StemCell Therapy

10-10-2011 16:05 http://www.StemCellTreatment.org is the #1 stem cell treatment and therapy center in the world. We have done over 8000 stem cell treatments. Stars like Danny Glover come to the American Stem Cell and Anti Aging Center. ASCAAC has done stem cell therapy for diabetes, heart disease, spinal injury, multiple sclerosis, autism and many other problems and diseases. Call 480 243 8859 and get your questions and concerns answered about stem cell treatment for whatever condition your need information on!

Follow this link:
Stem Cell Treatment - Video

07-11-2011 15:39 http://www.StemCellTreatment.org Salima had stem cell treatment for Fibromyalgia and had very good results. We have had great success with stem cell therapy for Fibromyalgia also known as FMS. Fibromyalgia symptoms include pain and tenderness in the joints, muscles and other soft tissue. Stem cell treatment for fibromyalgia is something that ASCAAC specializes in. Go to our website for more information and fill out the form or give us a call so we can answer your stem cell and fibromyalgia questions!

Read more:
Stem Cell Treatment Fibromyalgia - Video

20-12-2011 09:01 If you would like more information please call us Toll Free at 877-578-7908. Or visit our website at http://www.usastemcells.com Or click here to have a Free Phone Constultation with Dr. Matthew Burks usastemcells.com Real patient testimonials for USA Stem Cells. Adult stem cell therapy for COPD, Emphysema, and Pulmonary fibrosis.

Here is the original post:
Adult Stem Cell Treatments for COPD -Real patient results, USA Stem Cells- Donald W. Testimonial - Video

10-01-2012 17:54 Cell-based therapy research at Swedish Heart and Vascular Institute is quintessential to medical advancement. Medical director Dr. Paul P. Huang researches stem cell therapy pertaining to cardiovascular disease. He provides an historical perspective of stem cell research and explains how stem cells can help cardiovascular patients avoid surgery and improve their quality of life. Dr. Huang believes that regenerative medicine is medicine's next frontier. For more information visit http://www.swedish.org

More here:
Cell-based Therapy Research - Video

Your life depends on purposeful, targeted changes to cellular DNA. Although conventional thinking says directed DNA changes are impossible, the truth is that you could not survive without them. Your immune system needs to engineer certain DNA sequences in just the right way to function properly.

Today's blog is a tale of how cells engineer their DNA molecules for a specific purpose. It also illustrates how an evolutionary process works within the human body.

Your immune system has to anticipate and inactivate unknown invaders. Living organisms deal with unpredictable events by evolving. They change to adapt to new circumstances. Variation comes from their capacity for self-modification. Cells have many molecular mechanisms that read, write, and reorganize the information in their genomes, the DNA molecules used for data storage.

The adaptive immune system executes basic evolutionary principles in real time. It has to recognize and combat unknown (and utterly unpredictable) invaders. Immune system cells have to produce antibody molecules that can bind to any possible molecular structure.

How do cells with finite DNA, and finite coding capacity, produce a virtually infinite variety of antibodies? The answer is that certain immune cells (B cells) become rapid evolution factories. They generate antibodies with effectively limitless diversity while preserving molecular structures needed to interact with other parts of the immune system.

Immune cells achieve both diversity and regularity in antibody structures. They accomplish this by a targeted yet flexible process of natural genetic engineering: they cut and splice DNA.

Diversity is strictly limited to a special part of the antibody molecules: a "variable" region encoded by engineered DNA. DNA encoding the "constant" region does not change in the same way. The diversity-generating process is called "VDJ recombination" because it involves cutting and splicing together different "variable" (V), "diversity" (D) and "joining" (J) coding segments. Immune cells do this by cutting DNA at defined "recombination signal sequences." There are hundreds of V segments, about a few dozen D segments, and ten J segments. The various combinations of different spliced segments makes for a tremendous amount of diversity.

Antibodies contain two paired protein chains: a longer heavy chain and a shorter light chain. The heavy chain variable coding region forms by splicing V, D, and J segments together. The light chain variable coding region forms by joining V and J segments together. There are at least 10,000 VDJ combinations and 1,000 VJ combinations. Altogether, over 10,000,000 different heavy + light chain antibodies are possible through "combinatorial diversity."

Not bad... but not good enough.

VDJ recombination generates additional diversity. Although cutting the V, D, and J segments is precise, immune cells join each pair of cleaved DNA segments at about a dozen different positions. Connection between the same two segments can have about 30 to 35 possible different sequence outcomes. This "junctional diversity" adds over 1,000 possible antibody combinations.

In addition, heavy chain D segment joining has another virtually unlimited source of variability. Immune cells have an enzyme that attaches unique new DNA sequences to either end of the D segment. These are not encoded anywhere in the genome. Such so-called "N region" sequences can add over 1,000 new variations to each existing VDJ combination.

So the total possible genetically engineered antibody diversity is something above 10,000,000 X 1,000 X 1,000 = 10,000,000,000,000 combinations. This extraordinary number appears to be large enough to generate antibodies that can protect you from virtually any invader, whatever its molecular structure may be.

The immune system is itself a rapid evolutionary process, replacing one set of immune specificities with another. The right antibody-producing cells multiply when an invader enters the body. Antibodies sit on the surface of cells that made them. When a particular variable region binds an invader, that event sends a signal inside the cell to begin dividing.

