header logo image


Page 78«..1020..77787980..90100..»

Archive for the ‘Stem Cell Therapy’ Category

Stem cell therapy a cure-all? Not so fast

Thursday, November 1st, 2012

MANILA, Philippines Its supposed to cure various illnesses such as cancer, spinal cord injury and Parkinsons disease. Is stem cell therapy the cure-all that it is touted to be?

Health Undersecretary Teodoro Herbosa said it is important to note that stem cell treatments are still at the experimental stage.

"The advisory is very clear. This is still an investigative form of therapy. Anecdotal reports are not enough evidence to say there is treatment, he said in an interview on ANC's Talkback with Tina Palma.

He said there are only two standard stem cell therapies considered effective and acceptable to the medical community.

"To date, I can only name two cases that are considered standard therapy. That is bone marrow transplantation--one for severe cancer, blood cancer and the other one is bone marrow transplantation after chemotherapy for any type of cancer, he said.

Herbosa said the Department of Health cannot confirm yet if stem cell treatment is indeed effective against certain diseases.

Dr. Tranquilino Elicao Jr., an oncologist who availed of the treatment in April in Frankfurt, Germany, said stem cell therapy cured his high blood pressure, sugar, cholesterol and uric acid.

He had 12 injections of cells, which came from lambs.

After a month, I had my blood tests. Everything went down to normal, Elicao said.

Elicao also said he is not taking medication anymore because he has regained his health.

Read the original here:
Stem cell therapy a cure-all? Not so fast

Read More...

Stem Cell facelift: Does it work?

Thursday, November 1st, 2012

CHICAGO (FOX Chicago News) -

Doctors and researchers have long said that stem cell therapy has the potential to change the face of human disease. But what if stem cells could be used to reverse the aging process as well?

Plastic surgeons say they can use stem cells to make women look years younger without the pain of an invasive surgery.

"I lost weight, loss of volume in face, I looked gaunt and I said, so I said, 'okay what do we do to fix this?'" said Sarah, a patient.

The fix for this was a stem-cell face lift. Dr. Steve Szczerba of Chicago Aesthetic Surgery Institute recommended that Sarah undergo a procedure, where he'd use her own adult stem cells to turn back the clock.

"A stem cell facelift is rejuvenating the face using grafted fat. Grafted fat has stem cells in it," Dr. Szczerba explains.

Grafted fat is transferred fat. Dr. Szczerba typically gets it from the patient's abdomen or inner thigh during liposuction.

"During that process of liposuction, we save the fat and take the fat and prepare it for grafting by removing the fluid. And the stem cells along with other grafted fat cells are injected into the face," says Dr. Szczerba.

He says it's not simply a fat transfer. Dr. Szcerba believes the stem cells, which are specialized cells that self renew, are actually working to make collagen and rejuvenate the skin.

"You can actually see the surface of the skin change," says the doctor. "Similar to that a chemical peel or a laser peel accomplishes in order to see change in your cheek area."

Read the original here:
Stem Cell facelift: Does it work?

Read More...

California Stem Cell Agency First: Big Pharma Hook Up

Sunday, October 28th, 2012


BURLINGAME, Ca. – For the first
time, a Big Pharma company has hooked into the $3 billion California
stem cell agency, a move that the agency described as a “watershed”
in its efforts to commercialize stem cell research.

The involvement of GlaxoSmithKline
comes via a partnership with ViaCyte, Inc., of San Diego, Ca., in a
clinical trial, partially financed with a $10.1 million grant today
from the stem cell agency. The trial involves a human embryonic stem
cell product that has “the potential to essentially cure patients
with type 1 diabetes and provide a powerful new treatment for those
with type 2 disease,” ViaCyte said. Scientific reviewers for the agency, formally known as the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine(CIRM),  “characterized the goal of the proposed therapy as as the 'holy grail' of diabetes treatments.”
CIRM Director Jeff Sheehy, who is co
vice chair of the agency's grant review group, said the ViaCyte product
could be manufactured on a large scale and basically involves “taking
(small) pouches and popping them into patients.”
The stem cell agency's award triggered
arrangements between ViaCyte and Glaxo that will bring in financial
and other support from Glaxo. The exact amount of cash was not
disclosed. CIRM said Glaxo will “co-fund and, assuming success,
conduct the pivotal trial and commercialize the product.” Under the terms of the grant, Glaxo and ViaCyte will have to meet CIRM milestones in order to secure continued funding. 
Following board approval, Jason
Gardner
, head of the Glaxo stem cell unit, characterized the
arrangement as a partnership. He told the board that the company
intends to develop a “sustainable pipeline.”
Gardner credited CIRM President Alan
Trounson
with being instrumental in helping to put the arrangement
together, beginning with their first meeting three years ago.
Trounson said the deal will resonate not only in California but
throughout the world.
Paul Laikind, president of ViaCyte,
also addressed the board, stressing the importance of CIRM's
financial support for his company over past years. It has received
$26.3 million (not including the latest grant) from California taxpayers at a time when stem cell
funding was nearly dried up. He noted that small companies such as ViaCyte do not have the resources to carry a product through the
final stages of clinical trials and subsequent production. Gardner also said,

“When the commercial funding avenues
have become much more risk averse, CIRM support (has ensured) that
promising, innovative cell therapy technologies are fully explored.”

In comments to the California Stem Cell
Report,
Elona Baum, CIRM's general counsel and vice president for
business development, described the award as a “watershed” for
the eight-year-old agency, linking the agency with Big Phama for the
first time. Much of CIRM's current efforts are aimed at stimulating
financial commitments from large companies, which are necessary to
commercialize stem cell research.
Arrangements between Big Pharma and
small companies are not unusual and can vanish quickly. However, the
CIRM-ViaCyte-Glaxo deal sends a message to other Big Pharma companies
and smaller ones, perhaps clearing away concerns that have hindered
other deals that could involve the stem cell agency.
The stem cell agency is pushing hard to
fulfill the promises of the 2004 ballot campaign that created CIRM.
Voters were led to believe that stem cell cures were virtually around
the corner. None have been developed to date.

Source:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/blogspot/uqpFc/~3/Jt1JalGURys/california-stem-cell-agency-first-big.html

Read More...

Trounson Going Halftime in January and February

Sunday, October 28th, 2012


BURLINGAME, Ca. -- The president of the $3 billion California stem cell agency, Alan Trounson, will be working half-time while living in Australia during January and February of next year.

Trounson told the governing board of the agency of his plans at the beginning of its meeting here morning. He said he needs to spend more time with his family, which lives in Melbourne.

