of the UC Davis School of Veterinary Medicine and is home to the Karen C. Drayer Wildlife Health Center and many other programs and projects. The executive director of the One Health Institute is Dr. Michael Ziccardi.The One Health approach recognizes that the health of domestic animals, wildlife, and people are inextricably linked to one another and the environment..
Effective targeting of cancer stem cells (CSCs) requires neutralization of self-renewal and chemoresistance, but these phenotypes are often regulated by distinct molecular mechanisms. Here we report the ability to target both of these phenotypes via CD55, an intrinsic cell surface complement inhibitor, which was identified in a comparative analysis between CSCs and nonCSCs in endometrioid cancer models. In this context, CD55 functions in a complement-independent manner and required lipid raft localization for CSC maintenance and cisplatin resistance. CD55 regulated self-renewal and core pluripotency genes via ROR2/JNK signaling and in parallel cisplatin resistance via lymphocyte-specific protein tyrosine kinase (LCK) signaling, which induced DNA repair genes. Targeting LCK signaling via saracatinib, an inhibitor currently undergoing clinical evaluation, sensitized chemoresistant cells to cisplatin. Collectively, our findings identify CD55 as a unique signaling node that drives self-renewal and therapeutic resistance through a bifurcating signaling axis and provides an opportunity to target both signaling pathways in endometrioid tumors.
Background and Aim: The One Health approach integrates human, animal, plant, and environmental health through multisectoral collaboration and is increasingly recognized as essential for addressing zoonotic diseases, antimicrobial resistance (AMR), food security, and ecosystem degradation. Ukraine has formally adopted One Health principles through national strategies and international partnerships; however, the ongoing full-scale military conflict has profoundly disrupted health, veterinary, and environmental systems, challenging effective implementation. This study aimed to evaluate the current status, achievements, and constraints of the One Health approach in Ukraine, with particular emphasis on the effects of armed conflict on governance, surveillance capacity, and intersectoral coordination, and to outline strategic priorities for strengthening One Health resilience. Materials and Methods: A mixed-methods approach was used, combining bibliometric analysis of Scopus-indexed literature on zoonoses, AMR, food security, and environmental safety with targeted case studies and a review of policy documents. National legal frameworks, international guidelines, and reports from global organizations were systematically analyzed to assess institutional capacity and operational readiness. Results: Ukraine has established a solid policy foundation for One Health, notably through the national Strategy for Biosafety and Biosecurity, which is grounded in the One Health principle and aligned with quadripartite frameworks. Active initiatives address priority zoonoses (rabies, leptospirosis, tuberculosis), AMR surveillance, and food safety. Nevertheless, implementation remains fragmented. Armed conflict has caused extensive damage to laboratories, displaced the workforce, created surveillance blind spots, and disrupted multisectoral communication. AMR trends have intensified due to healthcare strain, while environmental and plant health components remain under-integrated despite their relevance to food security and long-term resilience. The Ukrainian experience demonstrates that policy commitment alone is insufficient in the context of conflict. Effective One Health operationalization requires institutionalized governance mechanisms, interoperable surveillance systems, and sustained investment in human resources and laboratory infrastructure. Environmental and plant health integration remains a critical gap. Conclusion: Reinforcing the One Health framework is essential for Ukraine’s recovery and long-term health security. Sustained international technical and financial support, coupled with national institutionalization of One Health principles, is crucial to rebuilding integrated surveillance, mitigating biological risks, and enhancing resilience in conflict-affected settings.
BACKGROUND:Transitioning tobacco sales (TTSs) to state-controlled stores would reduce tobacco retailer density, making tobacco less accessible while also providing infrastructure to support retailer licensing, raise prices and restrict marketing. Using 10 US states with an alcohol retail monopoly as an example, this study estimated population average increases in driving time associated with implementing TTS, reporting changes overall and by race, ethnicity and poverty status. METHODS:This cross-sectional study combined 2020 licensing data, business records and American Community Survey 5-year estimates. Network (road-based) driving times to the nearest tobacco retailer were calculated at the census tract level for the status quo (existing tobacco retailers) and TTS counterfactual (state alcohol stores) in 2020. Travel times were weighted by subpopulations to assess equity reach of decreases in tobacco retailer accessibility. RESULTS:On average, TTS would more than double travel times to the nearest tobacco retailer, resulting in a mean 119% increase in driving time (range: 30%-232%). The average per cent increase in travel time was slightly greater for black (127%) and Hispanic or Latino people (126%) than for white people (117%), and travel times increased more for black and/or Hispanic or Latino people in all states except Alabama, New Hampshire and Utah. There were larger increases in travel time for persons with incomes below the federal poverty line (vs above) in 7 of the 10 states. CONCLUSIONS:The TTS policy would make tobacco less accessible and reduce racial, ethnic and socioeconomic disparities in tobacco retail accessibility in most of the states examined.
The One Health approach is based on a systemic understanding of the interrelationship between human, animal, and environmental health. In today's world, characterized by rapid urbanization, globalization, climate change, and emerging zoonoses, the One Health concept has become critical as an interdisciplinary and multisectoral framework for ensuring biosecurity and sustainable development. This paper evaluates the status and prospects for the implementation of the One Health approach in Ukraine, a nation uniquely positioned between establishing a modern public health system and managing the profound disruptions of war. Ukraine achieved a major policy milestone with the Law on the Public Health System (2022), which legally mandated multisectoral cooperation and successfully prioritized key zoonotic threats. However, this legal progress runs parallel to severe operational setbacks. The ongoing conflict has resulted in widespread infrastructure destruction, loss of specialized workforce, and critically, the accelerated rise of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) and zoonotic diseases. These challenges restrict the immediate functionality of joint outbreak response and high-containment diagnostics. The medium- to long-term development trajectory of One Health in Ukraine is closely linked to regulatory harmonization with the European Union (EU), modernization of surveillance systems, and strengthening of laboratory capacity. The Ukrainian case illustrates the complexity of operationalizing the One Health framework under conditions of crisis while pursuing long-term structural transformation.
The United States (US) has witnessed a notable increase in socioeconomic disparities in all-cause mortality since 2000. While this period is marked by significant macroeconomic and health policy changes, the specific drivers of these mortality trends remain poorly understood. In this study, we assessed healthcare access variables and their association with socioeconomic status (SES)-related differences (exposure) in US all-cause mortality (outcome) since 2000. Our research drew upon cross-sectional data from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS, 2000-2018), linked to death records from the National Death Index (NDI, 2000-2019; n = 486 257). The findings reveal that the odds of a lack of health insurance and unaffordability of needed medical care were over 2-fold higher among individuals with lower education compared to those with high education, following differential time trends. Moreover, elevated mortality risk was associated with lower education (up to 77%), uninsurance (17%), unaffordability (43%), and delayed care (12%). Uninsurance and unaffordability accounted for 4%-6% of the disparities in time to mortality between low- and high-education groups. These findings were corroborated by income-based sensitivity analyses, emphasizing that inadequate healthcare access partially contributed to socioeconomic disparities in mortality. Effective policies promoting equitable healthcare access are imperative to mitigate socioeconomic disparities in mortality.