Dividing immune cells are called "activated B cells," which proliferate into distinct populations. Because the descendants of a single activated B cell share the same engineered variable region coding sequences, they produce even more invader-recognizing antibodies. By binding, these antibodies signal the rest of the immune system to begin eliminating the invaders. This is the front-line "primary" adaptive immune response.

In a future blog, I'll explain ongoing natural genetic engineering as activated immune cells mature in the "secondary" response. It is no less amazing. For now, let's draw three conclusions from the initial rapid evolution system. We see that:

Evolution has produced a system that engineers DNA with a specific purpose: encoding proteins that bind to unpredictable invaders and signal the immune system to make more antibodies and eliminate the invaders. Precise targeting of DNA cutting to variable region-coding segments allows the basic antibody structure to stay the same. At the same time, its recognition/binding capacity changes. Your B cells are able to combine several different kinds of DNA biochemistry into a functional engineering process: 1) cutting the V, D and J segments; 2) joining the cleaved segments; and 3) synthesizing and inserting the N region sequences.

In the immune system, "purposeful" and "having a predestined outcome" are far from the same thing. Your immune system follows a regular process, but the end result is not fixed in advance. This is an important lesson to keep in mind as we witness ongoing public debates over evolutionary DNA change.

In biology, the alternative to randomness is not necessarily strict determinism. If the cells of the immune system can use well-defined natural genetic engineering processes to make change when change is needed, there is a scientific basis for saying that germ-line cells might do the same in the course of evolution.

Read more here:
James A. Shapiro: Purposeful, Targeted Genetic Engineering in Immune System Evolution

Paul Marks senior technology correspondent

An 83-year-old Belgian woman is able to chew, speak and breathe normally again after a machine printed her a new jawbone. Made from a fine titanium powder sculpted by a precision laser beam, her replacement jaw has proven as functional as her own used to be before a potent infection, called osteomyelitis, all but destroyed it.

The medics behind the feat say it is a first. "This is a world premiere, the first time a patient?specific implant has replaced the entire lower jaw," says Jules Poukens, the researcher who led the operation at Biomed, the biomedical research department of the University of Hasselt, in Belgium. "It's a cautious, but firm step."

Until now, the largest 3D-printed implant is thought to have been half of a man's upper jawbone, in a 2008 operation in Finland.

In this operation, a 3D printed titanium scaffold was steeped in stem cells and allowed to grow biocompatible tissue inside the abdomen of the recipient. Then, in 2009, researchers reported successfully printing copies of whole thumb bones - opening the way for the replacement of smashed digits using information from MRI scans.

Poukens' team worked with researchers in Belgium and the Netherlands and a 3D printing firm called Layerwise in Leuven, Belgium, which specialises in printing with ultrastrong titanium to make dental implants (like bridges and crowns) and facial and spinal bone implants.

By using an MRI scan of their patient's ailing jawbone to get the shape right, they fed it to a laser sintering 3D printer which fused tiny titanium particles layer by layer until the shape of her jawbone was recreated. It was then coated in a biocompatible ceramic layer. No detail was spared: it even had dimples and cavities that promoted muscle attachment, and sleeves that allowed mandibular nerves to pass through - plus support structures for dental implants the patient might need in future.

The team were astonished at the success of the four-hour jaw implant operation, which took place in June 2011 but which has only just been revealed.  "Shortly after waking up from the anaesthetic the patient spoke a few words, and the day was able to speak and swallow normally again," says Poukens.

It's only the start, predicts Layerwise managing director Peter Mercelis. "Patient?specific implants can potentially be applied on a much wider scale than transplantation of human bone structures."

Since 3D printers can create layers of material only micrometres thick, and from just about any material, researchers are investigating ways to print skin grafts for burns victims from them - and how to build up whole organs from depositing cells in the correct shape.

Read more from the original source:
3D printer provides woman with a brand new jaw

"We want to come up with technology to replace defective tissue with beating heart tissue made from stem cells sloughed off by the infant into the amniotic fluid," said Rice bioengineer Jeffrey Jacot, who led the study. "Our findings serve as proof of principle that stem cells from amniotic fluid have the potential to be used for such purposes."

The results were published online by the journal Tissue Engineering Part A. The research was conducted at Texas Children's Hospital.

According to the American Heart Association, about 32,000 infants a year in the United States are born with congenital heart defects, 10,000 of which either result in death or require some sort of surgical intervention before they're a year old.

Jacot, an assistant professor of bioengineering based at Rice's BioScience Research Collaborative and director of the Pediatric Cardiac Bioengineering Laboratory at the Congenital Heart Surgery Service at Texas Children's Hospital, hopes to grow heart patches from the amniotic stem cells of a fetus diagnosed in the womb with a congenital heart defect. Because the cells would be a genetic match, there would be no risk of rejection, he said.

"Between 60 and 80 percent of severe heart defects are caught by ultrasound," he said. "Ultimately, when a heart defect is diagnosed in utero, we will extract amniotic cells. By birth, we will have made tissue for the repair out of the infant's own cells. The timing is critical because the surgery needs to be done within weeks of the infant's birth."

