header logo image


Page 915«..1020..914915916917..920930..»

Profit Maximization is Easy: Invest in Violence – Pressenza International Press Agency

September 6th, 2017 7:51 pm

For those of us committed to systematically reducing and, one day, ending human violence, it is vital to understand what is causing and driving it so that effective strategies can be developed for dealing with violence in its myriad contexts. For an understanding of the fundamental cause of violence, see Why Violence?

However, while we can tackle violence at its source by each of us making and implementing My Promise to Children, the widespread violence in our world is driven by just one factor: fear or, more accurately, terror. And I am not talking about jihadist terror or even the terror caused by US warmaking. Let me explain, starting from the beginning.

The person who is fearless has no use for violence and has no trouble achieving their goals, including their own defence, without it. But fearlessness is a state that few humans would claim. Hence violence is rampant.

Moreover, once someone is afraid, they will be less likely to perceive the truth behind the delusions with which they are presented. They will also be less able to access and rely on other mental functions, such as conscience and intelligence, to decide their course of action in any context. Worse still, the range of their possible responses to perceived threats will be extremely limited. And they will be more easily mobilised to support or even participate in violence, in the delusional belief that this will make them safe.

For reasons such as these, it is useful for political and corporate elites to keep us in a state of fear: social control is much easier in this context. But so is profit maximization. And the most profitable enterprise on the planet is violence. In essence then: more violence leads to more fear making it easier to gain greater social control to inflict more violence. And starting early, by terrorizing children, is the most efficient way to initiate and maintain this cycle. See Why Violence? and Fearless Psychology and Fearful Psychology: Principles and Practice.

So, for example, if you think the massive number of police killings of innocent civilians in the United States see Killed by Police and The Counted: People killed by police in the US is a problem, you are not considering it from the perspective of maintaining elite social control and maximizing corporate profit. Police killings of innocent civilians is just one (necessary) part of the formula for maintaining control and maximising profit.

This is because if you want to make a lot of money in this world, then killing or exploiting fellow human beings and destroying the natural world are the three most lucrative business enterprises on the planet. And we are now very good at it, as the record shows, with the planetary death toll from violence and exploitation now well over 100,000 human beings each day, 200 species driven to extinction each day and ecological destruction so advanced that the end of all life (not just human life) on Earth is postulated to occur within decades, if not sooner, depending on the scenario. See, for example, The End of Being: Abrupt Climate Change One of Many Ecological Crises Threatening to Collapse the Biosphere.

So what forms does this violence take? Here is a daily accounting.

Corporate capitalist control of national economies, held in place by military violence, kills vast numbers of people (nearly one million each week) by starving them to death in Africa, Asia and Central/South America. This is because this economic system is designed and managed to allocate resources for military weapons and corporate profits for the wealthy, instead of resources for living.

Wars kill, wound and incapacitate a substantial number of civilians, mostly women and children, as do genocidal assaults, on a daily basis, in countries all over the planet. Wars also kill some soldiers and mercenaries.

Apart from those people we kill every day, we sell many women and children into sexual slavery, we kidnap children to terrorise them into becoming child soldiers and force men, women and children to work as slave labourers, in horrific conditions, in fields and factories (and buy the cheap products of their exploited labour as our latest bargain).

We condemn millions of people to live in poverty, homelessness and misery, even in industrialized countries where the refugees of western-instigated wars and climate-destroying policies are often treated with contempt. We cause many children to be born with grotesque genetic deformities because we use horrific weapons, like those with depleted uranium, on their parents. We also inflict violence on women and children in many other forms, ranging from ordinary domestic violence to genital mutilation.

We ensnare and imprison vast numbers of people in the police-legal-prison complex. See The Rule of Law: Unjust and Violent. We pay the pharmaceutical industry and its handmaiden, psychiatry, to destroy our minds with drugs and electro-shocking. See Defeating the Violence of Psychiatry. We imprison vast numbers of children in school in the delusional belief that this is good for them. See Do We Want School or Education? And we kill or otherwise exploit animals, mostly for human consumption, in numbers so vast the death toll is probably beyond calculation.

We also engage in an endless assault on the Earths biosphere. Apart from the phenomenal damage done to the environment and climate by military violence: we emit gases and pollutants to heat and destroy the atmosphere and destroy its oxygen content. We cut down and burn rainforests. We cut down mangroves and woodlands and pave grasslands. We poison the soil with herbicides and pesticides. We pollute the waterways and oceans with everything from carbon and nitrogenous fertilizers to plastic, as well as the radioactive contamination from Fukushima. And delude ourselves that our token gestures to remedy this destruction constitutes conservation.

So if you are seeking work, whether as a recent graduate or long-term unemployed person, then the most readily available form of work, where you will undoubtedly be exploited as well, is a government bureaucracy or large corporation that inflicts violence on life itself. Whether it is the military, the police, legal or prison system, a weapons, fossil fuel, banking, pharmaceutical, media, mining, agricultural, logging, food or water corporation, a farm that exploits animals or even a retail outlet that sells poisonous, processed and often genetically-mutilated substances under the label food see Defeating the Violence in Our Food and Medicine you will have many options to help add to the profits of those corporations and government services that exist to inflict violence on you, your family and every other living being that shares this biosphere.

Tragically, genuinely ethical employment is a rarity because most industries, even those that seem benign like the education, finance, information technology and electronics industries, usually end up providing skilled personnel, finance, services or components that are used to inflict violence. And other industries such as those in insurance and superannuation, like the corporate banks, usually invest in violence (such as the military and fossil fuel industries): it is the most profitable.

So while many government bureaucracies and corporate industries exist to inflict violence, in one form or another, they can only do so because we are too scared to insist on seeking out ethical employment. In the end, we will take a job as a teacher, corporate journalist or pharmaceutical drug pusher, serve junk food, work in a bank, join the police or military, work in the legal system, assemble a weapons component rather than ask ourselves the frightening questions Is this nonviolent? Is this ethical? Does it enhance life?

And yes, I know about structural violence and the way it limits options and opportunities for those of particular classes, races, genders. But if ordinary people like us dont consider moral issues and make moral choices, why should governments and corporations?

Moral choices? you might ask in confusion. In this day and age? Well, it might seem old-fashioned but, in fact, while most of us have been drawn along by the events in our life to make choices based on such considerations as self-interest, personal gain and financial security, there is a deeper path. Remember Gandhi? True morality consists not in following the beaten track, but in finding the true path for ourselves, and fearlessly following it.

Strange words they no doubt sound in this world where our attention is endlessly taken by all of those high-tech devices. But Gandhis words remind us that there is something deeper in life that the violence we have suffered throughout our lives has taken from us. The courage to be ourselves and to seek our own unique destiny.

Do you have this courage? To be yourself, rather than a cog in someone elses machine? To refuse to submit to the violence that surrounds and overwhelms us on a daily basis?

If you are inclined to ponder these questions, you might also consider making moral choices that work systematically to end the violence in our world: consider participating in The Flame Tree Project to Save Life on Earth, signing the online pledge of The Peoples Charter to Create a Nonviolent World and/or helping to develop and implement an effective strategy to resist one or the other of the many threats to our survival using the strategic framework explained in Nonviolent Campaign Strategy.

Of course, these choices arent for everyone. As Gandhi observed: Cowards can never be moral.

See the rest here:
Profit Maximization is Easy: Invest in Violence - Pressenza International Press Agency

Read More...

UCLA receives $8.4 million NIH grant to help liver transplant recipients stay healthier longer – UCLA Newsroom

September 6th, 2017 7:50 pm

UCLA has received an $8.4 million grant from the National Institutes of Health to research ways to help donated livers last longer and improve outcomes for transplant recipients.

The five-year grant is the fourth in a series from the NIH to the DumontUCLA Transplant Center to develop medications to prevent the body from rejecting a transplanted liver and help patients live longer, healthier lives. The grants have totaled more than$13million.

The initiative is headed by Dr. Jerzy Kupiec-Weglinski, the Paul I. Terasaki Chair in Surgery and vice chair of research at the Department of Surgery at the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA. The project brings together the expertise and experience of researchers from the UCLA departments of surgery, pathology and laboratory medicine, and microbiology, immunology and molecular genetics.

UCLA Health

Dr. Jerzy Kupiec-Weglinski

There are less than 10 program project grants in the country funded by the NIH that are related to organ transplantation, so this is a big deal, Kupiec-Weglinski said. Through this project, we believe we will develop novel therapeutic strategies that can be directly applied in transplant patients.

Around 6,000 liver transplant surgeries are performed every year in the U.S., and UCLAs liver transplant program was the nations fourth busiest last year, according to the United Network for Organ Sharing. UCLA doctors performed 161 liver transplants in 2016. The UCLA division of liver and pancreas transplantation is headed by Dr. Ronald Busuttil and is a part of the department of surgery.

About 90 percent of people who undergo liver transplants at UCLA survive at least one year after their surgeries, which is the mark of success for the procedure.

However, the long-term outcomes are not so great for many recipients, regardless of where they receive their transplant, Kupiec-Weglinski said. Graft rejection and a lack of donor organs continue to be major problems for organ recipients.

On average, transplanted livers remain viable for 15 years, so recipients who live that long after their transplant must eventually return to the waiting list for a new organ. Organ recipients also have a higher risk of opportunistic infections because they must remain on immune-suppressing medications for life in order to prevent organ rejection.

This project addresses two of the major problems in transplantation worldwide: the decreasing quality of donor organs and a widening disparity between the increasing numbers of potential transplant recipients and inadequate donor organ supply, Kupiec-Weglinski said.

