header logo image


Page 952«..1020..951952953954..960970..»

First human embryo editing experiment in US ‘corrects’ gene for heart condition – Washington Post

August 5th, 2017 4:41 pm

Scientists have successfully edited the DNA of human embryos to erase a heritable heart condition that isknown for causingsudden death in young competitive athletes, cracking openthe doors toa controversial new era in medicine.

This is the first time gene editing on human embryos has been conducted in theUnited States. Researcherssaid in interviews this weekthat theyconsider their work very basic. The embryos were allowed to grow for only a few days, and there was never any intention to implant them to create a pregnancy. But they also acknowledged that they will continue to move forward with the science, with theultimate goal of being able to correct disease-causing genes in embryos that will develop into babies.

News of the remarkable experiment began to circulate last week, but details became public Wednesday with a paper in the journal Nature.

The experiment is the latest example of how the laboratory tool known as CRISPR (orClustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats), a type of molecular scissors, is pushing the boundaries of our ability to manipulate life, and it has been receivedwith both excitement and horror.

The most recent work is particularly sensitive because it involves changes to the germ line that is, genes that could be passed on to future generations. The United States forbids the use of federal funds for embryo research, and theFood and Drug Administration is prohibited from considering any clinical trials involving genetic modifications that can be inherited. A report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine in February urged caution in applying CRISPR to human germ-line editingbut laid out conditions by whichresearch should continue. The new study abides by those recommendations.

This animation depicts the CRISPR-Cas9 method for genome editing a powerful new technology with many applications in biomedical research, including the potential to treat human genetic disease or provide cosmetic enhancements. (Feng Zhang/McGovern Institute for Brain Research/MIT)

Shoukhrat Mitalipov, one of the lead authors of the paper and a researcher at Oregon Health & Science University, said that he is conscious ofthe need for a larger ethical and legal discussion about genetic modification of humans but that his team's work isjustified because it involves correcting genes rather than changing them.

Really we didnt edit anything. Neither did we modify anything, Mitalipov said. Our program is toward correcting mutant genes.

Alta Charo, a bioethicist at the University of Wisconsin at Madison who is co-chair of the National Academies committee that looked at gene editing,said that concerns about the work that have been circulating in recent days are overblown.

What this represents is a fascinating, important and rather impressive incremental step toward learning how to edit embryos safely and precisely, she said. However, no matter what anybody says, this is not the dawn of the era of the designer baby. She said that characteristics that some parents might desire, such as intelligence and athleticism, are influenced by multiple genes and that researchers don't understand all the components of how such characteristics areinherited, much less have the ability to redesign them.

The research involved eggs from 12 healthy female donors and sperm from a male volunteer who carries the MYBPC3 gene, which causes hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. HCM is a disease that causes an abnormal thickening of the heart muscle butcan cause no symptoms and remain undetected until it causes sudden cardiac death. There's no way to prevent or cure it, and it affects1 in 500 people worldwide.

Around the time the sperm was injected into the eggs, researchers snipped out the gene that causes the disease. The result was far more successful than the researchers expected: As the embryo's cells began to divide and multiply, a huge number appearedto be repairing themselves by using the normal, non-mutated copy of the gene from the women'sgenetic material. In all, they saw that about 72 percent were corrected, a very high number. Researchers also noticed that theredidn't seem to be any off-target changes in the DNA, which has been a major safety concern ofgene-editing research.

Mitalipov said he hoped the technique could one day be applied to a wide variety of genetic diseases and that one of the team'snext targets may be the BRCA gene mutation, which is associated with breast cancer.

The first published work involving human embryos, reported in 2015, was done in Chinaand targeted a gene that leads to theblood disorder beta thalassemia. But those embryos were abnormal and nonviable, and there were far fewer than the number used in the U.S. study.

Juan Carlos Izpisua Belmonte, a researcher at the Salk Institute who is also a co-author on the new study, saidthat there are many advantages to treating an embryo rather than a child or an adult. When dealing with an embryo in its earliest stages, only a few cells are involved, while in a more mature human being there aretrillions of cells in the body and potentially millions that must be corrected to eradicate traces of a disease.

Izpisua Belmonte said that even if the technology is perfected, it could deal with only a small subset of human diseases.

Idont want to be negative with our own discoveries, but it is important to inform the public of what this means, he said. In my opinion the percentage of people that would benefit from this at the current way the world is rather small. For the process to make a difference, the child would have to be born through in vitro fertilization or IVF and the parentswould have to know the child has the gene for a disease to get it changed. But the vast majority ofchildren are conceived the natural way, and this correction technology would not work in utero.

For years, some policymakers, historians and scientists have been calling for a voluntary moratorium on the modification of the DNA of human reproductive cells. The most prominent expression of concern came in the form of a 2015 letter signed by CRISPR co-inventor Jennifer Doudna, Nobel Laureate David Baltimore and 16 other prominent scientists. They warned that eliminating a genetic disease could have unintended consequences on human genetics, society and even the environment far into the future.

On Wednesday,Marcy Darnovsky, executive director of the Center for Genetics and Society, warned that the O.H.S.U. research would result in fertility clinics offering genetic upgrades to those able to afford them.

Once those commercial dynamics kick in, we could all too easily find ourselves in a world where some peoples children are considered biologically superior to the rest of us, she said in a statement. We need to ask ourselves whether we want to add that new kind of excuse for extreme social disparities to the ones we already tolerate.

Researchers who worked on the heart-condition experiment appear to have differing views on where their work is headed.

Paula Amato, a reproductiveendocrinologist with O.H.S.U., was excited about the idea of being able to editout diseases before birth. She said that while pre-implantation genetic screening of embryos is now available, it isn't perfect.She talked about how one of her patients went through three cycles of in vitro fertilizationbut all theeggs that were harvested hadthegene mutation that causes diseases.

With gene correction technology, Amatosaid, we could have rescued some of those embryos.

ButIzpisua Belmonte said he is focusing on using thefindings from this study to further research into gene modifications during a pregnancy or after birth into adulthood.

Ifeel that the practical thing to do is deal with the diseases people have, not with the disease they may have, he said.

Mitalipov said he hopes regulators will provide more guidance on what should or should not be allowed.

Otherwise, he said, this technology will be shifted to unregulated areas, which shouldnt be happening.

This story has been updated.

Read more:

A new CRISPR breakthrough could lead to simpler, cheaper disease diagnosis

Scientists debate the ethics of CRISPR

Ethicists urge caution in applying CRISPR to humans

Jennifer Doudna ponders 'what it means to be human' on the frontier of gene editing

More:
First human embryo editing experiment in US 'corrects' gene for heart condition - Washington Post

Read More...

Genetics expert discusses creating ground rules for human germline editing – Medical Xpress

August 5th, 2017 4:41 pm

A Stanford professor of genetics discusses the thinking behind a formal policy statement endorsing the idea that researchers continue editing genes in human germ cells.

A team of genetics experts has issued a policy statement recommending that research on editing human genes in eggs, sperm and early embryos continue, provided the work does not result in a human pregnancy.

Kelly Ormond, MS, professor of genetics at the Stanford School of Medicine, is one of three lead authors of the statement, which provides a framework for regulating the editing of human germ cells. Germ cells, a tiny subset of all the cells in the body, give rise to eggs and sperm. Edits to the genes of germ cells are passed on to offspring.

The statement, published today in the American Journal of Human Genetics, was jointly prepared by the American Society for Human Genetics and four other human genetics organizations, including the National Society of Genetic Counselors, and endorsed by another six, including societies in the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, Africa and Asia.

Germline gene editing raises a host of technical and ethical questions that, for now, remain largely unanswered. The ASHG policy statement proposes that federal funding for germline genome editing research not be prohibited; that germline editing not be done in any human embryo that would develop inside a woman; and that future clinical germline genome editing in humans not proceed without a compelling medical rationale, evidence supporting clinical use, ethical justification, and a process incorporating input from the public, patients and their families, and other stakeholders.

Ormond recently discussed the issues that prompted the statement's creation with writer Jennie Dusheck.

Q: Why did you think it was important to issue a statement now?

Ormond: Much of the interest arose a couple of years ago when a group of researchers in China did a proof of principle study demonstrating that they could edit the genes of human embryos.

The embryos weren't viable [meaning they could not lead to a baby], but I think that paper worried people. Gene editing in human germ cells is not technically easy, and it's not likely to be a top choice for correcting genetic mutations. Still, it worried us that somebody was starting to do it.

We've been able to alter genes for many years now, but the new techniques, such as CRISPR/Cas9, that have come out in the past five years have made it a lot easier, and things are moving fast. It's now quite realistic to do human germline gene editing, and some people have been calling for a moratorium on such work.

Our organization, the American Society of Human Genetics, decided that it would be important to investigate the ethical issues and put out a statement regarding germline genome editing, and what we thought should happen in the near term moving forward.

As we got into the process, we realized that this had global impact because much of the work was happening outside of the United States. And we realized that if someone, anywhere in the world, were moving forward on germline genome editing, that it was going to influence things more broadly. So we reached out to many other countries and organizations to see if we could get global buy-in to the ideas we were thinking about.

Q: Are there regulations now in place that prevent researchers from editing human embryos that could result in a pregnancy and birth?

Ormond: Regulations vary from country to country, so research that is illegal in one country could be legal in another. That's part of the challenge and why we thought it was so important to have multiple countries involved in this statement.

Also, since 1995 the United States has had regulations against federal funding for research that creates or destroys human embryos. We worry that restricting federal funding on things like germline editing will drive the research underground so there's less regulation and less transparency. We felt it was really important to say that we support federal funding for this kind of research.

Q: Is germline editing in humans useful and valuable?

Ormond: Germline editing doesn't have many immediate uses. A lot of people argue that if you're trying to prevent genetic disease (as opposed to treating it), there are many other ways to do that. We have options like prenatal testing or IVF and pre-implantation genetic testing and then selecting only those embryos that aren't affected. For the vast majority of situations, those are feasible options for parents concerned about a genetic disease.