Enlarge

Cells derived from amniotic fluid display a shape and typical cell-cell connections indicative of endothelial cells, which form blood vessels, after treatment with specific growth factors. Researchers at Rice University are working with amniotic stem cells with the goal of growing living tissue that matches infants born with congenital heart defects. Credit: Jacot Lab/Rice University/Texas Children's Hospital

Surgeons currently use such nonbiological materials as Dacron or Teflon, which do not contract or grow with the patient, or native pericardium, the membrane that surrounds the heart. Pericardium generally forms scar tissue and can only be used in the first operation. Both solutions require further operations and raise the risk of cardiac arrest, Jacot said.

Stem cells, the focus of both great hope and great controversy, are the cells in every organism that differentiate into specialized cells in the body. Stem cells drawn from human embryos are known to have great potential for treatment of defects and disease, but research into their use has been limited by political and other concerns, Jacot said.

That isn't the case with cells found in amniotic fluid, he said. Amniotic fluid is the liquid that protects and nourishes a fetus in the womb. Fluid is sometimes taken from pregnant women through amniocentesis, but cells for the Jacot lab's studies were drawn from women undergoing treatment for twin-twin transfusion syndrome. "This is where two identical twins share a placenta and one is getting more blood than the other. It's not common," he said, noting that Texas Children's is one of the few hospitals that treat the syndrome. "Part of the general treatment is to remove fluid with the goal of saving both lives, and that fluid is usually discarded."

Jacot said other labs have tested amniotic fluid as a source of stem cells with promising results. "Our work is based on five years of work from other labs in which they've discovered a very small population of amniotic stem cells – maybe one in every 10,000 – that naturally express markers characteristic of embryonic and mesenchymal stem cells."

Jacot and his team created a population of amniotic stem cells through a complex process that involved extracting cells via centrifugation and fluorescence-activated sorting. They sequestered cells with a surface receptor, c-kit, a marker associated with stem cells.

The cells were cultured in endothelial growth media to make them suitable for growing into a network of capillaries, Jacot said. When the cells were placed in a bio-scaffold, a framework used for tissue engineering, they did just that.

"Anything we make will need a blood supply," he said. "That's why the first cell type we looked for is one that can form blood vessels. We need to know we can get a capillary network throughout tissue that we can then connect to the infant's blood supply."

Jacot said the cells they tested grow very fast. "We've done calculations to show that, with what we get from amniocentesis, we could more than grow an entire heart by birth," he said. "That would be really tough, but it gives us confidence that we will be able to quickly grow patches of tissue outside of the body that can then be sewn inside."

He said construction of a functional patch is some years away, but his lab is making progress. While embryonic cells have the most potential for such a project, amniotic cells already show signs of an ability to turn into heart muscle, he said.

Co-authors are graduate students Omar Benavides and Jennifer Petsche, both of Rice; and Kenneth Moise Jr. and Anthony Johnson, now professors at the Texas Center for Maternal and Fetal Treatment at The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston with appointments at Children's Memorial Hermann Hospital.

The research was supported by the National Institutes of Health, the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship and CAREER programs, the Houston-Rice Alliance for Graduate Education and the Professoriate, the Howard Hughes Medical Institute Med into Grad Program and the Virginia and L.E. Simmons Family Foundation.

More information: http://online.lieb … EA.2011.0392

Provided by Rice University (news : web)

Original post:
Scientists make strides toward fixing infant hearts

20-01-2012 16:12 A conversation Dr. CC King, Ph.D., Associate Research Scientist at the UC, San Diego Pediatric Diabetes Research Center, about his work on stem cell therapy for type 1 (and type 2) diabetes.

Follow this link:
Stem Cell Therapy for Type 1 Diabetes (UCSD, PDRC) - Video

Suzanne Somers, a breast cancer survivor who’s become known for her controversial advice against chemotherapy, has done something that other women can truly find hope in. She turned to stem-cell techniques to successfully reconstruct her breasts.

The actress, 65, underwent a lumpectomy and radiation 12 years ago, and since then, she says, she wasn’t happy with the appearance of her breasts.  The radiation, she told “People” magazine, "left what breast I had flatter and flatter. I had a Double D on one side and on the other side I could hardly fill a B."

Dissatisfied with conventional breast-reconstruction procedures,  the “Three’s Company” veteran researched further and discovered that  Dr. Kotaro Yoshimura, a Japanese surgeon, had  developed stem-cell breast reconstruction in 2004. After talking with Yoshimura, Somers was convinced and decided to go with an American doctor for the operation.

So she began a clinical trial that has been ongoing at Hollywood Presbyterian Medical Center.  The first patient to participate, Somers had fat removed from her stomach via liposuction. Then her surgeon, Dr. Joel Aronowitz, harvested stem cells from half the fat and combined it with the remaining amount.

After that, Aronowitz injected the mixture back into Somers’ breast until it matched her left one in size.  (Somers had reduced her DD left breast to a C.)

Somers said she’s thrilled with the result and the implications for other breast-cancer survivors. I am so ensconced in what's cutting edge," she told “People.” "I get my thrill out of passing on information to women so they can have a better quality of life."

