StemCell Therapy

When you look at health news right now, it feels like every other headline is either a warning about the next rare disease or a tale about how flourishing gut bacteria is the secret to happiness. So should we all embrace the world's dirt, walking around barefoot in the mud, or live in spacesuits with a bottle of bleach at the ready? The very fact that we still use the word germs to describe bacteria, viruses, parasites, and whatever just attached itself to your shoe in the airport bathroom is probably one source of our collective confusion. We went in search of the answers to these seemingly conflicting reports about pathogens.

In utero, babies have rather weak, incomplete immune systems. This is probably so they can peacefully coexist with their mothers' bodies but also because in the womb, they have little exposure to bacteria. The good gut microbiotaa.k.a. the reason everyone pretends to like kombuchafirst comes from the birth canal and then everything babies are exposed to afterward. Their memory T-cells (the white blood cells that kill antigens) are also a blank slate until they've had something to fight and "learn" from.

"From the moment babies are born, they interact with the environment and come into contact with all kinds of germs," says William Shaffner, M.D., an infectious disease specialist at the Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville. "We live in a very germy world. This interaction with the germy world actually results in protection of children against all kinds of infections."

There's also evidence that exposure to microbes prevents children from developing allergies. You may have heard of the study in Sweden that indicates kids whose parents immediately sanitized dropped pacifiers were more likely to have asthma, eczema, and allergies than the children whose parents licked the pacifiers clean. (Were just going to assume the parents who sucked on that dirt are doing well too.)

A few unsettling facts: While some bacteria are part of our immune system, there are, of course, plenty of others that are deadlyand becoming deadlier as they grow resistant to antibiotics. According to the Review on Antimicrobial Resistance (commissioned by the U.K. Department of Health), at least 700,000 people across the world die each year of bacterial infections, malaria, tuberculosis, and HIV/AIDS as a direct result of drug-resistant bacteria. The WHO says that 480,000 people in the world develop drug-resistant TB each year.

While not usually fatal, the norovirus (that nasty bug we usually call the stomach flu) is so highly contagious, it takes just 18 viral particles to make one person ill, and the virus lives on in an infected person's stool for two weeks. Herpes simplex type-1 (oral herpes) can be passed to a child simply by pinching her cheek. Also, 20 percent of sexually active adults have herpes simplex type-2.

In July, a 3-week-old baby made headlines when she tragically died from complications of viral meningitis after contracting herpes, probably from someone who kissed her when she was a week old at her parents' wedding.

"What I will say about viral meningitis in infants is that this issue is now super, super rare," Shaffner says. "A much more common cause of serious disease in children that can actually kill them is influenza."

In the United States, influenza and pneumonia are one of the leading causes of death (ranking eighth overall in 2014).

"The recommendation is to give every child an influenza vaccine," Shaffner says. "It will provideif not completecertainly partial protection. Also, moms and dads should be comforted that the lights are on in the research laboratories at night. People keep working to develop a better flu vaccine and other mechanisms of protection for our children." In case you've forgotten, vaccines are good for us all.

"You don't have to spray every computer keyboard with disinfectant, which will ruin it anyway," Shaffner says. "And you don't have to worry about picking up a phone or a dollar bill. You're not going to get killed from that. A few years ago, one of the most common questions I got was, 'What can you pick up from a public toilet seat?' The answer is nothing. That's not a risk. If it were, we wouldn't have public toilets."

Even though places like public restrooms are basically petri dishes for bacteria and viruses, in most cases, all you have to do is wash your hands to be rid of them.

Though they seem ridiculously obvious, think twice the next time you want to laugh at the handwashing instructions you see at restaurants and medical offices. They save lives. The official recommendation from the CDC is to wet your hands first; lather them up with regular (nonantibacterial) soap, being sure to get under fingernails and between fingers, for the time it takes to sing "Happy Birthday" twice; rinse; and dry.

The FDA denounced antibacterial soap as useless at best and, at worst, potentially responsible for making bacteria more drug resistant. Hand sanitizer, however, is still your second-best friend after soap and water. It doesn't get rid of dirt or kill all germsnorovirus, for example, may stick aroundbut it's better than nothing when you aren't near a sink.

"My wife always has a small bottle of hand hygiene liquid in her purse; I have one in the glove compartment of my car," Shaffner says. "And then my wife has a simple rule in our house: You walk in the front door, hang up your coat and then go directly to the sink and wash your hands. Simple rules like that really are the great protection."

So unzip your bubble and the next time you read scary health news, just remember the lyrics to Happy Birthday.

Sabrina Rojas Weiss lives in Brooklyn, surrounded by her fellow freelance writers and competitive stroller-pushers. Her work has appeared on Refinery29, Yahoo, MTV News, and Glamour.com. Follow her on Twitter @shalapitcher.

Original post:
So What Exactly Is the Deal With Germs and Your Immune System? - Greatist

The white blood cells known as T cells regulate our bodys response to foreign substances our adaptive immune response. In a new study, Yale scientists have learned how changes in a recently discovered RNA epigenetic marker regulate T cells and the immune response. Their finding could lead to new approaches to treating autoimmune diseases.

The Yale-led research team focused on an important genetic marker, m6A, which modifies RNA. Prior to this study, it was known that m6A affected RNA and stem cells, but its role in biology was not understood. To investigate, the researchers deleted one of the genes that produce m6A in T cells, and tested m6A-deficient mice using various mice disease models.

The researchers found that the m6A-deficient T cells lost the ability to differentiate, or further develop into specialized immune cells; thus the cells were unable to cause autoimmune disease. The authors further revealed detailed molecular pathways that undermine T cell differentiation, which could have a profound impact on the research field, they said.

The finding provides new insight into this genetic markers role in development and human health. It also points to the potential for developing drugs to target m6A to alleviate autoimmune diseases, said first author and immunobiologist Huabing Li.

The research was led by Sterling Professor of Immunobiology, Richard Flavell, and is an international collaboration including researchers from China (Zhinan Yin, Jiyu Tong), Stanford University (Howard Y. Chang, Pedro Batista), and Yale (Matthew D. Simon, Erin Duffy, Yuval Kluger, Jun Zhao, Shu Zhu, Will Baillis, Lina Kroehling).

Read the full paper in Nature.

Read more from the original source:
Study describes key RNA epigenetic marker's role in immune ... - Yale News

It may have something to do with the hygiene hypothesis, say experts at the Cleveland Clinic. That means that effects of such parasitic worm infections might actually protect your gut.

Goj and his team settled on the pig whipworm for their product, since the parasite cant survive for long in humansand there was no evidence of them being able to reproduce in our guts. So theyre unlikely to cause any of the downsides associated with other worms.

There's actually some evidence to back this up. In fact, a small 2004 study in Gut of 29 people with active Crohns diseasea type of inflammatory bowel conditionfound that ingesting pig whipworm eggs every three weeks for 24 weeks decreased their symptom severity. The researchers say it shows that the worms can hamper inflammation in your intestines, and suggest they may be beneficial for other immune conditions as well.

But according to New Scientist, Gojs larger, placebo-controlled study on whipworms was stopped early, because a monitoring committee failed to see beneficial results within three months.

Still, his products have already been approved for sale in Thailand, and they're currently pending approval in Germany. Since its only awaiting approval as a food ingredient and not a medical drug, its creators dont have to prove that it works for those immune conditionsonly that its safe for people to take.

Even though they may be approved as a food product, that definitely doesnt mean you should start self-medicating with worms yourself.

Self-medication with any type of worm is not recommended and it is important to remember theyre not in any way completely harmless, and may cause quite severe side effects if not monitored very carefully by a doctor, Helena Helmby, Ph.D., of the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine told New Scientist.

More research is needed to test how worm eggs may function as treatment for other immune-related conditions. In the meantime, try these 9 foods that will boost your immune system instead. (For more health news, sign up for our Daily Dose newsletter.)

See more here:
Would You Eat Parasitic Worm Eggs To Improve Your Health? - Men's Health

Orphan Black, the Canadian science fiction show that revolves around human cloning, will end on Saturday, August 12th after five darkly funny, gory seasons. The show began with a former British street urchin, Sarah Manning (Tatiana Maslany), watching as someone with her exact facial features commits suicide by jumping in front of a train. From there, the show unravels to be about large biotech corporations, conspiracies, and above all, morally questionable science.