The number of situations where you couldn't use pre-implantation genetic diagnosis to avoid having an affected child are so few and far between. For example, if a parent was what we call a homozygote for a dominant condition such as BRCA1 or Huntington's disease, or if both members of the couple were affected with the same recessive condition, like cystic fibrosis or sickle cell anemia, it wouldn't be possible to have a biologically related child that didn't carry that gene, not unless germline editing were used.

Q: What makes germline editing controversial?

Ormond: There are families out there who see germline editing as a solution to some genetic conditions. For example, during a National Academy of Sciences meeting in December of 2015, a parent stood up and said, "I have a child who has a genetic condition. Please let this move forward; this is something that could help."

But I also work in disability studies, as it relates to genetic testing, and there are many individuals who feel strongly that genetic testing or changing genes in any way makes a negative statement about them and their worth. So this topic really edges into concerns about eugenics and about what can happen once we have the ability to change our genes.

Germline gene editing impacts not just the individual whose genes are edited, but their future offspring and future generations. We need to listen to all of those voices and try to set a path that takes all of them into account.

That's a huge debate right now. A lot of people say, "Let's not mess around with the germline. Let's only edit genes after a person is born with a medical condition." Treating an existing medical condition is different from changing someone's genes from the start, in the germline, when you don't know what else you're going to influence.

Q: There was a paper recently about gene editing that caused mutations in excessive numbers of nontargeted genes, so called "off-target effects." Did that result surprise you or change anything about what you were thinking?

Ormond: I think part of the problem is that this research is moving very fast. One of our biggest challenges was that you can't do a good ethical assessment of the risks and benefits of a treatment or technology if you don't know what those risks are, and they remain unclear.

We keep learning about potential risks, including off-target mutations and other unintended consequences. Before anyone ever tries to do germline gene editing in humans, it is very important that we do animal studies where the animals are followed through multiple generations, so that we can see what happens in the long term. There's just a lot that we don't know.

There are so many unknowns that we don't even know what guidelines to set. For example, what's an appropriate new mutation level in some of these technologies? What is the risk we're willing to take as we move forward into human studies? And I think those guidelines need to be set as we move forward into clinical trials, both in somatic cells [cells of the body, such as skin cells, neurons, blood cells] and in germline cells.

It's really hard because, of course, we're talking about, for the most part, bad diseases that significantly impact quality of life. So if you're talking about a really serious disease, maybe you're willing to take more risk there, and these new mutations aren't likely to be as bad as the genetic condition you already have. But we don't know, right?

We haven't had any public dialogue about any of this, and that's what we need to have. We need to find a way to educate the public and scientists about all of these issues so people can have informed discussions and really come together as this moves forward, so that were not in that reactive place when it potentially becomes a real choice.

And that goes back to your first question, which is why did we feel like we needed to have a statement now? We wanted to get those conversations going.

Explore further: 11 organizations urge cautious but proactive approach to gene editing

See the original post here:
Genetics expert discusses creating ground rules for human germline editing - Medical Xpress

Read More...

The Tragedy of Playing Politics with Children’s Health – HuffPost

August 5th, 2017 4:41 pm

by Johan Bester MBchB, PhD, MPhil and Eric Kodish MD

The case of Charlie Gard, a terminally ill British 11-month-old who passed away Friday, is deeply tragic for all involved: the parents who must try to come to terms with the fact that no curative therapy existed for their child; the physicians and nurses who have dedicated their lives to helping children and must continue to do what they think is best for the patient; and the judges who use phrases such as heaviest of hearts when handing down their judgments.

The tragedy is compounded when such cases become politicized, as has happened with Charlie.

Charlie was born with encephalomyopathic mitochondrial DNA depletion syndrome (MDDS), a rare genetic illness. Charlie suffered respiratory failure, muscle weakness, congenital deafness, encephalopathy, and eventual structural brain damage.

Charlies parents hoped to pursue an experimental treatment in the U.S. nucleoside therapy which has never been tried for Charlies variant of MDDS, but has shown some extension of life expectancy in patients with a different genetic variant of MDDS.

However, doctors at Londons Great Ormond Street Hospital did not believe this to be in Charlies best interest, and sought permission from the British courts to withdraw life-sustaining treatment and move Charlie to palliative care, where the focus would be on ensuring that his last days would be as comfortable as possible.

A lengthy series of court cases followed. At each stage at the High Court, the Supreme Court and to the European Court of Human Rights judges agreed that life sustaining treatment be withdrawn, that a palliative care approach should be followed, and that nucleoside therapy would be inconsistent with Charlies best interest. At this point, Charlie was considered to be terminally ill.

The court judgments explicitly rejected financial considerations as a basis for making the judgment, focusing instead on evidence of benefit versus harm and Charlies best interest.

As news coverage of the case exploded, it did not take long for coverage of the case to take on a political and ideological tone.

President Donald Trump and Pope Francis both offered to intervene to provide continued treatment to Charlie. Not long after, Vice President Mike Pence stated in an interview that Charlies parents were submitted to a government program that says, No, were going to remove life support from your precious 11-month-old child because the government has decided that the prospects of their life are such that they no longer warrant an investment in health services, and the American people ought to reflect on the fact that for all the talk on the left about single-payer, thats where it takes us.

Although the leaders on the left have been largely silent on Charlies case, some voices from the left responded with a rebuttal; some rightly pointed out that the central consideration in Charlies case had always been about Charlies best interests. Others went further, decrying the political vampirism of the right and defending universal healthcare systems.

The effect of all of this is to politicize the case.

Jonathan Haidt, an ethicist and social psychologist, tells us what happens in the psychology of politics: Otherwise reasonable people adopt a team mentality, us-against-them. When confronted with a politicized issue, they instinctively choose as their team would choose, and then come up with rational arguments to defend their choice afterwards.

Reasoned dialogue becomes less possible; people form into groups, aligned with their political tribe, becoming more and more entrenched in their respective ideologies.

Politicizing Charlie means that suddenly his case ceases to be about the suffering of a boy and his parents; it has been co-opted for a political and ideological purposes, complete with a set of villains who are ready to withhold from a child and parents what are rightly theirs.

It uses the emotion around the case to galvanize people towards a specific political goal. It now becomes about us against them. The facts of the case and the suffering caused is now almost incidental to what has become a political phenomenon.

In all of this, a greater tragedy occurs.

The case is used for a purpose that has nothing to do with those whose interests are at stake. Central to this case are grieving parents and healthcare professionals and, most importantly, a sick child. Because this case has now become a political football, their interests are compromised. The parents cannot grieve on their own; their every emotion, decision, and question is broadcast in the media and scrutinized by those who have an agenda.

It is hard for parents to come to terms with the loss of a child. It is even harder when they do it in public, and as the public faces of a political agenda. In the public discourse Charlies best interests take a back seat to the political purpose he serves. He has become an object rather than a person.

Politicizing such tragedies unnecessarily adds pain and angst to an already heartbreaking situation. The healthcare of children should not be a partisan issue, and it should not be politicized. Wherever one is on the political spectrum, what is best for the child should be the central consideration when making healthcare decisions for children.

What can we do to avoid politicizing future cases? First, we call for media restraint. It is difficult to report nuanced ethical and legal issues in medicine in a way that clarifies rather than confuses. If this cannot be done, it should not be done. Sensationalism should be avoided at all costs.

Second, we recommend that courts, hospitals and doctors adopt policies to keep things private that should be private. This is challenging, but should be thought through carefully.

Lastly, this case and others like it underlines the place for clinical ethics consultation in hospitals. In situations like these, clinical ethicists are invaluable at the bedside and on the hospital floor. Wed like to see clinical ethics consultation be part of every hospital.

Charlies case was not the first to be politicized; think of other high-profile cases such as the Sciavo case. In all such cases, tragedy is made worse by politicizing it. Let us hope that Charlies will be the last.

Johan Bester, MBchB, Ph.D., M.Phil., is the director of Bioethics at the UNLV School of Medicine, University of Las Vegas, Nevada. Eric Kodish, M.D., is a professor of Pediatrics and Bioethics at Cleveland Clinics Lerner College of Medicine.

The Morning Email

Wake up to the day's most important news.

Continued here:
The Tragedy of Playing Politics with Children's Health - HuffPost

Read More...

Inside researchers’ amazing and terrifying gene editing discovery – NEWS.com.au

August 5th, 2017 4:41 pm

Chinas eagerness to use genetic enhancement technology has led some to suggest the deeply divisive issue could cause a new kind of Cold War conflict.

WELCOME to the brave new world of gene editing.

An international team of scientists in the United States have safely repaired a gene mutation that causes a heritable heart defect in human embryos sparking debate about the new frontier of genetic engineering.

The first-of-its-kind research, which was spearheaded by the Oregon Health and Science University and published last week in the journal Nature, could one day help families affected by inherited diseases.

I, for one, believe, and this paper supports, the view that ultimately, gene editing of human embryos can be made safe. Then the question truly becomes: If we can do it, should we do it? said Dr. George Daley, the dean of Harvard Medical School.

One major fear is that this kind human embryo modification could give rise to designer babies, allowing parents to pay for desirable traits they want in their kids. I think gene editing can be used to help people who are sick, Marcy Darnovsky, director of the Center for Genetics and Society said.

But the idea of using it on the front end to engineer a future generation we need to draw a bright line there.

She insisted that current embryo-screening technology, done routinely at in-vitro fertilisation clinics across America, already helps parents avoid passing on genetic diseases to their kids.

If youre worried about passing on some inherited disease, you can already do that without mucking around with your childs genes, she said.

David King, of the Human Genetics Alert, a UK-based organisation, said governments need to wake up and pass an immediate global ban on creating cloned or GM [genetically modified] babies before it is too late.