The rest is here:
Suzanne Somers Uses Stem Cell Therapy for Breast Reconstruction

31-01-2012 13:32 James P. Watson, MD lecture sample from the 11th Clinical Applications for Age Management Medicine Conference, Fall 2011, Las Vegas, Nevada Pre-Conference Track 2: Regenerative and Cell Based Medicine This lecture focused on regenerative and cell-based medicine, Autologous Stem Cell Research. This field continues to grow in use by physicians across the world. From platelet rich plasma to culture expanded stem cells, the need for information about the applications of these therapies to treat patients has never been greater. This track will focus on the latest developments in cell-based medicine with speakers who are driving the research and using these technologies as part of their everyday practice of medicine. For more information about our upcoming conference visit our website http://www.agemed.org Or contact us at conference@agemed.org

Originally posted here:
An Overview of Data Trends in Autologous Stem Cell Research and Clinical Use - James P. Watson, MD - Video

6 February 2012

Angel Biotechnology Holdings plc.

("Angel" or "the Company")

Angel signs three new GMP (KOSDAQ: 018290.KQ - news) manufacturing contracts

for Materia Medica Holding

Angel Biotechnology Holdings plc., (AIM:ABH), the biopharmaceutical contract manufacturer, is pleased to announce that it has reached agreement on three further manufacturing contracts with OOO " NPF "Materia Medica Holding" (MMH) with a combined value in excess of £4.5 million. It is expected these projects will run concurrently and take approximately 22 months to complete.

Under the proposed agreements, Angel will initiate activities within existing facilities, with a view to transferring production to its Cramlington site during 2012, which the Company is currently re-commissioning. The commission of these new agreements will come under the terms of our current umbrella pricing agreement, pending formation of the joint venture company ("JVC") announced on 17 October 2011 after which the contracts will transfer into the control of the JVC.

Dr Paul Harper, Executive Chairman, Angel Biotechnology Holdings, said:

"The commission of these three new agreements provides a robust basis for the proposed JVC between Angel and MMH and demonstrates the confidence the customer has in Angel's capabilities. These agreements will put the proposed JVC on a sure footing from the outset, but is also an excellent example of the value Angel can provide via significant alliances such as this.. I would like to thank MMH for making this commercial commitment."

Professor Oleg Epstein, General Director, OOO "NPF "Materia Medica Holding", said:

"By signing these three new agreements with Angel, MMH can act in a timely manner to bring these products to market. As core business, it is important to us that development work begins whilst the JVC is being established. I am positive this will provide the best possible start to the new JVC.

For further information:

Angel Biotechnology Holdings plc

Lorna Peers, Finance Director +44 (0) 131 445 6077

Stewart White, Commercial Director http://www.angelbio.com

Grant Thornton, Corporate Finance

Colin Aaronson / Melanie Frean / Elliot Berg +44 (0) 20 7383 5100

Hybridan LLP (Broker)

Claire Noyce/Tim Goodman/

Deepak Reddy +44 (0) 20 7947 4350

Media (Frankfurt: 725292 - news) enquiries:

The Communications Portfolio Ltd

Ariane Comstive / Caolan Mahon +44 (0) 20 7536 2028 / 2029

ariane.comstive@communications-portfolio.co.uk

Notes to Editors:

Angel Biotechnology Holdings plc. is a full service contract bio-manufacturing partner to biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies worldwide. Angel specialises in advanced biologics including biopharmaceutical proteins and cell therapies, such as cellular vaccines and stem cells. At present, Angel's products are principally used in pre-clinical studies and clinical trials with a view to becoming the contract manufacturer of choice on a continuing basis.

Drug development companies outsource their biopharmaceutical manufacturing requirements to Angel to reduce their own capital requirements and enable them to develop products more rapidly. In addition, Angel provides complete regulatory services and documentation to its customers while its manufacturing processes adhere to the most stringent regulatory requirements. Products are produced to current Good Manufacturing Practice (cGMP) standards as required by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and in facilities that are certified to European standards by the Medicines (Xetra: 938858 - news) and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).

Its (Euronext: ALITS.NX - news) customers range from early-stage biotechnology companies including ReNeuron plc. and US-based Pathfinder Cell Therapy, to established pharmaceutical companies such as Russian-based Materia Medica Holdings.

Angel has two facilities: Pentlands Science Park near Edinburgh where it employs 38 people, and a site in Cramlington, near Newcastle (Frankfurt: 725198 - news) -upon-Tyne, which is expected to be commissioned by the end of Q1 2012, initially employing up to 10 people.

More information is available at http://www.angelbio.com .

- Ends -

Read more here:
Angel Biotechnology - Contracts with Materia Medica

Good news for millions of overweight Americans resolving to lose weight in 2012: the new gastric plication restrictive bariatric procedure features greater weight loss than banding and is device free, and Health Travel Technologies is sponsoring a free medical webcast for patients to learn all about it.

San Francisco CA (PRWEB) February 05, 2012

Will the gastric pleat beat the gastric band for restrictive weight loss surgery results? That's a topic on the agenda for the Health Travel Technologies live medical webcast on Friday February 10th at 12:00p PST.

The webcast is free for patients interested in learning information about the latest minimally invasive bariatric procedure to treat obesity, the gastric plication.