Spoilers ahead for all of Orphan Black except the finale.

Science classes teach students early on that human experimentation is ethically wrong if the subjects dont know theyre being experimented on, or exactly what the experiment entails. Orphan Black explores this taboo by giving us villains that love experimenting on unwilling or unwitting people. From installing a secret camera in a womans artificial eye to harvesting the eggs of an eight-year-old girl, the corporate forces on the show are unapologetically sinister and indifferent to basic scientific ethics. The show is both a celebration of science and a reminder that its frightening when used to the wrong ends.

With the end of Orphan Black imminent, were looking at the real world for our fix of real science straddling the world of science fiction. Since the show began airing in 2013, have we gotten any closer to the future of extreme body modifications and human cloning that Orphan Black has so often teased? I spoke with Paul Knoepfler, a biology professor at UC Davis, and John Quackenbush, professor of biostatistics and computational biology at Harvard and the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, to see how far away we are from some of the shows most outrageous inventions.

GROWING A TAIL

Early in the shows run, Olivier, a body-modification fan whos one of the antagonists overseeing a human cloning project, shows off the pink tail hes grown. Sarah is understandably disgusted. But such body modifications could exist, as humans are already naturally born with primordial tails, Knoepfler says. All youd need to do is stop the pre-programmed cell death of those tail cells, maybe by giving a pregnant woman a drug, Knoepfler says. The most challenging part of getting a functional tail would be finding a way to extend the length of the spine, according to Quackenbush. And even if a tail was successfully constructed, there are more unknowns, says Knoepfler, like what part of the brain would control it, or whether the tail would trip you as youre walking. Granted, that isnt a problem if its this short:

I SPY WITH MY BIONIC EYE

At the end of season 2, Rachel Duncan, a clone whos grown up under the care of large corporations, is stabbed in the eye. She receives an artificial replacement, and after many months, she regains complete sight. Ultimately, though, she decides to tear out her eye, because she learns the man responsible for commissioning it also had a camera installed inside it to spy on her. This leads to a truly creepy cinematic moment where Rachel sneaks into the mans office, looks down at his mysterious tablet, and discovers a live stream of what her eye sees: a screen within a screen within a screen, ad infinitum. I watched you touch yourself in the shower where you think its clean, the man says gleefully in a following episode.

Putting the shows sinister ingenuity aside for a moment, Rachels bionic eye spy-cam and all may be possible, Knoepfler and Quackenbush say. Bionic eyes already exist, but the main challenge is connecting an artificial eye with the optic nerve, which connects the eye to the brain. That nerve probably would have been damaged during Rachels initial injury. Creating a bionic eye poses an additional challenge, as the eye must mimic nature and be able to send and receive the right kinds of signals to be read by the brain, says Quackenbush. But if the eye and optic nerve could be reconnected, the eye could potentially be powered by a battery, and making a camera small enough to fit inside the eye is completely possible with todays current technology. Then Wi-Fi and Bluetooth would give the eye live-streaming capabilities.

POISONOUS BOT IMPLANT

In the penultimate season, Sarah discovers she has a bot implanted inside her cheek, which acts as a tracking device and contains a poison her enemies can release into her bloodstream. Micro-tracking implantations already exist in our world: just take the microchips that are often implanted in dogs and cats, Quackenbush says. The tracking device part of the bot also seems plausible: there are devices today that can draw on nearby Bluetooth devices as a network, Quackenbush says. And even storing a toxin inside the bot isnt just science fiction, given the steady infusion of insulin or other drugs that devices already offer humans today. The problem, however, is the bots power supply: it would have to be significant enough to potentially sustain the bot throughout a human lifetime and no such batteries exist yet.

AND OF COURSE, CLONING

We already have clones; theyre identical twins, says Quackenbush. But there are other, less random methods for achieving human cloning. One way is how Dolly the sheep was cloned, by taking the part of the egg cell that contains genetic information and replacing it with a donors cell nucleus. The egg is then fertilized and grown into a clone. But using this method, called somatic cell nuclear transfer, on humans could be extremely unsafe, because the clone could have serious developmental disorders, Knoepfler says.

Quackenbush imagines another method to approach human cloning: reversing cell aging. Basically, adult stem cells could be reverted into their original state as stem cells, when they possessed the genetic potential to divide and become the heart, liver, skin, and other organs. An embryo, in many ways, is the ultimate stem cell, says Quackenbush. But this method hasnt been tried before.

Orphan Blacks science consultant, Cosima Herter, believes that cloning humans is illegal in North America. Were not allowed to hear about it, because were not allowed to do it, she wrote in a blog post for the show in 2013. This isnt quite right no federal laws, at least in the US, ban human cloning. The US Food and Drug Administration is the regulator that matters for research into cloning humans.

With the end of Orphan Black comes the end of a decently plausible science fiction series. Its given us hints of what the future might have in store. It could even inspire the science to come. I think [science fiction] is part of what got us into this business in the first place, Quakenbush says of himself, and others in the science community, You see the future and you want to try to invent it.

More here:
Orphan Black is ending, but how far has human cloning come? - The Verge

Stocks discussed on the Lightning Round segment of Jim Cramer's Mad Money Program, Monday, August 7.

Philip Morris International (NYSE:PM): "No, don't sell it. I think they have a lot more optionality. I would not sell that here. And remember, I think the dollar's getting very weak still."

Blue Apron (NYSE:APRN): Cramer doesn't see upside.

International Game Technology (NYSE:IGT): It's an inexpensive stock but does not have a growth catalyst.

Eaton Corp (NYSE:ETN): Their quarter was not good. Cramer prefers Honeywell (NYSE:HON) or 3M (NYSE:MMM).

DaVita (NYSE:DVA): No. Cramer prefers Boston Scientific (NYSE:BSX) in that group.

Puma Biotechnology (NYSE:PBYI): It has had a big run. Book profits.

Masimo Corp (NASDAQ:MASI): Cramer just prefers Intuitive Surgical (NASDAQ:ISRG) in that group.

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

Jim Cramer's Action Alerts PLUS: Check out Cramer's multi-million dollar charitable trust portfolio and uncover the stocks he thinks could be HUGE winners. Start your FREE 14-day trial now!

Get Cramer's Picks by email - it's free and takes only a few seconds to sign up

More here:
Book Profits On Puma Biotechnology - Cramer's Lightning Round (8/7/17) - Seeking Alpha

Two entities that seem like they should be on the same page a coalition of environmental groups and a plant-based food company are at odds.

And the flash point is a veggie burger.

Impossible Foods is facing scrutiny about the safety of a key ingredient in its trademark Impossible Burger, commonly known as the veggie burger that bleeds.

The controversy arose when theNew York Timespublished an article highlightingcorrespondencebetween the FDA and Impossible Foods that environmental groups say indicates that the protein had not met the agencys approval before going to market about a year ago.

Currently our FDA, EPA and USDA regulations are falling behind the very quickly moving development of new technologies, and one of the ways that our regulatory agencies are falling behind is they are not assessing the process of genetically engineering these ingredients, said Dana Perls of Friends of the Earth, one of the groups that raised concerns about Impossible Foods safety testing.

[Read the GLPs profile on Friends of the Earth.]

[The companys CEO and founder, Patrick Brown] said the groups objections are more about the use of biotechnology than the product itself.

The vast majority of their effort is an antiscience, anti-GMO crusade, Brown said. Their strategy has tended to be to try to effectively take down any company that is using biotechnology by whatever means they can come up with.

[Editors note: Below is a letter by Impossible Burger CEO and founder Patrick Brown, republished in full with permission from the company.]

The New York Times published an Aug. 8 article falsely implying that Impossible Foods is trying to evade US Food and Drug Administration regulations and putting consumers at risk by selling a product (the Impossible Burger) containing soy leghemoglobin. The article was chock full of factual errors and misrepresentations and was instigated by an extremist anti-science group with the deliberate intention of damaging our reputation.

Heres the truth:

The greatest threat the world faces today is the enormously destructive impact that our use of animals as a food technology has on climate, water, wildlife and biodiversity, global food security and political stability. Although little known to the public and almost completely ignored by the news media, this threat is well recognized by environmental and climate scientists and organizations including the UN Environmental Program, the UN Food and Agriculture Organization, and the Union of Concerned Scientists, among many others. The problem is not going to be solved by asking that people give up, or even reduce, consumption of the animal-derived foods they love; the demand for meat, fish and dairy foods is growing even faster than the human population. Nothing is more important to the planet our children and future generations will inherit, or their quality of life, than finding a solution to this dilemma.

