Author Archives: admin


Role of Circular Ribonucleic Acids in the Treatment of Traumatic Brain and Spinal Cord Injury – DocWire News

This article was originally published here

Mol Neurobiol. 2020 Jul 22. doi: 10.1007/s12035-020-02027-9. Online ahead of print.

ABSTRACT

The causal and pathogenetic factors linked to traumatic brain injury (TBI) and spinal cord injury (SCI) are complex. This complexity is a contributive factor in the minimal improvement outcomes of injured individuals. Several studies have demonstrated the potentiality of stem cells in facilitating neuronal growth and improve outcome in various neurological conditions, including TBI and SCI. However, the efficiency concerning stem cell delivery at injured sites is open to question. Circular ribonucleic acids (circular RNAs) have recently been the focus of attention owing to their disparate functions and features in vivo. Exosomes have close relationship with circular RNAs and might have a significant impact on circular RNA expressions. Herein, we reviewed the specific functions of circular RNAs, exosomes, and stem cells in central nervous system conditions, particularly TBI and SCI, and attempted to show the connection among them. Our analyses showed the role of circular RNAs in brain/spinal cord injuries to be multifaceted, as they can modulate several signaling mechanisms while also acting as sponges for microRNAs and binding to their sites. Additionally, circular RNAs can activate several biological, molecular, and cellular activities in the wake of brain/spinal cord injuries. Thus, both non-pharmacological and pharmacological interventions centered on the regulation of circular RNAs could be promising for TBI and SCI.

PMID:32700251 | DOI:10.1007/s12035-020-02027-9

More here:
Role of Circular Ribonucleic Acids in the Treatment of Traumatic Brain and Spinal Cord Injury - DocWire News

Choosing a Stem Cell Clinic: 3 Critical Questions You Must …

Cell-based therapy is one of the newest and most innovative advancements in modern medicine. Through the use of stem cells, many conditions are treated through the self-renewal and production of more cells for the treatment of diseases.

The sudden interest in stem cell therapy has created increased consumer demand. As a consequence, many stem cell clinics have sprouted worldwide that claim to offer this unique therapy.

Not all medical centers are equal however, and many operate unethically. This article is going to give you 3 critical questions you must ask before choosing a clinic. This information can empower you in making a better choice. Knowledge is essential, and when it comes to stem cell therapy the more a consumer knows, the higher the likelihood they will have in making the best decision for choosing the best stem cell clinic for their treatment.

Stem cells are somewhat analogous to the stem of a plant in the sense that everything sprouts from the stem and differentiates into different parts such as leaves, bark, flowers and seeds. The theory behind the use of stem cells in treating diseases is based on the idea that stem cells can morph into different types of cells. Their other ability is to indirectly stimulate regeneration in local tissues, as well as reduce the level of inflammation. These cells are then believed to regenerate tissues of the body and heal disease, similar to the example of the plant.

Early uses of stem cell therapy involved the use of stem cells in bone marrow transplantation, making those types of stem cells the first to be identified. Thousands of people throughout the world have been treated with stem cells for diseases like leukemia and cancers of the blood.

Since then, stem cell clinics have used the same theory to attempt to treat many other diseases with varying degrees of success. Regenerative medicine centers in Europe have been treating patients for a wide array of diseases that include:

While many people are reported to have experienced excellent results with stem cell treatment, there are also many unfortunate stories. Opportunistic fraudsters have taken advantage of some vulnerable patients with serious consequences to their health in addition to the loss of money.

Choosing a stem cell clinic requires knowledge of many concepts of cell-based therapy in order to avoid similar situations. This gives the patient or caregiver insight into the procedure and the ability to differentiate the reputable clinics from fraudulent operations that operate unethically.

The following questions are designed to educate you on the stem cell treatment process so that you are informed when asking questions while choosing a clinic:

Stem cell treatments involve an injection of a cell-based product. These are substances that are promoted to heal tissues and manage diseases, and can include items like stem cells, platelet-rich plasma and other products like extracellular matrices that are derived from the patient (autologous) or from another person (allogeneic).

An increasingly serious problem with fraudulent stem cell clinics is that they claim to offer stem cell treatment but the cells are either not alive or nonfunctional.

When asking about what types of stem cells the clinic uses, it is important to understand what types they match to each treatment.

Many clinics such as Swiss Medica in Europe offer a wide variety of cell products that include adult stem cells and stromal vascular fraction products (SVF) that contain various stem and progenitor cells, immune cells, fibroblasts and other types of cells that are promoted as being helpful in the process of regeneration, reducing inflammation and relieving pain.

There are varying degrees of qualification among the professionals offering stem cell treatments. Since this is a new field, finding quality physicians can be difficult and there is limited training at present in the university education system.

There are many types of treatment providers currently offering stem cell treatments. Therapists such as alternative healthcare practitioners or naturopaths fall under a wide umbrella of therapists offering regenerative medicine, with some entering the stem cell field in recent years. They often offer treatments at unregulated clinics performing major operations such as spinal injections for which they may not have the appropriate training. Since there is no standard training for injections, many of these therapists may not have the knowledge to handle any complications that may arise.