Trounson has an 11-year-old son with whom Trounson said he hasn't spend much time in the last 18 months.  Trounson said he intends to teach his son to surf. Trounson's daughter also will be getting married in February.

Meanwhile, directors are currently discussing approval of grants in its $20 million-plus strategic partnership round.

Source:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/blogspot/uqpFc/~3/Qvgdz9k9XZ0/trounson-going-halftime-in-january-and.html

Read More...

Texas Science Flap Cited as California Stem Cell Agency Eyes its Own Processes

Sunday, October 28th, 2012


OAKLAND, Ca. – Meeting against a
backdrop from Texas that involves conflicts of interest and mass
resignations of grant reviewers, a task force of the $3 billion
California stem cell agency today began a partial examination of its
own grant approval process, specifically focusing on appeals by
rejected applicants.

The president of the California
organization, Alan Trounson, told the task force that it was dealing
with a “very serious matter” that in some ways is similar to what
happened in Texas. He said the science community is “very much
concerned.”
The situation in Texas involves the
five-year-old Cancer Prevention and Research Institute, which like
the California stem cell agency, formally known as the California
Institute of Regenerative Medicine (CIRM)
, has $3 billion of borrowed
money to use to finance research.
The chief scientific officer of the
Texas organization, Nobel laureate Alfred Gilman, resigned Oct. 12
during a flap about its attempts “to simultaneously support basic
research and nurture companies.”
Gilman's departure was triggered by a
$20 million award made without scientific review. Reviewer
resignations followed with letters that accused the Texas group of
“hucksterism” and dishonoring the peer review process. (Writer Monya Baker has a good overview today in Nature.)
The situation in Texas came to a head
AFTER the governing board of the California research group created
its task force. The problems in Texas are bigger and not identical to
those in California, which mainly involve the free-wheeling nature of the appeal process, not an entire lack of scientific review.
Nonetheless, this past summer, directors of the California agency for
the first time approved an award that was rejected twice by
reviewers. The award went to StemCells, Inc., of Newark, Ca., which
now has won $40 million, ranking the company No. 1 in
awards to business from CIRM.
Earlier this month, Los Angeles Times
business columnist Michael Hiltzik characterized the StemCells, Inc.,
award as “redolent of cronyism.”
Today's session of the CIRM task force
focused primarily on an aspect of the agency's appeals process that
CIRM labels as “extraordinary petitions.” They are letters which
rejected applicants use to challenge decisions by grant reviewers.
The researchers follow up with public appearances before the
governing board, often trailing squads of patients making emotional
appeals.
Both researchers and patients have a
right under state law to appear before the CIRM board to discuss any
matter. CIRM, however, is trying to come up with changes in the
appeal process that will make it clear to researchers on what the
grounds the board might overturn reviewers' decisions. The agency is
also defining those grounds narrowly and aiming at eliminating
appeals based on differences in scientific opinion.
At today's meeting, CIRM Director Jeff
Sheehy
, a patient advocate and co-vice chair of the grants review
group, said peer review is an “extraordinary way of analyzing
science, but it is not always perfect.” However, he also said that
“as a board we are not respecting input” from scientists and thus
allow the perception that we can be “persuaded against the judgment
of scientists.”
CIRM Director Oswald Steward, director
of the Reeve-Irvine Research Center at UC Irvine, agreed with a
suggestion by Sheehy that board must act with “discipline” when
faced with appeals by rejected applicants. Steward said, 

“The
process has gotten a little out of hand.”

It was a sentiment that drew no dissent
at today's 90-minute meeting.
Missing from today's meeting, which had
teleconference locations in San Francisco, Irvine, La Jolla and Palo
Alto, were any of the hundreds of California scientists whose
livelihoods are likely to be affected by changes in the grant
approval process. Also absent were California biotech businesses,
along with the only representative on the task force from CIRM's
scientific reviewers.
Our comment? When researchers and
businesses that have millions at stake fail to show up for key
sessions that set the terms on how they can get the money, it is a
sad commentary on their professional and business acumen.
Bert Lubin, a CIRM director and
chairman of the task force, indicated he would like to have two more
meetings of the task force prior to making recommendations to a full
board workshop in January with possible final action later that
month. Lubin, CEO of Children's Hospital in Oakland, said the matter
is “really important for the credibility of our whole
organization.”

Source:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/blogspot/uqpFc/~3/A3HGGTzzso8/texas-science-flap-cited-as-california.html

Read More...

California Stem Cell Agency First: Big Pharma Hook Up

Sunday, October 28th, 2012


BURLINGAME, Ca. – For the first
time, a Big Pharma company has hooked into the $3 billion California
stem cell agency, a move that the agency described as a “watershed”
in its efforts to commercialize stem cell research.

The involvement of GlaxoSmithKline
comes via a partnership with ViaCyte, Inc., of San Diego, Ca., in a
clinical trial, partially financed with a $10.1 million grant today
from the stem cell agency. The trial involves a human embryonic stem
cell product that has “the potential to essentially cure patients
with type 1 diabetes and provide a powerful new treatment for those
with type 2 disease,” ViaCyte said. Scientific reviewers for the agency, formally known as the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine(CIRM),  “characterized the goal of the proposed therapy as as the 'holy grail' of diabetes treatments.”
CIRM Director Jeff Sheehy, who is co
vice chair of the agency's grant review group, said the ViaCyte product
could be manufactured on a large scale and basically involves “taking
(small) pouches and popping them into patients.”
The stem cell agency's award triggered
arrangements between ViaCyte and Glaxo that will bring in financial
and other support from Glaxo. The exact amount of cash was not
disclosed. CIRM said Glaxo will “co-fund and, assuming success,
conduct the pivotal trial and commercialize the product.” Under the terms of the grant, Glaxo and ViaCyte will have to meet CIRM milestones in order to secure continued funding. 
Following board approval, Jason
Gardner
, head of the Glaxo stem cell unit, characterized the
arrangement as a partnership. He told the board that the company
intends to develop a “sustainable pipeline.”
Gardner credited CIRM President Alan
Trounson
with being instrumental in helping to put the arrangement
together, beginning with their first meeting three years ago.
Trounson said the deal will resonate not only in California but
throughout the world.
Paul Laikind, president of ViaCyte,
also addressed the board, stressing the importance of CIRM's
financial support for his company over past years. It has received
$26.3 million (not including the latest grant) from California taxpayers at a time when stem cell
funding was nearly dried up. He noted that small companies such as ViaCyte do not have the resources to carry a product through the
final stages of clinical trials and subsequent production. Gardner also said,

“When the commercial funding avenues
have become much more risk averse, CIRM support (has ensured) that
promising, innovative cell therapy technologies are fully explored.”