Thats why I founded Impossible Foods. Our singular mission is to enable the world to continue to enjoy the foods they love and increasingly demand, without catastrophic damage to the environment. Our strategy was simple: invent a better way to transform plants into delicious, nutritious, safe and affordable meat, fish and dairy foods that consumers love. Then let consumers choose. If we do our job right, the market will take care of the rest. Commitment to the health, nutrition and safety of our customers is an inseparable part of our mission; its at the heart of why we exist, embedded in our ethos and everything we do.

With support from investors who understand and believe in our mission, we built a team of scientists who have worked tirelessly on this problem, understanding meat what underlies its flavor, texture and all its physical properties far better than it was ever understood. One of many discoveries they made, perhaps the most important, is that a molecule called heme is what makes meat taste like meat. Without heme, you cant make meat that will satisfy the billions of people who love meat.

Heme is an iron-containing molecule thats essential for life on Earth. Its found in every living organism. Its the magic molecule that enables the cells in our bodies and in every living being on Earth to benefit from the oxygen in our atmosphere. Its the molecule that carries oxygen in our blood, makes our blood red and our lips pink. Because its in every plant and animal, humans have been eating heme every day since the first human walked on Earth. The reason that animal tissues (meat) tastes like meat and unlike any vegetable, is that animal tissues contain hundreds to thousands-fold more heme than plant tissues.

To accomplish our essential mission, we needed to find a safe way to produce heme without using animals. We used yeast cells, into which we introduced a plant gene encoding a protein called soy leghemoglobin thats naturally found in the roots of soy plants. The heme in the Impossible Burger is atom-for-atom identical to the heme found in meat, fish, plants and other foods. Soy leghemoglobin carries the heme molecule in the same way a very similar protein, myoglobin, carries heme in muscle tissue (meat). Myoglobin is just one of the thousands of different heme proteins we all consume safely in our diets every day.

The health and safety of our customers is our first priority. The foods in our diet and the molecules and ingredients they contain are by default presumed to be safe, but only a minuscule fraction have ever been scientifically tested for their safety. Although there was never a reason to suspect that soy leghemoglobin would pose any more risk than myoglobin, or any of the new proteins we encounter in our diet all the time, we started four years ago to do a deep scientific study of its safety, including any potential for toxicity or allergenicity. The data we collected and our analyses were documented and reviewed by three independent food-safety experts in toxicology, allergenicity and yeast. In 2014, this expert panel unanimously concluded based on all the evidence that the protein is generally recognized as safe (GRAS) for human consumption. This is the approach followed by thousands of food companies to meet the FDA requirement that foods be generally recognized as safe. But we did more.

There is no legal or regulatory requirement that a companys finding of GRAS be submitted to the FDA for review. And its frequently not done. In fact, a total of only 709 have been submitted since the GRAS Notification system was put in place almost 20 years ago in 1998. But we did it because we recognize and respect the value of the FDA as guardian of the safety of the American food supply, one of the safest in the world.

We wanted the FDA to review our GRAS determination, to have the added benefit of their expertise, and to assure consumers that our testing of leghemoglobin has passed the most rigorous scrutiny. After submitting our GRAS determination, the FDA reviewed it, and had some questions. To address them, we conducted additional tests. And the tests turned out just as we expected: no adverse effects in rats consuming leghemoglobin every day for a month at levels more than 200 times what an average American would consume if all the ground beef in their diet were the Impossible Burger, and very low risk of allergenicity. A panel of the worlds leading experts in food safety and allergenicity has reviewed the new data, as well as the data originally submitted.

The expert panel has again unanimously concluded that soy leghemoglobin is safe; it is GRAS.

Impossible Foods has always worked constructively with the FDA, whose role as guardian of food safety for the nation we deeply respect. We will be submitting the additional data, along with the expert panels analysis of it, to the FDA this month. And FDA will make Impossible Foodss submission hundreds of pages of safety and allergenicity test results and the expert analysis of those results publicly available on its web site soon thereafter. In addition, in an abundance of caution, we clearly label our product as containing potential allergens: wheat and soy also in compliance with federal regulations. Finally, restaurants where the Impossible Burger is sold also comply with federal regulations about labeling.

Impossible Foods is proud of the safety of its first product, the Impossible Burger, and is committed to the health and safety of our customers. Thats why weve gone far beyond merely complying with food safety regulations, and we always will. I am confident in saying that the Impossible Burger is the safest and most thoroughly safety-tested burger in history. In striking contrast, the alternative, animal-derived burger is one of the least safe and most inadequately tested foods on the market.

And were committed to solving the most urgent threat the world faces today: the use of animals in the food system. Since the small-scale launch of the Impossible Burger, with just 50,000 lbs sold to date (10 billion lbs of ground beef were sold in the same time period), and working with our great restaurant partners, the Impossible Burger has already had an outsized impact: weve had an overwhelmingly positive response from consumers, and weve reduced greenhouse gases emissions by the equivalent of removing 246 American cars from the road for a year, reduced the land footprint of meat production by an area half the size of New Yorks Central Park, saved as much fresh water as 50,000 average Americans drink in a year, and saved more than 100 cows from slaughter. We cant solve this problem unless people love our burger.

Impossible Foods intends to be the most open and transparent company in the world. We welcome every opportunity to answer questions from the public and media, and share our answers on our social media channels. Before deciding how you feel about Impossible Foods or the Impossible Burger, read our story and then decide for yourself.

Continue reading here:
Impossible Burger blowback: Will irrational fears of biotechnology block introduction of sustainable foods? - Genetic Literacy Project

August 11, 2017 - By Linda Rogers

Aug 11 is a positive day so far for BioShares Biotechnology Clinical Trials (NASDAQ:BBC) as the ETF is active during the day after gaining 1.42% to hit $23.65 per share. The exchange traded fund has 23.44 million net assets and 2.75% volatility this month.

Over the course of the day 619 shares traded hands, as compared to an average volume of 11,600 over the last 30 days for BioShares Biotechnology Clinical Trials (NASDAQ:BBC).

The ETF is -32.38% of its 52-Week High and 35.06% of its low, and is currently having ATR of 0.74. This years performance is -25.34% while this quarters performance is 2.78%.

The ETFs YTD performance is 0%, the 1 year is 0% and the 3 year is 0%.

More notable recent BioShares Biotechnology Clinical Trials Fund (NASDAQ:BBC) news were published by: Marketwatch.com which released: BioShares Biotechnology Clinical Trials Fund on December 16, 2014, also Etfdailynews.com with their article: This Tiny Early-Stage Biotech ETF Was Q1s Best Performing Fund published on March 31, 2017, Globenewswire.com published: BioShares Biotechnology ETFs Complete Semi-Annual Rebalance and Recomposition on June 16, 2017. More interesting news about BioShares Biotechnology Clinical Trials Fund (NASDAQ:BBC) were released by: Forbes.com and their article: A More Viable Way To Invest In Top-Performing Biotech Stocks published on August 12, 2015 as well as Etftrends.coms news article titled: Silver Lining for Biotechnology ETFs After Pfizer Calls off Allergan Deal with publication date: April 06, 2016.

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 FREE daily email newsletter.

View post:
BioShares Biotechnology Clinical Trials (BBC) Rises 1.42% for Aug 11 - BZ Weekly

Researchers from the University of Chicago have successfully completed a proof-of-concept studywhere they managed to treat obesity in mice using a new type of gene therapy that utilized skin transplants. Human skin transplantation is a well-established clinical approach that has been used for the treatment of burns. However, using it as a vehicle to deliver genetic treatments for non-skin diseases could be revolutionary.

There are several reasons why skin stem cell therapy can be applicable to a broad type of diseases. The skin is the largest human organ, providing an easy access to cells needed for genetic treatments. The skin enables easy monitoring for potential off-target mutations resulting from the CRISPR intervention, as well as easy removal of such mutations, should they occur. Most importantly, proteins that are secreted by epidermal cells can reach the blood circulation and achieve desired therapeutic effects for the entire body.