Some licensed medical providers, such as nurse practitioners, have undergone approximately half the training of a certified doctor. In some cases, these people are better equipped to provide treatments, however there are complex decision-making skills in critical situations that require physician-level training.

The best-case scenario in most instances would be a physician with basic injection skills and training in a practice like sports/physical medicine or orthopedic surgery. When choosing a clinic it is essential that such certified professionals with high levels of training are available to monitor the procedures and provide recommendations in the event of complications.

Another useful vetting procedure is to confirm if the doctors working in the clinic are part of any sort of regenerative medicine or tissue engineering society. Memberships in groups like this signify that the doctors are keeping their education current, and that the treatments are up to standard with the latest technology.

The site of the injection is of paramount importance to ensure a successful treatment. Some clinics inject the cells intravenously (IV) with the idea that the cells navigate to the treatment area, which is known as homing. Other clinics inject them directly into the site that has issues, to increase the local effect.

On-site injection also has varying degrees of complexity depending on the specific parts of the body part being treated. Spinal injections are some of the most complex of all due to the interaction of the nervous system with various parts of the body. For these reasons and more, specialized knowledge is required to determine the best injection site that will bring the most successful treatment.

Top questions to ask concern the efficacy of generalized IV treatments for localized conditions, such as arthritis of the knee, hip, shoulder or ankle. Additional queries should concern the complexities of the treatment site and the specific location receiving the injections.

There are many questions to ask when choosing a stem cell treatment provider. Since knowledge is power, more information leads to more questions and this is helpful in the selection process.

The most important information required by any patient or caregiver encompasses the 3 top questions discussed in this article. They include: (1) What is being injected? (2) Who is doing the injections? and (3) Where is the treatment being administered?

Armed with specialized knowledge, seekers of cell-based therapy are equipped with the information necessary to ask the right questions and assess if the doctors are qualified through their responses. This procedure will make it much easier to dismiss the fraudulent clinics and to find the best stem cell treatment provider for the highest degree of success.

READ 5 Changes You Can Make To Improve Your Overall Health

Read more here:
Choosing a Stem Cell Clinic: 3 Critical Questions You Must ...

Cell Culture Market: Research Analysis by Basic Information, Manufacturing Base, Sales Area and Regions – Cole of Duty

A complete research offering of comprehensive analysis of the market share, size, recent developments, and trends can be availed in this latest report by Big Market Research.

As per the report, the global Global Cell Culture Industry Marketis anticipated to witness significant growth during the forecast period from 2020to 2025.

The report provides brief summary and detailed insights of the market by collecting data from the industry experts and several prevalent in the market. Besides this, the report offers a detailed analysis of geographical areas and describes the competitive scenario to assist investor, prominent players, and new entrants to obtain a major share of the global Cell Culture market.

Our analysis involves the study of the market taking into consideration the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Please get in touch with us to get your hands on an exhaustive coverage of the impact of the current situation on the market. Our expert team of analysts will provide as per report customized to your requirement. For more connect with us at [emailprotected] or call toll free: +1-800-910-6452

Request a sample of this premium research: https://www.bigmarketresearch.com/request-sample/3919852?utm_source=COD&utm_medium=Neha

The report presents a summary of each market segment such as type, end-user, applications, and region. With the help of pie charts, graphs, comparison tables, and progress charts a complete overview of the market share, size, and revenue, and growth patterns areaccessible in the report.

Additionally, an outline of each market segments such as end user, product type, application, and region are offered in the report.The market across various regions is analyzed in the report which includes North America, Europe, Asia-Pacific, and LAMEA.The report explains future trends and growth opportunities in every region. These insights help in understanding the global trends in the market and form strategies to be implemented in the future. Moreover, the research report profiles some of the leading companies in the global Cell Culture industry. It mentions their strategic initiatives and offers a brief about their business. Some of the players profiled in the global Cell Culture market include:

Key players in the Cell Culture covers : Sigma-Aldrich NEST Thermo Fisher Bio-Rad Eppendorf BD Cyagen Life Technologies Sartorius BBI Solutions Haier Esco GE Healthcare Heal Force Corning (Cellgro) Lonza Beckman Coulter Takara HiMedia Merck Birui Excellent Science

Analysts have also stated the research and development activities of these companies and provided complete information about their existing products and services. Additionally, the report offers a superior view over different factors driving or constraining the development of the market.

The Cell Culture can be split based on product types, major applications, and important countries as follows:

The basis of applications, the Cell Culture from 2015 to 2025 covers: Biopharmaceutical Basic Research Stem Cell Technologies Industrial & Cosmetics Other

The basis of types, the Cell Culture from 2015 to 2025 is primarily split into: Consumables Equipment

Request a discount on standard prices of this premium research:https://www.bigmarketresearch.com/request-for-discount/3919852?utm_source=COD&utm_medium=Neha

The report clearly shows that the Cell Culture industry has achieved remarkable progress since 2025 with numerous significant developments boosting the growth of the market. This report is prepared based on a detailed assessment of the industry by experts. To conclude, stakeholders, investors, product managers, marketing executives, and other experts in search of factual data on supply, demand, and future predictions would find the report valuable.