If irresponsible scientists are not stopped, the world may soon be presented with a fait accompli of the first GM baby, he said.

In this photo provided by Oregon Health & Science University, taken through a microscope, human embryos grow in a laboratory for a few days after researchers used gene editing technology to successfully repair a heart disease-causing genetic mutation.Source:AP

But Shoukhrat Mitalipov, an embryologist at OHSU who led the gene-editing experiment, said the research was about correcting genes that cause diseases, not altering them.

Really, we didnt edit anything. Neither did we modify anything, Mitalipov said. Our program is toward correcting mutant genes.

The researchers used a gene-editing tool called CRISPR-Cas9 which acts like a pair of molecular scissors to target a mutation that causes hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, a disease that weakens the heart and has led to the sudden deaths of many apparently healthy young athletes.

They then injected sperm from a donor with the heart disease, which affects 1 in 500 people worldwide, into eggs from 12 healthy patients, along with the genetic scissors to snip out the mutated gene. Scientists were surprised to discover the embryos then repaired themselves, taking a healthy copy of the gene from the egg as its cells began to multiply.

The embryos are really looking for the blueprint, Mitalipov said. Were finding embryos will repair themselves if you have another healthy copy.

All told, the experiment was successful in 42 of the 58 embryos used, about 72 per cent of the time.

Mitalipov now hopes the strategy could one day be used to prevent a slew of heritable diseases caused by gene mutations, which include Huntingtons disease and cystic fibrosis.

Every generation on would carry this repair because weve removed the disease-causing gene variant from that familys lineage, he said. By using this technique, its possible to reduce the burden of this heritable disease on the family and eventually the human population.

There have been previous attempts to edit embryos in China but those experiments were marred by a problem called mosaicism, which means some cells in the embryo still carry the mutation.

Mitalipov said they solved that problem by intervening before fertilisation. Everybody was injecting too late, he said.

But Chinas eagerness to use CRISPR technology has heightened concerns about designer babies and prompted some to suggest the deeply divisive issue of genetic enhancement could cause a new kind of Cold War conflict.

Shoukhrat Mitalipov, left, talks with research assistant Hayley Darby in the Lab. Mr Mitalipov led a research team that, for the first time, used gene editing to repair a disease-causing mutation in human embryos. Picture: Kristyna Wentz-Graff/Oregon Health & Science UniversitySource:AP

Scientists are still a long way off from taking their gene-editing experiments out of the lab and using them on pregnant women. There are safety concerns, of course, but also regulatory roadblocks in the US.

The National Institutes of Health doesnt fund research involving embryos, and Congress doesnt allow the FDA to consider any experiments that involve genetically modified human embryos. This experiment was financed by OHSU, the Institute for Basic Science in South Korea and others.

Particularly controversial is the idea of germ-line editing making precise genetic changes that can pass on to future generations.

Advances in technology have given us an elegant new way of carrying out genome editing, but the strong arguments against engaging in this activity remain, the NIH said in 2015.

These include the serious and unquantifiable safety issues, ethical issues presented by altering the germ line in a way that affects the next generation without their consent and a current lack of compelling medical applications justifying the use of CRISPR-Cas9 in embryos.

But more recently, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine took a softer approach, advising caution but not prohibiting germ-line editing.

We say proceed with all due caution, but we dont prohibit germ line after considerable discussion and debate, said Richard Hynes, an MIT biologist who chaired the review. Were talking only about fixing diseases.

Mitalipov said regulators should start giving more guidance on whats permissible especially since some scientists may resort to conducting their experiments in areas that dont have regulations. This technology will be shifted to unregulated areas, which shouldnt be happening, he told The Washington Post.

Mitalipov added that they could be interested in continuing their work in other countries, like the United Kingdom, NPR reported.

Medical ethicist Arthur Caplan said the technology is still at embryonic stages in terms of developing legal guidelines. Who should own genetic-engineering techniques, and what, if any, requirements will they have to make the taxpayer-funded research that made this possible available and accessible at affordable prices? said Caplan, founder of the Division of Medical Ethics at NYU School of Medicine.

This article originally appeared on The New York Post.

Read the rest here:
Inside researchers' amazing and terrifying gene editing discovery - NEWS.com.au

Read More...

Ben-Gurion University scholars uncover the secret to personalized medicine – The Jerusalem Post

August 5th, 2017 4:41 pm

The secret to healing what ails you lies within your own DNA.(photo credit:DREAMSTIME)

Israeli genetic researchers have opened the door to new avenues of medical innovation with their research into the role that RNA plays in gene regulation.

Genomes, a complete set of genes, are divided into two categories: coding DNA and noncoding DNA (known as RNA). Dr. Ramon Birnbaum, co-founder of Ben-Gurion University of the Negevs Center for Evolutionary Genomics and Medicine (EGM), had long been fascinated with the latter. His pioneering research found that noncoding DNA, once labeled junk, plays an essential role in gene regulation.

His research focuses on understanding gene regulation during the brains development and specifically in early onset epilepsy. He explains why diagnosis and treatment can be difficult in infants: The symptoms can look the same, but the causes can be very different. Diving into the mechanisms that cause genes to express or not express will lead to more accurate diagnoses and avoid inefficient or even damaging medication."

Dr. Barak Rotblat, a member of the EGM Center, focuses on how genes affect cancer cells. He explains the potential for personalized medicine treating cancer patients. You can take a biopsy, see the specific tumor, know which genes are highly expressed, and which promote the cancers growth. You then create a cocktail to hit the tumor cells of the individual patient.

Meanwhile, Dr. Debbie Toiber, also of the EGM Center and Department of Life Sciences, is taking the RNA research in another direction. Her focus is on how mapping DNA can improve health and potentially increase lifespans.

DNA damage is one of the major causes of aging and age-related diseases, she explains. Most of the damage is repaired, but not everything. So as we age the DNA damage accumulates. With the accumulated damage, cells and neurons die, and organs become debilitated, causing the body to be more susceptible to disease and aging disorders.

Damage to the body is inevitable on some level by simply living, with the environment causing additional damage. While lifestyle plays a major role in the bodys ability to repair DNA damage on its own, genetic makeup contributes as well.

For example, if someone has an inherited gene mutation, it could limit his or her bodys ability to repair itself, leaving the individual prone to immune system damage, cancer, neurodegeneration, and premature aging. By looking into a persons genetic makeup, researchers are opening the door to personalized medicine, designed to uniquely address an individuals needs.

As Israeli researchers move forward with their studies, we come closer to gaining a deeper understanding of the human genome and providing the right personalized treatment for a myriad of medical conditions, from birth to old age and everything in between.

Making lives better in the Negev, in Israel and around the world, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev inter-disciplinary research and applied science teams are shaping the world of tomorrow with groundbreaking innovation. Sign up for eIMPACT newsletter to learn about the latest innovations as they happen.

Share on facebook

Read the original here:
Ben-Gurion University scholars uncover the secret to personalized medicine - The Jerusalem Post

Read More...

Biomedical informatics gets a boost with $2.5 million grant – UB News Center

August 5th, 2017 4:41 pm

BUFFALO, N.Y. Personalized medicine, tracking of deadlyepidemics and new insights into drug side effects are just a few ofthe ways that biomedical informatics is helping enhance medicalresearch and clinical care. Big data science holds the promise ofrevolutionizing how health care data are used to provide bettercare for patients.

But as more and more health care data become available, theability to efficiently analyze and utilize these data is growingincreasingly problematic. At the same time, there arentenough people trained in the field of biomedical informatics.

Now, a new five-year $2.5 million grant to the Department ofBiomedical Informatics in the Jacobs School of Medicine andBiomedical Sciences at the University at Buffalo will train a newcadre of research leaders skilled in analyzing and interpretingthese data.

The funding, known as T15, from the National Library of Medicineof the National Institutes of Health, supports doctoral andpostdoctoral level training for research careers in biomedicalinformatics and data science. The training programs are designed tomeet the growing need for investigators trained in biomedicalcomputing, data science and related fields with applications inhealth care clinical informatics, translational bioinformatics andclinical research informatics.

Over the five years of the grant, the department will be able totrain as many as 15 doctoral and postdoctoral researchers inbiomedical informatics.

UBs program will focus on three major areas:

clinical informatics, including socio-technical and human-centereddesign, workflow analysis and cybersecurity.

translational bioinformatics, including database management,pharmacogenomics and predictive modeling.

clinical research informatics, including a big data sciencetraining program, statistical machine learning and data mining.

The NLM grant puts the department at the forefront ofthis rapidly changing field, said Peter Elkin, MD, professorand chair of the Department of Biomedical Informatics, and directorof the new training program. Elkin also is director of theinformatics core of UBs Clinical and Translational ScienceInstitute.

Biomedical informatics is the field that will provide theinfrastructure necessary to allow scientists to performtranslational and clinical genomic research moreefficiently, he explained. The National Library ofMedicine funding, together with our established fellowship programin clinical informatics, will allow our department to play a keyrole in developing tomorrows research leaders in biomedicalinformatics.

He added that trainees in the new program will benefit fromUBs existing Big Data-Scientist Training EnhancementProgram, funded by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs incollaboration with the National Cancer Institute of the NIH. The UBprogram was one of just six sites funded nationally in 2015.

Read this article:
Biomedical informatics gets a boost with $2.5 million grant - UB News Center

Read More...

Medicine Is Getting More Precise For White People – FiveThirtyEight

August 5th, 2017 4:41 pm

Every human on earth is unique our genes are different, we eat different things, we live in different places. As a result, medical treatments tend to work differently on different people. Depending on your genes, a drug might cure your sickness or it might cause a side effect that makes you sicker.

In the past, many of humanitys individual variations were invisible to us, but today, new technology offers us a way to peer into each persons genome, allowing doctors to personalize treatments for each patient. This approach, called precision medicine, has been a major focus of research and investment in the last few years.