In the study published this month, titledEngineered Epidermal Progenitor Cells Can Correct Diet-Induced Obesity and Diabetes,the scientists genetically engineered skin cells to be able to deliver GLP1 (glucagon-like peptide 1) - a hormone which regulates blood glucose. Then they developed a surgical procedure which allowed them to successfully engraft the new skin onto a mouse host. Finally, the genetically modified cells had a mechanism for releasing GLP1, which was regulated by a small amount of antibiotic that was fed to the mice. The treated group of obese mice significantly reduced their body weight and insulin resistance, compared to the control group.

Xiaoyang Wu, one of the authors of the study, says in an interview for ResearchGate:

We established a novel mouse to mouse skin transplantation system to test skin gene therapy. [] Our proof-of-concept work demonstrated its possible to use engineered skin grafts to treat many non-skin diseases. Clinical translation of our findings will be relatively easy, as skin transplantation in human patients has been well established and clinically used for treatment of burn wounds for many years.

Skin grafts are an exciting new avenue to explore for genetic treatments of diseases. They are relatively inexpensive compared to other types of gene therapy, the procedure is minimally invasive, and it has already been tested and proven safe.

See the rest here:
A Novel Form of Gene Therapy Can Treat Diabetes With Genetically Modified Skin Transplants - Big Think

Regenxbio has joined forces with investment firm OrbiMed and a new nonprofit foundation to create Prevail Therapeutics, a startup focused on new biologics and gene therapiesfor Parkinson's disease (PD).

Prevail will draw on the expertise of the Silverstein Foundation for Parkinson's with GBA, which concentrates on a particular form of the disease caused by mutations in the glucocerebrosidase gene.

The foundation was set up this year by OrbiMed's co-head of private equity Jonathan Silverstein, who was diagnosed with GBA-linked PD in February and is mobilizing efforts to discover a cure for the disease. Silverstein backed the foundation with $10 million of his own money, and is intent on accelerating research into PD with GBA as well as other forms of the disease.

Prevail says it will focus initially on research coming out of the lab of its co-founder and CEO Asa Abeliovich, M.D., Ph.D., who is on the faculty of Columbia University as well as being a scientific adviser to the Silverstein Foundation and co-founder of neurodegenerative disease biotech Alector.

By joining forces with Regenxbio, Prevail launches with an exclusive license to the gene therapy specialist's adeno-associated virus (AAV) based vector technology NAV AAV9 for PD and other neurodegenerative disorders.

Silverstein said that the NAV platform and Dr. Abeliovich's "deep expertise in the molecular mechanisms of neurodegeneration provides us with a promising opportunity to develop potential life-changing therapies for patients suffering from Parkinson's disease and other neurodegenerative diseases."

He told CNBC today that Prevail's board will also have some big names, including Leonard Bell, co-founder and former CEO of Alexion, OrbiMed venture partner and Alexion co-founder Steve Squinto and serial entrepreneur Peter Thompson of Silverback Therapeutics and Corvus Pharmaceuticals.

The new company will initially focus on GBA1, the most common of the PD mutations, which is estimated to be present in up to 10% of U.S. PD patients and perhaps 100,000 people worldwide. The disease mechanism linked to the mutationan accumulation of alpha-synuclein in the brainmay have implications for the broader PD population and other neurodegenerative diseases.

"Many of the drugs we are trying for Parkinson's with GBA may work in the broader Parkinson's population," said Silverstein. The aim will be to get drugs approved for use in GBA patients first, and then expand their use into other patient groups.

The work of the foundation is attracting investment from companies who are not even active in PD, with cancer specialist Celgene today pledging a grant of $5 million.

See original here:
Silverstein-backed startup will test gene therapy for Parkinson's - FierceBiotech

Pfizer is moving forward with plans to invest in a new clinical and commercial gene therapy manufacturing facility in Sanford, NC, but the work is still in the preliminary stages, said the company. A $100-million investment in the Sanford facilities is expected to create 40 jobs, according to a press release from the North Carolina governors office.

The facility will build upon a technology first developed at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Gene therapy focuses on highly specialized, one-time treatments that address the root cause of diseases caused by genetic mutation. The technology involves introducing genetic material into the body to deliver a correct copy of a gene to a patients cells to compensate for a defective or missing gene.

Gene therapy is an important area of focus for Pfizer. In 2016, the company acquired Bamboo Therapeutics, a privately held biotechnology company based in Chapel Hill focused on developing gene therapies for the potential treatment of patients with certain rare diseases related to neuromuscular conditions and those affecting the central nervous system. Pfizer also committed $4 million to support postdoctoral fellowships in North Carolina universities for training in gene therapy research, according to the press release.

A performance-based grant of $250,000 from the One North Carolina (NC) Fund will help facilitate Pfizers expansion. The One NC grant will formally be awarded to Wyeth Holdings, a wholly owned subsidiary of Pfizer. The One NC Fund provides financial assistance to local governments to help attract economic investment and to create jobs. Companies receive no money upfront and must meet job creation and capital investment targets to qualify for payment. All One NC grants require a matching grant from local governments and any award is contingent upon that condition being met.

Source: Pfizer, NC Governors Office

Continue reading here:
Pfizer Plans Gene Therapy Manufacturing Investment in North ... - Pharmaceutical Technology Magazine

A new consortium, led by Oxford BioMedica, will embark on a two-year, 2 million project focused on gene and cell therapy manufacturing.

Other partners include the Cell and Gene Therapy Catapult, Stratophase and Synthace, and the collaboration is co-funded by Innovate UK.

The aim of the consortium is to explore and apply novel advanced technologies to further evolve OXBs proprietary suspension LentiVector platform to deliver higher quality vectors for both clinical and commercial use. The project aims to deliver tangible benefits to patients by shortening the time-to-clinic and time-to-market as well as to improve the cost and access of bringing novel gene and cell therapies to patients.

Each partner in the collaboration holds proprietary technology and know-how that can be used to develop an innovative approach to viral vector manufacturing. The aims of this pioneering project are closely aligned with the current government national priorities to make the UK a global hub for manufacturing advanced therapies, which will benefit economic growth and create and retain more highly skilled employment.

John Dawson, CEO of Oxford BioMedica, commented: Cell and gene therapies offer unprecedented promise for the cure, treatment or long term management of disease and we are delighted that this consortium has been awarded funding from Innovate UK that will help to keep Oxford BioMedica, our partners and the UK at the forefront of innovation in industrial viral vector manufacturing."

Keith Thompson, CEO of Cell and Gene Therapy Catapult, added: Collaborating on developing improved process analytic technologies with our partners will help drive productivity in viral vector manufacturing, accelerating the development of these transformative advanced therapies. We have the opportunity to both transform patients lives and grow an industry in the UK that we can be proud of.

More here:
2m UK consortium to tackle gene therapy - PharmaTimes

A new paper from Duke molecular genetics and microbiology shows how pathogenic Cryptococcus fungi evolved from having many sexes to just two through 50 million years of gene swapping. Credit: Kara Manke

Biologically speaking, nearly every species on Earth has two opposite sexes, male and female. But with some fungi and other microbes, sex can be a lot more complicated. Some members of Cryptococcus, a family of fungus linked to human disease, can have tens of thousands of different mating types.

In a study appearing early online Aug. 11 in PLOS Biology, Duke researchers have mapped the evolutionary turning point that transformed the pathogenic form of Cryptococcus from an organism of many sexes to one with only two. They found that during evolution, a reshuffling of DNA known as translocation brought together separate chunks of sex-determining genes onto a single chromosome, essentially mimicking the human X or Y chromosome.

Surprisingly, they've shown that these crucial translocations occurred at the centromeres, the twisty ties that hold together chromosomes at the center of an x-shaped pair. These regions of the chromosome are so dense that they were once thought to be removed from recombination.

"Recombination at the centromere doesn't have to happen frequently, it just has to happen often enough that it punctuates the evolution of the organism," said Joseph Heitman, MD, PhD, senior study author and professor and chair of molecular genetics and microbiology at Duke University School of Medicine. "With each translocation, the genome is altered again and again, until you have evolved an entirely new species."

Scientists have been studying the evolution of sex chromosomes for more than a century. In the 1960's, Japanese-American geneticist and evolutionary biologist Susumu Ohno proposed a theory in which the genes determining sex first arose at various spots scattered across the entire genome, but over time were "captured" on the sex chromosomes. In humans, those chromosomes go by the familiar X and Y; in birds, they are known as Z and W; in moss, they are called U and V.