In comments to the California Stem Cell
Report,
Elona Baum, CIRM's general counsel and vice president for
business development, described the award as a “watershed” for
the eight-year-old agency, linking the agency with Big Phama for the
first time. Much of CIRM's current efforts are aimed at stimulating
financial commitments from large companies, which are necessary to
commercialize stem cell research.
Arrangements between Big Pharma and
small companies are not unusual and can vanish quickly. However, the
CIRM-ViaCyte-Glaxo deal sends a message to other Big Pharma companies
and smaller ones, perhaps clearing away concerns that have hindered
other deals that could involve the stem cell agency.
The stem cell agency is pushing hard to
fulfill the promises of the 2004 ballot campaign that created CIRM.
Voters were led to believe that stem cell cures were virtually around
the corner. None have been developed to date.

Source:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/blogspot/uqpFc/~3/Jt1JalGURys/california-stem-cell-agency-first-big.html

Read More...

Trounson Going Halftime in January and February

Sunday, October 28th, 2012


BURLINGAME, Ca. -- The president of the $3 billion California stem cell agency, Alan Trounson, will be working half-time while living in Australia during January and February of next year.

Trounson told the governing board of the agency of his plans at the beginning of its meeting here morning. He said he needs to spend more time with his family, which lives in Melbourne.

Trounson has an 11-year-old son with whom Trounson said he hasn't spend much time in the last 18 months.  Trounson said he intends to teach his son to surf. Trounson's daughter also will be getting married in February.

Meanwhile, directors are currently discussing approval of grants in its $20 million-plus strategic partnership round.

Source:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/blogspot/uqpFc/~3/Qvgdz9k9XZ0/trounson-going-halftime-in-january-and.html

Read More...

Texas Science Flap Cited as California Stem Cell Agency Eyes its Own Processes

Sunday, October 28th, 2012


OAKLAND, Ca. – Meeting against a
backdrop from Texas that involves conflicts of interest and mass
resignations of grant reviewers, a task force of the $3 billion
California stem cell agency today began a partial examination of its
own grant approval process, specifically focusing on appeals by
rejected applicants.

The president of the California
organization, Alan Trounson, told the task force that it was dealing
with a “very serious matter” that in some ways is similar to what
happened in Texas. He said the science community is “very much
concerned.”
The situation in Texas involves the
five-year-old Cancer Prevention and Research Institute, which like
the California stem cell agency, formally known as the California
Institute of Regenerative Medicine (CIRM)
, has $3 billion of borrowed
money to use to finance research.
The chief scientific officer of the
Texas organization, Nobel laureate Alfred Gilman, resigned Oct. 12
during a flap about its attempts “to simultaneously support basic
research and nurture companies.”
Gilman's departure was triggered by a
$20 million award made without scientific review. Reviewer
resignations followed with letters that accused the Texas group of
“hucksterism” and dishonoring the peer review process. (Writer Monya Baker has a good overview today in Nature.)
The situation in Texas came to a head
AFTER the governing board of the California research group created
its task force. The problems in Texas are bigger and not identical to
those in California, which mainly involve the free-wheeling nature of the appeal process, not an entire lack of scientific review.
Nonetheless, this past summer, directors of the California agency for
the first time approved an award that was rejected twice by
reviewers. The award went to StemCells, Inc., of Newark, Ca., which
now has won $40 million, ranking the company No. 1 in
awards to business from CIRM.
Earlier this month, Los Angeles Times
business columnist Michael Hiltzik characterized the StemCells, Inc.,
award as “redolent of cronyism.”
Today's session of the CIRM task force
focused primarily on an aspect of the agency's appeals process that
CIRM labels as “extraordinary petitions.” They are letters which
rejected applicants use to challenge decisions by grant reviewers.
The researchers follow up with public appearances before the
governing board, often trailing squads of patients making emotional
appeals.
Both researchers and patients have a
right under state law to appear before the CIRM board to discuss any
matter. CIRM, however, is trying to come up with changes in the
appeal process that will make it clear to researchers on what the
grounds the board might overturn reviewers' decisions. The agency is
also defining those grounds narrowly and aiming at eliminating
appeals based on differences in scientific opinion.
At today's meeting, CIRM Director Jeff
Sheehy
, a patient advocate and co-vice chair of the grants review
group, said peer review is an “extraordinary way of analyzing
science, but it is not always perfect.” However, he also said that
“as a board we are not respecting input” from scientists and thus
allow the perception that we can be “persuaded against the judgment
of scientists.”
CIRM Director Oswald Steward, director
of the Reeve-Irvine Research Center at UC Irvine, agreed with a
suggestion by Sheehy that board must act with “discipline” when
faced with appeals by rejected applicants. Steward said, 

“The
process has gotten a little out of hand.”

It was a sentiment that drew no dissent
at today's 90-minute meeting.
Missing from today's meeting, which had
teleconference locations in San Francisco, Irvine, La Jolla and Palo
Alto, were any of the hundreds of California scientists whose
livelihoods are likely to be affected by changes in the grant
approval process. Also absent were California biotech businesses,
along with the only representative on the task force from CIRM's
scientific reviewers.
Our comment? When researchers and
businesses that have millions at stake fail to show up for key
sessions that set the terms on how they can get the money, it is a
sad commentary on their professional and business acumen.
Bert Lubin, a CIRM director and
chairman of the task force, indicated he would like to have two more
meetings of the task force prior to making recommendations to a full
board workshop in January with possible final action later that
month. Lubin, CEO of Children's Hospital in Oakland, said the matter
is “really important for the credibility of our whole
organization.”

Source:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/blogspot/uqpFc/~3/A3HGGTzzso8/texas-science-flap-cited-as-california.html

Read More...

BioTime Makes Bid for Geron’s Stem Cell Assets

Sunday, October 21st, 2012


Biotime, Inc., and two men who were
leading players in history of Geron Corp. today made a surprise,
public bid for the stem cell assets of their former firm.