The report constitutes: Chapter 1 provides an overview of Cell Culture market, containing global revenue, global production, sales, and CAGR. The forecast and analysis of Cell Culture market by type, application, and region are also presented in this chapter. Chapter 2 is about the market landscape and major players. It provides competitive situation and market concentration status along with the basic information of these players. Chapter 3 provides a full-scale analysis of major players in Cell Culture industry. The basic information, as well as the profiles, applications and specifications of products market performance along with Business Overview are offered. Chapter 4 gives a worldwide view of Cell Culture market. It includes production, market share revenue, price, and the growth rate by type. Chapter 5 focuses on the application of Cell Culture, by analyzing the consumption and its growth rate of each application. Chapter 6 is about production, consumption, export, and import of Cell Culture in each region. Chapter 7 pays attention to the production, revenue, price and gross margin of Cell Culture in markets of different regions. The analysis on production, revenue, price and gross margin of the global market is covered in this part. Chapter 8 concentrates on manufacturing analysis, including key raw material analysis, cost structure analysis and process analysis, making up a comprehensive analysis of manufacturing cost. Chapter 9 introduces the industrial chain of Cell Culture. Industrial chain analysis, raw material sources and downstream buyers are analyzed in this chapter. Chapter 10 provides clear insights into market dynamics. Chapter 11 prospects the whole Cell Culture market, including the global production and revenue forecast, regional forecast. It also foresees the Cell Culture market by type and application. Chapter 12 concludes the research findings and refines all the highlights of the study. Chapter 13 introduces the research methodology and sources of research data for your understanding.

Years considered for this report: Historical Years: 2015-2019 Base Year: 2019 Estimated Year: 2020 Forecast Period: 2020-2025

About Us: Big Market Research has a range of research reports from various publishers across the world. Our database of reports of various market categories and sub-categories would help to find the exact report you may be looking for. We are instrumental in providing quantitative and qualitative insights on your area of interest by bringing reports from various publishers at one place to save your time and money. A lot of organizations across the world are gaining profits and great benefits from information gained through reports sourced by us.

Contact us: Mr. Abhishek Paliwal 5933 NE Win Sivers Drive, #205, Portland, OR 97220 United States Direct: +1-971-202-1575 Toll Free: +1-800-910-6452 E-mail: [emailprotected]

See more here:
Cell Culture Market: Research Analysis by Basic Information, Manufacturing Base, Sales Area and Regions - Cole of Duty

Takeaways from the As loss to the Giants: Why is the offense cold? Who is the Opening Day second baseman? – Chico Enterprise-Record

The Oakland As traveled across the Bay Bridge to play the second of a two-game exhibition series against the San Francisco Giants, losing 4-2.

This short and semi-sweet summer is over, and the As are clearly shaking off some rust heading into Opening Day at home against the Los Angeles Angels at the Oakland Coliseum.

Here are some takeaways from the last exhibition game of 2020.

As offense goes cold

The As scored all of four runs in these two losses. Stephen Piscotty hit a home run on Monday, and Chad Pinder hit a two-run double off the deep centerfield bricks at Oracle Park on Tuesday that the naked eye tells us was actually a home run.

Manager Bob Melvin challenged it, and the base hit call was upheld with very little explanation.

That the As faced 18 different pitchers in 18 innings probably didnt help ignite the offensive momentum. But, rare high points and a handful of competitive at bats aside, the As put together some rough plate appearances in these exhibition games.

We would have like to have better offense here the last couple games, just didnt happen, manager Bob Melvin said. We have a good offensive team, so its not concerning. Just didnt do a whole lot.

The As struck out eight times on Monday, 12 times on Tuesday. Through these two games, theyve collected six hits and eight walks.

If the As want to avoid a slow star thats plagued them in recent years, the sluggish offense theyve displayed certainly isnt promising.

Whos on second?

For all the hullabaloo surrounding second base during Spring Training 1.0 will it be Jorge Mateo? Tony Kemp? Franklin Barreto? Vimael Machin? Will there be a platoon? Will one player play the lions share? theres a chance Pinder could be the starting second baseman against Angels left-handed starter Andrew Heaney, Melvin said.

If not at second, expect Pinder somewhere in the lineup.

Pinder has been a standout at the plate during this camp, and hes had success against left-handed pitching: slashing .252/.313/.436 with a .748 OPS and 112 wRC+ against them.

If Pinder starts at second base, what does this mean for Barreto? He had one at bat in Tuesdays game, resulting in a strikeout. None on Monday.

Barreto also caught the teams attention at camp, where he hit two quick home runs off Frankie Montas and Liam Hendriks. Coaches have said that Barreto is in need of consistent at bats to show that his high ceiling he demonstrated in the minor leagues power at the plate, speed on the bases can translate to the big leagues.

Having too much talent at one position is a good problem to have. But, somehow the second base picture got a little more fuzzy. Maybe thats OK.