Regardless of the name or species, Heitman contends that some universal principles could govern the evolution of all sex chromosomes. He and an international team of researchers focused on the last common ancestor of the human pathogen Cryptococcus neoformans and its nearest sibling species, a non-pathogen called Cryptococcus amylolentus.

In C. amylolentus, dozens of genes at two different locations on the chromosomes control what's called a tetrapolar, or four-part, mating system. At one location or locus known as P/R, genes encode pheromones and pheromone receptors that help the fungus recognize compatible mating types. At the other locus, called HD, genes govern the development of sexual structures and reproductive spores.

The researchers sequenced the entire genome of C. amylolentus, mapping the location of all the genes as well as the centromeres on each of the organism's 14 chromosomes.

They found that the genomes had undergone quite a bit of rearrangement since the two species shared a common ancestor, at least 50 million years ago. For example, chromosome 1 of C. neoformans contained pieces of four different chromosomes from C. amylolentus, providing evidence of multiple translocations, some within the centromere.

"That was very surprising. The dogma has been that recombination is repressed in centromeric regions," said Sheng Sun, PhD, lead study author and assistant research professor at Duke University School of Medicine.

In the 1980's, a seminal paper by Duke colleague Tom Petes demonstrated recombination could occur across the centromeres in Saccharomyces cerevisiae, but some attributed the finding to a quirk of the favored model organism with its tiny point centromeres. But since then, other studies have emerged suggesting that the phenomenon was wider spread.

In this study, the researchers showed that in Cryptococcus amylolentus, the ancestral state, the P/R locus resided on chromosome 10 and the HD locus on chromosome 11. But in Cryptococcus neoformans, the evolved state, those loci ended up in one place. According to their model, multiple translocations deposited the two sex determinants on the same chromosome, with a centromere in between. Subsequent rearrangements put P/R and HD next to each other. The result was an organism with a bipolar mating system, much like the male and female sexes that embody most species.

"In any kind of model like this, you are thinking about what could have been the organization in the last common ancestor, which is now extinct so you can't know definitively," said Heitman. "But in each of these lineages, there are multiple evolutionary events that have occurred, and you can use genomics to turn back the hands of time and deduce the trajectory."

Heitman says their study suggests that other researchers should actively look for translocations, both in the expected locations as well as within centromeres. These chromosomal rearrangements are a common cause of birth defects and cancer in humans.

He and his colleagues are currently investigating whether similar translocations occur in the evolution of sex chromosomes in other fungal families, such as Ustilago and Malassezia.

Explore further: Evolution of the Sexes: What a Fungus Can Tell Us

More information: "Fungal genome and mating system transitions facilitated by chromosomal translocations involving intercentromeric recombination," Sheng Sun, Vikas Yadav, R. Blake Billmyre, Christina A. Cuomo, Minou Nowrousian, Liuyang Wang, Jean-Luc Souciet, Teun Boekhout, Betina Porcel, Patrick Wincker, Joshua A. Granek, Kaustuv Sanyal and Joseph Heitman. PLOS Biology, Early online Aug. 11, 2017. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.2002527

Journal reference: PLoS Biology

Provided by: Duke University

See the original post here:
Scientists map sex chromosome evolution in pathogenic fungi - Phys.Org

Bow

Alex Locatelli Alfano, son of Paul and Debra Alfano of Bow, graduated from The Derryfield School in Manchester. While at Derryfield, Alex was a four-year member of both the basketball and baseball teams. He was also an active member of Key Club, the literary magazine, Excerpt, and the Current Events Club. He will be attending the University of New England in the fall.

Gabrielle Megan Brummett, daughter of Russ and Michelle Brummett of Bow, graduated from The Derryfield School in Manchester. She will be attending Duke University to play Division I soccer in the fall. While at Derryfield, Gabi maintained high honors throughout her Derryfield academic career and volunteered with Key Club as a youth soccer coach and with Samba International. Gabi played four years of varsity girls soccer and made her mark on the soccer community locally and nationally. A two-time Gatorade State Player of the Year, Gabi led the Derryfield Cougars to two state championships in four years.

Abigail Wadewas named to the honor roll for the spring semester at the University of Dallas in Irving, Texas. She is an art major.

Harry Gunn earned a bachelor of science degree, summa cum laude, in chemical engineering from Syracuse University in Syracuse, N.Y. He will be attending the University of Pennsylvania Law School this fall.

Kevin Hayes, son of Dan and Ellen Hayes, was named to the deans list for the spring semester at the University of Rochester in Rochester, N.Y. He is a junior majoring in molecular genetics.

Abigail Painchaud was named to the deans list for the spring semester at Trinity College in Hartford, Conn.

Tyler Hussey was named to the deans list for the spring semester at Nichols College in Dudley, Mass. He is a human resources major.

Maeghan Connor was named to the deans list for the spring semester at St. Lawrence University in Canton, N.Y. She is a senior conservation biology and global studies major.

Kyle Zollo-Venecek, son of Daniel Venecek and Linda Zollo of Concord, was named to the deans list for the spring semester at Bates College in Lewiston, Maine. He is a chemistry major.

Flannery Black-Ingersoll, daughter of Douglas Ingersoll and Rebecca Black of Concord, was named to the deans list for the spring semester at Bates College in Lewiston, Maine. She is a mathematics and arts and visual culture major.

Anastasia Toumpas earned a degree in biology and environmental studies from Wells College in Aurora, N.Y. She was also named to the deans list for the spring semester.

Elizabeth Bailey was elected as secretary to the Board of Trustees of Leadership New Hampshire for the 2017-18 program year. She has been a member of the board since 2016.

View post:
People for Aug. 12, 2017 - Concord Monitor

VANCOUVER, BC / ACCESSWIRE / August 11, 2017 / Friday Night Inc. (Friday Night) (CSE:TGIF) (1QF.F) (OTC PINK: VPGDF) is pleased to announce that the Company has appointed Dr. Anthony R. Torres, MD to its board of advisors and would also like to provide an update on the genetics breeding program at the Company's 91% owned subsidiary, Alternative Medicine Association, LC. (AMA).

NEW GENETIC STRAIN

Over the past several months, AMA has been cross breeding existing strains in hopes of creating an improved cannabis product. This time consuming and laborious process has resulted in a new product offering that only AMA will be able to provide.

One of AMA's favorite prototype plants from the genetics program is a strain they have created and named ''Naughty Cookies''. Over the last year and thousands of test plants later, AMA created the new strain by crossing the high-THC and popular 'Girl Scout Cookies' strain with the high-yielding 'Juggernaut' male. The buds are very frosty, aesthetically pleasing and dense with light purple coloration.

This week AMA received the test results for the first lot. The cannabinoid content was higher than any strain AMA had seen in the last 3 years, and the THC content came back as 34.9%. Most fortunately, AMA had the foresight to cultivate over 70 of these plants in anticipation of great results. These will be flowered during the next growing cycle and so far are yielding over 2 pounds per light of dried flower.

The creator of this strain and Director of Operations, Mr. Ben Horner said, ''This gives us a competitive edge in a market which we now control. When new cultivators come on board, we will be the only producer with this strain. I feel it will inevitably become a favorite in Las Vegas.''

NEW ADVISOR TO THE COMPANY

Anthony R. Torres, M.D. with training at the National Institutes of Health, Yale University School of Medicine and the University of Utah, has considerable experience in the separation sciences of biological molecules. Anthony is widely published and has made a career not only in university research, but also in the biotechnology field including protein enrichment and advance separation processes. He is an inventor and owns several patents in the field. He is not new to the world of start-up companies and continues to be a pioneer in biotechnology. He also brings a deep understanding of the cannabis plant and its molecular structure.

Dr. Torres commented, ''I am very interested in applying traditional laboratory processes to the rapidly developing field of molecular cannabis. I believe that there are many positive applications for the natural benefits of this plant in modern medicine and that it has the potential to help hundreds of thousands, perhaps even millions of people.''

About Friday Night Inc.