Michael West
West photo
Tom Okarma
AP file photo
The men are Michael West and Thomas
Okarma
. West founded Geron in 1990 and was its first CEO. West is
now CEO of Biotime. Okarma was CEO of Geron from 1999 to 2011.
Okarma joined Biotime on Sept. 28 to lead its acquistion efforts.
Both Geron, based in Menlo Park, Ca., and Biotime, based in Alameda,
Ca., are publicly traded.
West and Okarma sent an open letter this morning to Geron shareholders and issued a press release making
a pitch for the Geron's stem cell assets. Geron jettisoned its hESC
program nearly a year ago and closed its clinical trial program for
spinal injuries. The move shocked the California stem cell agency,
which just a few months earlier had signed an agreement to loan the
firm $25 million to help fund the clinical trial. The portion of the
loan that was distributed was repaid with interest.
At the time, Geron said it would try to
sell off the hESC program, but no buyers have surfaced publicly.
Personnel in the program have been laid off or found employment
elsewhere.
The West-Okarma letter to shareholders
said that under the deal,

“Geron would transfer its stem cell
assets to BAC(a new subsidiary of Biotime headed by Okarma), in
exchange for which you along with the other Geron shareholders would
receive shares of BAC common stock representing approximately 21.4%
of the outstanding BAC capital stock. BioTime would contribute to BAC
the following assets in exchange for the balance of outstanding BAC
capital stock:

  • “$40 million in BioTime common
    shares;
  • “Warrants to purchase BioTime
    common shares (“BioTime Warrants”);
  • “Rights to certain stem cell
    assets of BioTime, and shares of two BioTime subsidiaries engaged in
    the development of therapeutic products from stem cells.”
The letter asked Geron shareholders to
write the firm's board of directors to urge them to approve the
offer.
Geron had no immediate response to the
proposal. Asked for comment, Kevin McCormack, spokesman for the
California stem cell agency, said the deal “had nothing to do with
us.” However, in the past, CIRM has indicated that it could find a
way to transfer the loan to an entity that would continue spinal
injury clinical trial. CIRM President Alan Trounson was also involved
at one point in trying to assist in a deal.
Geron's shares rose 12 cents to $1.54
today while Biotime's shares lost four cents to $3.95.
Here are links to the two news stories
that have appeared so far on the proposed deal: Associated PressMarketwatch.

Source:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/blogspot/uqpFc/~3/v1bas6eGZF0/biotime-makes-bid-for-gerons-stem-cell.html

Read More...

California Stem Cell Agency Boosting Disease Team Program to $543 Million

Sunday, October 21st, 2012


Directors of the California stem cell
agency are set to give away $20 million next Thursday and authorize
a handsome addition to their signature disease team effort, bringing
its total to $543 million.

It is all part of the $3 billion
agency's push to develop therapies prior to running out of money for
new grants in 2017.
The $20 million is expected to go to
the first two winners in the agency's new strategic partnership
program. CIRM says the effort is aimed at
creating “incentives and processes that will: (i) enhance the
likelihood that CIRM funded projects will obtain funding for Phase
III clinical trials (e.g. follow-on financing), (ii) provide a source
of co-funding in the earlier stages of clinical development, and
(iii) enable CIRM funded projects to access expertise within
pharmaceutical and large biotechnology partners in the areas of
discovery, preclinical, regulatory, clinical trial design and
manufacturing process development.”
CIRM reviewed six applications with two winning approval. The agency's governing board is expected to ratify the decision next week. None of the applicants have been identified by the agency, which routinely withholds that information prior to
board action even when applicants have identified themselves.
Addition of a new $100 million
disease team round will come on top of the second, $213 million disease
team awards approved last this summer. The first round, awarded in
2009, totaled $230 million.  The size of the new round could be altered by CIRM directors prior to approval. Also before the board is a $40 million
proposal to expand the industry-friendly strategic partnership effort
into a second round.
The thrust of the disease team effort
is to speed the process of establishing clinical trials and to finance
efforts that might founder in what the biotech industry calls a
valley of death – a high risk financial location, so to speak,
where conventional financiers fear to tread.
The new disease team round will require
“co-funding” from applicants but the agency did not specify what
it means by the term. The matter of matching funds has become an issue in awards to StemCells, Inc., of Newark, Ca., in this summer's
disease team round.
Next week's agenda additionally
contains a plan to tighten review of proposed research budgets in
grant applications, making it clear that CIRM staff will be
negotiating such matters even after the board approves grants and
loans.
So far no researchers have testified in
public on the budget plan although it could well have a significant
impact on their future efforts.
Additional matters will discussed as
well at the meeting in Burlingame, which also has a teleconference
location in La Jolla that will be open to the public. The address
and additional material can be found on the agenda.  

Source:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/blogspot/uqpFc/~3/1gFmBSDEYCU/california-stem-cell-agency-boosting.html

Read More...

Los Angeles Times: StemCells, Inc., Award ‘Redolent of Cronyism’

Sunday, October 21st, 2012


The Los Angeles Times this
morning carried a column about the “charmed relationship” between
StemCells, Inc., its “powerful friends” and the $3 billion
California stem cell agency.

The article was written by
Pulitzer prize winner and author Michael Hiltzik, who has been
critical of the agency in the past. The piece was the first in the major
mainstream media about a $20 million award to StemCells, Inc., that was approved in September by the agency's board. The bottom line of the
article? The award was “redolent of cronyism.”
Hiltzik noted that
StemCells, Inc., now ranks as the leading corporate recipient of cash
from the agency with $40 million approved during the last few months.
But he focused primarily
on September's $20 million award, which was approved despite being
rejected twice by grant reviewers – “a particularly
impressive” performance, according to Hiltzik. It was the first
time that the board has approved an award that was rejected twice by
reviewers.
Hiltzik wrote,

What was the company's
secret? StemCells says it's addressing 'a serious unmet medical need'
in Alzheimer's research. But it doesn't hurt that the company also
had powerful friends going to bat for it, including two guys who were
instrumental in getting CIRM off the ground in the first place.”

The two are Robert Klein,
who led the ballot campaign that created the agency and became its
first chairman, and Irv Weissman of Stanford, who co-founded
StemCells, Inc., and sits on its board. Weissman, an internationally
known stem cell researcher, also was an important supporter of the
campaign, raising millions of dollars and appearing in TV ads. Klein,
who left the agency last year, appeared twice before the CIRM board
this summer to lobby his former colleagues on behalf of Weissman's
company. It was Klein's first appearance before the board on behalf
of a specific application.
The Times piece continued,

But private enterprise
is new territory for CIRM, which has steered almost all its grants
thus far to nonprofit institutions. Those efforts haven't been
trouble-free: With some 90% of the agency's grants having gone to
institutions with representatives on its board, the agency has long
been vulnerable to charges of conflicts of interest. The last thing
it needed was to show a similar flaw in its dealings with private
companies too.”