But precision medicine only works if scientists have studied people who are similar to you. If your genes are rare or unusual compared to those researchers have examined in the past, you could end up getting the wrong treatment. Since the vast majority of genetics studies are done on people of European ancestry, members of other racial groups may lose out on the benefits of precision medicine entirely. Those same groups already often receive worse health care in the United States than people of European descent get, and personalized medical treatment could make the gap in care larger.

Precision medicine is based on the idea that genes can be linked to diseases. To study this, scientists assemble a group of people, some with a disease and some without, and identify their genetic differences. If particular differences are common among the people who have the disease and absent from the people without it, then scientists can infer that those genetic patterns might be involved in the disease.

But each person has their own catalogue of genetic characteristics. Some are common in people of certain ancestral backgrounds and rare in those from other backgrounds. If scientists exclusively study individuals of one ethnic group, they may not know how to refine their treatments for a person from a different group.

A 2009 analysis of the studies that can link a genetic variant to a disease or trait showed that fully 96 percent of participants were of European descent. In a 2016 commentary in the journal Nature, Alice Popejoy and Stephanie Fullerton, respectively a graduate student and a professor at the University of Washington, showed that these studies had grown more diverse and people of European ancestry now account for 81 percent of research subjects. Things are getting better, and its still pretty darn slow, Fullerton said in an interview. And of the progress that has been made, much of it is attributable not to an increase in diversity in U.S. research but to studies conducted in Asian countries, which involve local participants.

Disparities in biomedical research exacerbate an existing gap in U.S. health care. African-Americans and Latinos are less likely to have health insurance and more likely to suffer from chronic diseases. Even controlling for wealth differences between populations, African-Americans receive worse health care.

The science underlying precision medicine threatens to make these disparities worse because it could leave any genetic differences that primarily affect nonwhite groups unstudied. Some genetic differences are prevalent in one population and rare in another. A prominent example is a gene called APOL1. Differences in this gene are common in people whose ancestors are from sub-Saharan Africa but rare in those of other backgrounds. Some of these variations increase the risk of developing kidney disease more than sevenfold, but they also seem to confer protection against African sleeping sickness. Knowing a patients APOL1 genetic makeup might be useful for guiding kidney disease treatment, and APOL1 is likely one of many genes that must be studied within a nonwhite population.

Its possible to solve the problem of underrepresentation. The National Institutes of Health fund a number of large-scale genetic research projects in the United States, and scientists there consider this a major issue. We are aware of this situation, and work is being funded to rectify the situation, said Charles Rotimi, an investigator at NIH. He pointed to initiatives like Human Heredity and Health in Africa and the Population Architecture using Genomics and Epidemiology Consortium. These projects are developing more diverse study populations to address the underrepresentation of people of non-European ancestries, in some cases going to African countries to collect genetic data. In the United States, individual investigators can also apply for smaller-scale NIH grants to study particular diseases.

Even when scientists make a conscious effort to recruit a diverse study population, they can run into hurdles. For very good reason, minority populations can be more skeptical and concerned about being involved in biomedical research, said professor Danielle Dick of Virginia Commonwealth University, who studies how genetics contribute to a persons risk of substance abuse. The good reason Dick referred to is a long history of biomedical researchers mistreating people of color, including in the Tuskegee trials and through the forced sterilization of Puerto Ricans. Dicks team and others have tried to address issues of underrepresentation by visiting various hospitals to recruit Hispanic or African-American study participants, providing educational materials about genetics research, arranging to collect samples when patients may be off work, and taking other measures to encourage participation.

But the imbalance in samples is so severe, and the rush to develop precision medicine is so swift, that the problem may not be solved before treatments are developed, and as a result, those treatments will likely predominantly help people of European ancestry. The time horizon for a lot of therapies is typically in the 10- to 15-year range, Fullerton said. Could we solve it in that time frame? Possibly. But genetic differences may already be causing disparities in treatment results between groups. Some genetic variants that are common to certain racial or ethnic groups can affect a patients tolerance for drugs, for example, so knowing about a patients genetic code can guide a physicians prescription. Doctors are observing these phenomena in the clinic already, said Nishadi Rajapakse, an NIH administrator at the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities.

Clinical differences in health care are only likely to become more severe as precision medicine advances. New drugs are already targeting certain genetic differences, although none that would function primarily in one ethnic group and not in others. In the long run, people of European ancestry could benefit from ever more specialized treatments while people of color are left behind.

More here:
Medicine Is Getting More Precise For White People - FiveThirtyEight

Read More...

3 Reasons the Best Is Yet to Come for Celgene – Motley Fool

August 4th, 2017 8:47 pm

Celgene Corp.'s (NASDAQ:CELG) second-quarter revenue and sales came in nearly 50% higher than they were two short years ago, yet the company doesn't appear to be anywhere near peaking. A flurry of R&D activity should provide it with a steady stream of label expansion and new drug opportunities, and if so, management should have no trouble delivering on its goal of growing sales to $21 billion in 2020 from an estimated $13 billion this year.

Celgene's widely used first-line multiple myeloma drug Revlimid has been a big reason the company's delivering significant top- and bottom-line growth. Originally approved for use in the second-line setting, the FDA approved it as a first-line drug in February 2015, and in February 2017, it also approved its use as maintenance therapy in multiple myeloma patients following stem-cell transplants to help prevent the cancer from progressing.

IMAGE SOURCE: GETTY IMAGES.

The company's success in expanding Revlimid's addressable market has caused Revlimid's sales to spike. In Q2, Revlimid revenue was $2.03 billion, up 19.6% year over year, and that has Celgene estimating $8 billion in revenue from the drug this year.

The strategy of expanding the use of its drugs to more patients, however, isn't limited to Revlimid. Management hopes to boost sales of its other drugs this way, too. For instance, studies are evaluating its third-line multiple myeloma drug, Pomalyst, as a second-line treatment. They're also exploring the use of its psoriasis drug Otezla in ulcerative colitis patients. And the company's pancreatic cancer drug, Abraxane, could someday be used to help treat patients with non-small-cell lung cancer and triple-negative breast cancer.

Given the company's track record with Revlimid, I think there's a good shot these trials pan out, and if so, then revenue and profit will march steadily higher.

Management may dominate multiple myeloma treatment, but it's not sitting on its laurels. Thanks to a slate of collaborations with emerging biotech companies, it has plenty of irons in the fire that could result in new drugs targeting a variety of cancer indications.

This week, the company's collaboration strategy took a big step forward when the FDA approved Idhifa, the first drug specifically OK'd to treat relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients possessing a specific genetic mutation. Celgene co-developed Idhifa with Agios (NASDAQ:AGIO), and it won FDA approval only four short years after entering clinical trials.

Idhifa isn't likely to become a huge source of profits for Celgene because Celgene will share its success with Agios, but it could still rack up $100 million to $200 million in annual sales, or more, if it's eventually approved for first-line use. The two companies estimate that Idhifa's current addressable market is between 1,200 to 1,500 patients, and they've priced the drug at nearly $25,000 per month.

The company's also making headway on its other collaborations. Celgeneand partner Acceleron Pharma have completed of enrollment in phase 3 trials evaluating luspatercept in patients with lower-risk myelodysplastic syndromes and transfusion dependent beta-thalassemia. Results from those studies are anticipated in the middle of 2018.

Further back in the pipeline are intriguing chimeric antigen receptor T-cell drugs, too. Celgene's working with Juno Therapeutics on JCAR017, a non-Hodgkin lymphoma drug in early stage studies, and bluebird bio on bb2121, a multiple myeloma drug that's in phase 1 trials.

IMAGE SOURCE: GETTY IMAGES.

When Celgene launched psoriasis drug Otezla, it marked its first foray into treating autoimmune disorders. Now, Celgene's close to the finish line on yet another autoimmune-disease drug. It's targeting relapsing multiple sclerosis this time around, though.

Celgene spent over $7 billion buying Receptos to get its hands on the clinical-stage MS drug ozanimod, and based on ozanimod's success in phase 3 studies, that looks to have been money well spent.

The global MS market is worth over $22 billion, and about 40% of the market value belongs to oral MS drugs, including Gilenya, which generates sales of over $3 billion annually. Like Gilenya, ozanimod controls MS by inhibiting S1P to limit immune system responses. However, unlike Gilenya, ozanimod is more selective, and its selectivity may make it safer. During trials, ozanimod outperformed the MS drug Avonex without showing signs of the cardiovascular safety risks associated with Gilenya. If all goes well at the FDA, ozanimod could put a big dent in Gilenya's market share. It could also chip away at Tecfidera, another oral MS drug with nearly $4 billion in annual sales, depending on its label.

Celgene's also conducting a phase 3 trial of ozanimod in ulcerative colitis, and it expects enrollment in that trial to be complete this year. It's also got a phase 3 study of another drug, GED-0301, for use in Crohn's disease. Management expects enrollment in that trial to wrap up soon, too. Since these are blockbuster indications, a positive outcome in one or both of them could eventually be needle-moving.

In 2020, Celgene's wants to deliver $21 billion in sales and over $13 per share in earnings. Those figures represent a huge jump from the $13 billion and $7.25 in EPS that's forecast for 2017. Yet there's reason to think Celgene can meet or exceed those targets.Management based its long-term forecast on the drugs it currently has on the market, so if collaborations and R&D efforts yield new commercial-stage medicines, then Celgene should be able to deliver on its goal. In this respect, the company's best days may truly be yet to come.

Originally posted here:
3 Reasons the Best Is Yet to Come for Celgene - Motley Fool

Read More...