Fiers got the start at Oracle Park on Tuesday, allowing two home runs to Mike Yastrzemski to lead off the first inning and Alex Dickerson in the second inning on 67 pitches in 3.1 innings. He walked Pablo Sandoval before his exit in the fourth, and Sandoval scored on a sac fly off of Joakim Soria for Fiers third earned run.

The right-handed pitchers command was a tad off and he fumbled a few signs with catcher Austin Allen.

Allen, who was named to the 30-man roster as the backup catcher, is still adjusting to Fiers unpredictability and backwards pitching style.

I made it tough on myself, Fiers said after his start. I was just wild. Wasnt throwing the ball exactly where I wanted to. Just a little erratic.

Got another five days before games actually start, for me at least.

Fiers first meaningful start should come on Sunday, where hell go head-to-head with Angels phenom Shohei Ohtani. Fiers missed the first few days of camp taking extra precautions due to exposure to Jess Luzardo, who tested positive for the coronavirus prior to report day.

Because Fiers threw bullpens during the hiatus, he wasnt too far behind his fellow rotation mates. Even if this start left a sour taste in his mouth, Fiers curveball looked season ready.

Remember, Fiers curveball had one of the best vertical drops in baseball in 2019. His 70.7 vertical drop is 7.7 inches over the league average which ranks eighth in all of baseball.

Chris Bassitt looks ready to roll

Bassitt was a step behind the rest of the starters heading into camp. He hadnt faced live hitting during the hiatus like the others had.

He caught up quickly, and looked rotation ready dealing four innings with five strikeouts in Tuesdays game. His fastball hit 95 mph and he had command of his changeup and curveball.

Hell pitch fourth out of the rotation, on Monday against the Angels.

A.J. Puk and Jess Luzardo update

Puk traveled to Los Angeles to meet with Dr. Neal ElAttrache on Monday and received platelet-rich plasma and cortisone injections in his strained left shoulder, As manager Bob Melvin said Tuesday.

Puk is likely to be sidelined for two weeks, at least, and is resting for the next 48 hours.

The left-handed pitcher was slotted to start the season in the fifth spot of Oaklands rotation, but was placed on the 10-day IL. Right-handed pitcher Daniel Mengden will fill in for him in the rotation until Puks return from injury.

Jess Luzardo is slated to pitch in either the first or second game of the regular season, Melvin announced. Luzardo, who missed the first two weeks of camp after testing positive for coronavirus, is expected to come out of the bullpen and build his arm up to pitching three innings until he can be slotted into the rotation.

Luzardo pitched to Ramn Laureano in live batting practice prior to Mondays game against the San Francisco Giants.

Other notes

See the article here:
Takeaways from the As loss to the Giants: Why is the offense cold? Who is the Opening Day second baseman? - Chico Enterprise-Record

‘Self-eating’ process of stem cells may be the key to new regenerative therapies – 7thSpace Interactive

'Self-eating' process of stem cells may be the key to new regenerative therapies

PHILADELPHIA--The self-eating process in embryonic stem cells known as chaperone-mediated autophagy (CMA) and a related metabolite may serve as promising new therapeutic targets to repair or regenerate damaged cells and organs, Penn Medicine researchers show in a new study published online in Science.

Human bodies contain over 200 different types of specialized cells. All of them can be derived from embryonic stem (ES) cells, which relentlessly self-renew while retaining the ability to differentiate into any cell type in adult animals, a state known as pluripotency. Researchers have known that the cells' metabolism plays a role in this process; however, it wasn't clear exactly how the cells' internal wiring works to keep that state and ultimately decide stem cell fate.

The new preclinical study, for the first time, shows how the stem cells keeps CMA at low levels to promote that self-renewal, and when the stem cell is ready, it switches that suppression off to enhance CMA, among other activities, and differentiate into specialized cells.

"It's an intriguing discovery in the field of stem cell biology and for researchers looking to develop therapies for tissue or organ regeneration," said senior author Xiaolu Yang, PhD, a professor of Cancer Biology at the Abramson Family Cancer Research Institute in the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania. "We reveal two novel ways to potentially manipulate the self-renewal and differentiation of stem cells: CMA and a metabolite, known as alpha-ketoglutarate, that is regulated by CMA. Rationally intervening or guiding these functions could be a powerful way to increase the efficiency of regenerative medicine approaches."

Autophagy is a cell-eating mechanism necessary for survival and function of most living organisms. When cells self-eat, the intracellular materials are delivered to lysosomes, which are organelles that help break down these materials. There are a few forms of autophagy. However, unlike the other forms, which are present in all eukaryotic cells, CMA is unique to mammals. To date, the physiological role of CMA remains unclear.

Using metabolomic and genetic laboratory techniques on the embryonic stem cells of mice, the researchers sought to better understand significant changes that took place during their pluripotent state and subsequent differentiation.

They found that CMA activity is kept at a minimum due to two cellular factors critical for pluripotency--Oct4 and Sox2--that suppresses a gene known as LAMP2A, which provides instructions for making a protein called lysosomal associated membrane protein-2 necessary in CMA. The minimal CMA activity allows stem cells to maintain high levels of alpha-ketoglutarate, a metabolite that is crucial to reinforce a cell's pluripotent state, the researchers found.