Hiltzik wrote,

(Weissman) has also
been a leading beneficiary of CIRM funding, listed as the principal
researcher on three grants worth a total of $24.5 million. The agency
also contributed $43.6 million toward the construction of his
institute's glittering $200-million research building on the Stanford
campus.”

CIRM board approval of the
$20 million for StemCells, Inc., came on 7-5 vote that also required
the firm to prove that it had a promised $20 million in matching
funds prior to distribution of state cash.
Hiltzik continued,

The problem is that
StemCells doesn't have $20 million in spare funds. Its quarterly
report
 for the period ended June 30 listed about $10.4
million in liquid assets, and shows it's burning about $5 million per
quarter. Its prospects of raising significant cash from investors
are, shall we say, conjectural.

As it happens, within
days of the board's vote, the
firm downplayed
 any pledge 'to raise a specific amount of
money in a particular period of time.' The idea that CIRM 'is
requiring us to raise $20 million in matching funds' is a
'misimpression,' it said. Indeed, it suggested that it might count
its existing spending on salaries and other 'infrastructure and
overhead' as part of the match. StemCells declined my request that it
expand on its statement.
 

CIRM spokesman Kevin
McCormack
says the agency is currently scrutinizing StemCells'
finances 'to see what it is they have and whether it meets the
requirements and expectations of the board.' The goal is to set
'terms and conditions that provide maximum protection for taxpayer
dollars.' He says, 'If we can't agree on a plan, the award will
not be funded.'"

Hiltzik wrote,

The agency shouldn't be
deciding on the spot what does or doesn't qualify as matching funds.
It should have clear guidelines in advance.

Nor should the board
overturn the judgment of its scientific review panels without
clear-cut reasons....The record suggests that the handling of the
StemCells appeal was at best haphazard and at worst redolent of
cronyism.” 

Source:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/blogspot/uqpFc/~3/6qvBfSLP3RE/los-angeles-times-stemcells-inc-award.html

Read More...

Researcher Alert: Stem Cell Agency to Take Up Grant Appeal Restrictions

Sunday, October 21st, 2012


The move by the $3 billion California
stem cell agency to curtail its free-wheeling grant appeal process
will undergo its first public hearing next week.

The proposals will mean that scientists
whose applications are rejected by reviewers will have fewer avenues
to pursue to overturn those decisions. The changes could take effect
as early as next year.
The move comes in the wake of a record
number of appeals this summer that left the board complaining about
“arm-twisting,” lobbying and “emotionally charged presentations.”
Among other things, the new "guidelines" attempt to define
criteria for re-review – “additional analysis” – of
applications involved in appeals, also called “extraordinary
petitions.” The plan states that re-review should occur only in
the case of a material dispute of fact or material new information.
(See the end of this item for agency's proposed definitions.)
In addition to alterations in the
appeal process, the CIRM directors' Application Review Task Force
will take up questions involving “ex parte communications.” The
agenda for the Oct. 24 meeting did not contain any additional
information on the issue but it likely deals with lobbying efforts on
grants outside of public meetings of the agency. We understand that
such efforts surfaced last summer involving the $$214 million disease
team round and Robert Klein, the former chairman of the stem cell
agency.
Klein appeared twice publicly before
the board on one, $20 million application by StemCells, Inc., the
first time a former governing board member has publicly lobbied his former
colleagues on an application. The application was rejected twice by reviewers – once
on the initial review and again later on a re-review – but it was
ultimately approved by directors in September on a 7-5 vote.
The board has long been troubled with
its appeal process but last summer's events brought the matter to a
new head. The issue is difficult to deal with because state law
allows anyone to address the CIRM governing board on any subject when
it meets. That includes applicants who can ask the board to approve
grants for any reason whatsoever, not withstanding CIRM rules. The board can also approve a grant
for virtually any reason although it has generally relied on
scientific scores from reviewers.
The proposals to restrict appeals are
designed to make it clear to scientists whose applications are
rejected by reviewers that the board is not going to look with favor
on those who depart from the normal appeals procedure.
While the board almost never has
overturned a positive decision by reviewers, in nearly every round it  approves some applications that have been rejected by reviewers. That has
occurred as the result of appeals and as the result of motions by
board members that did not result from public appeals.
Ten of the 29 board members are classified as patient advocates and often feel they must advance the cause of the
diseases that they have been involved with. Sometimes that means
seeking approval of applications with low scientific scores.
Here is how agency proposes to define
“material dispute of fact:”

“A material dispute of fact should
meet five criteria:(1) An applicant disputes the accuracy of a
statement in the review summary;(2) the disputed fact was significant
in the scoring or recommendation of the GWG(grant review group); (3) the dispute pertains
to an objectively verifiable fact, rather than a matter of scientific
judgment or opinion;(4) the discrepancy was not addressed through the
Supplemental Information Process and cannot be resolved at the
meeting at which the application is being considered; and
(5) resolution of the dispute could affect the outcome of the board’s
funding decision."

Here is how the agency proposes to
define “material new information:”

“New information should: (1)be
verifiable through external sources; (2) have arisen since the
Grants Working Group(grant review group) meeting at which the application
was considered; (3) respond directly to a specific criticism or
question identified in the Grants Working Group’s review; and (4)
be submitted as part of an extraordinary petition filed five business
days before the board meeting at which the application is
being considered."

Next week's hearing is scheduled for
Children's Hospital in Oakland with a teleconference location at UC
Irvine
. Addresses can be found on the agenda.

Source:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/blogspot/uqpFc/~3/6sbxGqQJ77Y/researcher-alert-stem-cell-agency-to.html

Read More...

BioTime Makes Bid for Geron’s Stem Cell Assets

Sunday, October 21st, 2012


Biotime, Inc., and two men who were
leading players in history of Geron Corp. today made a surprise,
public bid for the stem cell assets of their former firm.