Institutional Investors Lead Shift in Neuralstem Inc (NASDAQ:CUR) Sentiment – BZ Weekly

August 4th, 2017 8:47 pm

August 4, 2017 - By Marguerite Chambers

Neuralstem Inc (NASDAQ:CUR) institutional sentiment decreased to 0.3 in Q4 2016. Its down -0.37, from 0.67 in 2016Q3. The ratio worsened, as 8 institutional investors increased or opened new positions, while 27 sold and decreased their stakes in Neuralstem Inc. The institutional investors in our partners database now own: 6.88 million shares, down from 12.30 million shares in 2016Q3. Also, the number of institutional investors holding Neuralstem Inc in their top 10 positions decreased from 1 to 0 for a decrease of 1. Sold All: 16 Reduced: 11 Increased: 6 New Position: 2.

Neuralstem, Inc. is a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company. The company has market cap of $18.31 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.

About 412,558 shares traded or 2.10% up from the average. Neuralstem, Inc. (NASDAQ:CUR) has risen 3.35% since August 4, 2016 and is uptrending. It has underperformed by 13.35% the S&P500.

National Asset Management Inc. holds 0.01% of its portfolio in Neuralstem, Inc. for 167,500 shares. Bank Of America Corp De owns 8,400 shares or 0% of their US portfolio. Moreover, Bank Of New York Mellon Corp has 0% invested in the company for 91,969 shares. The Delaware-based Blackrock Advisors Llc has invested 0% in the stock. Blackrock Fund Advisors, a California-based fund reported 24,841 shares.#img1#

Since January 1, 0001, it had 3 insider buys, and 0 selling transactions for $70,004 activity.

More important recent Neuralstem, Inc. (NASDAQ:CUR) news were published by: Globenewswire.com which released: Neuralstem Awarded $~1MM Grant by NIH to Continue Preclinical Research into on August 02, 2017, also Marketwatch.com published article titled: UPDATE: Neuralstem stock plummets 61% on news of mid-stage clinical trial miss, Seekingalpha.com published: Neuralstem Is Doomed on August 03, 2017. More interesting news about Neuralstem, Inc. (NASDAQ:CUR) was released by: Benzinga.com and their article: Mid-Day Market Update: ShoreTel Gains On Acquisition News; Neuralstem Shares with publication date: July 27, 2017.

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.

Read more:
Institutional Investors Lead Shift in Neuralstem Inc (NASDAQ:CUR) Sentiment - BZ Weekly

Read More...

Opthalmology Doctor Warns Of The Dangers Of Starring At The Solar Eclipse – CBS Chicago

August 4th, 2017 8:46 pm

CHICAGO (CBS) While the sun may be difficult to spot on Friday, an eye expert warns of the danger of staring at it for too long during the eclipse later this month.

Dr. Kirk Packo, chair of the ophthalmology department at Rush University Medical Center, said 22 years after the instrument for inspecting the eye was invented doctors saw the after affects of looking at a solar eclipse.

The first big description of sun damage to the eye occurred following a total solar eclipse that went through Europe in 1912, he said.

For those watching the eclipse without lenses rated to block the full spectrum of light, he said substituting multiple pairs of sunglasses wont protect you. In fact, he said, they could lead to more damage because things will look darker so you may stare longer, but the invisible thermal-damaging light is still coming through.

Then you are looking at it, you are not getting the painful stimulus, because you have darkened the visible light, and yet all that time, you are letting the invisible, dangerous thermal damaging light still through, he said.

Dr. Packo said rentinal burns from the sun can cause lifelong dead spots in the center of your vision and can reduce your vision permanently; but are not likely to make you completely blind.

When the medical facility where Dr. Packo worked in Atlanta in May 1984 offered free eye exams after an annular eclipse (not total solar edge still visible), he said none of the roughly 100 people who came in suffered any damage.

He attributes the lack of problems to how well publicized the warnings were.

If you are going to watch the eclipse, you should get eclipse glasses properly rated to block the visible spectrum, said Dr. Packo. But even then, he said, you are not immune from any retinal damage.

Adler Planetarium display of giant solar eclipse glasses with information on protecting your eyes during the solar eclipse. (WBBM/Nancy Harty)

Dont look through a camera, telephoto lense, telescope or binoculars while wearing solar eclipse glasses, he said.

That magnification can lead to damage.

If you cannot get eclipse glasses, he suggests making a pinhole camera to project the suns image on a piece of paper to safely watch.

When asked whats a safe amount of time to stare at the eclipse Dr. Packo hesitated, saying it depends on how much cataract you have or refractive error is.

He said the problem is an eclipse is mesmerizing and you will want to look longer than a couple of seconds, as the doctor recommends.

Link:
Opthalmology Doctor Warns Of The Dangers Of Starring At The Solar Eclipse - CBS Chicago

Read More...

Applied Genetic Technologies (AGTC): Gene Therapy for Opthalmology – Equities.com

August 4th, 2017 8:46 pm

According to the Cleveland Clinic, more than 60% of infant blindness cases are caused by inherited eye diseases such as congenital cataracts and glaucoma, retinal degeneration, optic atrophy and eye malformations., and up to 40% of patients with certain types of strabismus (ocular misalignment) have a family history of the disease. In adults, glaucoma and age-related macular degeneration are two of the leading causes of blindness, and both appear to be inherited in a large portion of cases.

Applied Genetic Technologies (Nasdaq: AGTC) is developing treatments for severe opthalmological diseases using gene therapy to replace abnormal or broken genes with normal functional genes, enabling the body to produce proteins to treat its own illness.

Pipeline

AGTC has a broad pipeline of severe opthalmological diseases and corresponding gene targets that it's pursuing in the clinic, including two programs under collaboration with Biogen (Nasdaq: BIIB).

Source: Applied Genetic Technologies Corporation website

X-Linked Retinoschisis (XLRS)

An inherited form of retinal degeneration affecting young males, presenting with poor visual acuity by school age that usually worsens during the teenage years. Severe complications such as retinal hemorrhage or retinal detachment occur in up to 40% of patients, especially in older individuals. There are currently no approved treatments for XLRS.

Achromatopsia (ACHM)

An inherited condition that is associated with visual acuity loss, extreme light sensitivity resulting in daytime blindness and total loss of color discrimination. There is no specific treatment, although deep red tinted spectacles or contact lenses can reduce symptoms of light sensitivity. AGTC is working on two programs based on the gene mutations known as CNGB3 and CNGA3, which account for 75% of affected patients.

X-Linked Retinitis Pigmentosa (XLRP)

An inherited condition that causes boys to develop night blindness by the time they are 10 years old, followed by progressive constriction of the field of vision. Affected men become legally blind at an average of about 45 years of age.

Age-Related Macular Degeneration (AMD)

The leading cause of blindness in the US, with more than 1.6 million people affected. Wet AMD is a more severe progression of AMD. Although it affects only 10-15 percent of those who have the condition, it accounts for 90 percent of the severe vision loss caused by macular degeneration according to the Macular Degeneration Partnership. One of the treatments for wet AMD is ranibizumab, a blood vessel growth inhibitor marketed as Lucentis by Roche (OTCQB: RHHBY) and Novartis (NYSE: NVS), which requires frequent injections into the affected eye. AGTC believes that gene therapy offers a potential long-term solution to treat wet AMD with just one injection, and that there is a strong rationale for combination therapy to become the standard of care.

Management

CEO Sue Washer has led the company since 2002. She has a decade of pharmaceutical management and research experience with Abbott Labs (NYSE: ABT) and Eli Lilly (NYSE: LLY) and more than 16 years of senior management experience with entrepreneurial firms in Florida including three start-ups. Ms. Washer is the chair of Southeast BIO and a member of the Executive Committee of BioFlorida and the board of the Florida High Tech Corridor Council.

William Sullivan was announced yesterday as the new CFO succeeding the retiring Larry Bullock. Mr. Sullivan has 20 years of experience in corporate finance, leading strategic transactions, fundraising, and accounting. Most recently, he held a variety of leadership positions at Merrimack Pharmaceuticals (Nasdaq: MACK), including CFO, Principal Accounting Officer and Treasurer.

Michael Goldstein, MD has been Chief Medical Officer since November 2016. Previously, Dr. Goldstein was the Chief Medical Officer and VP of Clinical Research at Eleven Biotherapeutics (Nasdaq: EBIO). He is the Co-Director of Cornea and External Disease Service and Assistant Professor of Ophthalmology at the New England Eye Center.

AGTC Stock

AGTC went public in 2014, raising $57.5 million in gross proceeds at a post-IPO valuation of $168 million. The stock peaked at above $400 million in market value in early 2015 but is now trading at an all-time low of just $82 million. The company has a good cash position - $149 million as of the end of March and an anticipated $130-$140 million at the end of the fiscal year, June 30th. We like where AGTC sits on the risk-reward spectrum, as we await the company's fiscal year-end update sometime this month.

Please email us at content@equities.com to see our Case Studies and Testimonials.

Please click here if you would like information on our new trading platform.

Please click here if you would like to see our weekly newsletter.

DISCLOSURE:The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors, and do not represent the views of equities.com. Readers should not consider statements made by the author as formal recommendations and should consult their financial advisor before making any investment decisions. To read our full disclosure, please go to: http://www.equities.com/disclaimer

Link:
Applied Genetic Technologies (AGTC): Gene Therapy for Opthalmology - Equities.com

Read More...

Military Brain Injuries are the Subject of Center for Neurological Studies "Hope After Combat" Study – Markets Insider

August 4th, 2017 8:46 pm

NOVI, Mich., Aug. 3, 2017 /PRNewswire/ --Thousands of military men and women involvedinthe long raging war in the Middle East have arrived home suffering from undiagnosed traumatic brain injuries, the "invisible wound" of battle. These injuries can lead to stress, depression, insomnia, alcoholism, substance abuse and, all too often, suicide.

Center for Neurological Studies (CNS), a Novi-based non-profit, has launched "Hope After Combat," an in-depth study combining ten diagnostic testing disciplines to diagnose and develop individualized treatment for veterans with brain injuries.

"Any attempt to treat veterans with traumatic brain injuries begins with an accurate diagnosis," says Randall Benson, M.D., CNS Vice President and Medical Director. "Combat injuries are frequently mis-diagnosed resulting in inappropriate and unsuccessful treatment. We can and must do better. Better diagnoses lead to improved outcomes."