Learn more about the immunity, inflammation, infection and transplantation research theme, or I3T, at UCLA.

Go here to read the rest:
UCLA receives $8.4 million NIH grant to help liver transplant recipients stay healthier longer - UCLA Newsroom

Read More...

Analyzing BioTelemetry (BEAT) and Signal Genetics (MGEN) – The Ledger Gazette

September 6th, 2017 7:50 pm

BioTelemetry (NASDAQ: BEAT) and Signal Genetics (NASDAQ:MGEN) are both small-cap medical companies, but which is the better investment? We will contrast the two companies based on the strength of their dividends, institutional ownership, earnings, analyst recommendations, valuation, profitability and risk.

Institutional and Insider Ownership

78.0% of BioTelemetry shares are held by institutional investors. Comparatively, 20.7% of Signal Genetics shares are held by institutional investors. 9.6% of BioTelemetry shares are held by insiders. Comparatively, 44.4% of Signal Genetics shares are held by insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that large money managers, hedge funds and endowments believe a company is poised for long-term growth.

Risk & Volatility

BioTelemetry has a beta of 0.73, indicating that its share price is 27% less volatile than the S&P 500. Comparatively, Signal Genetics has a beta of 1.96, indicating that its share price is 96% more volatile than the S&P 500.

Analyst Ratings

This is a summary of recent ratings and target prices for BioTelemetry and Signal Genetics, as provided by MarketBeat.com.

BioTelemetry currently has a consensus price target of $45.75, indicating a potential upside of 21.19%. Signal Genetics has a consensus price target of $23.00, indicating a potential upside of 156.70%. Given Signal Genetics higher possible upside, analysts clearly believe Signal Genetics is more favorable than BioTelemetry.

Valuation and Earnings

This table compares BioTelemetry and Signal Genetics revenue, earnings per share (EPS) and valuation.

BioTelemetry has higher revenue and earnings than Signal Genetics.

Profitability

This table compares BioTelemetry and Signal Genetics net margins, return on equity and return on assets.

Summary

BioTelemetry beats Signal Genetics on 7 of the 11 factors compared between the two stocks.

BioTelemetry Company Profile

BioTelemetry, Inc. (BioTelemetry), formerly CardioNet, Inc., provides cardiac monitoring services, cardiac monitoring device manufacturing, and centralized cardiac core laboratory services. The Company operates in three segments: patient services, product and research services. The patient services business segments principal focus is on the diagnosis and monitoring of cardiac arrhythmias or heart rhythm disorders, through its core Mobile Cardiac Outpatient Telemetry(MCOT), event and Holter services in a healthcare setting. The product business segment focuses on the development, manufacturing, testing and marketing of medical devices to medical companies, clinics and hospitals. The Companys research services focuses on providing cardiac safety monitoring services for drug and medical treatment trials in a research environment. In August 2012, the Company completed the acquisition of Cardiocore Lab, Inc. (Cardiocore).

Signal Genetics Company Profile

Signal Genetics, Inc. is a commercial stage, molecular genetic diagnostic company. The Company is focused on providing diagnostic services that help physicians to make decisions concerning the care of cancer patients. The Companys diagnostic service is the Myeloma Prognostic Risk Signature (MyPRS) test. The MyPRS test is a microarray-based gene expression profile (GEP), assay that measures the expression level of specific genes and groups of genes that are designed to predict an individuals long-term clinical outcome/prognosis, giving a basis for personalized treatment options. The Companys MyPRS test provides a whole-genomic expression profile of a patients multiple myeloma (MM). The Company offers MyPRS test in its laboratory located in Little Rock, Arkansas. The Company is licensed to sell its test in all 50 states.

Receive News & Ratings for BioTelemetry Inc. Daily - Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of the latest news and analysts' ratings for BioTelemetry Inc. and related companies with MarketBeat.com's FREE daily email newsletter.

Original post:
Analyzing BioTelemetry (BEAT) and Signal Genetics (MGEN) - The Ledger Gazette

Read More...

The 2 Major Catalysts Behind Myriad Genetics, Inc.’s 26% Gain in August – Motley Fool

September 6th, 2017 7:50 pm

What happened

Shares of Myriad Genetics (NASDAQ:MYGN), a leading developer of molecular diagnostic tests, surged by 26% during the month of August, according to data from S&P Global Market Intelligence. Why the sudden surge? The bulk of the gains look traceable to the company's fourth-quarter and full-year earnings release on Aug. 8, as well as positive insurance coverage decisions made on a key diagnostic product mid-month.

The rally really began for Myriad Genetics following the release of its fourth-quarter report. During Q4, Myriad wound up generating $200.5 million in sales, an 8% year-over-year improvement, largely helped by growth in its GeneSight test.Despite the jump in sales, its adjusted profit fell by 17% to $0.30 per share. Nevertheless, Myriad wound up topping Wall Street's sales and profit projections for the fourth quarter. This beat, coupled with growth from newer diagnostic products, which have helped offset competitive weaknesses in its hereditary cancer testing franchise (e.g., BRCA gene tests), clearly have investors upbeat about Myriad's prospects.

Image source: Getty Images.

The other catalyst driving big gains in August was favorable insurer coverage decisions for EndoPredict, a next-generation prognostic test that helps physicians determine a best course of care for patients with breast cancer. Myriad wound up announcing that Palmetto GBA, the Medicare contractor that oversees the MoIDx (Molecular Diagnostics) program, and Anthem, the second-largest insurer nationally, have decided to cover EndoPredict.Following the implementation of these decisions, Myriad will be able to cover more than 90% of breast cancer patients, which is pretty impressive considering EndoPredict was launched less than six months ago.

In a world of personalized medicine, Myriad Genetics continues to lead the charge. Unfortunately, this is also an increasingly crowded space that tends to rely on healthy reimbursements from Medicare and Medicaid. With the Trump administration looking to cut long-term payouts to both programs, it leaves Myriad's future somewhat cloudy.

By a similar token, the company has also seen price erosion from competition in its hereditary cancer segment, from which it derives about three-quarters of its sales. However, growth from new products, compounded with volume growth in hereditary cancer testing, even at a lower margin, could still fuel substantial sales and profit improvements in the coming years.

So, what's an investor to do? I'd suggest that modest optimism seems fair at these levels. It's probably going to take a few more years before sales in Myriad's core operating segment level off, but at the same time it should be able to continue to grow its newly launched diagnostic products. Once the company has a more balanced revenue stream, it should be able to throttle back a bit on its operating expenses and allow its operating margin to soar. Patient investors with at least a five-year time horizon should do just fine.

Sean Williams has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Excerpt from:
The 2 Major Catalysts Behind Myriad Genetics, Inc.'s 26% Gain in August - Motley Fool

Read More...

College of Veterinary Medicine searches for new dean – Kansas State Collegian

September 6th, 2017 7:50 pm

After two years as dean of the College of Veterinary Medicine, Tammy Beckham has resigned. Beckham accepted an offer to work for the Department of Defense in their Cooperative Biological Engagement Program, according to an email from Barbara Lutjemeier, executive assistant to the dean of the College of Veterinary Medicine.

The process of finding a new dean started right away, with executive associate dean Bonnie Rush appointed as acting dean. Currently, the college is undergoing the first stage of the dean replacement process, searching for an interim dean.

The search for interim dean is conducted within the college, and the timeline is short. Applications for interim dean were due Aug. 30, 2017. The applications are currently being considered.

Kansas States College of Veterinary Medicine is nationally renowned for its prestige. The search for a permanent dean will extend beyond the bounds of the university and be conducted nationally in order to find the best candidate for the position.

Applicants must be a doctor of veterinary medicine, and they must have some collegiate experience making them suitable for the position. The dean of veterinary medicine is in charge of overseeing activity in the departments, representing the college and acting as the point person for fundraising.

The members of the interim dean search committee were chosen by April Mason, provost and senior vice president of K-State. Mason selected professors from the College of Veterinary Medicine, as well as professors from other colleges, a student representative and a representative from the American Veterinary Medical Association.

Brian Niehoff, chair of the search committee, is also the associate provost for institutional effectiveness. Niehoff has been the chair for three previous interim dean searches.

There are only around thirty veterinary colleges in the nation, Niehoff said. The relationship we have with rural and urban communities is very important.

The College of Veterinary Medicine conducts research on numerous topics related to Kansas agriculture in addition to other research ventures, like studying cancer.

When asked about the timeframe for permanently replacing the dean, Niehoff said the acting dean can only operate for about a month, so the interim dean will be expected to be announced in late September or early October. Niehoff also said he hopes there will be a new permanent dean by the beginning of the 2018-2019 school year.

The rest is here:
College of Veterinary Medicine searches for new dean - Kansas State Collegian

Read More...

Veterinarian told you to stop bringing your pet in? It’s probably your fault – Miami Herald

September 6th, 2017 7:50 pm

Q: My veterinarian sent me a letter saying that she would not see my pet anymore. Is this legal?

A: As long as shes not withholding your pets medical records, divorce is perfectly legal in medicine, whether in human healthcare or veterinary medicine. But lets be clear: In a veterinary context divorce is never about the pet. Its always about the human.

When clients add stress to our lives above and beyond what we consider fair, veterinarians sometimes initiate divorce proceedings. This message typically arrives in the guise of a nice letter explaining that were sorry to see your pet go.

Though it may seem harsh, you can bet that if youre receiving that kind of notice youve done something to deserve it. After all, we feel for your pet. And we dont reject paying customers for no good reason. Here are a few reasons why you mightve been cut off:

Behavior problems. Sometimes a pets misbehavior leads us to part ways. In my experience, however, its usually because of the owners approach to the pets unruliness. This is especially true if the owners permissiveness and denial of the problem lead to safety issues.