Friday Night Inc. is a Canadian public company, which owns and controls cannabis and hemp based assets in Las Vegas Nevada. The company owns 91% of Alternative Medicine Association, LC (AMA), a licensed medical and adult-use cannabis cultivation and production facility that produces its own line of unique cannabis-based products and manufactures other third-party brands. Infused MFG, also a 91% owned subsidiary, produces hemp-based, CBD products, thoughtfully crafted of high quality organic botanical ingredients. Friday Night Inc. is focused on strengthening and expanding these operations within and outside of the state.

For further information please contact:Joe Bleackley, Corporate Communications604-674-4756Joe@FridayNightInc.com

Notice regarding Forward Looking Statements: This news release contains forward-looking statements. The use of any of the words ''anticipate,'' ''continue,'' ''estimate,'' ''expect,'' ''may,'' ''will,'' ''project,'' ''should,'' ''believe,'' and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. Although the Company believes that the expectations and assumptions on which the forward-looking statements are based are reasonable, undue reliance should not be placed on the forward-looking statements because the Company can give no assurance that they will prove to be correct. This news release includes forward-looking statements with respect to the entering into a definitive agreement, the future exercise of the option regarding the vape lounge and the regulatory environment in Canada. Since forward-looking statements address future events and conditions, by their very nature they involve inherent risks and uncertainties. These statements speak only as of the date of this news release. Actual results could differ materially from those currently anticipated due to a number of factors and risks including failure to enter into a definitive agreement, inability to attract new customers in Nevada as a result of the license, the inability of the Company to take advantage of the license arrangement and various risk factors discussed in the Company's disclosure documents, which can be found under the Company's profile on http://www.sedar.com. Friday Night undertakes no obligation to update publicly or revise any forward-looking information, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by law or the Canadian Securities Exchange.

Read More

SOURCE: Friday Night Inc.

See the rest here:
Friday Night Inc. Announces Dr. Torres Advisor and Genetics Update - Yahoo News

Product News Aug 11, 2017

Image Credit: Integrated DNA Technologies

Integrated DNA Technologies (IDT) will host a webinar titled "Increase on-target specificity of CRISPR genome editing using a novel, high-fidelity Cas9 nuclease on August 16, 2017. The webinar will be presented by Dr Chris Vakulskas, Staff Scientist, Molecular Genetics at IDT. Dr Vakulskas will present data from the development of the novel Alt-R S.p. HiFi Cas9 Nuclease 3NLS, as well as describe its benefits for improved specificity without compromising on-target activity.

Despite its revolutionary impact on life science research, the CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing system suffers from concerns related to target specificity, particularly for researchers considering therapeutic applications. Until now, modifications to guide RNAs and Cas9 proteins have been used to reduce off-target effects, but many of these have also reduced on-target editing. In this webinar, Dr Vakulskas will describe how his team developed the novel Alt-R S.p. HiFi Cas9 Nuclease 3NLS through an intensive screening and selection process. Webinar attendees will learn about the benefits and usefulness of this this novel nuclease as part of a ribonucleoprotein (RNP) complex to mitigate unwanted off-target gene editing.

Like what you just read? You can find similar content on the communities below.

To personalize the content you see on Technology Networks homepage, Log In or Subscribe for Free

Here is the original post:
Stay On-Target With Novel, High-Fidelity Cas9 - Technology Networks

Some of you may remember back to the fun days when taking a pig to the fair was the highlight of summer. Early on I wrote about my sons exercising their pigs in the roadside ditch when the pigs started chasing cars. Of course, the more the pigs chased the car, the driver slowed down which of course egged the pigs on to run even faster alongside.

Now the 4-H swine business has become a much more serious project. Readers may remember that it wasnt only a couple years ago that all 4-H poultry projects in Ohio were banned from exhibition because of an epidemic of avian influenza a disease that might have easily caused an epidemic in humans.

It wasnt until the days of checking DNA and genomic testing did anyone realize the different strains of influenza. (I call it a strain even though a more appropriate term is genotype.) Influenza or flu as most people call it has a long history, even though most of us chalk it up as one of those diseases that might cause us to stay home from work or school for a couple of days.

The 1918 influenza outbreak caused a pandemic worldwide. In the spring of 1918 (and then a reappearance in the fall) this pandemic caused an estimated 50 million human deaths worldwide. So influenza isnt anything to trifle with, especially in this age of around-the-world travel. It is a virus that can jump back and forth between humans, pigs, poultry, and wild birds then back again.

You would need to live in a shoebox to not know about the influenza outbreak in pigs that occurred recently at the Clinton County Fair. What you may not know is that influenza in pigs at the Clinton Country Fair appears to actually contain some human DNA genetic code rather than just the normal flu virus found in pigs.

Here are some basic facts. From early in my career until recent years, influenza was primarily classified as H1N1. Now with molecular genetics and DNA analysis we know that the virus has been changing. It has mutated to several different new types. For instance just to name a few there are: H3N2, H7N8, H3N5 and then we could also discuss low-pathogen versus high pathogen influenza. You get the idea, as fast as the virus can modify itself to attack a vulnerable animal or a human, it will.

Formerly swine vaccines were primarily for H1N1. You can deduce that a vaccine for a specific genotype may be very effective. We cant vaccinate our way out of having either sick animals or sick humans if the latest infection is a different genotype.

The current strategy experts have espoused is biosecurity. This refers to use a common sense approach towards eliminating or minimizing exposure when evaluating the risk of contracting a disease in either humans or animals. Sick pigs, just like sick children, should have limited risk or no risk of exposing others. Dont send a sick pig with a fever to the fair just as you shouldnt send a sick child to school.

Someone took a sick pig with a fever to the Clinton County fair. Authorities know this because pigs started spiking fevers immediately upon arrival rather than the virus incubating several days before illness appeared. Fortunately the fair veterinarian recognized early on that too many pigs were getting sick and called for diagnostic expertise from the virologists at the State Animal Diagnostic Lab in Reynoldsburg. They responded immediately.

Nasal swabs confirmed a diagnosis of influenza H3N2. Over the next couple of days more pigs tested positive demonstrating that an epidemic had started. Approximately 68 pigs were confirmed ill of the slightly less than 300 pigs in the swine pavilion. Since then, the CDC in Atlanta has been doing further DNA sequencing to pinpoint its precise anatomy. A human DNA sequence has also been identified in the virus.

Dr. Tony Forshey, the state veterinarian, and his team quarantined the barn early in the course of the disease. The team made the decision to allow the youth to show their projects while in quarantine as the show arena was adjacent to the pig pens. Parents were allowed to attend to watch the 4-Hers show their animals, but other interested parties were excluded. At the conclusion of the show, the pigs were then sent to a packing plant for processing into meat a normal sequence of events after most county fair shows.

News outlets reported faster than the influenza could spread that the pigs were destroyed and the barn burned down. Talk about fake news! What a bunch of baloney, or perhaps I should say sausage, the pig kind. No pigs were destroyed at the fair and no barns burned. After the show the pigs were shipped to a packing company for processing into meat. With standard processing and inspection, all of the meat from chops to bacon was determined to be safe to consume. Contrary to what was reported by several other news outlets, the barn was not burned but cleaned and sanitized. Since those early reports news organizations did get their stories straight.

Some had several thousand dollars for their pigs. These exhibitors were angry because their plans were to ship these high dollar porkers from fair to fair and win as many prizes as possible. Perhaps they may have even planned on a climax at the State Fair. If their pig was a champion, it would bring a lot of recognition and money in the Sale of Champions.

These individuals would have chosen to ignore the health risks. Should these infected pigs be allowed to move to other show premises, a major epidemic was certain to occur at every exhibition the pigs appeared and likely start a human health crisis. Ohios commercial swine industry would also have been put to a serious health and economic risk. It is readily apparent that protecting all Ohioans and the commercial swine industry is critical. There are over two million commercial breeding and market swine in Ohio supplying high quality protein in the form of meat to consumers.

I grew up showing pigs, my sons showed pigs and my granddaughters are showing pigs next month. Today it is most important to protect the commercial swine industry rather than gunners going for the big prize. There is more to life than the big prize, the accompanying recognition and a big paycheck for a few individuals.

Dr. Forshey took a lot of heat for quarantining those Clinton County pigs, allowing them to show their pigs, then shutting down the swine exhibition and sending the pigs to slaughter. In view of the virus containing aberrant human DNA code, allowing the pigs to move onto other exhibitions may have started a human influenza epidemic. In my estimation he made a wise decision for the Ohio citizens and also the swine industry, but yet was compassionate to 4-Hers in Clinton County. Kudos to Dr. Forshey and his team!