According to Health Travel Technologies director of patient information services Debbie Natsch, the gastric plication webcast series was developed with the input of the world’s leading obesity surgical team, including gastroenterologist surgeons, physician nutritionists, hospital administrators and bariatric nurses.

Natsch said the webcast provides participants with detailed information about the weight loss procedure, including a review of existing patient data from various clinical studies, as well as an opportunity to have questions answered by the medical team.

“In the past nine months we’ve had more than 1400 participants in our webcast series,” said Natsch. “It’s a great way for patients to learn about the specifics of a surgical procedure: everything from how the surgeon determines eligibility, to expectations for weight loss and life style changes after the procedure.”

“The gastric plication webcast is also a great way for participants to learn how the medical exchange system works; most patients are not intimately familiar with the very high level of quality and services accessible through medical exchange programs.”

The word “plication” means “to pleat” which describes the method of stomach restriction. The gastric plication involves a specialized suturing technique to restrict stomach capacity without the need for resection, implanted devices or surgical stapling.

The gastric plication weight loss surgery is performed laparoscopically, with patients hospitalized for 24-48 hours.

The gastric plication webcast is part of the weekly Patient Education Series sponsored by Health Travel Technologies, a Silicon Valley-based health information technology company specializing in cloud-based global patient referral and management applications.

According to Natsch, many surgeons find the gastric plication notable for its expected lower risk of complication compared to the more invasive gastric bypass and vertical sleeve gastrectomy procedures, while demonstrating similar weight loss outcomes.

“We’ve had a strong response to the gastric plication program,” shared Case Director Marci Mauro. “We have a robust roster of happy patients who demonstrating excellent weight loss and remission of many obesity complications, including type 2 diabetes,” said Mauro.

According to statistics published by the American Diabetes Association, 26 million Americans are diagnosed with type 2 diabetes, with another 79 million classified as “pre-diabetic”. Diabetes is the seventh leading cause of death in the US and is linked to an increased likelihood of kidney failure, heart disease, stroke, and cancer diagnosis and death.

Type 2 diabetes has also been linked to lower lifetime income and professional opportunities.

“One of our own bariatric medical exchange Case Managers has had weight loss surgery with a Health Travel Technologies obesity surgical team, led by one of the world’s leading gastroenterologist surgical teams. We know first-hand that the gastric plication medical travel program is first-rate,” said Mauro.

About Medical Exchange International Health Care

“The American health care system is broken,” Health Travel Technologies CEO Herb Stephens points out. “Health insurance premiums and out-of-pocket costs have skyrocketed, often forcing people to defer necessary medical treatments, or hold fundraisers just to afford them.

Health Travel Technologies offers Americans – form the uninsured to t the underinsured to self-insured employers - a chance to easily access affordable health care for both essential and elective procedure with some of the best medical providers in the world,” said Stephens. “Usually at a savings rate of fifty percent or more.”

The practice of global patient medical exchange (also called medical travel, medical tourism and health travel) has become increasingly common as US health insurance costs continue to outstrip growth in workers’ wages.

The benefits of medical travel are being sought by self-insured US employers seeking to reduce the cost of employee health care benefits. A study by the Kaiser Family Foundation shows that the annual premium for family coverage through an employer increased 9% last year to $15,073.

“Health care really is a global market place now,” said Stephens. “It’s a great opportunity for Americans to make their medical dollar stretch farther, especially in a weak US economy with high employment uncertainty.”

About Health Travel Technologies

Founded in 2006, Health Travel Technologies is a Silicon Valley technology and services company that licenses its award-winning cloud-based Inpatra™ medical collaboration platform to major international hospitals, medical travel facilitators, physician practices, and insurance networks.

“Our patient referral services application platform that connects patients and doctors like never before,” said Stephens.

“Whether for patients traveling from Canada to Costa Rica or East Africa to India, Health Travel Technologies enables access to the world’s best medical care.”

Health Travel Technologies’ gastric plication live medical webcast is part of an ongoing Patient Information Series for medical travel treatment programs for bariatric procedures, orthopedic and spinal surgery, stem cell treatment for chronic disease, and functional cancer therapies.

Health Travel Technologies is a subsidiary of Health Travel Guides, is a privately held company.

###

Marci Mauro
Health Travel Technologies
(866) 978-2573 x130
Email Information

The rest is here:
Big News For Big Loser Wannabes: Health Travel Technologies Offers Free Live Medical Webcast on New Minimally Invasive ...

Interview with Dr. Zannos Grekos Grekos contests that his office has done ...

The state took action against Dr. Zannos Grekos because of the death of a 69-year-old breast cancer patient April 4, 2010, after undergoing the treatment at his Bonita Springs practice, at 9500 Bonita Beach Road, Suite 310.

BONITA SPRINGS — Dr. Zannos Grekos may not have an attorney representing him at a hearing next month against a state complaint that he performed an unauthorized stem cell procedure on a patient who later died.

Or maybe the Bonita Springs cardiologist will have new counsel for the three-day administrative hearing scheduled to begin March 20.

His original attorney, Greg Chaires of Orlando, withdrew from the case Jan. 24, less than two months before the hearing. He's been Grekos' attorney since the state filed an administrative complaint against the doctor a year ago.