Financial issues. Some owners will dispute their bills after theyve agreed to them. Though we typically try to work it out, its not always doable.

Unfair demands. Chances are youve met people who can be demanding about their pets. We respect that they care so much for their pets, but when their demands repeatedly interfere with the normal course of our work, we sometimes have to part ways.

Unrealistic expectations. Sometimes owners expect their pet to be healed immediately. Though we work hard to manage expectations, some owners remain convinced that a cure should occur instantaneously and can even become irate should we fail to meet these lofty goals.

Shady behavior. Every once in a while well be confronted with pet people who will ask us to engage in fraudulent behavior on their behalf (on an insurance form or in a government document, for example). These clients are often terminated.

Verbal abuse. If youre having a bad day I can put up with a lot. But make my receptionist cry and youre getting one of those letters. As to why you received one I cannot say, but if youre unsure, Im sure your veterinarian will be happy to explain.

Dr. Patty Khuly has a veterinary practice at Sunset Animal Clinic in South Miami. Her website is drpattykhuly.com.

Send questions to khulyp@bellsouth.net.

See the rest here:
Veterinarian told you to stop bringing your pet in? It's probably your fault - Miami Herald

Read More...

The Impossible Burger wouldn’t be possible without genetic engineering – Salon

September 6th, 2017 7:49 pm

This article originally appeared on Grist

The Impossible Burger has had a charmed honeymoon period. Crowds offoodies surged into fancy eateriesto try it.Environmentalistsandanimal rights activistsswooned. So did investors: Impossible Foodsbrought in $75 millionduring its latest investment round.

Now the backlash is here. The activist organizationsFriends of the Earthand theETC Groupdug up documents which they claim show that Impossible Foods ignored FDA warnings about safety and they handed them over to the New York Times.

Theensuing storydepicted Impossible Foods as a culinary version of Uber disrupting so rapidly that its running headlong into government regulators. In reality, Impossible Foods has behaved like a pedestrian food company, working hand in hand with the FDA and following a well-worn path to comply with an arcane set of rules.

So why isnt this story a nothingburger?

In a word: GMOs. You see, soy leghemoglobin, or SLH, the key ingredient that makes the Impossible Burger uniquely meaty, is churned out by genetically modified yeast. This is a protein produced with genetic engineering; its a new food ingredient, Dana Perls, senior food and technology campaigner at Friends of the Earth, told me when I asked why theyd singled out Impossible Foods.

The company has never exactly hidden the fact that they used genetic engineering, but they havent put it front and center either. You have to dig into theirfrequently asked questionsto catch that detail and thats a recent edit, according to Perls. When I first looked at the Impossible Foods website, maybe back in March, there was no mention of genetic engineering, she said.(An Impossible Foods spokesperson disputed Perlss claim, saying the FAQ has included references to genetic engineering for at least a year, since before the burgers launch in restaurants. But areview of cached webpagessuggests the references were added in June.*)

By tiptoeing around this issue, Impossible Foods set themselves up for a takedown by anti-GMO campaigners. These groups monitor new applications of genetic engineering, watch for potentially incriminating evidence, then work with journalists to publicize it. In 2014, Ecover, a green cleaning company,announced it was using oils made by algae as part of its pledge to remove palm oil a major driver of deforestation from its products. When Friends of the Earth and the ETC Groupfigured out the algae was genetically engineered, they pingedthe same Times writer. Ecover quickly went back to palm oil.

WhenI asked Impossible Foods founder Pat Brownabout the GMO question, he said he didnt think that battle was theirs to fight. After all, the SLH may be produced by transgenic yeast, but it isnt a GMO itself. He also pointed out that this isnt unusual:nearly all cheese contains a GMO-produced enzyme.

But now, Friends of the Earth and the ETC Group have brought their battle to Impossible Foods doorstep. (In ablisteringseriesofresponsesto the New York Times article, the company charged it was chock full of factual errors and misrepresentations and was instigated by an extremist anti-science group.)The FDA documents handed over to the Timesinclude worrying sentences like this one: FDA stated that the current arguments at hand, individually and collectively, were not enough to establish the safety of SLH for consumption.

If FDA officials say your company hasnt done enough to convince them that a new ingredient is safe, arent you supposed to stop selling it?

Not according toa risk expert at Arizona State Universitywho reviewed the documents released by activists. There are no indications that they should have pulled this off the market, Andrew Maynard told me.

Thats just not how the food safety review process works, said Gary Yingling, a former FDA official now helping Impossible Foods navigate the bureaucracy. In the United States, its up to the companies themselves to determine if an ingredient is safe. (Not everyone likes that systemorthinks the FDA is doing enoughto protect public safety, but it is the law.)

Impossible worked with a group of experts at universities who decided in 2014 that their burger was safe. SLH, it turns out, grows naturally in the roots of soy plants, and the proteins in the burger look a lot like animal proteins a good indicator of safety.

Impossible could have stopped there: Companies, however, can ask the government to weigh in on their research. Sometimes, the FDA asks for more information, which is what happened with Impossible Foods. Its not unusual for the FDA to determine it cant establish the safety of a new ingredient its happened more than 100 times, with substances like Ginkgo biloba, gum arabic, and Spirulina. The FDA has called for more information in about one in every seven of the ingredients companies have asked it to review.

In the case of SLH, the FDA suggested more tests, including rat-feeding trials. Impossible Foods has finished these tests, and academics who have studied the new data confirmed that its generally recognized as safe. Next, Impossible Foods will bring the new evidence back to the FDA, Yingling said.

The criticism raised in this case is really criticism of a system that allows companies to decide for themselves if a new ingredient is OK to add to our food.

If a company decides something is safe, they can go ahead and do it, said Maynard, the risk expert. So thats a weakness in the system. On the other hand, you can argue that once you start this process with the FDA, they have smart scientists who ask tough questions. You can see in those documents that the level of due diligence that a company has to go through is really pretty deep. You really want to make sure that you have a system that doesnt inhibit innovation, but captures as much potentially harmful things as possible.

Each new innovation creates the potential for new hazards. We can block some of those hazards by taking precautions. But how high should we put the precautionary bar?

Impossible Burger could indeed pose some unknown hazard. We just have to weigh that against the known hazards of the present foodborne diseases in meat, greenhouse gases from animal production, the development of antibiotic resistant bacteria in farms, and animal suffering. These are problems which Impossible Foods is trying to solve.

There are other companies trying to solve these problems. (Friends of the Earthnotesthat the success of non-animal burgers, like the non-GMO Beyond Burger, demonstrates that plant-based animal substitutes can succeed without resorting to genetic engineering.) But its not yet clear that any of these companies including Impossible Foods will be successful in just generating a profit, let alone in replacing the global meat industry. No one knows which startups will pan out. And well probably need to try and discard lots of new things as we shift to a sustainable path.

Trying new things can be risky. Not trying new things and staying on our current trajectory is even more risky.

*This story has been updated to include a response from Impossible Foods about when references to genetic engineering first appeared in its FAQ, and to add information about the FDAs food safety review process.

Read more from the original source:
The Impossible Burger wouldn't be possible without genetic engineering - Salon

Read More...

Climate change will cause food shortages. We should use genetic engineering to prevent them – Salon

September 6th, 2017 7:49 pm

This article originally appeared on Massive.

Even small changes in temperature can have massive impacts on crop productivity. In the United States, a single degree of warming is expected to decrease corn yield by 10 percent. Worldwide, one degree of warming is expected to decrease crop productivity by 3-7 percent. Making matters worse, at the same time as crop yields are expected to decrease, the global population will continue to rise. If we do nothing to slow the effects of climate change, we risk a global food shortage that will affect us all.

Deep cuts to greenhouse gas emissions could do a lot to stave off disaster. But many researchers predict that even if we stopped all emissions tomorrow, wed still experience some degree of future warming due to past emissions. So, even if we prevent additional damage, well still have to adapt to the changes in climate that are already underway.

If we want to feed our growing population, well have to tackle the problem of adapting agriculture to climate change head-on. Right now, one of our best hopes for adapting to a warming climate is a controversial one: genetically engineering our crops to survive better in higher temperatures.

Genetic engineering, the process of directly modifying an organisms DNA, strikes many people as an arrogant, unsafe intrusion on the natural world. The debate over GMOs (genetically modified organisms) has raged for decades, with opponents arguing that our capacity to tinker with nature has outpaced our understanding of the risks.

Concerns about the safety and ethics of genetic engineering are absolutely valid, but we should also realize that, in some cases, our ethical intuition may lead us astray. If you have ever grown a tomato plant, and you live somewhere other than the Andean region of South America, you have selected a plant with mutations that allow it grow somewhere it wouldnt naturally do so. When we domesticated the tomato plant, we picked out mutant plants that were able to thrive in different areas of the globe. The difference between that process and genetic engineering is that scientists dont have to search for a rare mutant; they can create it themselves.

Speedier adaptation

CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing tools have made modifying DNA much easier. Using CRISPR/Cas9, scientists can create a DNA break in a specific place in the genome. They provide a strand of DNA that has a new sequence and the cell copies from that strand when it repairs the break, creating a genetic change.

Crops made using this technique are not, strictly speaking, GMOs, because they contain no foreign DNA. A wild tomato plant that was modified using CRISPR/Cas9 to be able to grow further north would be indistinguishable from the mutant plants that arose naturally, right down to the molecular level. And yet if engineers use genome editing to make that same change, it strikes many people as dangerous, even though the plants are completely identical.