Hope After Combat combines diagnostic testing including neurology, neuro-opthalmology and neuropsychology enhanced by CNS' advanced magnetic resonance imaging techniques (MRI), diffusion tensor imaging and susceptibility-weighted imaging. These advanced MRI techniques developed at CNS are significantly more sensitive than traditional MRI imaging and have worked successfully on hundreds of non-combat brain-injury victims.

In the Hope After Combat study, once diagnostic testing is complete a treatment plan is developed and the veteran takes part in an individualized 60-day rehabilitation program based on his or her specific diagnosis. All disciplines continue to provide input and care for the victim and his/her family. The final study is expected to include more than 50 combat victims.

"These veterans and their families are desperate for answers and we're trying to provide them," says John D. Russell, CEO and President of CNS. "The veterans have been real troopers in every sense of the word and we're learning from their individual efforts and progress. But our donors are the ones who've made the study possible. Without them we couldn't bring all these disciplines together for such an important study."

For further information or to participate in or make a contribution to the Hope After Combat study, contact John Russell at 313-228-0930 or visit the CNS website, http://neurologicstudies.com

CNS was founded in 2011 with the objective of advancing scientific research for neurovascular disease. CNS staff are available for interview on brain injuries and brain-related diseases.

View original content:http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/military-brain-injuries-are-the-subject-of-center-for-neurological-studies-hope-after-combat-study-300499425.html

SOURCE Center for Neurological Studies

Read the rest here:
Military Brain Injuries are the Subject of Center for Neurological Studies "Hope After Combat" Study - Markets Insider

Read More...

Loss of Siddikur’s eyesight and focus shift – Financial Express Bangladesh

August 4th, 2017 8:46 pm

Column

Underdevelopment has its cost which is far greater than the mere incidental. Siddkur's is thus an avoidable personal tragedy. It could not have happened if the authorities moved fast and were serious enough to take up the affiliation matters. The tragic incident involving Siddiqur, however, has both diluted and shifted the focus from the main issue. Now Siddikur has become the issue instead of the fate of 167,000 students, writes Nilratan Halder

In case of the loss of his eyesight, an uncertain future stares in the fact of the young man and his poor mother. He lost his father at an early age and his mother struggled to educate her son with the hope that he would soon take over the responsibility of the family once he completes his graduation. He nurtured in his bosom the dream of becoming a government officer and pleaded with her to wait for two more years. Now that appears to be a distant dream.

To call it an accident is a gross misstatement. What prompted the students of Dhaka City's seven government colleges affiliated with the University of Dhaka after their dissociation with the National University to hold a demonstration exposes both underdevelopment and the lack of seriousness on the part of some highly placed responsible people. Relations between the National University and the University of Dhaka cannot be said to be ideal on account of personal antagonism between the highest authorities. Lack of cooperation and coordination between the two universities simply cast a dark shadow on the future of 167,000 students studying at those colleges. For months students have been passing agonising time in the absence of curricula or syllabuses for some and an announcement of exam date for others. How so often does it happen that students are holding rallies for announcement of exam dates? The demonstrating students at Shahbagh were exactly doing this. They were not protesting against anyone. Their objective was simple: just announce the exam date so that they do not have to waste their academic year. Usually demonstrations are held for opposite reasons but here is a most positive cause they were making a demand for.

And it is exactly for this reason Siddiqur is now going to lose his eyesight. The police know the language of force and indiscriminately use it. This was an apolitical demonstration and could be handled with care. After all, the demonstration was not violent. It is exactly here the authorities responsible for creating the mess also demonstrated how callous and insensitive they could be. Eminent educationist Jafar Iqbal has rightly accused the Dhaka University authorities for not doing enough to save the day for the highest seat of learning. It failed miserably when no one felt the need to arrive at the scene to tell that the exam schedule has been finalised two days ago. If this message was conveyed to the assembled students, they would leave the place happily.

Instead, the authorities maintained an atrocious silence over the decision they have already arrived at. Understandably, the preparation for a smooth transition and takeover is missing. Overall, it is a mess that the two universities have created for the students of the seven colleges. The students are now neither here nor there. The website of the NU has been deleted and the DU is yet to prepare the required dossier for the inducted students. Now the very objective of raising the quality of education of the seven colleges under the DU is fading out when the rudimentary tasks remain unfulfilled. These are signs of underdevelopment and inefficiency.

It is already late but the authorities need to gear up their efforts in order to bring the academic activities of the colleges in order. It is not a tall order, though. The university has its curricula and syllabuses. Those will mostly be recommended with minor changes for the colleges as well. Students not receiving lessons in the absence of syllabi cannot be blamed for demanding the same. If the crucial issues are not attended on a priority basis, more such unpleasant incidents cannot be ruled out. The name of the game is discharging duty responsibly.

However, responsibility is increasingly becoming a casualty at the hands of teachers at the highest seats of learning now. Or else, it would have been unthinkable for teachers getting involved in a scuffle with students over Dhaka University Central Students' Union (DUCSU) election and the number of university senate members required for the election of the university's vice-chancellor.

nilratanhalder2000@yahoo.com

Read more from the original source:
Loss of Siddikur's eyesight and focus shift - Financial Express Bangladesh

Read More...

Our Services | Virginia Integrative Medicine

August 4th, 2017 8:46 pm

Proudly Providing Integrative Medicine in Virginia

Your health is important to us and we will not rest until we have helped you figure out a solution to your ailments. At Optimal Health Dimensions, we pride ourselves on caring, listening, and providing personalized solutions. If you are suffering from a medical impairment, or affliction, our Virginia integrative medicine practice is dedicated to helping you achieve results to better your future. We employ highly-skilled healthcare practitioners which allows our patients to glean from a variety of therapy options as well as extensive medical knowledge and experience. Our holistic doctors are dedicated to providing excellent services for our patients, and we can put our experience to work for you if you choose to take advantage of our services.

We offer the following therapeutics to our clients:

Intravenous Light Therapy

If you are suffering from an illness that is causing severe pain, our providers offer a therapy that can help relieve those symptoms using an intravenous delivery system that delivers UVA light, green and red light waves to the individual directly through the vein.

Bio-identical Hormone Therapy - The Rejuvenated You Therapy (RYT) ApproachIf you are facing a hormone deficiency of estrone, estradiol, or testosterone to name a few, then you may greatly benefit from the option of Bio-identical hormone replacement therapy. This is the process by which your hormones are targeted and matched on a molecular level, and then replaced with identical hormones to supplement a deficiency.

Healthy Baby ProjectThere are too many cases where mothers before pregnancy were not detoxed or properly prepared for the joyful event of a pregnancy resulting in an un-well baby or child that later develops undesirable medical issues. With our years of experience, we can help you pursue a healthy lifestyle and prepare your body to an optimal level to receive and nourish your unborn baby.

IV TherapiesThere is a variety of different issues that can be solved through various IV nutrient/mineral and antimicrobial therapies. In the case of dehydration, an IV can be used to quickly hydrate a human body. IVs can be used to supplement nutrients, minerals, and vitamins or quickly insert antibacterial medicine, or used for detoxification purposes through flushing the system.

Nutritional ConsultationAll our providers have extensive experience and medical skill in nutritional and lifestyle modification to provide you with a better understanding of the human body and how it responds to the fuel given. There are many different medical issues that can be solved by healthy nutrition choices, and exercise. You will greatly benefit from the information gleaned from our skilled medical staff.

Besides our most popular therapeutics mentioned above, we also provide many other therapies to address and improve your unique health needs. Even when you can't put a finger on what health problem is plaguing you, we can listen to your symptoms and prescribe the therapies and medications that could most likely benefit you. Don't try to troubleshoot your health conditions on your own or by simply going off of the tips you find on Google. We are certified experts that can provide you with the proven and beneficial therapies you need.

These therapies include the following:

At Optimal Health Dimensions, we care about your unique situation and will not approach improving your health with any cookie-cutter tactics. Our work ethic and character is something we prize above all else.

What makes us stand apart, is that we will do the following:

Your medical concerns are important to us, and we can put our first-hand knowledge to work for you. Are you looking for aholistic doctor in Virginia?Contact us today to schedule an evaluation so we can begin the process of retaining the medical assistance that you need. Don't delay in getting the counsel and guidance you need to pursue a healthier, happier life. We care about your life and your future, which is why we use integrative medicine to heal both your mind and body. By choosing Optimal Health Dimensions, you will be in the safe hands you can trust. Visit our Fairfax medical center today at 3930 Pender Drive, Suites #260 and #280!

More:
Our Services | Virginia Integrative Medicine

Read More...

Burnout Recovery Guide by Doctor/Nurse Team Offers New Science-Based System – Markets Insider

August 4th, 2017 8:46 pm

FOREST GROVE, Ore., Aug. 4, 2017 /PRNewswire/ --Every year, stress and professional burnout cost US business and consumers over $400 billion. Thousands of talented, well-trained professionals become overwhelmed by burnout and leave the careers they love, creating shortages in many critical industries such as nursing, primary care medicine and teaching.

While researchers have successfully demystified many aspects of burnout, people who need help don't know where to start. OnOctober 8, 2017, the definitive guide, "Save Yourself from Burnout: A System to Get Your Life Back," will be available in bookstores and online retailers nationwide.

This informative, encouraging and highly strategic guide, written by the integrative medical team of Dr. Marnie Loomis, naturopathic physician, former faculty member of the National University of Natural Medicine, and Beth Genly, retired nurse-midwife, former faculty member of Oregon Health and Science University, provides a comprehensive approach to understanding and overcoming burnout. It is specifically designed for people who are exhausted yet want to return to the lives and careers they love.