Grekos couldn't be reached for comment at his practice, Regenocyte Therapeutic, 9500 Bonita Beach Road, Suite 310.

Chaires stated in his withdrawal notice to the judge that he had good cause to stop representing him, but didn't elaborate.

Florida health department spokeswoman Jennifer Hirst said this past week that Grekos has two weeks to hire a new attorney "and regardless of whether he does or not, the trial date will not change."

The case, which stems from events in early 2010, culminated a year later on Feb. 22, 2011, when the health department imposed an emergency restriction against his license. The restriction prohibits him from doing any procedures with bone marrow or stem cells in his practice.

If the administrative law judge sides with the state, Grekos could face sanctions or permanent restriction or revocation of his license.

At issue was Grekos' treatment of a 69-year-old woman who went to him for a consult on Feb. 25, 2010, for numbness and tingling in her arms and legs after chemotherapy.

Grekos ordered imaging of her carotid arteries and her brain and later injected her own aspirated bone marrow into her cerebral circulatory system.

At home that evening, she fell and was hospitalized. She had suffered a severe brain stem injury and was taken off life support on April 2, 2010.

Licensed in Florida since 1992, Grekos' cardiology practice in recent years has focused more on stem cell therapy to repair damaged heart muscle, lungs and other tissue.

He sends a sample of a patient's lung to Israel to cultivate new stem cells and the blood gets sent to a clinic or hospital in the Dominican Republic. The patient travels to the Dominican Republic, where the stem cells are injected into the damaged tissue.

Grekos has established a relationship with doctors and clinicians in the Dominican Republic who do the injections on his behalf; he isn't licensed to practice medicine there.

The case has captured widespread attention among Grekos' supporters who swear their once-chronic illnesses have undergone dramatic improvement since having the therapy through him. Detractors say he is taking advantage of a vulnerable population with congestive heart failure, lung failure and other illnesses for which conventional treatments no longer are effective.

Original post:
Bonita stem cell doctor's attorney quits, state hearing still scheduled

South Korea is playing a risky game as it has given the permission for using human eggs in cloning research despite a high level scandal in their country which involved one of their top scientists admitting to his involvement in doctored research work. Hwang Woo-suk was the scientist who had claimed that he had cloned human embryos and extracted stem cells from them but it was found out that all his claims were false. What raised eyes were when eggs required for research were donated by a female scientist in his team and this questioned the ethics of such practice. This shameful incident caused Hwang Woo-suk to resign from his post at the Seoul National University and is now facing trial for misappropriation of government funds. In order to get over the shameful act the government has again given a go ahead to use of human eggs in cloning but this time with an act of caution and under a new set of guidelines has asked that researchers should only use eggs which are to be destroyed after fertility treatments or from other legal ways and a prior license would have to be obtained from the government for undertaking research. It seems this time South Korea wants to take no chances. Via theage

Source:
http://www.biotechblog.org/rss.xml

The Cancer Stem Cell Consortium (CSCC) is a partner in the 2012 Large-Scale Applied Research Project Competition of Genome Canada, in collaboration with the first phase of the Personalized Medicine Signature Initiative of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR). Genome Canada is leading the research competition. An excerpt from Fact Sheet: The Potential of Personalized Medicine:

Funding of $67.5M will come from Genome Canada ($40 million), CIHR ($22.5 million) and the Cancer Stem Cell Consortium ($5 million). Projects will be funded for a maximum of four years. To qualify for funding, researchers must obtain matching funding that at is least equal to that provided through the competition, which will bring the total investment in this research area to close to $140 million. Matching funding is typically derived from provincial, academic, private sector or international sources.

Details about the competition are available here.

Press releases, dated January 31, 2012, about the federal government's support for personalized medicine, are available here and here.

Source:
http://cancerstemcellnews.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default?alt=rss

Source:
http://intlstemcell.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default?alt=rss

The Center for Genetics and Society has filed a brief statement with the Institute of Medicine panel examining the performance of the California stem cell agency, expressing the hope that the inquiry will include "a broader range of sources."

Marcy Darnovsky, associate executive director of the Berkeley group, said that "a meaningful review by (the IOM) committee could make an important contribution to needed changes at the agency." Darnovsky's organization has followed the stem cell effort since its inception.

She noted that CIRM is "a public agency spending increasingly scarce public resources" and has raised the possibility of seeking another multibillion dollar bond measure from voters.

The IOM inquiry has finished half of its public process and is yet to hear an independent analysis of the stem cell agency, which is paying $700,000 for the study.

Earlier Darnovsky told the California Stem Cell Report that the Institute of Medicine has not contacted her organization for comments, although she has spoken with the public relations person for the IOM.

Here is the text of Darnovsky's statement sent to the IOM.

"The Center for Genetics and Society is a public interest organization working to ensure responsible uses and effective societal governance of human genetic and reproductive technologies.  We support embryonic stem cell research, but have been concerned for some years about a number of aspects of the field, and of the California Institute of Regenerative Medicine in particular.

"We have been closely following CIRM since the campaign for Proposition 71 that established it in 2004. We have attended numerous meetings of the agency’s governing board and Standards Working Group, worked with other public interest groups who share our concerns about CIRM, written frequently about CIRM in our publications, and been cited dozens of times in articles about CIRM in key state and national news outlets.