Our food sources have already benefited from past forays into genetic engineering. Researchers past efforts were focused on creating crops that are resistant to pests and disease. This is an important part of feeding the world we could feed 8.5 percent of all the people on Earth with the crops lost to fungal pathogens alone. Climate change is making this problem worse: as warmer temperatures have spread toward the poles, so has disease.

But disease isnt the sole consequence of climate change: the overall yield of food will likely drop because the areas where crops grow will no longer have the right weather for them to thrive.

Expanding crop-growing regions

One solution to this problem is to move heat-sensitive crops closer to the poles. But its not that simple: the seasonal cue that tells many plants when to flower is day length, and day length depends on latitude. That means you cant take a plant that requires short days, move it further north, and expect it to produce fruit, even if its at the right temperature.

Recently, researchers discovered the gene that represses flowering in tomato plants in response to long days. Its thanks to the variation in this gene that were able to grow tomatoes further from the equator. These researchers used CRISPR to show that disrupting this gene results in plants that flower rapidly, regardless of day length. That means that if we want crops to grow at different latitudes, we wont have to find a rare mutant. By zeroing in on the genes that control day-length-sensitive flowering, we can create those crops within months.

Increasing yields

And when it comes to boosting crop productivity, one option is to create plants that convert sunlight into food more efficiently. Thats the goal of the RIPE(Realizing Increased Photosynthetic Efficiency) project, an international group working to increase crop yield by improving photosynthesis through genetic engineering.

Surprisingly, photosynthesis isnt as efficient as it could be. Plants dont adapt as quickly as they could to transitions between sunlight and shade. When theres too much sunlight, plants protect themselves by releasing excess light as heat. But if a cloud passes in front of the sun, the protective mechanism lingers, which means less photosynthesis and lower yield. By speeding up the process of adaptation, RIPE scientists have shown that they can increase crop yield by 15 percent.

Although producing enough food to feed the world is crucial, genetic engineering isnt a cure-all. As long as we fail to confront the problems of war and unequal distribution of wealth, people will starve no matter how much food we produce. But adapting agriculture to climate change is unquestionably part of the equation, and genetic modification allows us to produce those changes quickly, easily, and safely.

Critiques of genetic engineering often focus on the most ethically questionable and unsettling research, but many scientists are doing work that could save the lives of millions. Keeping a closed mind risks demonizing a technology that may help us to survive.

Follow this link:
Climate change will cause food shortages. We should use genetic engineering to prevent them - Salon

Read More...

Fall armyworm threatens Nigerian crops; genetic engineering offers … – Genetic Literacy Project

September 6th, 2017 7:49 pm

Nigeria remains Africas largest [corn] producer, growing nearly 8 million tons annually. It is closely followed by South Africa, Tanzania, Kenya and Uganda. It was therefore a nightmare when Nigeria, like the rest of Africa, woke up to the fall armyworm (FAW) infestation that is rapidly spreading across the region. The five zones affected by the infestation include the southeast, south, southwest, northeast and northwest.

[Chief Audu Ogbeh, Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development] said the federal government required N2.98 billion to curb the armyworm infestation in farmlands across the country, adding the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) had pledged to support the country in its fight against the armyworm.

However, scientists are calling on farmers to embrace biotechnology by using genetically engineered (GE) crops, which have been proven safe for humans and the environment, to permanently tackle such occurrences.

[Dr. Rose Gidado, the country coordinator of the Open Forum on Agricultural Biotechnology (OFAB)] said adopting genetic modification technology to develop maize varieties resistant to pests offered a lasting solution for army worm infestation, adding that GE plants are selectively bred and enhanced with genes to withstand common problems that confront farmers.

The GLP aggregated and excerpted this article to reflect the diversity of news, opinion and analysis. Read full, original post: Food shortages loom as Nigeria battles fall armyworm infestation

Related Stories

Original post:
Fall armyworm threatens Nigerian crops; genetic engineering offers ... - Genetic Literacy Project

Read More...

Nanomedicine – Overview

September 6th, 2017 7:49 pm

The program began in 2005 with a national network ofeight Nanomedicine Development Centers. Now, in the second half of this 10-year program, the four centers best positioned to effectively apply their findings to translational studies were selected to continue receiving support.

Nanomedicine, an offshoot of nanotechnology, refers to highly specific medical intervention at the molecular scale for curing disease or repairing damaged tissues, such as bone, muscle, or nerve. A nanometer is one-billionth of a meter, too small to be seen with a conventional lab microscope. It is at this size scale about 100 nanometers or less that biological molecules and structures operate in living cells.

The NIH vision for Nanomedicine is built upon the strengths of NIH funded researchers in probing and understanding the biological, biochemical and biophysical mechanisms of living tissues. Since the cellular machinery operates at the nanoscale, the primary goal of the program - characterizing the molecular components inside cells at a level of precision that leads to re-engineering intracellular complexes - is a monumental challenge.

The teams selected to carry out this initiative consist of researchers with deep knowledge of biology and physiology, physics, chemistry, math and computation, engineering, and clinical medicine. The choice and design of experimental approaches are directed by the need to solve clinical problems (e.g., treatment of sickle cell disease, blindness, cancer, and Huntingtons disease). These are very challenging problems, and great breakthroughs are needed to achieve the goals within the projected 10 year timeframe. The initiative was selected for the NIH Roadmap (now Common Fund) precisely because of the challenging, high risk goals, and the NIH team is working closely with the funded investigators to use the funds and the intellectual resources of the network of investigators to meet those challenges.

10 Year Program Design High Risk, High Reward

The Centers were funded with the expectation that the first half of the initiative would be more heavily focused on basic science with increased emphasis on application of this knowledge in the second five years. This was a novel, experimental approach to translational medicine that began by funding basic scientists interested in gaining a deep understanding of an intracellular nanoscale system and necessitated collaboration with clinicians from the outset in order to properly position work at the centers so that during the second half of the initiative, studies would be applied directly to medical applications. The program began witheight Nanomedicine Development Centers(NDCs), and four centers remain in the second half of the program.

Clinical Consulting Boards (CCBs)

The program has establishedClinical Consulting Boards (CCBs)for each of the continuing centers. These boards consist of at least three disease-specific clinician-scientists who are experts in the target disease(s). The intent is for CCBs to provide advice and insight into the needs and barriers regarding resource and personnel allocations as well as scientific advice as needed to help the centers reach their translational goals. Each CCB reports directly to the NIH project team.

Translational Path

In 2011, the PIs of the NDCs worked with their CCBs to precisely define their translational goals and the translational research path needed to reach those goals by the end of the initiative in 2015. To facilitate this, the NIH project team asked them to developcritical decision pointsalong their path. These critical decision points differ from distinct milestones because they may be adjusted based on successes, challenges, barriers, and progress. Similarly, the timing of these decision points may be revised as the centers progress. Research progress and critical decision points are revisited several times a year by the CCB and the NIH team, and when a decision point is reached, next steps are re-examined for relevance, feasibility and timing.

Transition plan

Throughout the program, various projects have been spun off of work at all the centers and most have received funding from other sources. This was by design as work at each center has been shifting from basic science to translational studies. Centers will not be supported by the common fund after 10 years. It is expected that work at the centers will be more appropriately funded by other sources. Pre-clinical targets will likely be developed, and the work at each center will be focused on a specific disease so the work will need to transition out of the experimental space of the common fund.

Support for the NIH Nanomedicine Initiative is provided by the NIH Common Fund, and a team of staff members from across the NIH oversees the program. You may direct questions or comments on the NIH Nanomedicine Initiative to Dr. Richard S. Fisher, Nanomedicine Project Team Leader (nano@nih.gov).

Read this article:
Nanomedicine - Overview

Read More...

Global Nanomedicine Industry 2017 Market Growth, Trends and Demands Research Report – MENAFN.COM

September 6th, 2017 7:49 pm

(MENAFN Editorial) iCrowdNewswire - Sep 4, 2017

The Global Nanomedicine Market 2017 Industry Research Report' report provides a basic overview of the industry including its definition, applications and manufacturing technology. Then, the report explores the Global major industry players in detail.

The Global Nanomedicine Market Research Report 2017 renders deep perception of the key regional market status of the Nanomedicine Industry on a global level that primarily aims the core regions which comprises of continents like Europe, North America, and Asia and the key countries such as United States, Germany, #China and Japan.

Complete report on Nanomedicine market report spread across 116 pages, profiling 12 companies and supported with tables and figuresavailable @

The report on 'Global Nanomedicine Market is a professional report which provides thorough knowledge along with complete information pertaining to the Nanomedicine industry propos classifications, definitions, applications, industry chain summary, industry policies in addition to plans, product specifications, manufacturing processes, cost structures, etc.

The potential of this industry segment has been rigorously investigated in conjunction with primary market challenges. The present market condition and future prospects of the segment has also been examined. Moreover, key strategies in the market that includes product developments, partnerships, mergers and acquisitions, etc., are discussed. Besides, upstream raw materials and equipment and downstream demand analysis is also conducted.

Report Includes:-

The report cloaks the market analysis and projection of 'Nanomedicine Market on a regional as well as global level. The report constitutes qualitative and quantitative valuation by industry analysts, first-hand data, assistance from industry experts along with their most recent verbatim and each industry manufacturers via the market value chain. The research experts have additionally assessed the in general sales and revenue generation of this particular market. In addition, this report also delivers widespread analysis of root market trends, several governing elements and macro-economic indicators, coupled with market improvements as per every segment.