When it's time for differentiation, the cells begin to upregulate CMA due to the reduction in Oct4 and Sox2. Augmented CMA activity leads to the degradation of key enzymes responsible for the production of alpha-ketoglutarate. This leads to a reduction in alpha-ketoglutarate levels as well as an increases in other cellular activities to promote differentiation. These findings reveal that CMA and alpha-ketoglutarate dictate the fate of embryonic stem cells.

Embryonic stem cells are often called pluripotent due to their remarkable ability to give rise to every cell type in the body, except the placenta and umbilical cord. Embryonic stem cells not only provide a superb system to study early mammalian development, but also hold great promise for regenerative therapies to treat various human disorders. The development of stem-cell based regenerative medicine therapies has rapidly increased in the last decade, with several approaches in studies shown to repair damaged heart tissue, replace cells in solid organ transplantation, and in some cases address neurological disorders.

"This newly discovered role of autophagy in the stem cell is the beginning of further investigations that could lead to researchers and physician-scientists to better therapies to treat various disorders," Yang said.

###

Penn co-authors of the study include the first author Yi Xu, a post-doctoral researcher in Yang's Lab, Yang Zhang and Sixiang Yu, also in Yang's lab, Lili Guo and Ian A. Blair of the department of Systems Pharmacology and Translational Therapeutics, Mengyuan Kan of the department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Informatics, as well as Juan C. Garca-Caaveras and Joshua D. Rabinowitz of Princeton University.

The study was supported the National Institutes of Health (R01CA182675, R01CA184867, R01CA235760, and P30ES013508, and the Department of Defense (W81XWH-15-1-0678).

Penn Medicine is one of the world's leading academic medical centers, dedicated to the related missions of medical education, biomedical research, and excellence in patient care. Penn Medicine consists of the Raymond and Ruth Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania (founded in 1765 as the nation's first medical school) and the University of Pennsylvania Health System, which together form a $7.8 billion enterprise.

The Perelman School of Medicine has been ranked among the top medical schools in the United States for more than 20 years, according to U.S. News & World Report's survey of research-oriented medical schools. The School is consistently among the nation's top recipients of funding from the National Institutes of Health, with $425 million awarded in the 2018 fiscal year.

The University of Pennsylvania Health System's patient care facilities include: the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania and Penn Presbyterian Medical Center--which are recognized as one of the nation's top "Honor Roll" hospitals by U.S. News & World Report--Chester County Hospital; Lancaster General Health; Penn Medicine Princeton Health; and Pennsylvania Hospital, the nation's first hospital, founded in 1751. Additional facilities and enterprises include Good Shepherd Penn Partners, Penn Home Care and Hospice Services, Lancaster Behavioral Health Hospital, and Princeton House Behavioral Health, among others.

Penn Medicine is powered by a talented and dedicated workforce of more than 40,000 people. The organization also has alliances with top community health systems across both Southeastern Pennsylvania and Southern New Jersey, creating more options for patients no matter where they live.

Penn Medicine is committed to improving lives and health through a variety of community-based programs and activities. In fiscal year 2018, Penn Medicine provided more than $525 million to benefit our community.

This story has been published on: 2020-07-23. To contact the author, please use the contact details within the article.

Read more from the original source:
'Self-eating' process of stem cells may be the key to new regenerative therapies - 7thSpace Interactive

‘Embryoids’ not the breakthrough they’re made out to be – The B.C. Catholic

Last year, Nature magazine reported scientists had discovered a way to produce large numbers of living beings that resemble primitive human embryos. These synthetic embryos, known as embryoids, raise extremely significant ethical issues.

Catholic teaching on biomedical ethics says direct experimentation on human embryos is barred, as is the use of embryonic stem cells (Catechism of the Catholic Church). With the latest development on embryoids, does the new technique fall afoul of either Catholic principle?

(Asked his views on the new technology, Catholic bioethicist Father Tad Pacholczyk agreed the ethical issue hinges in part on the question of whether embryoids constitute embryos in their full developmental potential or not, and there would remain debate over that question.)

First lets ask, what are embryoids? In short, these are embryonic stem cells that have been coaxed into developing like an early embryo in order to study how the embryo grows and develops. The motivation behind this research is to study gestational periods not currently permitted for experimentation embryonic growth beyond 14 days.

If this research doesnt actually require embryos and can be generated from other living things while still providing the same development path, this would be a true breakthrough enabling us to reduce the use of actual embryos in experimentation. However, there is a catch.

The embryonic stem cells being used are the same ones that have been used over and over by many scientists for dubious scientific reasons. Although the Nature article shies away from their true nature and the need to scale up this development to the degree expected, this would drastically increase demand for them. The primary source is currently aborted children, a very large and serious ethical concern. So, while the is of embryoids is touted as an advance, it is most certainly not.