Michael West
West photo
Tom Okarma
AP file photo
The men are Michael West and Thomas
Okarma
. West founded Geron in 1990 and was its first CEO. West is
now CEO of Biotime. Okarma was CEO of Geron from 1999 to 2011.
Okarma joined Biotime on Sept. 28 to lead its acquistion efforts.
Both Geron, based in Menlo Park, Ca., and Biotime, based in Alameda,
Ca., are publicly traded.
West and Okarma sent an open letter this morning to Geron shareholders and issued a press release making
a pitch for the Geron's stem cell assets. Geron jettisoned its hESC
program nearly a year ago and closed its clinical trial program for
spinal injuries. The move shocked the California stem cell agency,
which just a few months earlier had signed an agreement to loan the
firm $25 million to help fund the clinical trial. The portion of the
loan that was distributed was repaid with interest.
At the time, Geron said it would try to
sell off the hESC program, but no buyers have surfaced publicly.
Personnel in the program have been laid off or found employment
elsewhere.
The West-Okarma letter to shareholders
said that under the deal,

“Geron would transfer its stem cell
assets to BAC(a new subsidiary of Biotime headed by Okarma), in
exchange for which you along with the other Geron shareholders would
receive shares of BAC common stock representing approximately 21.4%
of the outstanding BAC capital stock. BioTime would contribute to BAC
the following assets in exchange for the balance of outstanding BAC
capital stock:

  • “$40 million in BioTime common
    shares;
  • “Warrants to purchase BioTime
    common shares (“BioTime Warrants”);
  • “Rights to certain stem cell
    assets of BioTime, and shares of two BioTime subsidiaries engaged in
    the development of therapeutic products from stem cells.”
The letter asked Geron shareholders to
write the firm's board of directors to urge them to approve the
offer.
Geron had no immediate response to the
proposal. Asked for comment, Kevin McCormack, spokesman for the
California stem cell agency, said the deal “had nothing to do with
us.” However, in the past, CIRM has indicated that it could find a
way to transfer the loan to an entity that would continue spinal
injury clinical trial. CIRM President Alan Trounson was also involved
at one point in trying to assist in a deal.
Geron's shares rose 12 cents to $1.54
today while Biotime's shares lost four cents to $3.95.
Here are links to the two news stories
that have appeared so far on the proposed deal: Associated PressMarketwatch.

Source:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/blogspot/uqpFc/~3/v1bas6eGZF0/biotime-makes-bid-for-gerons-stem-cell.html

Read More...

Los Angeles Times: StemCells, Inc., Award ‘Redolent of Cronyism’

Sunday, October 21st, 2012


The Los Angeles Times this
morning carried a column about the “charmed relationship” between
StemCells, Inc., its “powerful friends” and the $3 billion
California stem cell agency.

The article was written by
Pulitzer prize winner and author Michael Hiltzik, who has been
critical of the agency in the past. The piece was the first in the major
mainstream media about a $20 million award to StemCells, Inc., that was approved in September by the agency's board. The bottom line of the
article? The award was “redolent of cronyism.”
Hiltzik noted that
StemCells, Inc., now ranks as the leading corporate recipient of cash
from the agency with $40 million approved during the last few months.
But he focused primarily
on September's $20 million award, which was approved despite being
rejected twice by grant reviewers – “a particularly
impressive” performance, according to Hiltzik. It was the first
time that the board has approved an award that was rejected twice by
reviewers.
Hiltzik wrote,

What was the company's
secret? StemCells says it's addressing 'a serious unmet medical need'
in Alzheimer's research. But it doesn't hurt that the company also
had powerful friends going to bat for it, including two guys who were
instrumental in getting CIRM off the ground in the first place.”

The two are Robert Klein,
who led the ballot campaign that created the agency and became its
first chairman, and Irv Weissman of Stanford, who co-founded
StemCells, Inc., and sits on its board. Weissman, an internationally
known stem cell researcher, also was an important supporter of the
campaign, raising millions of dollars and appearing in TV ads. Klein,
who left the agency last year, appeared twice before the CIRM board
this summer to lobby his former colleagues on behalf of Weissman's
company. It was Klein's first appearance before the board on behalf
of a specific application.
The Times piece continued,

But private enterprise
is new territory for CIRM, which has steered almost all its grants
thus far to nonprofit institutions. Those efforts haven't been
trouble-free: With some 90% of the agency's grants having gone to
institutions with representatives on its board, the agency has long
been vulnerable to charges of conflicts of interest. The last thing
it needed was to show a similar flaw in its dealings with private
companies too.”

Hiltzik wrote,

(Weissman) has also
been a leading beneficiary of CIRM funding, listed as the principal
researcher on three grants worth a total of $24.5 million. The agency
also contributed $43.6 million toward the construction of his
institute's glittering $200-million research building on the Stanford
campus.”

CIRM board approval of the
$20 million for StemCells, Inc., came on 7-5 vote that also required
the firm to prove that it had a promised $20 million in matching
funds prior to distribution of state cash.
Hiltzik continued,

The problem is that
StemCells doesn't have $20 million in spare funds. Its quarterly
report
 for the period ended June 30 listed about $10.4
million in liquid assets, and shows it's burning about $5 million per
quarter. Its prospects of raising significant cash from investors
are, shall we say, conjectural.

As it happens, within
days of the board's vote, the
firm downplayed
 any pledge 'to raise a specific amount of
money in a particular period of time.' The idea that CIRM 'is
requiring us to raise $20 million in matching funds' is a
'misimpression,' it said. Indeed, it suggested that it might count
its existing spending on salaries and other 'infrastructure and
overhead' as part of the match. StemCells declined my request that it
expand on its statement.
 

CIRM spokesman Kevin
McCormack
says the agency is currently scrutinizing StemCells'
finances 'to see what it is they have and whether it meets the
requirements and expectations of the board.' The goal is to set
'terms and conditions that provide maximum protection for taxpayer
dollars.' He says, 'If we can't agree on a plan, the award will
not be funded.'"

Hiltzik wrote,

The agency shouldn't be
deciding on the spot what does or doesn't qualify as matching funds.
It should have clear guidelines in advance.

Nor should the board
overturn the judgment of its scientific review panels without
clear-cut reasons....The record suggests that the handling of the
StemCells appeal was at best haphazard and at worst redolent of
cronyism.” 

Source:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/blogspot/uqpFc/~3/6qvBfSLP3RE/los-angeles-times-stemcells-inc-award.html

Read More...

California Stem Cell Agency Boosting Disease Team Program to $543 Million

Sunday, October 21st, 2012


Directors of the California stem cell
agency are set to give away $20 million next Thursday and authorize
a handsome addition to their signature disease team effort, bringing
its total to $543 million.