For any Inquire before buying @

Global Nanomedicine market competition by top manufacturers/players, with Nanomedicine sales volume, Price (USD/MT), revenue (Million USD) and market share for each manufacturer/player; the top players including: GE Healthcare, Johnson & Johnson, Mallinckrodt plc, Merck & Co. Inc., Nanosphere Inc., Pfizer Inc., SigmaTau Pharmaceuticals Inc., Smith & Nephew PLC, Stryker Corp, Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., UCB (Union chimique belge) S.A

The report is generically segmented into six parts and every part aims on the overview of the Nanomedicine industry, present condition of the market, feasibleness of the investment along with several strategies and policies. Apart from the definition and classification, the report also discusses the analysis of import and export and describes a comparison of the market that is focused on the trends and development. Along with entire framework in addition to in-depth details, one can prepare and stay ahead of the competitors across the targeted locations. The fact that this market report renders details about the major market players along with their product development and current trends proves to be very beneficial for fresh entrants to comprehend and recognize the industry in an improved manner. The report also enlightens the productions, sales, supply, market condition, demand, growth, and forecast of the Nanomedicine industry in the global markets.

Buy a copy of this report @

Every region's market has been studied thoroughly in this report which deals with the precise information pertaining to the Marketing Channels and novel project investments so that the new entrants as well as the established market players conduct intricate research of trends and analysis in these regional markets. Acknowledging the status of the environment and products' up gradation, the market report foretells each and every detail.So as to fabricate this report, complete key details, strategies and variables are examined so that entire useful information is amalgamated together for the understanding and studying the key facts pertaining the global Nanomedicine Industry. The production value and market share in conjunction with the SWOT analysis everything is integrated in this report.

Table of Contents

1 Nanomedicine Market Overview 2 Global Nanomedicine Market Competition by Manufacturers 3 Global Nanomedicine Capacity, Production, Revenue (Value) by Region (2011-2016) 4 Global Nanomedicine Supply (Production), Consumption, Export, Import by Regions (2011-2016) 5 Global Nanomedicine Production, Revenue (Value), Price Trend by Type 6 Global Nanomedicine Market Analysis by Application 7 Global Nanomedicine Manufacturers Profiles/Analysis

8 Nanomedicine Manufacturing Cost Analysis 9 Industrial Chain, Sourcing Strategy and Downstream Buyers 10 Marketing Strategy Analysis, Distributors/Traders 11 Market Effect Factors Analysis 12 Global Nanomedicine Market Forecast (2016-2021) 13 Research Findings and Conclusion

About Us

Deep Research Reportsis digital database of syndicated market reports for global and #China industries. These reports offer competitive intelligence data for companies in varied market segments and for decision makers at multiple levels in these organizations. We provide 24/7 online and offline support to our customers.

Connect us

Hrishikesh Patwardhan

Corporate Headquarters

2nd floor, metropole,

Next to inox theatre,

Bund garden road,Pune-411001.

1 888 391 5441

MENAFN0509201700703403ID1095819074

Excerpt from:
Global Nanomedicine Industry 2017 Market Growth, Trends and Demands Research Report - MENAFN.COM

Read More...

Avalon Advisors Has Decreased Its Comcast Cmn Class (CMCSA) Position; Neuralstem (CUR)’s Sentiment Is 0 – High Point Observer

September 6th, 2017 7:48 pm

September 6, 2017 - By Clifton Ray

Avalon Advisors Llc decreased Comcast Corporation Cmn Class (CMCSA) stake by 3.04% reported in 2016Q4 SEC filing. Avalon Advisors Llc sold 4,568 shares as Comcast Corporation Cmn Class (CMCSA)s stock rose 3.16%. The Avalon Advisors Llc holds 145,911 shares with $10.08M value, down from 150,479 last quarter. Comcast Corporation Cmn Class now has $194.05B valuation. The stock increased 1.23% or $0.5 during the last trading session, reaching $41.17. About 14.24M shares traded. Comcast Corporation (NASDAQ:CMCSA) has risen 28.96% since September 6, 2016 and is uptrending. It has outperformed by 12.26% the S&P500.

Neuralstem, Inc. is a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company. The company has market cap of $13.81 million. The Firm is engaged in research, development and commercialization of central nervous system therapies based on its human neuronal stem cells and its stem-cell derived small molecule compounds. It currently has negative earnings. The Firm has approximately three assets: its NSI-189 small molecule program, its NSI-566 stem cell therapy program and its chemical entity screening platform.

Investors sentiment decreased to 1.01 in Q4 2016. Its down 11.82, from 12.83 in 2016Q3. It turned negative, as 58 investors sold CMCSA shares while 518 reduced holdings. 123 funds opened positions while 431 raised stakes. 1.89 billion shares or 0.35% more from 1.88 billion shares in 2016Q3 were reported. Quantitative Investment Mgmt Ltd Liability Co reported 0.19% in Comcast Corporation (NASDAQ:CMCSA). 88 were reported by Sun Life Incorporated. Moreover, Twin Tree Mngmt LP has 0.01% invested in Comcast Corporation (NASDAQ:CMCSA) for 15,085 shares. North Carolina-based Bb&T has invested 0.48% in Comcast Corporation (NASDAQ:CMCSA). Wetherby Asset Mngmt owns 38,194 shares or 0.52% of their US portfolio. Fiduciary Wi has invested 4.13% of its portfolio in Comcast Corporation (NASDAQ:CMCSA). Janus Capital Mgmt Limited Company has 18.62M shares for 1.08% of their portfolio. Roberts Glore Co Il invested in 5,382 shares or 0.26% of the stock. Tower Bridge Advsrs reported 65,524 shares or 0% of all its holdings. Van Hulzen Asset Mngmt Limited Liability has 274,360 shares. Pacad Inv accumulated 138,501 shares. Dumont & Blake Invest Advsr Lc stated it has 0.5% in Comcast Corporation (NASDAQ:CMCSA). The New Hampshire-based Tru Advisors Ltd has invested 3.17% in Comcast Corporation (NASDAQ:CMCSA). Grisanti Mgmt Ltd Com reported 189,525 shares. Delphi Management Inc Ma invested in 32,962 shares.

Among 26 analysts covering Comcast Corporation (NASDAQ:CMCSA), 21 have Buy rating, 1 Sell and 4 Hold. Therefore 81% are positive. Comcast Corporation had 56 analyst reports since July 27, 2015 according to SRatingsIntel. As per Monday, January 4, the company rating was maintained by Macquarie Research. The stock of Comcast Corporation (NASDAQ:CMCSA) earned Buy rating by Pivotal Research on Thursday, January 26. Telsey Advisory Group maintained Comcast Corporation (NASDAQ:CMCSA) on Tuesday, January 24 with Outperform rating. The firm has Buy rating given on Wednesday, May 4 by Goldman Sachs. The stock of Comcast Corporation (NASDAQ:CMCSA) earned Buy rating by Oppenheimer on Thursday, July 27. The stock has Buy rating by Macquarie Research on Wednesday, July 5. Nomura maintained Comcast Corporation (NASDAQ:CMCSA) rating on Monday, June 27. Nomura has Buy rating and $73 target. The firm has Buy rating by Pivotal Research given on Tuesday, September 27. The stock of Comcast Corporation (NASDAQ:CMCSA) earned Buy rating by Wunderlich on Wednesday, September 16. Suntrust Robinson initiated the stock with Neutral rating in Wednesday, November 11 report.

Since March 20, 2017, it had 0 buys, and 6 selling transactions for $12.52 million activity. 20,572 shares valued at $762,193 were sold by BLOCK ARTHUR R on Wednesday, March 22. The insider BURKE STEPHEN B sold $10.07 million. On Thursday, May 25 BACON KENNETH J sold $303,713 worth of Comcast Corporation (NASDAQ:CMCSA) or 7,500 shares.

Avalon Advisors Llc increased Intl Business Machines Corp Cm (NYSE:IBM) stake by 65,901 shares to 239,076 valued at $39.68 million in 2016Q4. It also upped Chevron Corporation Cmn (NYSE:CVX) stake by 27,633 shares and now owns 377,867 shares. Asml Holding N V N Y Registry (NASDAQ:ASML) was raised too.

About 121,853 shares traded. Neuralstem, Inc. (CUR) has risen 3.35% since September 6, 2016 and is uptrending. It has underperformed by 13.35% the S&P500.

Ratings analysis reveals 100% of Neuralstems analysts are positive. Out of 2 Wall Street analysts rating Neuralstem, 2 give it Buy, 0 Sell rating, while 0 recommend Hold. CUR was included in 2 notes of analysts from August 29, 2016. The rating was initiated by Roth Capital with Buy on Monday, August 29. The rating was initiated by Aegis Capital on Monday, November 7 with Buy.

Receive News & Ratings Via Email - Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of the latest news and analysts' ratings with our daily email newsletter.

Read more:
Avalon Advisors Has Decreased Its Comcast Cmn Class (CMCSA) Position; Neuralstem (CUR)'s Sentiment Is 0 - High Point Observer

Read More...

Contrasting PTC Therapeutics (NASDAQ:PTCT) & Keryx Biopharmaceuticals (KERX) – The Ledger Gazette

September 6th, 2017 7:47 pm

Keryx Biopharmaceuticals (NASDAQ: KERX) and PTC Therapeutics (NASDAQ:PTCT) are both small-cap medical companies, but which is the superior stock? We will contrast the two companies based on the strength of their profitability, dividends, valuation, institutional ownership, analyst recommendations, earnings and risk.