There are additional ethical issues regarding the possibilities that these stem cells can develop as an actual embryo. This could be a revolutionary change, but it is not clear to me that this is in fact the case, and much research would have to be done in order to prove this. What this would entail is an advance in human cloning as the new human embryo would carry the identical genes to the source of the embryonic stem cells. In essence, the children killed through abortion would be cloned.

The other question raised concerns adult stem cells. Generally, advances in adult stem cells have been more successful than those using embryonic stem cells in clinical trials and are in accord with what the Church teaches. Would it be possible to coax adult stem cells to develop in this manner? If so, what are the consequences for this type of research?

It would be a staggering development if this were so, because it would permit mass human cloning based on the manipulation of adult stem cells. This has a variety of ethical consequences that Im not sure this article has the scope to touch, least of all being the ethics surrounding the commodification of human life and the abuse that such technology could entail with respect to both genetic manipulation and so called breeding for stock.

If this technology does what it claims it can do (and this is a big if, many advancements have been shown not to be), it seems that this would fall afoul of the Catechism regarding the separation of the procreative from the unitive aspects of sex. If these cells can and do grow as embryos do, this would be yet another form of procreation similar to the use of in-vitro fertilization. But we are not quite there yet, and research would have to be conducted to prove that this was in fact the case.

However, the fact that this research does use and harvests embryonic stem cells from aborted babies renders this research invalid according to the principles of the Catholic Church. Whatever further developments this approach garners may or may not incur other problems, but it is very important that Catholics know and understand the process being used with the science of embryoids.

It is also important that they understand that while it is unknown whether embryoids have a development limit, we are bound to respect them as if they are embryos due to the ethical principle of primum non nocere. If we are uncertain as to the true status of an entity, then we must treat it as if it were the entity it could be.

Calling embryoids artificial embryos is a lie because the research requires the use of embryonic stem cells, which are most certainly not artificial. If this research did forgo the use of embryonic stem cells, it would be another very significant development, but this research does not do this and it is important to understand this in light of claims to the contrary.

In short, this development needs careful examination to determine what the limits of embryoid growth are and whether this growth does or does not have a limit. This would establish the true nature of the embryoid and whether there is anything that distinguishes an embryoid from an embryo.

As is, this particular research and this approach is contrary to Catholic teachings barring the use of embryonic stem cells. It may also fall afoul of Catholic principles concerning other reproductive technologies, like IVF, but that is at present unknown.

Sean Ollech is a Prince George writer and B.C. Catholic contributor.

Excerpt from:
'Embryoids' not the breakthrough they're made out to be - The B.C. Catholic

Massive Growth in Stem Cell Manufacturing Market Breaking new grounds and touch new level in Upcoming Year by Thermo Fisher, Merck Group, Becton…

Stem Cell Manufacturing Market research is an intelligence report with meticulous efforts undertaken to study the right and valuable information. The data which has been looked upon is done considering both, the existing top players and the upcoming competitors. Business strategies of the key players and the new entering market industries are studied in detail. Well explained SWOT analysis, revenue share and contact information are shared in this report analysis.

Stem Cell Manufacturing Market is growing at a High CAGR during the forecast period 2020-2026. The increasing interest of the individuals in this industry is that the major reason for the expansion of this market.

Get the PDF Sample Copy of This Report:

https://www.a2zmarketresearch.com/sample?reportId=110629

Note In order to provide more accurate market forecast, all our reports will be updated before delivery by considering the impact of COVID-19.

Top Key Players Profiled in This Report:

Thermo Fisher, Merck Group, Becton Dickinson, Bio-Rad, Miltenyi Biotec, Takara Bio, STEMCELL, Pharmicell, Osiris, Anterogen, Cellular Dynamics, MEDIPOST, Lonza, Holostem, Pluristem

The key questions answered in this report:

Various factors are responsible for the markets growth trajectory, which are studied at length in the report. In addition, the report lists down the restraints that are posing threat to the global Stem Cell Manufacturing market. It also gauges the bargaining power of suppliers and buyers, threat from new entrants and product substitute, and the degree of competition prevailing in the market. The influence of the latest government guidelines is also analyzed in detail in the report. It studies the Stem Cell Manufacturing markets trajectory between forecast periods.

Hurry Up! Get 20% Discount on this Premium Report @:

https://www.a2zmarketresearch.com/discount?reportId=110629

Reasons for buying this report:

Table of Contents:

Global Stem Cell Manufacturing Market Research Report

Chapter 1 Stem Cell Manufacturing Market Overview

Chapter 2 Global Economic Impact on Industry

Chapter 3 Global Market Competition by Manufacturers

Chapter 4 Global Production, Revenue (Value) by Region

Chapter 5 Global Supply (Production), Consumption, Export, Import by Regions

Chapter 6 Global Production, Revenue (Value), Price Trend by Type

Chapter 7 Global Market Analysis by Application

Chapter 8 Manufacturing Cost Analysis

Chapter 9 Industrial Chain, Sourcing Strategy and Downstream Buyers

Chapter 10 Marketing Strategy Analysis, Distributors/Traders

Chapter 11 Market Effect Factors Analysis

Chapter 12 Global Stem Cell Manufacturing Market Forecast

Buy Exclusive Report @:

https://www.a2zmarketresearch.com/buy?reportId=110629

Read the original:
Massive Growth in Stem Cell Manufacturing Market Breaking new grounds and touch new level in Upcoming Year by Thermo Fisher, Merck Group, Becton...