It is all part of the $3 billion
agency's push to develop therapies prior to running out of money for
new grants in 2017.
The $20 million is expected to go to
the first two winners in the agency's new strategic partnership
program. CIRM says the effort is aimed at
creating “incentives and processes that will: (i) enhance the
likelihood that CIRM funded projects will obtain funding for Phase
III clinical trials (e.g. follow-on financing), (ii) provide a source
of co-funding in the earlier stages of clinical development, and
(iii) enable CIRM funded projects to access expertise within
pharmaceutical and large biotechnology partners in the areas of
discovery, preclinical, regulatory, clinical trial design and
manufacturing process development.”
CIRM reviewed six applications with two winning approval. The agency's governing board is expected to ratify the decision next week. None of the applicants have been identified by the agency, which routinely withholds that information prior to
board action even when applicants have identified themselves.
Addition of a new $100 million
disease team round will come on top of the second, $213 million disease
team awards approved last this summer. The first round, awarded in
2009, totaled $230 million.  The size of the new round could be altered by CIRM directors prior to approval. Also before the board is a $40 million
proposal to expand the industry-friendly strategic partnership effort
into a second round.
The thrust of the disease team effort
is to speed the process of establishing clinical trials and to finance
efforts that might founder in what the biotech industry calls a
valley of death – a high risk financial location, so to speak,
where conventional financiers fear to tread.
The new disease team round will require
“co-funding” from applicants but the agency did not specify what
it means by the term. The matter of matching funds has become an issue in awards to StemCells, Inc., of Newark, Ca., in this summer's
disease team round.
Next week's agenda additionally
contains a plan to tighten review of proposed research budgets in
grant applications, making it clear that CIRM staff will be
negotiating such matters even after the board approves grants and
loans.
So far no researchers have testified in
public on the budget plan although it could well have a significant
impact on their future efforts.
Additional matters will discussed as
well at the meeting in Burlingame, which also has a teleconference
location in La Jolla that will be open to the public. The address
and additional material can be found on the agenda.  

Source:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/blogspot/uqpFc/~3/1gFmBSDEYCU/california-stem-cell-agency-boosting.html

Read More...

Researcher Alert: Stem Cell Agency to Take Up Grant Appeal Restrictions

Sunday, October 21st, 2012


The move by the $3 billion California
stem cell agency to curtail its free-wheeling grant appeal process
will undergo its first public hearing next week.

The proposals will mean that scientists
whose applications are rejected by reviewers will have fewer avenues
to pursue to overturn those decisions. The changes could take effect
as early as next year.
The move comes in the wake of a record
number of appeals this summer that left the board complaining about
“arm-twisting,” lobbying and “emotionally charged presentations.”
Among other things, the new "guidelines" attempt to define
criteria for re-review – “additional analysis” – of
applications involved in appeals, also called “extraordinary
petitions.” The plan states that re-review should occur only in
the case of a material dispute of fact or material new information.
(See the end of this item for agency's proposed definitions.)
In addition to alterations in the
appeal process, the CIRM directors' Application Review Task Force
will take up questions involving “ex parte communications.” The
agenda for the Oct. 24 meeting did not contain any additional
information on the issue but it likely deals with lobbying efforts on
grants outside of public meetings of the agency. We understand that
such efforts surfaced last summer involving the $$214 million disease
team round and Robert Klein, the former chairman of the stem cell
agency.
Klein appeared twice publicly before
the board on one, $20 million application by StemCells, Inc., the
first time a former governing board member has publicly lobbied his former
colleagues on an application. The application was rejected twice by reviewers – once
on the initial review and again later on a re-review – but it was
ultimately approved by directors in September on a 7-5 vote.
The board has long been troubled with
its appeal process but last summer's events brought the matter to a
new head. The issue is difficult to deal with because state law
allows anyone to address the CIRM governing board on any subject when
it meets. That includes applicants who can ask the board to approve
grants for any reason whatsoever, not withstanding CIRM rules. The board can also approve a grant
for virtually any reason although it has generally relied on
scientific scores from reviewers.
The proposals to restrict appeals are
designed to make it clear to scientists whose applications are
rejected by reviewers that the board is not going to look with favor
on those who depart from the normal appeals procedure.
While the board almost never has
overturned a positive decision by reviewers, in nearly every round it  approves some applications that have been rejected by reviewers. That has
occurred as the result of appeals and as the result of motions by
board members that did not result from public appeals.
Ten of the 29 board members are classified as patient advocates and often feel they must advance the cause of the
diseases that they have been involved with. Sometimes that means
seeking approval of applications with low scientific scores.
Here is how agency proposes to define
“material dispute of fact:”

“A material dispute of fact should
meet five criteria:(1) An applicant disputes the accuracy of a
statement in the review summary;(2) the disputed fact was significant
in the scoring or recommendation of the GWG(grant review group); (3) the dispute pertains
to an objectively verifiable fact, rather than a matter of scientific
judgment or opinion;(4) the discrepancy was not addressed through the
Supplemental Information Process and cannot be resolved at the
meeting at which the application is being considered; and
(5) resolution of the dispute could affect the outcome of the board’s
funding decision."

Here is how the agency proposes to
define “material new information:”

“New information should: (1)be
verifiable through external sources; (2) have arisen since the
Grants Working Group(grant review group) meeting at which the application
was considered; (3) respond directly to a specific criticism or
question identified in the Grants Working Group’s review; and (4)
be submitted as part of an extraordinary petition filed five business
days before the board meeting at which the application is
being considered."

Next week's hearing is scheduled for
Children's Hospital in Oakland with a teleconference location at UC
Irvine
. Addresses can be found on the agenda.

Source:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/blogspot/uqpFc/~3/6sbxGqQJ77Y/researcher-alert-stem-cell-agency-to.html

Read More...

Husband testifies wife 'was looking for a cure' and found Bonita stem-cell doctor

Wednesday, October 17th, 2012

The Grekos hearing is scheduled to resume today. The location is the Collier County Courthouse in room 4-D, according to a case filing Monday.

The hearing before J. Lawrence Johnson, an administrative law judge from Tallahassee, is scheduled to last four days. The Collier County Courthouse is located at 3315 U.S. 41 E.

Photo by Allie Garza

Zannos Grekos

EAST NAPLES The patient was friends with the mother of Dr. Zannos Grekos, a Bonita Springs cardiologist who performed stem cell therapy on people with debilitating illnesses.

Chemotherapy for breast cancer several years earlier had left the 69-year-old patient, Domenica Fitzgerald, with numbness in her legs. She was unable to walk for more than 10 minutes. She hoped Grekos and his stem cell treatment could help.

"She was looking for a cure. She wanted to get well," her husband, John "Jack" Fitzgerald, testified Tuesday.

A four-day administrative hearing started Tuesday in a Collier County courtroom for a state Department of Health complaint against Grekos. The state says he committed medical malpractice and violated other standards of care when he performed a stem cell treatment on the patient on March 24, 2010. The patient suffered brain damage.

The state is only identifying the patient in its complaint by her initials, D.F. The Daily News learned of her identity by a public records request to the Collier County Medical Examiner's Office of all people who died on April 4, 2010, in the county. That was the day that Fitzgerald died after being taken off life support.