Insider and Institutional Ownership

65.2% of Keryx Biopharmaceuticals shares are held by institutional investors. Comparatively, 81.4% of PTC Therapeutics shares are held by institutional investors. 3.1% of Keryx Biopharmaceuticals shares are held by insiders. Comparatively, 8.1% of PTC Therapeutics shares are held by insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that endowments, hedge funds and large money managers believe a company is poised for long-term growth.

Analyst Ratings

This is a summary of recent ratings for Keryx Biopharmaceuticals and PTC Therapeutics, as provided by MarketBeat.

Keryx Biopharmaceuticals currently has a consensus price target of $7.50, indicating a potential downside of 1.19%. PTC Therapeutics has a consensus price target of $15.44, indicating a potential downside of 28.53%. Given Keryx Biopharmaceuticals stronger consensus rating and higher possible upside, equities analysts clearly believe Keryx Biopharmaceuticals is more favorable than PTC Therapeutics.

Earnings and Valuation

This table compares Keryx Biopharmaceuticals and PTC Therapeutics revenue, earnings per share and valuation.

PTC Therapeutics has higher revenue and earnings than Keryx Biopharmaceuticals. PTC Therapeutics is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than Keryx Biopharmaceuticals, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

Profitability

This table compares Keryx Biopharmaceuticals and PTC Therapeutics net margins, return on equity and return on assets.

Risk & Volatility

Keryx Biopharmaceuticals has a beta of 5.24, suggesting that its share price is 424% more volatile than the S&P 500. Comparatively, PTC Therapeutics has a beta of 1.39, suggesting that its share price is 39% more volatile than the S&P 500.

Summary

PTC Therapeutics beats Keryx Biopharmaceuticals on 7 of the 12 factors compared between the two stocks.

About Keryx Biopharmaceuticals

Keryx Biopharmaceuticals, Inc. is a biopharmaceutical company focused on the development of medicines for people with renal disease. The Company is engaged in the manufacture, development and commercialization of products for use in treating human diseases. Its marketed product, Auryxia (ferric citrate), which is an orally available, absorbable, iron-based medicine is approved in the United States for the control of serum phosphorus levels in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) on dialysis. Auryxia is marketed in Japan under the brand name Riona. It is investigating the use of ferric citrate for the treatment of iron deficiency anemia (IDA) in adults with non-dialysis dependent (NDD), CKD and NDD-CKD. It focuses on Keryx Patient Plus program to assist with patient accessibility to Auryxia. It has completed a Phase II clinical trial and a Phase III clinical trial of ferric citrate to gain Food and Drug Administration approval to use ferric citrate in patients with NDD-CKD.

About PTC Therapeutics

PTC Therapeutics, Inc. is a biopharmaceutical company. The Company is focused on the discovery, development and commercialization of medicines using its expertise in ribonucleic acid (RNA) biology. Its product pipeline includes Ataluren (Translarna), PTC596 and RG7916. Its product candidate, ataluren, is an orally administered small-molecule compound for the treatment of patients with genetic disorders due to a nonsense mutation. Ataluren is in clinical development for the treatment of Duchenne muscular dystrophy caused by a nonsense mutation (nmDMD) and cystic fibrosis caused by a nonsense mutation (nmCF). PTC596 is an orally active small molecule that targets tumor stem cell populations by reducing the function, activity and amount of BMI1. RG7916 is an investigational oral therapeutic, which is in two clinical studies: SUNFISH, a trial in childhood onset (Type II/III) spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) patients, and FIREFISH, a trial in infant onset (Type I) SMA patients.

Receive News & Ratings for Keryx Biopharmaceuticals Inc. Daily - Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of the latest news and analysts' ratings for Keryx Biopharmaceuticals Inc. and related companies with MarketBeat.com's FREE daily email newsletter.

See the article here:
Contrasting PTC Therapeutics (NASDAQ:PTCT) & Keryx Biopharmaceuticals (KERX) - The Ledger Gazette

Read More...

The Next Generation of Genetic Medicine: A Review of Epigenetics – Labiotech.eu (blog)

September 6th, 2017 7:47 pm

The field of genetics has long been an object of global fascination, beginning with Mendels pea plant experiments in the 19th century and peaking when the human genome was sequenced (albeit not completely) in 2003. But epigenetics as the next level up from genetics is still mysterious to most. Efforts are already underway to make this next leap in our therapeutic understanding of DNA to unlock the potential of epigenetics.

Genetics has gone mainstream and people get really excited about it, but when I tell people I work on epigenetics, I have to explain what I do, laughed Dr. Jason Mellad, CEO of Cambridge Epigenetix.

While there has been much excitement as epigenetics advances with the development of diagnostics, therapeutic applications are still in their infancy. Historically, epigenetic discovery has been expensive, the right tools havent existed to do it, and interpreting the data has been challenging, he explained.

Mellad and his company are working to change that by establishing themselves in diagnostics to lay the groundwork for more diverse applications. Initially, we sold kits to academic researchers so that they could examine how certain enzymes regulate interpretation of the genetic code, he explained to me in an interview after ON Helix. We started there to prove ourselves and enable discovery; now we are harnessing the power of epigenetics in diagnostics and thereby laying the foundation for new therapeutics.

Cambridge Epigenetix was spun out of its eponymous university to address a challenge a colleague lobbed at Sir Shankar Balasubramanian, Professor of Medicinal Chemistry at the University of Cambridge. Professor Balasubramanian co-invented the sequencing-by-synthesis platform at the heart of Solexa, which was subsequently snapped up by DNA sequencing giant Illumina.

As Mellad recounted, the colleague noticed that a particular epigenetic enzyme, TET2, is highly mutated in acute myeloid leukemia and produces a new DNA modification called 5-hydroxymethylcytosine (5hmC). Balasubramanianwondered, could this modification be detected by sequencing and used as a novel diagnostic epigenetic biomarker?

A DNA methyltransferase, DNMT3, which transfers methyl groups in DNA to regulate gene expression and activity. Such an enzyme could serve as a target for epigenetic medicine.

Balasubramanian and his PhD student, Michael Booth, took on the challenge and developed a selective chemical oxidation methodology that made it possible to accurately and quantitatively sequence 5hmC and other methylated variants of the DNA base cytosine for the first time. On the heels of its 2012 publication in Science, Cambridge Epigenetix was born with this methodology as its foundational platform.

The following year, Mellad was recruited for business development as Employee #3. We were still camped out in the lab at that point, he told me. But it soon built up steam: After its first fundraising round in 2014, the company went on to raise a $21M (18M) Series B led by none other than Google Ventures (GV). GV was excited by the tech and the team, but they also saw the potential and long-term vision, said Mellad.

So what was this promise that Google saw in epigenetics? Big companies seem to be rushing to jump on board: AstraZeneca has already launched its own exploration of the field with MRC Technology, now known as LifeArc. Could epigenetics be the next generation of genetic medicine?

Though the field still feels brand new, there are a handful of epigenetic drugs already on the market. These drugs are largely histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitors targeted at T cell lymphomas; the most recent approval went to Belinostat, which was developed by a formerly Copenhagen-based company known as TopoTarget, now part of the French Onxeo.

Epigenetics has taken a particularly strong hold in the cancer niche. As scientists from Harvard Medical School and the Broad Institute discussed in a Science review last July, recent cancer genome projects [have] unexpectedly highlighted the role of epigenetic alterations in cancer development and suggested that these changes are responsible for the so-called hallmarks of cancer.

Unfortunately, HDAC inhibitors seem to have limited use in this arena. A pair of Italian researchers concluded in the British Journal of Cancer that they are effective on a small set of [cancer] patients with selected hematological diseases, but their use as a monotherapy has not been satisfactory. The efficacy of these drugs has been marred by individual sensitivities to them that are difficult to untangle such that patient stratification is not an option.

A German company, 4SC, has taken heed of such findings, combining its lead candidate resminostat with Bayers kinase inhibitor, Nexavar (sorafenib). In January, 4SC was able to show that its HDAC in tandem with this first-line liver cancer treatment reducedthe risk of death and extended patient survival from 5.1 months to 13.7 months.

The hallmarks of cancer (Source)

Carlos Buesa, Founder and CEO of Oryzon Therapeutics, is optimistic about the rise of a new generation of epigenetic treatments that his company is leading. Weve seen very recently that the second generation of epigenetic modulators could be druggable in a selective manner overcoming the problems that the old-fashioned HDAC inhibitors have gone through, he told me at BIO Europe Spring earlier this year.

His Barcelona-based company, founded in 2000, is leading the charge in this direction. Its lead candidate ORY-1001 just cleared Phase I for acute leukemia and is under investigation in small cell lung cancer. It inhibits lysine specific demethylase 1 (LSD1), which in 2004 became the first histone demethylase to be discovered of approximately 30 thus far described.

LSD1 is thought to play a role in epigenetic reprogramming during cell proliferation among other biological processes, making it an attractive target for potential cancer therapies. We know now that its key to hematopoietic differentiation in normal progenitors, and we know that in some cancers its responsible for the differentiation blockade, as in some leukemias, Buesa said.

The role of epigenetics in cancer (Source)

Oryzon presented its Phase I/IIa results at the American Society for Hematology conference last fall: ORY-1001 proved itself to be safe and likely effective, on top of indicating a number of useful biomarkers to monitor patient responses. We were the first company to ever present [clinical] results with such an inhibitor, Buesa told me proudly. More recently, 4SC launched a program to develop an LSD1 inhibitor, 4SC-202, but it has yet to enter the clinic.

For the Oryzon, much has been riding on the success of ORY-1001: Having been shown to provoke the differentiation of cancer cells accompanied by a preliminary clinical response, it now serves as the companys proof of concept.