"Burnout has devastating effects on health and well-being. 'Save Yourself from Burnout' is timely and offers a multitude of customizable solutions for people who are feeling burned out," comments Kelly Campbell, Ph.D., associate professor of psychology, California State University, Santa Barbara; and co-host of the radio show "Let's Talk Relationships."

"We both experienced burnout. When we realized so many of our students, colleagues and loved ones were also suffering from burnout, we had to figure out how to help," Dr. Loomis says.

"Unlike generic lists of tips and tricks, 'Save Yourself from Burnout'leads each reader to identify the extent of their own burnout protection and vulnerability, creating a simple visual map to guide recovery and maintain their energy and passion for life," Genly adds.

"Save Yourself from Burnout" details how burnout is different from and more destructive than stress. "Burnout is common, but most people try to keep it a secret when it happens to them. Certainly, when burnout got to me, I wondered if I had some deep-seated personal flaw that might be the cause."

"Fear and stigma keep most people from talking about it," Dr. Loomis says. "We find people are empowered by thinking of burnout as a sort of repetitive stress injury, like carpal tunnel syndrome or tennis elbow. If you treat burnout as an injury to the parts of your mind and body that deal with constant stress, the path to recovery becomes clear."

For those who have witnessed the devastating effects of burnout on their friends, family members and coworkers, the new book, "Save Yourself from Burnout," provides hope that burnout does not have to be a life sentence for the members of our community who are too valuable to lose.

Contact

Beth Genly503-267-4482 rel="nofollow">170920@email4pr.com

Dr. Marnie Loomis, ND 503-544-7044 rel="nofollow">170920@email4pr.com

Book Data

Save Yourself from Burnout: A System to Get Your Life Back,by Dr. Marnie Loomis, ND, and Beth Genly, MSN

Find Photos, Videos, Author Bios, and Advance Readers' Reactions at: http://www.burnout-solutions.com/press-kit-save-burnout/

View original content with multimedia:http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/burnout-recovery-guide-by-doctornurse-team-offers-new-science-based-system-300499590.html

SOURCE Bouclier Press

Read more here:
Burnout Recovery Guide by Doctor/Nurse Team Offers New Science-Based System - Markets Insider

Read More...

Tonawanda medical practice thinks holistically, despite insurance challenges – Buffalo News

August 4th, 2017 8:45 pm

Workdays at Sheridan Medical Group start with "morning scrubs," brainstorming sessions where doctors, physician assistants and their health team gather to talk about ways to best serve the patients they will serve in the coming hours. A physical therapist, nutritionist, behavioral therapist and other workers on the 32-member staff also likely will attend.

This isn't the way traditional offices operated.

It's by design.

Doctors here have been trained to ask more questions, spend a bit more time with patients, and send them down the hallway to talk with preventative health specialists, including physical therapists in the medically oriented gym.

"We believe that we are creating the model for the future," said Jennifer Carlson, clinical director of the Town of Tonawanda practice. "I think this sort of interdisciplinary team is really essential. What we know is what's been happening in the past a physician making decisions on behalf of a patient has failed. We know we in the U.S. have the sickest population that's costing the most amount of money in the entire developed world."

Dr. Richard Carlson Jr., an internist and geriatrician, and Dr. Rajiv Jain, board certified in pediatrics, internal medicine and sports medicine, launched Sheridan Medical 11 years ago. Both doctors have trained and practiced in Buffalo and far-flung places, including Africa. Their fathers were both doctors.

They've enlisted help from their wives in establishing a Sheridan Drive operation that looks to provide cradle-to-grave, community health services in the same building in a patient-centered way.

Aanchal Jain, who has a finance background, is director of business operations. Jennifer Carlson is tasked with making the operation click.

"I see the world through the eyes of a social worker," said Carlson, a graduate of the University at Buffalo School of Social Work who has worked three decades in the field. "Social workers have their roots in transformation. They've been agitators and have sort of an incendiary role because they're sympathetic to the needs of individuals. They are trained to be good communicators and relationship builders and to perceive shortcomings, problems and challenges, then to bring to bear various kinds of forces to help a system become more responsive."

It has been a challenge, she said, but the staff looks to help change health care in Western New York as it goes about its work.

Q. This sounds quite a bit different than the top-down medical care many patients know.

If you can't think differently about your role in the lives of patients, you're never going to change the way you're practicing medicine. Patients are going to continue to become overly dependent on you and they're not going to take their responsibility seriously. It's way too easy to take a back seat and let somebody else run the show. You need to make it harder for people to not be in control. If you stop being in control, they can start to pick up the slack

Doctors' offices have historically had a bunch of exam rooms and a receptionist and a waiting room. That's it. We need teaching spaces, places where people can confer. Our reimbursement doesn't match what we know we need to be doing. We're getting paid to take care of diseases. Eighty percent of our reimbursement is dedicated to fee for service but our practice is deeply invested in population health management. We're banking on that flipping and we're going to be ready.

Q. What do you do?

A huge amount of my time is dedicated to teaching the staff and the patients to think differently about care from a preventative standpoint and to take themselves seriously as a member of a team. Historically, all of our nurses and our medical assistants and our dietitians were cued to take orders from the doctor. The doctor has a lot of knowledge about overall health but they don't really know a lot about nutrition. They're very bad social workers. This is not a secret. Our doctors have heard me say this to them. But they're great doctors. Great doctors. It's almost as important knowing what you don't do

That team approach matters. Physician satisfaction has gone down the drain. They're working 18-hour days. Their reimbursement rates are lower than in the past. Their document burden is incredible. People should know that.

Q. And you're seeing more chronically ill patients?

The whole reason reform came into being is that we are sicker than any other country in the entire developed world and we're putting huge amount of money way more than anybody else into maintaining sick people. Our strength as a team is helping not only with medication but poor eating habits or stress management.

Q. You say insurers could be more helpful?

We're absorbing part of the cost to develop the model. People who work here know what works and what doesn't, and how to collaborate, yet there's no reimbursement structure to support some of what we do. Insurers know that to prevent that 80-year-old on multiple medications and with complex health issues from falling, it's really critical they be seen and be given a suitable fitness program. Sending them to the Y is not the same thing as being seen by physical therapist Russ Certo and his team (but he can't get traction with insurance companies on reimbursement). Getting someone in to see a dietitian so we can create a menu that's suitable for whatever it is they're struggling with, rather than have them become diabetic ... would be better but the system is not designed to reimburse those services.

email: refresh@buffnews.com

Twitter: @BNrefresh

Originally posted here:
Tonawanda medical practice thinks holistically, despite insurance challenges - Buffalo News

Read More...

LETTER: HMSA and Primary Care Physicians – Big Island Now

August 4th, 2017 8:45 pm

Primary Care is comprehensive medical care by those specifically trained in first contact and continuing care for patients, serving as the central hub for all of the patients health care needs. Primary Care Providers (PCPs) specialize in the management of chronic medical diseases, treatment of acute issues, and preventative care. A good PCP is an invaluable asset to your health.

Yet somewhere along the way, that value has come into question. HMSA has promoted its new payment transformation model as a way of supporting primary care. But they failed to actually calculate a fair and reasonable wage for such services.

The Big Island is in the midst of a population expansion, in addition to a staggering physician shortage of 33%. In the last 8 months alone, Hilo has lost 6 PCPs, only one of which was not related to income. This magnifies the physician shortage, and not due to the expected upcoming retirements, making the acuity of the situation pronounced and urgent. HMSA advised us that as PCPs we should be able to safely and effectively care for 2,500 patients, an industry standard.

We practice evidence based medicine in my office, and a search of journals revealed that this number was actually a speculative remark in a journal that has since been discounted on numerous occasions. Estimates based on the time required to provide all recommended acute, chronic and preventative care for 2,500 patients is 21.7 hours/day. To manage chronic conditions alone for a panel of patients in whom those conditions are already controlled, it is estimated to take 3.5 hours/day. When those conditions are uncontrolled, the time commitment increased to an estimated 10.6 hours/day.

Other time management studies suggest a conventional medical model of primary care can manage approximately 1,000 patients with appropriate care. Time delegation models validate Team-Based Primary Care, with a PCP supervising a medical team including midlevel providers, nurses, medical assistants and receptionists to maximize high quality care to a larger population of patients. However there needs to be a system in place that allows for appropriate reimbursement of such a model.

With an average reimbursement of $24/month, working 200 hours/month, we need to manage over 1500 patients to pay a fair and reasonable salary to a single physician, and over 2100 patients to support Team-Based care. And that does not include any overhead or supplies; just salaries. There is no change in the HMSA reimbursement, no matter what services the patient requires acute illness or injury, nebulizer for asthma flare-up, routine follow up, skin biopsy to check for cancer. We get the same $24/month.

With this reimbursement model, the PCP actually loses money by offering more to their patients. Patients lose their opportunity to receive the best medical management at a true medical home. Ultimately, the insurance company actually loses more money and worse, patients will visit urgent care and ER more frequently, as more PCPs shut their doors, unable to afford the primary care the patients need and deserve.

Letters, commentaries and opinion pieces are not edited by Big Island Now.

Link:
LETTER: HMSA and Primary Care Physicians - Big Island Now

Read More...

Planning underway for combined medical engagement in Angola with Ohio, Serbia – U.S. Africa Command (press release)

August 4th, 2017 8:45 pm

8 photos: Planning underway for combined medical engagement in Angola with Ohio, Serbia

8 photos: Planning underway for combined medical engagement in Angola with Ohio, Serbia

8 photos: Planning underway for combined medical engagement in Angola with Ohio, Serbia

8 photos: Planning underway for combined medical engagement in Angola with Ohio, Serbia

8 photos: Planning underway for combined medical engagement in Angola with Ohio, Serbia

8 photos: Planning underway for combined medical engagement in Angola with Ohio, Serbia

8 photos: Planning underway for combined medical engagement in Angola with Ohio, Serbia

8 photos: Planning underway for combined medical engagement in Angola with Ohio, Serbia

COLUMBUS, Ohio Representatives of the Serbian and Angolan Armed Forces met with members of the Ohio National Guard in late June to discuss plans for an upcoming Combined Medical Engagement set to take place in Angola later this year. More than 20 planners from all three countries gathered for a week to work through the details for the upcoming event.

