Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain
the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in
Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles
and JavaScript.
Anti-infective drug development: histories, uses and policies
This Collection invites perspectives on the historical, socio-cultural and bio-medical facets of anti-infectives, including failure and success stories of anti-infective drugs, a discourse of pharmaceuticals and people inside the drug pipeline, and tightly focused examinations on policy or market decisions. We take historical perspectives as our point of departure and backbone but are not limited to it.
Research is primarily welcomed on the following five axes of anti-infective drug development, use, and policy; although other perspectives will be also considered:
● I, Imagination & Innovation
○ How has imagination and innovation regarding anti-infective drug development, use, and policy evolved?
○ What innovation is needed?
● II, Push, Pull, Politics, and Policy
○ How have financial investments, political interferences, and corporate/governmental policies influenced anti-infective drug development and use?
○ What barriers are there to fiscal, politics, or policy measures that inhibit or complicate anti-infective drug development and use?
● III, Co-constructed drugs: sociocultural approaches
○ How is the anti-infective drug pipeline socio-culturally constructed and shaped by both researchers and consumers in all its facets (research, clinical trials and efficacy, policy creation, commercialization, marketing and packaging, prescription, use and consumption, etc.)?
○ How is the unrecognition of these sociocultural dimensions (including gender, class, race, etc.) causing anti-infectious initiatives to fail? How taking them into account has resulted or would result in successful drug development and use?
● IV, Pharmaceutical Companies and ‘bulk antibiotics’
○ How do pharmaceutical companies view the anti-infective drug development pipeline and how did this gaze change over time?
○ How do pharmaceutical companies respond to policies, and how does industry prioritise anti-infectives within their product lines?
● V, Drug development - Inside the Lab.
○ How has the development of anti-infectives changed over time? Did empirical methodology affect the development of new antimicrobials?
○ What are the main lines of investigation nowadays and what are the prognostics to mitigate the shortage in new antibiotics?
This Collection supports and amplifies research related to SDG 3.
The escalating challenge of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) has led to a surge of global research and policy discourse on refilling an empty antibiotic pipeline. The empty pipeline metaphor is, however, wrought with paradoxes. Drawing on critical social sciences and humanities research on pharmaceutical innovation, this comment article presents five of the key paradoxes that structure contemporary innovation discourse: Was the so-called “Golden Age” of antibiotics really golden? Was rational drug design truly rational in terms of antibiotic development? Was the antibiotic pipeline really built on a foundation of scientific breakthroughs by an elite group of (male) inventors? How can antibiotics, powerful symbols of industrial power, be considered as market failures? How could the crisis of antibiotics become the golden hour of their policing? Rather than dissect each paradox, the article aims to complicate standard problem diagnoses and encourage creative new conceptualizations of inclusive antimicrobial innovation.