Even though Roche abandoned the biotech when it reprioritized its portfolio, Oryzon is pressing on, so far alone. Were seeing now that this is opening a door for a personalized approach, and its giving us information about diseases that have an underlying epigenetic component, said Buesa, explaining the companys determination to move ahead.

Though approved epigenetic drugs are limited to oncology, applications to other indications are also receiving attention. A recent mouse study published by the American Society for Microbiology in mBio suggested they might work as antivirals that would be effective against Herpes Simplex Virus, while an investigation into the treatment of HIV/AIDS is still at an early stage. Various neurodegenerative diseases are also topics of interest.

In order to build a foundation for the development of such a wide range of therapeutics, Cambridge Epigenetix plans to continue its technology and diagnostic development programs to illuminate epigenetic signatures that improve our understanding of biology to develop better therapeutics, said Mellad. Whats important is to first understand the biology.

Thats the sticking point for epigenetics at the moment: as reflected in the global scarcity of biotechs in the space, its still such new territory with a largely unknown extent that effective therapeutics may be an overreach.

As an intermediate step, Cambridge Epigenetix hopes that its diagnostic assays will become standard screening practice before treatment decisions, since, as he argues, the epigenetic versions are more effective than their genetic counterparts. Were developing a companion diagnostic strategy to be used from day one to get the best efficacy and patient outcomes, Mellad told me. Genetic sequencing is informative, but epigenetics is better for monitoring and predicting responses [to treatments].

Such an addition is already an important dimension of checkpoint inhibitor regimens as pharmas like Bristol-Meyers Squibb and Merck compete to dominate the niche. BMS was quick to knock the necessary genetic test for its rivals candidate, Keytruda, as cumbersome, while its own comparatively easy drug, Opdivo, maintainednearly a half billion-dollar sales lead in the first half of 2016.

The tide turned in May this year when the FDA approved Keytruda for solid tumors with a specific genetic signature. For the first time in history, cancer was classified not by location but by the genetic mutation believed to be at its root.

Keytrudas biomarker approval changed how people see diagnostics like the ones were working on,Mellad continued, hailing the FDA decision as a milestone for not just cancer genetics but epigenetics as well. And, Mellad said, this grown-up version of genetics could be even more useful, since epigenetics provides a more nuanced view of responses to therapeutics as a mirror of the bodys dynamic response to its environment.

More and more companies are jumping on board, making epigenetics increasingly mainstream versus a niche, remarked Mellad. As personalized medicine takes hold and such drugs become more successful in the treatment of diseases like cancer, epigenetics may soon capture the public imagination following in the footsteps of its predecessor.

Images via petarg, Leigh Prather, ESB Professional / shutterstock.com

Read this article:
The Next Generation of Genetic Medicine: A Review of Epigenetics - Labiotech.eu (blog)

Read More...

New Medical Geneticists Join Ted Rogers Centre for Heart Research – Newswise (press release)

September 6th, 2017 7:47 pm

Newswise TORONTO, September 6, 2017 The Ted Rogers Centre for Heart Research today announces that Dr. Raymond Kim is its newest scientific lead, guiding efforts at the countrys only clinic devoted to cardiac genomics.

The Ted Rogers Centre Cardiac Genome Clinic is Canadas first such program to investigate the genetic causes of heart failure in both children and adults. At one of the worlds only cardiac genome clinics, researchers use whole genome sequencing to help identify the cause, formulate appropriate treatment options and optimize the management of patients and family members.

Genomics is a major part of our mission to better understand the nature of heart failure in order to develop novel treatments and preventative strategies, said Dr. Mansoor Husain, executive director of the Ted Rogers Centre. We are excited to have Raymond on board to build a unique program that is set up to have a very positive impact on heart failure care across the lifespan.

Dr. Kim, one of a handful of dual-trained internal medicine and medical genetics specialists in Toronto, is a rising star in medical genetics. He holds appointments at the Division of Clinical and Metabolic Genetics at SickKids, at the Fred A. Litwin Family Centre in Genetic Medicine that is jointly run by UHN and Mount Sinai Hospital, and at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre. His research interests include genomic medicine, rare disorder registries and weaving novel genetic technologies into patient care.

Dr. Kim will co-direct the Cardiac Genome Clinic along with fellow medical geneticist Dr. Rebekah Jobling (SickKids), who is medical geneticist in the SickKids Division of Clinical and Metabolic Genetics and molecular geneticist in its Genome Diagnostics Molecular Laboratory.

The clinic opens up the incredible opportunity for families facing cardiovascular issues to have a team of scientists search for answers in the genome, said Dr. Kim. Genome testing will gradually become a normalized part of care, and we are at the forefront of this evolution, and are already helping shape best practices in this area.The addition of unique team members like Dr. Jobling makes our team world-class.

Dr. Kim joins three other scientific leads of the Ted Rogers Centre for Heart Research: Dr. Seema Mital, Dr. Heather Ross, and Professor Craig Simmons who are respective experts in genetics, heart failure, and cell and tissue engineering. Together, they are helping direct a vast, collaborative effort to change the lives of Canadians who live with, or are at risk of, heart failure a costly disease that is a global epidemic.

ABOUT THE TED ROGERS CENTRE FOR HEART RESEARCH

The Ted Rogers Centre for Heart Research aims to develop new diagnoses, treatments and tools to prevent and individually manage heart failure Canadas fastest growing cardiac disease. Enabled by an unprecedented gift of $130 million from the Rogers family, the Centre was jointly conceived by its three partner organizations: The Hospital for Sick Children, University Health Network, and the University of Toronto. Together, they committed an additional $139 million toward the Centre representing a $270 million investment in basic science, translational and clinical research, innovation, and education in regenerative medicine, genomics, and the clinical care of children and adults. It is addressing heart failure across the lifespan. http://www.tedrogersresearch.ca / @trogersresearch

To transform the care of children and adults with heart failure through discovery, innovation and knowledge translation.

Read more from the original source:
New Medical Geneticists Join Ted Rogers Centre for Heart Research - Newswise (press release)

Read More...

Shares of drugmaker that targets gene mutations soar after positive muscular dystrophy study – CNBC

September 6th, 2017 7:47 pm

Shares of Sarepta Therapeutics soared 12 percent in early trading Wednesday after the biopharmaceutical company reported positive results from a clinical trial of an experimental medicine for Duchenne muscular dystrophy.

The drug, golodirsen, would be Sarepta's second to treat the rare, genetic disease, which causes muscle wasting and can be fatal before patients turn 30. Sarepta focuses on the discovery and development of precision genetic medicines to treat rare neuromuscular diseases.

The new study, conducted in Europe, involved 25 boys with confirmed deletions of the DMD gene amenable to skipping exon 53. Exons are part of the DNA code. The treatment targets a genetic mutation affecting about 8 percent of patients with DMD.

Sarepta's first drug for DMD, Exondys 51 approved on a conditional basis by the FDA last year pending more testing to confirm results treats a mutation affecting about 13 percent. Exondys 51 costs about $300,000 per year.

"Our goal is to treat 100 percent" of DMD suffers, Sarepta CEO Doug Ingram told CNBC's "Squawk Box." "The data that we have this morning shows we're on the right path."

The results, announced before Wall Street's open bell, showed that golodirsen increased production of the protein dystrophin to 1.02 percent of normal levels from about 0.095 percent without the drug. Analysts said those results were higher than expected, but scientists wonder whether that's enough to increase muscle strength and have a clinical benefit.

According to Sarepta, the underlying cause of DMD is a mutation in the gene for dystrophin, which is an essential protein involved in muscle fiber function. DMD occurs in one in every 3,500 to 5,000 males worldwide. Symptoms usually start in early childhood, usually between 3- and 5-years old. It primarily affects boys. But in rare cases can affect girls.

"Sarepta is a small company. We have already invested $1 billion fighting Duchenne muscular dystrophy. And we're not done yet," said Ingram, who was appointed as CEO in July. Ahead of Wednesday, Sarepta had a stock market value of $2.6 billion.

Here is the original post:
Shares of drugmaker that targets gene mutations soar after positive muscular dystrophy study - CNBC

Read More...

Jennifer Krupp, MD is First Recipient of the New NIH-ACMG Fellowship in Genomic Medicine Program Management – PR Newswire (press release)

September 6th, 2017 7:47 pm

Dr. Krupp's NIH-ACMG Fellowship begins in September 2017 and will last 24 months. She will do five three-month rotations beginning at ACMG and then through the National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI), the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute (NHLBI), the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities (NIMHD), and the Precision Medicine Initiative All of Us Research program, followed by a six-month elective.

"I feel privileged to be the first recipient of the NIH-ACMG Fellowship in Genomic Medicine Program Management," said Dr. Krupp. "Responsible leadership is key both to further develop our understanding of human genome variation and to best support genome based predictive medicine programs. This fellowship provides unprecedented opportunities to engage with leaders at NIH and ACMG as they provide contemporary management of such programs. This will foster leadership attributes invaluable for my career goal to contribute leadership oversight in genomic medicine research and program implementation."

Dr. Krupp earned her medical degree from the St. Louis University School of Medicine and is board certified in Anesthesiology. She completed a Pediatric Anesthesiology Fellowship at Children's Hospital and Regional Medical Center in Seattle, WA. Most recently, she was a fellow in Medical Genetics and Genomic Medicine at the University of Colorado School of Medicine. Dr. Krupp has been devoted to medical volunteer work throughout her career and has completed numerous volunteer medical assignments throughout the world including Venezuela, Peru, Haiti, Cambodia and the Dominican Republic.