"In 2006, we published The California Stem Cell Program at One Year: A Progress Report, which assessed CIRM's performance to that date and offered recommendations. See http://www.geneticsandsociety.org/downloads/200601report.pdf

"In 2008, CGS policy analyst Jesse Reynolds gave invited testimony to the Little Hoover Commission’s hearing on CIRM. See http://www.geneticsandsociety.org/article.php?id=4386

"We are encouraged that the Institute of Medicine is undertaking an independent assessment of CIRM, though we hope that you will invite input from a broader range of sources than were represented at the meeting last month in San Francisco. With key questions about the future of CIRM unresolved, and its leadership contemplating a campaign for another bond measure.

"As I wrote in a recent commentary that expressed our disappointment with the roster of speakers at last month’s hearing,

"Ballot measure or no ballot measure, CIRM will continue to disperse the public money it controls – another billion and a half dollars. This is a public agency spending increasingly scarce public resources. It is funding a field of research in which we place great hopes for medical and scientific advances. These factors make it all the more crucial that CIRM follow the basics of good governance and public accountability, and eschew the hyperbole and exaggerated promises that have tainted stem cell research for so long.

"See  http://www.geneticsandsociety.org/article.php?id=6045

"Please let us know if we can be of help. We would be very glad to share our insights and recommendations."

Source:
http://californiastemcellreport.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default?alt=rss

The blue-ribbon panel examining the performance of the $3 billion California stem cell agency is midway through its public process and is yet to hear from a single independent witness during its open sessions.

The panel's report and recommendations are due this fall and are expected to have a major impact on the seven-year-old agency and its future.

So far, the IOM panel has heard only from employees or directors of the agency and persons representing institutions that have received $418 million in CIRM cash.

The panel of scientists and academics was put together by the prestigious Institute of Medicine under a $700,000 contract with the stem cell agency itself. At the 2010 meeting during which agency directors approved the contract, they expressed hope that the IOM panel's findings would bolster public support for another multibillion dollar bond measure for the agency, which expects to run out of funds for new grants in 2017.

Last week, the California Stem Cell Report asked the IOM about its plans to gather independent or critical information about the stem cell agency's performance. With only one more California public meeting scheduled, the IOM said that it is seeking the "full range of perspectives" but did not respond directly to questions about the specifics of how it is going to fulfill that task.

None of the four organizations in California that have an independent perspective on CIRM have been contacted by the IOM, the California Stem Cell Report has been told. They are the state's Little Hoover Commission, the Center for Genetics and Society, Consumer Watchdog and the Citizens Financial Accountability and Oversight Committee, which is the only state body specifically charged with oversight of CIRM and its directors and which is chaired by the state's top fiscal officer, Controller John Chiang. A spokeswoman for the IOM panel said, however, it plans to touch base with at least some of the four.

In response to questions from the California Stem Cell Report, Christine Stencel, the IOM spokeswoman, said the IOM also wants to hear comments from businesses whose applications have been rejected by CIRM. However, she said the panel is still working on "ways to get them." She did not respond directly to questions about how many of such businesses would be interviewed or how they would be selected. The tiny number of CIRM grants to business is a sore spot with industry. Even directors and CIRM's own "external review" panel have said much more is needed.

In response to a question about complaints about conflicts of interest on the part of CIRM reviewers, Stencel was also non-specific, saying only that the panel wants to "obtain all relevant insights." She did not respond directly to a question about whether the panel would examine "private complaints" filed with CIRM by rejected applicants.

Currently the IOM has forms posted online that interested parties, if they know about the existence of the forms, can use to comment on CIRM. We asked whether the panel plans to do more than passively post the forms, specifically whether it plans to email them to all CIRM applicants who were rejected. We also asked about IOM plans to follow up to generate an adequate response. Stencel said the IOM is "proactively working" to get survey responses but did not say what specific steps it was taking.

Our comment?

The IOM has a well-deserved reputation for rigor and thoroughness. However, the IOM is all but unknown to 99 pecent of the public, which will be the ultimate consumer of its findings on the stem cell agency. The fact that the IOM is being paid $700,000 by CIRM will undoubtedly raise questions in the minds of some about IOM's own objectivity. The panel itself consists of persons who have like-minded interests and sympathy with CIRM and its 485 grant recipients. No member of the panel is likely to publicly discourage more scientific research, even if CIRM is deemed to be failing to fulfill the voters expectations in 2004 when they created the agency. All the more reason to aggressively seek out those with contrary views about CIRM's performances, if the IOM's report is to have maximum credibility.

Earlier this week we heard from a knowledgeable and longtime observer of the research scene, who said that the IOM looks at things "differently than regular people" and views scientists who receive funding from CIRM as "independent." The IOM's Stencel responded by reiterating that the IOM is seeking the full range of information from the full range of sources.

The IOM evaluation of CIRM's performance is much too far along not to have progressed further with its attempts to hear from independent and critical voices about CIRM. Generalizations to the effect that "we are going to get to it" do not serve the panel well. The IOM should lay out publicly and quite specifically its plans to aggressively seek thoughtful analysis from parties that do not have financial or professional links to CIRM, as well as from those who feel they have received a short shrift from the $3 billion enterprise.

