I believe I have a personal responsibility to make a positive impact on society.
Disagreements are one of the fundamental positive aspects of science.
You can't rush the science, but when the science points you in the right direction, then you can start rushing.
Antibiotics are a very serious public health problem for us, and it's getting worse. Resistant microbes outstrip new antibiotics. It's an ongoing problem. It's not like we can fix it, and it's over. We have to fight continued resistance with a continual pipeline of new antibiotics and continue with the perpetual challenge.
Bioethics is a very, very important field. As we get more and more in the arena of understanding science and getting better opportunities, the fact that you can do things with biological sciences that have an impact on a human being means you must have ethical standards.
Science is telling us that we can do phenomenal things if we put our minds and our resources to it.
A pandemic influenza would mean widespread infection essentially throughout every region of the world.
The discovery of HIV in 1983 and the proof that it was the cause of AIDS in 1984 were the first major scientific breakthroughs that provided a specific target for blood-screening tests and opened the doorway to the development of antiretroviral medications.
It's the advantage of the virus to spread, and you can only spread when you infect people and they infect other people without necessarily killing them. So if you had 100 percent mortality, the potential pandemic would almost self-eliminate itself.
The most pressing ethical question is to make sure that everything you do from a scientific standpoint is done for the ultimate good and positive issue for the people that you're caring about.
Even the pandemic flu of 1918 only killed one to two percent of the people who were infected.
I consider myself a perpetual student. You seek and learn every day: from an experiment in the lab, from reading a scientific journal, from taking care of a patient. Because of this, I rarely get bored.
An AIDS-free generation would mean that virtually no child is born with HIV; that, as those children grow up, their risk of becoming infected is far lower than it is today; and that those who become infected can access treatment to help prevent them from developing AIDS and from passing the virus on to others.
There cannot be any impediment to science that will ultimately be good to the general public.
The world is a place that is so interconnected that what happens in another part of the world will impact us.
Investigating rare diseases gives researchers more clues about how the healthy immune system functions.
Well I think the media has a very powerful influence on almost anything and everything we do because the general public gets their perception of what is going on in things they don't have immediate access to from what they get through the media.
Some people feel, you make your case, if they listen to you, fine, if they don't, that's it. That's not what leadership is. Leadership is trying to continue to make a case.
We can sharply deflect the curve of HIV incidence.
There's more than one way to get to the goal that you want to get to, but once you compromise your own principles, then you're lost. You're really lost.