Cell Viability Assays Market : What will be the Future in Upcoming Years | Biotium, Abcam plc, BioTek Instruments, Inc., , Boehringer Ingelheim…

Market Definition: Global Cell Viability Assays Market

Viability means ability to survive or live. Cell viability is a homogeneous method to determine the number of cells that are dead or living on a total cell sample. They are usually based on the ongoing cellular metabolism and enzyme activity. The increase in the cell viability means that there is cell growth while decrease in the cell viability means that toxic effects of compound. To determine the optimal growth conditions of the cell populations often call viability is very useful.

Cell Viability Assays Market report comprises of a chapter on the global market and all of its associated companies with their profiles, which gives important information and data pertaining to their outlook in terms of finances, product portfolios, investment plans, and marketing and business strategies. The report has information on product development, market sales, regional trade, investment calculation, investment opportunity, trade outlook, policy, regional market and another important characteristic of the Cell Viability Assays Market.

Get a Sample PDF of Global Cell Viability Assays Market Report @https://www.databridgemarketresearch.com/request-a-sample/?dbmr=global-cell-viability-assays-market

Few of the major competitors currently working in the cell viability assays market are Thermo Fisher Scientific, Merck KGaA, Bio-Rad Laboratories, GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY, Danaher, BD, Promega CorPerkinElmer Inc., Pfizer Inc., Bristol-Myers Squibb Companyporation, Biotium, Abcam plc, BioTek Instruments, Inc., , Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, GlaxoSmithKline plc. and Gilead Sciences, Inc., Others.

Global Cell Viability Assays MarketBy Products (Consumables, Instruments), Cell Type (Human Cells, Microbial Cells, Animal Cells), Applications (Stem Cell Research, Clinical & Diagnostics Applications, Drug Discovery & Development, Basic Research, Other Applications), End-Users (Pharmaceutical & Biotechnology Companies, Academic & Research Institutes, Hospital & Diagnostics Laboratories, Other End-Users), Geography (North America, South America, Europe, Asia-Pacific, Middle East and Africa) Industry Trends & Forecast to 2026Global Cell Viability Assays Marketis expected to rise from its initial estimated value of USD 2.75 billion in 2018 to an estimated value of USD 5.30 billion by 2026, registering a CAGR of 8.57% in the forecast period of 2019-2026.

Segmentation: Global Cell Viability Assays Market

Key Developments in the Market:

Inquiry Before Buying @https://www.databridgemarketresearch.com/inquire-before-buying/?dbmr=global-cell-viability-assays-market

Market Drivers

Market Restraints

The report can answer the following questions:

Get Detailed TOC with Tables and Figures athttps://www.databridgemarketresearch.com/toc/?dbmr=global-cell-viability-assays-market

About Data Bridge Market Research

An absolute way to forecast what future holds is to comprehend the trend today!

Data Bridge set forth itself as an unconventional and neoteric Market research and consulting firm with unparalleled level of resilience and integrated approaches. We are determined to unearth the best market opportunities and foster efficient information for your business to thrive in the market. Data Bridge endeavors to provide appropriate solutions to the complex business challenges and initiates an effortless decision-making process.

Data Bridge is an aftermath of sheer wisdom and experience which was formulated and framed in the year 2015 in Pune. We ponder into the heterogeneous markets in accord with our clients needs and scoop out the best possible solutions and detailed information about the market trends. Data Bridge delve into the markets across Asia, North America, South America, Africa to name few.

Data Bridge adepts in creating satisfied clients who reckon upon our services and rely on our hard work with certitude. We are content with our glorious 99.9 % client satisfying rate.

Contact:

Data Bridge Market Research

US: +1 888 387 2818

UK: +44 208 089 1725

Hong Kong: +852 8192 7475

Email:[emailprotected]

Read more here:
Cell Viability Assays Market : What will be the Future in Upcoming Years | Biotium, Abcam plc, BioTek Instruments, Inc., , Boehringer Ingelheim...

The Long Game of Coronavirus Research – The New Yorker

Last month, Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, spoke at a biotech conference, where he emphasized how much is still unknown about the coronavirus. I thought H.I.V. was a complicated disease, he said. Its really simple compared to whats going on with COVID-19. To anyone who knows the history of AIDS researchFauci has spent much of his career studying the diseasethis was a dismaying thing to hear. In 1984, President Reagans Health and Human Services Secretary, Margaret Heckler, said, We hope to have a vaccine ready for testing in about two years. Almost four decades later, there is still no vaccine. If Hecklers words now seem like wishful thinking, the Trump Administration has worried scientists and physicians with what may prove to be a similar overpromise. In May, it unveiled a plan to deliver hundreds of millions of doses of a COVID-19 vaccine by the end of this year. The plans nameOperation Warp Speedis meant to spark hope. But, in science, true hope is clear-eyed and brings a tight focus on the barriers and potential setbacks that exist along the path to desired results.

