Share This Page

Newsmaker: Seth Horne

| Thursday, July 18, 2013, 12:01 a.m.
Seth Horne, 35, of Squirrel Hill was awarded a five-year, $1.35-million grant from the National Institutes of Health to design synthetic proteins that will mimic but be more stable than natural proteins.

Notable: Horne in June received a five-year, $1.35-million grant from the National Institutes of Health to fund research into designing synthetic proteins to mimic natural proteins.

Some proteins, as they occur in nature, are unstable and difficult to work with in a clinical setting. Horne hopes to design proteins for use in cancer detection and to stop the spread of malaria parasites to humans. Some proteins could act as imagining agents inside the body, detecting cancer when tumors are small. Residence: Squirrel Hill

Occupation: Assistant professor in the Department of Chemistry at the University of Pittsburgh.

Education: Undergraduate degree in chemistry from Texas A&M in 2000; Ph.D. in chemistry from the Scripps Research Institute in La Jolla, Calif. in 2005; post-doctorate fellowship at the University of Wisconsin-Madison in 2009.

Quote: “What we're doing is trying to take these known proteins and improve on them. ... The most important thing that we're trying to show is that this basic method for mimicking proteins with these specific molecules will work.”

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.