The rest is here:
Learn how influenza topped fake news - Ohio's Country Journal and Ohio Ag Net

The humble kitchen sponge may not exactly be the cleanest thing around, but it's still your trusted tool for dealing with that sink of dirty dishes. So, it cant be that bad, right? Err Actually, those innocent-looking little sponges can be some of the most bacteria-packed things in your house.

Thats according to a recent study, published in the journal Scientific Reports, which analyzed the bacteria in sponges that people regularly used to clean their kitchens. For the study, researchers looked at the genetic information of microbes that live in the sponges and found 362 different species of bacteria in 14 sponges.

Granted, exposure to some bacteria can be good for you, and it takes a lot of the less-friendly types to actually make you sick. But in this study, five of the 10 most common species of bacteria in the sponges were kinds that can potentially cause infections, including three species in the Acinetobacter genus, for instance, which can cause pneumonia.

So, you should probably just clean your sponges more often, right? Not necessarily. The study also found that two of the most common bacteria found on the spongesChryseobacterium hominis and Moraxella osloensiswere more likely to be resistant to cleaning (including both conventional washing with hot, soapy water and microwaving). In fact, these bacteria actually thrived in sponges that were cleaned regularly. Fantastic.

The reason why cleaning the sponge doesn't solve the problem is a little confusing, but it comes down to simple math, Michael G. Schmidt, Ph.D., professor and vice chair of the department of microbiology and immunology at Medical University of South Carolina, tells SELF. The majority of disinfectants are designed to reduce the concentration of bacteria by 99.9 percent. Although we tend to assume that's "basically 100 percent," it's really not.

If there are 10 million bacteria associated with the sponge and the disinfectant did its job, a 99.9 percent reduction would still leave approximately 10,000 bacteria in the sponge, Schmidt explains. And those that escape the disinfectant end up with less competition and can, therefore, proliferate. Ultimately, its not that surprising that there were still microbes in the nooks and crannies of the sponge, he says.

It's also a good idea to pay attention to where you put your sponge. For most bacteria to grow and maintain that growth, they need moisture, Daniel Hassett, Ph.D., professor of molecular genetics at the University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, tells SELF. A lot of people let their sponges sit on top of the sink, and theres still moisture there, he points out. Ideally, you should put your sponge on an elevated, highly aerated area, he says, like a little soap dish with holes in the bottom so it won't just sit in moisture.

When it comes to the bacteria on your sponge, keep a few factors in mind before freaking out. The types of microbes you're dealing with, how concentrated they are, and their virulence factors (molecules that add to their ability to infect you) all affect the chances of you getting sick, Schmidt says. For the most part, your immune system will fight these bacteria off. But, occasionally, a nasty pathogen can slip through, he says. The chances of illness are always present, but if you eat well [and] get plenty of rest, your immune system and microbes will be able to resist the majority of the bugs in the sponge. If you have a compromised immune system for whatever reason, though, you may be more likely to get sick from these and other pathogens.

And, according to Hassett, your odds of getting sick are virtually zero if you wash your hands well after using a sponge. Even if you use a tainted sponge to clean a plate, a lot of that bacteria will be killed as it dries.

For the vast majority of us, the go-to sanitization methods are still totally fine. The dishwasher is often considered the best way, since heat, soap, and water work quite well with each other to inactivate bacteria, Schmidt says.

And you can still microwave your (wet) sponge for a minute or two. Schmidt says the basic idea makes sense, but your results may vary based on the thickness of your sponge and concentration of the bacteria. "Steam needs to reach the microbeand effectively render the [bacteria] to an inactive state," he explains. Think about it like trying to make the perfect baked potato: Some microwaves can do it perfectly with a single presetting, while others require a little more fiddling. That's because both the power of the microwave and the thickness of the spud can vary. And, just like a microwaved potato, your sponge will be piping hot when it comes outso proceed with caution. Also, don't forget to wet the sponge before putting it in the microwave or you will set a small fire.

You can also make sure your sponge has a chance to fully dry out before you use it again. So remember to move it onto an elevated holder that allows it to drain.

Its also best to avoid using sponges to clean up meat and fish, since those foods are more likely to carry bacteria. Ideally, sponges are great for wiping up crumbs, Dr. Schmidt says. But, if you use them to decontaminate your counter or cutting board, be sure to spray a disinfectant on the dirty surface first, let it sit for a moment, and then use your sponge to wipe up the dead microbes.

And, of course, dont keep your sponge forever. The studys researchers recommend tossing them after a week. Yes, a week.

Related:

You May Also Like: 12 Healthy Foods You Should Always Keep in Your Pantry

Go here to see the original:
Your Sponge Holds a Disgusting Amount of Bacteria, BTW | SELF - SELF

Early phase Northwestern Medicine research published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences has demonstrated a potential new therapeutic strategy for treating deadly glioblastoma brain tumors.

The strategy involves using lipid polymer-based nanoparticles to deliver molecules to the tumors, where the molecules shut down key cancer drivers called brain tumor-initiating cells (BTICs).

BTICs are malignant brain tumor populations that underlie the therapy resistance, recurrence and unstoppable invasion commonly encountered by glioblastoma patients after the standard treatment regimen of surgical resection, radiation and chemotherapy, explained the studys first author, Dou Yu, MD, PhD, research assistant professor of Neurological Surgery.

Using mouse models of brain tumors implanted with BTICs derived from human patients, the scientists injected nanoparticles containing small interfering RNA (siRNA) short sequences of RNA molecules that reduce the expression of specific cancer-promoting proteins directly into the tumor. In the new study, the strategy stopped tumor growth and extended survival when the therapy was administered continuously through an implanted drug infusion pump.

This major progress, although still at a conceptual stage, underscores a new direction in the pursuit of a cure for one of the most devastating medical conditions known to mankind, said Yu, who collaborated on the research with principal investigator Maciej Lesniak, MD, Michael J. Marchese Professor of Neurosurgery and chair of the Department of Neurological Surgery.

Glioblastoma is particularly difficult to treat because its genetic makeup varies from patient to patient. This new therapeutic approach would make it possible to deliver siRNAs to target multiple cancer-causing gene products simultaneously in a particular patients tumor.

In this study, the scientists tested siRNAs that target four transcription factors highly expressed in many glioblastoma tissues but not all. The therapy worked against classes of glioblastoma BTICs with high levels of those transcription factors, while other classes of the cancer did not respond.

This paints a picture for personalized glioblastoma therapy regimens based on tumor profiling, Yu said. Customized nanomedicine could target the unique genetic signatures in any specific patient and potentially lead to greater therapeutic benefits.

The strategy could also apply to other medical conditions related to the central nervous system not just brain tumors.

Degenerative neurological diseases or even psychiatric conditions could potentially be the therapeutic candidates for this multiplexed delivery platform, Yu said.

Before scientists can translate this proof-of-concept research to humans, they will need to continue refining the nanomedicine platform and evaluating its long-term safety. Still, the findings from this new research provide insight for further investigation.

Nanomedicine provides a unique opportunity to advance a therapeutic strategy for a disease without a cure. By effectively targeting brain tumor-initiating stem cells responsible for cancer recurrence, this approach opens up novel translational approaches to malignant brain cancer, Lesniak summed up.

This article has been republished frommaterialsprovided by Northwestern University. Note: material may have been edited for length and content. For further information, please contact the cited source.

Reference

Dou Yu, Omar F. Khan, Mario L. Suv, Biqin Dong, Wojciech K. Panek, Ting Xiao, Meijing Wu, Yu Han, Atique U. Ahmed, Irina V. Balyasnikova, Hao F. Zhang, Cheng Sun, Robert Langer, Daniel G. Anderson, Maciej S. Lesniak. Multiplexed RNAi therapy against brain tumor-initiating cells via lipopolymeric nanoparticle infusion delays glioblastoma progression. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2017; 201701911 DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1701911114

Originally posted here:
siRNA Treatment for Brain Cancer Stops Tumor Growth in Mouse Model - Technology Networks

With a jolt from a tiny chip, humdrum skin cells may transform into medical mavericks.