About the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) and ACMG Foundation

Founded in 1991, ACMG is the only nationally recognized medical society dedicated to improving health through the clinical practice of medical genetics and genomics. The American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (www.acmg.net) provides education, resources and a voice for more than 2100 biochemical, clinical, cytogenetic, medical and molecular geneticists, genetic counselors and other healthcare professionals, nearly 80% of whom are board certified in the medical genetics specialties. The College's mission is to develop and sustain genetic initiatives in clinical and laboratory practice, education and advocacy. Three guiding pillars underpin ACMG's work: 1) Clinical and Laboratory Practice: Establish the paradigm of genomic medicine by issuing statements and evidence-based or expert clinical and laboratory practice guidelines and through descriptions of best practices for the delivery of genomic medicine. 2) Education: Provide education and tools for medical geneticists, other health professionals and the public and grow the genetics workforce. 3) Advocacy: Work with policymakers and payers to support the responsible application of genomics in medical practice. Genetics in Medicine, published monthly, is the official ACMG peer-reviewed journal. ACMG's website offers a variety of resources including Policy Statements, Practice Guidelines, Educational Resources, and a Find a Geneticist tool. The educational and public health programs of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics are dependent upon charitable gifts from corporations, foundations, and individuals through the ACMG Foundation for Genetic and Genomic Medicine.

Contact Kathy Beal, MBA

ACMG Media Relations,

kbeal@acmg.net

View original content:http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/jennifer-krupp-md-is-first-recipient-of-the-new-nih-acmg-fellowship-in-genomic-medicine-program-management-300515082.html

SOURCE American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics

http://www.acmg.net

Read the original post:
Jennifer Krupp, MD is First Recipient of the New NIH-ACMG Fellowship in Genomic Medicine Program Management - PR Newswire (press release)

Read More...

Hate to Work Out? Your DNA May Be to Blame – Ravalli Republic

September 6th, 2017 7:47 pm

TUESDAY, Sept. 5, 2017 (HealthDay News) -- If a gym visit elicits more grimaces than grins, you might be genetically predisposed to dislike exercise, Dutch researchers suggest.

The notion that at least part of a penchant for enjoying exercise -- or not -- may be inherited came from tracking the exercise habits and feelings of several hundred sets of identical twins, fraternal twins, and non-twin siblings between the ages of 12 and 25.

The study team further found that people who enjoyed working out spent more time doing so. And that raises the prospect that new interventions might eventually help boost exercise pleasure among those who've inherited a bias against it.

"Despite the persistent general belief that exercise makes everyone feel better, this is not always the case," said study lead author Nienke Schutte.

"There are large differences in how people feel during and after exercise," Schutte said. She's a postdoctoral researcher in the department of public and occupational health with the VU Medical Center in Amsterdam.

"In our study," she added, "we submitted healthy adolescent twin pairs to a 20-minute exercise test on a cycle and a 20-minute exercise test on a treadmill. During and after the exercise tests, we asked them to indicate how they felt."

And in the end, Schutte said, "we showed that up to 37 percent of the differences in the subjective experience of exercise was due to genetics."

The study included 115 pairs of identical twins, 111 pairs of fraternal twins and 35 of their non-twin siblings. All of the study volunteers completed a 20-minute stationary bike ride and a 20-minute treadmill run. Both were characterized as "non-vigorous," although an additional bike ride had participants (which also included six non-twin sibling pairs) ride until they were exhausted.

During each ride and run participants were asked to describe how good or bad they felt, and whether the workout made them energetic, lively, jittery or tense. Lifestyle interviews were also conducted to gauge routine exercise habits.

In the end, the research team estimated that genetic predisposition accounted for anywhere between 12 to 37 percent of the variations seen in exercise enjoyment. And the more a person said they enjoyed exercising, the more often they routinely worked out.

That said, the study authors stressed that what they identified for now is simply an association between exercise pleasure and genetics, rather than a definitive case of cause and effect.

But "an important conclusion is that a one-size-fits-all approach to get people to exercise might not be very effective," Schutte said. "Now we know that how you feel during and shortly after an exercise bout is heritable, we can look for the actual genes that are involved."

And successful identification of such genes could mean that "in the future, depending on your genetic profile, interventions [could] be tailored to set realistic person-specific exercise goals," she added.

James Maddux is an emeritus professor in psychology with George Mason University in Fairfax, Va. He said that "the findings make sense," in his opinion.

"And given the accumulating research findings on the role of genes in individual differences among people on biological and psychological factors [such as] intelligence, personality [or] self-control, I'm not at all surprised," he added.

Maddux also suggested that the mere acknowledgement of a genetic underpinning to exercise enjoyment could end up being of practical benefit, even without knowing which specific genes are involved.

"You don't need to identify the genes that may be partly responsible for individual differences in the experience of pleasure and pain during exercise in order to use descriptions of those individual differences to design individualized exercise programs," he said.

What's more, said Maddux, "knowing that there is a genetic contribution may help the high-exercise-discomfort person engage in less self-blame, which can be demoralizing and discouraging. In fact, this could be useful information for personal trainers to pass along to their high-discomfort clients. It could help both of them be a little more patient."

The study was published in the journal Psychology of Sport and Exercise.

Read this article:
Hate to Work Out? Your DNA May Be to Blame - Ravalli Republic

Read More...

Global Psoriatic Arthritis Market and Competitive Landscape 2017-2021 – Research and Markets – Business Wire (press release)

September 5th, 2017 11:45 pm

DUBLIN--(BUSINESS WIRE)--The "Global Psoriatic Arthritis Market and Competitive Landscape - 2017" report has been added to Research and Markets' offering.

The latest research, Global Psoriatic Arthritis Market and Competitive Landscape - 2017, provides comprehensive insights into Psoriatic Arthritis pipeline, epidemiology, market valuations, product sales, market forecast, product forecasts, and market shares. This study accurately estimates and forecast Psoriatic Arthritis market size and drug sales. This research also provides insights into Psoriatic Arthritis epidemiology and late stage pipeline.

The report is classified into twelve sections - Psoriatic Arthritis overview with definitions, symptoms, etiology, diagnosis, treatment options; Psoriatic Arthritis pipeline insights covering late stage clinical trials pipeline; Psoriatic Arthritis prevalence trends by countries; Psoriatic Arthritis market size and forecast by countries, market events, trends; product sales and forecast by countries; market shares by countries. The research scope includes G7 countries - US, Germany, France, Italy, Spain, UK, Japan, Europe, Global.

Key Topics Covered:

1. Psoriatic Arthritis: Disease Overview

2. Psoriatic Arthritis Pipeline Insights

3. Psoriatic Arthritis Epidemiology Analysis

4. US Psoriatic Arthritis Market Insights

5. Germany Psoriatic Arthritis Market Insights

6. France Psoriatic Arthritis Market Insights

7. Italy Psoriatic Arthritis Market Insights

8. Spain Psoriatic Arthritis Market Insights

9. UK Psoriatic Arthritis Market Insights

10. Europe Psoriatic Arthritis Market Insights

11. Japan Psoriatic Arthritis Market Insights

12. Global Psoriatic Arthritis Market Insights

13. Research Methodology

For more information about this report visit https://www.researchandmarkets.com/research/q3gzk9/global_psoriatic

Go here to read the rest:
Global Psoriatic Arthritis Market and Competitive Landscape 2017-2021 - Research and Markets - Business Wire (press release)

Read More...

Kicking rheumatoid arthritis – Jamaica Gleaner

September 5th, 2017 11:45 pm

Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) is seen as a monster in most people's closets, sending them on a terrifying rage, suffering from joint pain and stiffness. Rheumatoid arthritis is a chronic inflammatory disease that causes joint pain, stiffness, swelling and decreased movement of the joints. In some people, the condition can damage a number of body systems, including the skin, eyes, lungs, heart and blood vessels.

According to certified personal trainer Carol McPherson, getting lots of exercise is an important part of coping with rheumatoid arthritis.

"My job is physically demanding and RA has hindered me from doing certain aerobics routines and exercises." she told Flair. "I would have flare-ups experiencing pain, stiffness and swelling in my knee from walking or standing for long periods. After my diagnosis, I did intense research on RA and found that exercise can help to improve your health and fitness without hurting your joints," McPherson explained.

With the correct treatment programme, McPherson and psychotherapist Desmond Thompson stress that exercise can strengthen the muscles around the joints, helping to maintain bone strength and enhance the quality of life for those suffering from the disease.

Before engaging in any form of exercise, it is important to stretch to prepare your muscles and joints for the exercise routine. You should also stretch after your exercises to prevent stiffness. It is OK to rest a day between your workouts, and take an extra day or two if your joints are painful or swollen.

With the help of McPherson and Thompson, today Flair shares a few exercises that persons suffering from RA can indulge in and feel much better for it.

There are three sets of exercises you can kick off RA with: range of motion exercises such as cycling, elliptical workout, strengthening exercises like leg presses, hip extensions, and aerobics exercises such as walking, cycling and making use of the treadmill.

These exercises relieve stiffness and increase your ability to move your joints through their full range of motion. Aerobics exercises help with your overall fitness, and strengthening exercises help to build strong muscles that support and protect your joints.

kimberly.goodall@gleanerjm.com

See the rest here:
Kicking rheumatoid arthritis - Jamaica Gleaner

Read More...

Page 915«..1020..914915916917..920930..»


2025 © StemCell Therapy is proudly powered by WordPress
Entries (RSS) Comments (RSS) | Violinesth by Patrick