The upcoming Combined Medical Engagement will have medical personnel from the three nations provide infectious disease prevention training as well as basic care to four different villages in the area surrounding Caixito, Angola. Local residents will be able to receive preventative medicine as well as see specialists in obstetrics, pediatric care, dermatology and optometry.

The Ohio National Guard has a long-standing relationship with Serbia, having been state partners with the country for more than 10 years as part of the National Guard State Partnership program. Ohio National Guard and Serbian Armed Forces conducted a similar event in Serbia in 2016. Last years event, (see Combined Medical Engagement partners ONG, Serbia, Angola to help citizens in rural Serbia) which included three observers from the Angolan military, was conducted to lay the groundwork for developing a working relationship with Angola in the future.

Read the original:
Planning underway for combined medical engagement in Angola with Ohio, Serbia - U.S. Africa Command (press release)

Read More...

Tommy Thompson: Congress has a Golden Opportunity on Health Care – WisBar

August 4th, 2017 8:45 pm

Aug. 2, 2017 Tommy Thompson, former Wisconsin governor and the U.S. Health and Human Services (HHS) secretary under George W. Bush, says the GOPs inability to enact health care reform creates a golden opportunity for bipartisanship.

Thompson is speaking at the State Bar of Wisconsins upcoming Health, Labor and Employment Law(HLE) Institute, Aug. 17-18, in Wisconsin Dells. Hell talk about the health care political atmospherefrom the perspective of the countrys top health official.

The four-term Republican state governor served as HHS secretary from 2001 to 2005, overseeing the passage of Medicare Part D (prescription drugs), a contentious bill at the time. He also dealt with 9/11, smallpox vaccination, and the AIDS epidemic.

In preparation for his HLE appearance, Thompson reflects on his experience as HHS secretary and where health care could be headed next.

Number one, I think the Republicans really have made some terrible mistakes and should have had a workable plan that had the votes to get through. They didnt, and thats their fault. Secondly, Obamacare is dead. Its not going to go anywhere. Sooner or later, the Democrats will have to realize they should work with the Republicans to get a bipartisan bill done.

Third, the President has the opportunity to either continue the subsidies or not, and to the best ofmy knowledge, he has not made up his mind yet. But all indications are that he will apply pressure and could accelerate the demise of Obamacare and therefore force action.

Looking back at history, you always have Democrats and Republicans working together when you have big social policy. You look back at Social Security, you look back at Medicare, look back at Medicaid, look back on Medicare Part D, which I was responsible for all successful programs by the way and they were all done with bipartisan votes. Never has there been a really big change on social policy in America without bipartisan support. And so I think that the failure of the Republicans to act gives Congress a golden opportunity. Im looking at this optimistically as a way to get a bipartisan health care bill through thats reform minded, thats affordable and accessible, and treats all the states the same on Medicaid.

I think thats doable and its possible, and I think that will be the result when saner minds come back in the fall and realize they have to get something done.

Very contentious. President Bush told me he promised to get drug coverage for seniors and said it was my responsibility to get it done. And so, my department and the White House worked for weeks on getting that done, and I spent months over inCongress working with the House Ways and Means Committee and the House and the Senate Finance Committee to get a bipartisan proposal done. In the Senate, I had John Breaux [Democrat for Louisiana], and Max Baucus [a Democrat from Montana] and got a bipartisan bill done. I also had some outside advice from Ted Kennedy. He didnt vote for it, but he gave me a lot of good advice.

My philosophy never changes. My philosophy is to work with people who want to get things done. I did that as governor and I did it as secretary. If a Democrat wanted to work with me, I said come on in. We did it.

The biggest change in AIDS policy was done under the Department of Health and Human Services. We set up the Global Fund, and with President Bushs leadership, we were able to pass the Presidents Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR). To this day, he will credit PEPFAR as his No. 1 accomplishment in the social arena.

I had 9/11 on my handsand fears of bioterrorism. I had a shortage of medicine. People were afraid that smallpox was going to be the next big epidemic, and we did not have enough vaccine. We went around and found a cache of smallpox vaccine from the 1950s that was locked up in a room at a pharmaceutical company, and we were able to use that vaccine and divide it up so that we could make more smallpox vaccine.

It was finding that cache and finding a way to use it, it was setting up a public health system that had deteriorated, including adequate antibiotics and vaccines. People were really worried about smallpox and monkey pox, and Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS). AIDS was running rampant, especially in Africa. We set up the Global Fund and PEPFAR to fight that. I negotiated with Bayer to buy Cipro, an anthrax vaccine, at a percentage of what they were selling it to the public. To my knowledge, no HHS secretary has negotiated with a pharmaceutical company for lower drug prices.

Getting a health care bill done.

Obamacare is not going to stay. It just isnt. Its falling apart. Congress has got to pass something.

Because they dont understand the importance of it. We spend 91 percent of our health care dollars getting people well after they get sick, and less than 9 percent of that $3 trillion is spent on keeping you well in the first place. We do not have a health system, we have a disease system. I think we should go to a health system.

I was into wellness and prevention when I was governor, but I really got into it when I became HHS secretary and went down to CDC and did something no secretary has ever done. I spent a week at each of the divisions. I found out that we are killing ourselves through obesity and diabetes, and we were not going to be able to afford it. I decided we were going to prevent diabetes, infectious diseases, and chronic illnesses. Alzheimers and diabetes are killing our health care costs. I came to the conclusion that the best way forward was wellness and prevention.

Preventative health has always been a low funding priority. It just always has been. People just dont understand it. They dont understand the connection. One thing is the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has to put a fiscal estimate on it. The CBO does not score something as esoteric as wellness. They cant score it without a dollar amount.

BadgerCare came as an idea I had when I was sitting on the Joint Finance Committee 50 years ago. I came to the conclusion that if you were middle-income to well-to-do, you could buy a good lawyer if you got in trouble. If you were poor, you got a public defender at the states expense.

If you were, like I was then, just on the verge of making a living, small business people that I represented including farmers working 14 hours per day those poor blokes never had enough money to hire a lawyer or a doctor or go to get your shots. I didnt think it was fair. That carried with me, but I couldnt get anything done while I was in the Assembly because I was always in the minority. That changed when I became governor. That was how BadgerCare came to be.

Find clarity in a chaotic legal and political landscape at the 2017 Health, Labor, and Employment Law Institutein Wisconsin Dells, Aug. 17-18.

Earn up to 12 CLE credits and 1 EPR credit from breakout sessions in three tracks health law, labor and employment law, and practical perspectives. Four plenary sessions take a closer look at crucial issues such as whistleblower laws, cybersecurity, and ethics. Topics include:

Health law: False Claims Act litigation, labor and employment issues in health care, health care integration strategies, Stark Anti-Kickback claims, and HIPAA

Labor and employment law: Telecommuting, wage and hour claims, gender discrimination in compensation, impact of potential LIRC elimination, and non-compete agreements

Practical perspectives: Antitrust red flags, pregnancy and work restrictions, managing problem employees, getting difficult cases to mediation, and medical ethics

Register today

Read the original post:
Tommy Thompson: Congress has a Golden Opportunity on Health Care - WisBar

Read More...

Don’t fear the rise of superbabies. Worry about who will own genetic engineering technology. – Chicago Tribune

August 4th, 2017 8:44 pm

Seen any clone armies in your backyard lately? Probably not. This might surprise you if you are old enough to remember the ethical panic that greeted the birth of Dolly the sheep, the first mammal cloned from an adult cell, in Scotland 21 years ago.

The cloned creature set off a crazy overreaction, with fears of clone armies, re-creating the dead, and a host of other horrors, monsters, abuses and terrors none of which has come to pass. That is why it is so important, amid all the moral hand-wringing about what could happen as human genetic engineering emerges, to keep our ethical eye on the right ball. Freaking out over impending superbabies and mutant humans with the powers of comic book characters is not what is needed.

An international team of scientists, led by researchers at the Oregon Health and Science University, has used genetic engineering on human sperm and a pre-embryo. The group is doing basic research to figure out if new forms of genetic engineering might be able to prevent or repair terrible hereditary diseases.

How close are they to making freakish superpeople using their technology? About as close as we are to traveling intergalactically using current rocket technology.

So what should we be worrying about as this rudimentary but promising technique tries to get off the launch pad?

First and foremost, oversight of what is going on. Congress, in its infinite wisdom, has banned federal funding for genetic engineering of sperm, eggs, pre-embryos or embryos. That means everything goes on in the private or philanthropic world here or overseas, without much guidance. We need clear rules with teeth to keep anyone from trying to go too fast or deciding to try to cure anything in an embryo intended to become an actual human being without rock-solid safety data.

Second, we need to determine who should own the techniques for genetic engineering. Important patent fights are underway among the technology's inventors. That means people smell lots of money. And that means it is time to talk about who gets to own what and charge what, lest we reinvent the world of the $250,000 drug in this area of medicine.

Finally, human genetic engineering needs to be monitored closely: all experiments registered, all data reported on a public database and all outcomes good and bad made available to all scientists and anyone else tracking this area of research. Secrecy is the worst enemy that human genetic engineering could possibly have.

Let your great-great-grandkids fret about whether they want to try to make a perfect baby. Today we need to worry about who will own genetic engineering technology, how we can oversee what is being done with it and how safe it needs to be before it is used to try to prevent or fix a disease.

That is plenty to worry about.

Arthur L. Caplan is head of the division of medical ethics at the New York University School of Medicine.

Visit link:
Don't fear the rise of superbabies. Worry about who will own genetic engineering technology. - Chicago Tribune

Read More...

Page 952«..1020..951952953954..960970..»


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