A small electrical pulse blasts open tiny pores in cells and zaps in fragments of DNA or RNA loaded in the chips nanochannels. Those genetic deliveries then effectively reprogram the skin cells to act like other types of cells and repair damaged tissue. In early experiments on mice, researchers coaxed skin cells to act like brain cells. They also restored blood flow to a rodents injured limb by prompting skin cells to grow into new blood vessels.

The technology, published this week in Nature Nanotechnology, is still a long way from confirmed clinical applications in humans. But, the Ohio State researchers behind the chip are optimistic that it may one day perform myriad medical featsincluding healing severe injuries, restoring diseased organs, erasing brain damage, and even turning back the clock on aging tissues.

The researchers, led by regenerative medicine expert Chandan Sen and biomolecular engineer L. James Lee, expect to begin clinical trials next year.

The concept is very simple, Lee said in a press statement. As a matter of fact, we were even surprised how it worked so well. In my lab, we have ongoing research trying to understand the mechanism and do even better. So, this is the beginning, more to come.

Their concept is similar to other cell-based regenerative therapies under development, but it skips some pesky steps. Some other methods explored by researchersand dubious clinicsinvolve harvesting adult cells from patients, reprograming them to revert to stem cells, then injecting those cells back into patients, where they develop into a needed cell type.

But this setup has snags. Researchers often use viruses to deliver the genetic elements that reprogram the cells, which have caused cancer in some animal studies. The method also requires a lot of manipulation of cells in lab, adding complications. Its unclear if the suspect stem cell clinics are even successful at reprogramming cells.

The method used by Lee, Sen, and colleagues ditches the need for a virus and for any cellular handling. The electrical pulse opens pores in cells that allow for direct genetic deliverya process called electroporation. The researchers skipped the need to make stem cells by using preexisting methods of converting one cell type directly into a different one. Generally, this works by introducing bits of genetic material that code for gene regulators key to a specific cell type. Once delivered, these regulators can switch genes on or off so cells can start acting like the different cell type. Such a method has been worked out for creatingliver, brain, and vascular cellsfrom other cell types.

Finally, the researchers method also all takes place on a patch of skin on a living subject, potentially directly where its neededno cell harvesting or lab manipulations are required. (That said, the researchers note that future therapies could use skin patches to generate specific cell types that can then be transferred to other locations in the body if needed.)

So far, the researchers have dabbled with making brain cells and vasculature cells from skin cells. In early experiments, their direct delivery proved effective at converting the cells. The researcher verified that the converted cells mirrored normal brain and vasculature cells' gene expression profilesthe pattern of genes they have turned on and off.

In their ultimate test, the researchers severed leg arteries in ahandful of mice. Then a researcher placed over the injuries nanochips loaded with genetic ingredients for converting skin cells to vasculature cells. The conversion reached cells deep within the skin layers. After a week, the researchers saw more blood flow and less tissue death in the treated mice compared withcontrol animals that werent treated.

Much work still needs to be done to test the idea and prove it's effective for certain treatments. But the researchers are optimistic. They conclude in the study that the technology has the potential to ultimately enable the use of a patients own tissue as a prolific immunosurveilled bioreactor.

Nature Nanotechnology, 2017. DOI: 10.1038/nnano.2017.134 (About DOIs).

Read the original:
Heal thyself: Skin-zapping chip aims to reprogram cells for tissue repair - Ars Technica

This article originally ran on Ensia.

Which is more disruptive to a plant: genetic engineering or conventional breeding?

It often surprises people to learn that GE commonly causes less disruption to plants than conventional techniques of breeding. But equally profound is the realization that the latest GE techniques, coupled with a rapidly expanding ability to analyze massive amounts of genetic material, allow us to make super-modest changes in crop plant genes that will enable farmers to produce more food with fewer adverse environmental impacts. Such super-modest changes are possible with CRISPR-based genome editing, a powerful set of new genetic tools that is leading a revolution in biology.

My interest in GE crops stems from my desire to provide more effective and sustainable plant disease control for farmers worldwide. Diseases often destroy 10 to 15 percent of potential crop production, resulting in global losses of billions of dollars annually. The risk of disease-related losses provides an incentive to farmers to use disease-control products such as pesticides.

One of my strongest areas of expertise is in the use of pesticides for disease control. Pesticides certainly can be useful in farming systems worldwide, but they have significant downsides from a sustainability perspective. Used improperly, they can contaminate foods. They can pose a risk to farm workers. And they must be manufactured, shipped and applied all processes with a measurable environmental footprint. Therefore, I am always seeking to reduce pesticide use by offering farmers more sustainable approaches to disease management.

It often surprises people to learn that GE commonly causes less disruption to plants than conventional techniques of breeding.

What follows are examples of how minimal GE changes can be applied to make farming more environmentally friendly by protecting crops from disease. They represent just a small sampling of the broad landscape of opportunities for enhancing food security and agricultural sustainability that innovations in molecular biology offer today.

Genetically altering crops the way these examples demonstrate creates no cause for concern for plants or people. Mutations occur naturally every time a plant makes a seed; in fact, they are the very foundation of evolution. All of the food we eat has all kinds of mutations, and eating plants with mutations does not cause mutations in us.

A striking example of how a tiny genetic change can make a big difference to plant health is the strategy of "knocking out" a plant gene that microorganisms can benefit from. Invading microorganisms sometimes hijack certain plant molecules to help themselves infect the plant. A gene that produces such a plant molecule is known as a susceptibility gene.

We can use CRISPR-based genome editing to create a "targeted mutation" in a susceptibility gene. A change of as little as a single nucleotide in the plants genetic material the smallest genetic change possible can confer disease resistance in a way that is absolutely indistinguishable from natural mutations that can happen spontaneously. Yet if the target gene and mutation site are carefully selected, a one-nucleotide mutation may be enough to achieve an important outcome.

A substantial body of research shows proof-of-concept that a knockout of a susceptibility gene can increase resistance in plants to a wide variety of disease-causing microorganisms. An example that caught my attention pertained to powdery mildew of wheat, because fungicides (pesticides that control fungi) are commonly used against this disease. While this particular genetic knockout is not yet commercialized, I personally would rather eat wheat products from varieties that control disease through genetics than from crops treated with fungicides.

Plant viruses are often difficult to control in susceptible crop varieties. Conventional breeding can help make plants resistant to viruses, but sometimes it is not successful.

Early approaches to engineering virus resistance in plants involved inserting a gene from the virus into the plants genetic material. For example, plant-infecting viruses are surrounded by a protective layer of protein, called the "coat protein." The gene for the coat protein of a virus called papaya ring spot virus was inserted into papaya. Through a process called RNAi, this empowers the plant to inactivate the virus when it invades. GE papaya has been a spectacular success, in large part saving the Hawaiian papaya industry.

Mutations occur naturally every time a plant makes a seed; in fact, they are the very foundation of evolution.

Through time, researchers discovered that even just a very small fragment from one viral gene can stimulate RNAi-based resistance if precisely placed within a specific location in the plants DNA. Even better, they found we can "stack" resistance genes engineered with extremely modest changes in order to create a plant highly resistant to multiple viruses. This is important because, in the field, crops are often exposed to infection by several viruses.

Does eating this tiny bit of a viral gene sequence concern me? Absolutely not, for many reasons, including:

Microorganisms often can overcome plants biochemical defenses by producing molecules called effectors that interfere with those defenses. Plants respond by evolving proteins to recognize and disable these effector molecules. These recognition proteins are called "R" proteins ("R" standing for "resistance"). Their job is to recognize the invading effector molecule and trigger additional defenses. A third interesting approach, then, to help plants resist an invading microorganism is to engineer an R protein so that it recognizes effector molecules other than the one it evolved to detect. We can then use CRISPR to supply a plant with the very small amount of DNA needed to empower it to make this protein.

This approach, like susceptibility knockouts, is quite feasible, based on published research. Commercial implementation will require some willing private- or public-sector entity to do the development work and to face the very substantial and costly challenges of the regulatory process.

The three examples here show that extremely modest engineered changes in plant genetics can result in very important benefits. All three examples involve engineered changes that trigger the natural defenses of the plant. No novel defense mechanisms were introduced in these research projects, a fact that may appeal to some consumers. The wise use of the advanced GE methods illustrated here, as well as others described elsewhere, has the potential to increase the sustainability of our food production systems, particularly given the well-established safety of GE crops and their products for consumption.

Visit link:
When genetic engineering is the environmentally friendly choice - GreenBiz