You can read the full text of the questions from the California Stem Cell Report and the IOM responses here.

Source:
http://californiastemcellreport.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default?alt=rss

Here is the text of questions from the California Stem Cell Report and answers from the Institute of Medicine concerning its plans to secure independent perspectives during the IOM's examination of the California stem cell agency. So far, the IOM has not heard publicly from any independent sources.

Christine Stencel, a spokeswoman for the IOM, responded for the IOM. She first gave an overall statement. Then she answered the specific queries. We have inserted the questions from the California Stem Cell Report into her text  in order to make the Q&A easier to follow.

The IOM's general comment:

"The committee and staff are planning their next info gathering sessions. Specifics of these events haven't all been worked out yet, but one overall point is that the committee believes it is important to hear the full range of perspectives and experiences with CIRM and the committee members are actively pursuing sources of information that will allow them to adequately answer the questions they've been tasked to explore. The study is ongoing and there are still a lot of people and resources to tap and information to learn.

"To your specific questions:"

California Stem Cell Report:

"Does the IOM have plans to talk with or seek statements from such groups as the Little Hoover Commission and the Center for Genetics and Society or state Controller John Chiang?"

IOM response:

"Yes. And the committee is reading all the past reviews of CIRM."

California Stem Cell Report:

"Does the IOM plan to seek comments from grant applicants rejected by CIRM, particularly businesses? If so how many? How would such applicants be selected by the IOM for interviews or comments?"

IOM response:

"Yes, the committee wishes to hear these perspectives and is seeking ways to get them."

California Stem Cell Report:

"Does the IOM plan to do more than passively post forms for comment from others? Does it plan to email those forms, for example, to all CIRM grant recipients and applicants who were rejected? Does it plan to follow up to be sure an adequate response is generated?"

IOM response:

"The IOM is proactively working to get survey responses and encouraging people to respond."

California Stem Cell Report:

"What does the IOM mean by 'industry partners' on its (online) forms for comment?"

IOM response:

"Industry partners means CIRM investigators representing for-profit companies."

California Stem Cell Report:

"Does the IOM plan to examine both public and private complaints about conflicts of interest on the part of CIRM grant reviewers? By private, I mean written complaints to CIRM that the agency retains but has not made public."

IOM response:

"The committee is looking into the grants review process and working to make sure that the members obtain all relevant insights and information. The committee members intend to invite people who can provide a broad range of experiences with and perspectives of CIRM to the upcoming meeting in April."

The California Stem Cell Report later asked the IOM if it wanted to comment on a quote that we were considering using, which said,

"In the eyes of the IOM, scientists who draw funding from CIRM and other sources are 'independent.' They look at these things differently than regular people would."

The IOM responded,

"As to the quote you sent, as a response we would just reiterate that the committee is methodically going about its task and during the course of the study aims to gather the full range of information, experiences, and insights relevant to CIRM from a full range of sources."

Source:
http://californiastemcellreport.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default?alt=rss

The prestigious journal Nature today said that asking California voters for more billions for stem cell research in a few years "may strike residents as a luxury that they can ill afford."

The comment came in a piece by Erika Check Hayden dealing with the future of the California stem cell agency, which is expected to run out of money for new grants in about 2017. She wrote,

"Given that California is facing severe budget shortfalls, several billion dollars more for stem-cell science may strike residents as a luxury that they can ill afford. It may also prove difficult for CIRM’s supporters to point to any treatments that have emerged from the state’s investment. So far, the agency has funded only one clinical trial using embryonic stem cells, and that was halted by its sponsor, Geron of Menlo Park, California, last November.

"Yet the institute has spent just over $1 billion on new buildings and labs, basic research, training and translational research, often for projects that scientists say are crucial and would be difficult to get funded any other way. So the prospect of a future without CIRM is provoking unease. 'It would be a very different landscape if CIRM were not around,' says Howard Chang, a dermatologist and genome scientist at Stanford University in California."

Chang was a scheduled witness recently at a public meeting in California of the blue-ribbon Institute of Medicine panel examining the performance of the Golden State's $3 billion stem cell research effort. Chang is the recipient of $3.2 million in CIRM funding. Hayden wrote,

"Chang has a CIRM grant to examine epigenetics in human embryonic stem cells, and is part of another CIRM-funded team that is preparing a developmental regulatory protein for use as a regenerative therapy. Both projects would be difficult to continue without the agency, he says. Federal funding for research using human embryonic stem cells remains controversial, and could dry up altogether after the next presidential election (see Nature 481, 421–423; 2012). And neither of Chang’s other funders — the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Howard Hughes Medical Institute in Chevy Chase, Maryland — supports his interdisciplinary translational work. Irina Conboy, a stem-cell engineer at the University of California, Berkeley, who draws half of her lab’s funding from CIRM, agrees that in supporting work that has specific clinical goals, the agency occupies a niche that will not easily be filled by basic-research funders. 'The NIH might say that the work does not have a strong theoretical component, so you’re not learning anything new,' she says."

Conboy was also a scheduled witness at the IOM hearing. She holds $2.2 million in CIRM grants.

Source:
http://californiastemcellreport.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default?alt=rss