The state last year restricted Grekos' license after her death and ordered him not to do anything with stem cells with other patients. His license was fully suspended earlier this year when the state said he violated the order by treating another patient who also died.

Follow this link:
Husband testifies wife 'was looking for a cure' and found Bonita stem-cell doctor

Read More...

ReNeuron progresses stroke clinical trial

Wednesday, October 17th, 2012

LONDON (ShareCast) - ReNeuron has reported further progress in the clinical trial of its ReN001 stem cell therapy for disabled stroke patients, known as the PISCES study.

The third and penultimate batch of three patients have all been successfully treated with ReN001 and discharged from hospital with no acute safety issues arising. This follows approval last month by the independent Data Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) for the study to proceed to completion of dosing of this batch of patients.

The PISCES study continues to run to plan, with no cell-related serious adverse events reported in any of the patients treated to date, the clinical-stage stem cell specialist reported. The remaining three, high-dose cohort patients to be treated in the PISCES study have been identified and evaluated as potentially eligible for treatment, with patient enquiries continuing to come into the Glasgow clinical site and a number of patients consequently identified as reserve candidates for the study. Subject to DSMB approval, these final three patients are scheduled to be treated in January and March 2013.

In June of this year, interim data from the PISCES study from the first five patients treated was presented by the Glasgow clinical team at the 10th Annual Meeting of the International Society for Stem Cell Research (ISSCR) in Yokohama, Japan (EUREX: FMJP.EX - news) . Reductions in neurological impairment and spasticity were observed in all five patients compared with their stable pre-treatment baseline performance and these improvements were sustained in longer term follow-up.

Based on the above progress, the company announced last month that, ahead of plan, it had submitted an application to the UK regulatory authority to commence a multi-site Phase II clinical trial to examine the efficacy of ReN001 in patients disabled by an ischaemic stroke.

This trial is designed to recruit from a well-defined population of patients between two and four months after their stroke, which the company and its clinical collaborators currently believe will be the optimum treatment window for the therapy. Subject to continuing positive progress with the PISCES study, and subject to regulatory and ethical approvals, the company hopes to be able to commence the Phase II stroke study in mid-2013. The proposed study is expected to take up to 18 months to complete.

ReNeuron's ReN001 stem cell therapy is being administered in ascending doses to a total of 12 stroke patients who have been left disabled by an ischaemic stroke, the most common form of the condition.

This news should also have positive read-across for Aim-listed Angel Biotechnology (Berlin: A3G.BE - news) , which supplies the stem cells used in the study.

CM

More:
ReNeuron progresses stroke clinical trial

Read More...

Realizing the potential of stem cell therapy

Tuesday, October 16th, 2012

Public release date: 15-Oct-2012 [ | E-mail | Share ]

Contact: Kat Snodgrass 202-962-4090 Society for Neuroscience

NEW ORLEANS New animal studies provide additional support for investigating stem cell treatments for Parkinson's disease, head trauma, and dangerous heart problems that accompany spinal cord injury, according to research findings released today. The work, presented at Neuroscience 2012, the annual meeting of the Society for Neuroscience and the world's largest source of emerging news about brain science and health, shows scientists making progress toward using stem cell therapies to repair neurological damage.

The studies focused on using stem cells to produce neurons essential, message-carrying cells in the brain and spinal cord. The loss of neurons and the connections they make for controlling critical bodily functions are the chief hallmarks of brain and spinal cord injuries and of neurodegenerative afflictions such as Parkinson's disease and ALS (amyotrophic lateral sclerosis), also known as Lou Gehrig's disease.

Today's new findings show that:

Other recent findings discussed show that:

"As the fields of developmental and regenerative neuroscience mature, important progress is being made to begin to translate the promise of stem cell therapy into meaningful treatments for a range of well-defined neurological problems," said press conference moderator Jeffrey Macklis, MD, of Harvard University and the Harvard Stem Cell Institute, an expert on development and regeneration of the mammalian central nervous system. "Solid, rigorous, and well-defined pre-clinical work in animals can set the stage toward human clinical trials and effective future therapies."

###

This research was supported by national funding agencies such as the National Institutes of Health, as well as private and philanthropic organizations.

Todd Bentsen, (202) 962-4086

Read more:
Realizing the potential of stem cell therapy

Read More...

Beauty salon ‘offers’ stem cell therapy

Tuesday, October 16th, 2012

With all the publicity about the miraculous effects of stem cell therapy, the Department of Health (DOH) should prepare itself for the possibility that the new procedure would be performed by unqualified, and completely clueless, people.

I passed a beauty parlor recently and saw a huge poster on its door announcing the arrival of stem cell therapy. I was instantly reminded of botched breast enhancement and nose jobs performed by salon personnel who seemed to think it was as easy to learn complicated surgical procedures as it was to train to cut hair or do manicures and pedicures.

The DOH should start warning the public not to fall for these special offers just because they are available at giveaway rates.

Modern lifestyle problem

Experts have repeatedly talked about problems brought about by modern lifestyles. Changing diets and stress are two of the best known. Dr. Jaime G. Ignacio, section chief of gastroenterology at Veterans Hospital and head of the Digestive Malignancy Council of the Philippine Society of Gastroenterology, said constipation could be one of the consequences of the combination of these two factors.

Speaking at an event hosted by Boehringer Ingelheim, maker of Dulcolax (generic name Bisacodyl), a formulation for constipation relief, Ignacio, who, as a gastroenterologist is a specialist in digestive system disorders, defined the problem as having fewer than three bowel movements in a week (normal ranges from three times a week to three times a day).

He said constipation itself was not a disease but it could sometimes be a symptom of something serious, like colorectal cancer. But he said about 95 percent of cases were acuteoccurring suddenly and lasting for only a short periodresulting from some sudden lifestyle or hormonal changes, the taking of medication, lack of exercise, etc.

Ignacio said acute was easy to treat, with products like Dulcolax to solve the problem. But, if left unattended, acute constipation could lead to a chronic or long-term condition, which was the more worrisome, and would need medical attention.

He said constipation should be treated as soon as the problem had lasted for four or more days.

Constipation is part of modern living. [Like other diseases] prevention is the key. Safe and effective treatment is available [if needed], Ignacio stressed.

Here is the original post:
Beauty salon ‘offers’ stem cell therapy

Read More...

Page 78«..1020..77787980..90100..»


2024 © StemCell Therapy is proudly powered by WordPress
Entries (RSS) Comments (RSS) | Violinesth by Patrick