Read The New Yorkers complete news coverage and analysis of the coronavirus pandemic.

In the face of a crisis as urgent as COVID-19, speed is desirable, and the worldwide mobilization to conquer the virus has been inspiring. But what Fauci said illustrates why its a grave mistake to favor speed at the cost of rigor. Quite simply, this is a disease that weare only beginning to understand: since the outbreak began, it has become evident that its effects are, like those of AIDS, astonishingly diverse and complex. Still largely thought of as a respiratory diseaseit can indeed inflict devastating damage to the lungsit is actually, as Fauci noted, capable of roving throughout the body. There are cases in which it causes kidney failure, stroke, or a so-called cytokine storm, an overreaction of the bodys immune system that can lead to multiple organ failure. In children, infection can lead to multisystem inflammatory syndrome, a condition that can damage the heart and other vital organs. COVID-19 has a startling spectrum of severityfrom no symptoms to deathdepending on a host of poorly understood factors. Fauci also pointed out another unknown: whether some survivors, especially those with the severest symptoms, would end up dealing with lifelong debilitating effects. Currently, we are not even sure how to assess protective immunity if we had a vaccine in handwhether protection would be broad among all age groups and encompass the healthy as well as those whose clinical conditions, such as diabetes, heart disease, and obesity, predispose them to COVID-19. Even more worrying, for those who imagine a vaccine might end the pandemic like turning off a light switch, a number of recent studies suggest that people whove had the disease may not emerge with robust, lasting immunity. If so, its possible that the initial protection offered by a successful vaccine would similarly wane, and people could be infected again.

Its understandable how desperate we all are for quick solutions, with the number of infections and deaths skyrocketing. Some twelve hundred clinical studies have been designed since January, but many are too small to have much chance of producing clear results. Researchers have been publishing their papers online before they have undergone peer review. In May, the biotech company Moderna published initial results of an early trial of their vaccine in a press release. Modernas vaccine dominated research news again last week, afterfuller results of that trial were published in The New England Journal of Medicine. That work is still a preliminary achievement, since there were only fifteen healthy volunteers in each of three vaccine dose groups, and, in the moderate- and high-dose groups, almost every volunteer had side effects. An accompanying editorial from Penny Heaton, of the Gates Foundation, cautioned that we wont really know about the safety of Modernas vaccine until many thousands receive it, nor whether the reported immune response in volunteers is actually protective against the virus. There are clear risks with proceeding to human trials in haste. As Kenneth Frazier, the C.E.O. of Merck, pointed out last week, there have been cases, in the past, in which trial vaccines not only didnt confer protection, but actually helped the virus invade the cell, because it was incomplete in terms of its immunogenic properties. Promises to have a vaccine ready by the end of the year, he said, did a grave disservice to the public.

Producing a vaccine that is able to confer immunity on disparate age groups with varying levels of vulnerability is an enormous task, especially because COVID-19 is a brand new disease in humans, and therefore one to which we have no natural immunity. (Even a vaccine as comparatively simple as the annual flu shot reduces the risk of flu sickness for only about forty to sixty per cent of recipients.) All this means that a first vaccine, while a welcome tool in fighting COVID-19, may well turn out to be of limited use. The lesson learned from AIDS is the value of building a protective scientific infrastructure beyond a vaccine, something that requires legions of scientists working carefully and in concert to understand the numerous ways that a virus causes disease.

In early June, I visited the National Emerging Infectious Diseases Laboratories (NEIDL), to interview researchers there who are working on COVID-19. Part of Boston University, NEIDL (pronounced like needle) is one of two academically-affiliated institutions in the U.S. with laboratories that are certified to handle the deadliest pathogens known to man, like the Ebola and Marburg viruses and yellow fever. NEIDLs origins date to the period after 9/11, when Fauci warned that the country needed a better system to defend against possible bioterrorism attacks, and the government earmarked billions of dollars to prepare for such an event. NEIDL received its funding in 2003, but getting a facility ready to handle such pathogens takes years: the building itself was completed in 2008; acquiring the necessary environmental approvals from local government and community representatives took almost a decade. It wasnt until 2017, that NEIDL was fully approved to undertake all the work for which it was created.

The facility, which is on B.U.s medical campus, in Bostons South End, stands seven stories high, a modern structure of glass and concrete. Barriers surround the site at a distance of a hundred and fifty feet from the building; they are fitted with motion-detection sensors and are strong enough to stop a fifteen-thousand-pound truck going fifty miles an hour. Inside, there are around a dozen containment laboratories for dangerous microbes, which hold specialized microscopic equipment and robotic devices, and secure environmental facilities designed for pathogen vectors, like mosquitos and ticks, and animals, which researchers use to model human diseases. NEIDLs Biosafety Level 4 facilitythe part of the building that is licensed to handle the most dangerous microbesis constructed as a building within the larger building. That nested structure has twelve-inch-thick concrete walls coated with multiple layers of epoxy resin. While NEIDL itself is built on piling that go into bedrock, the B.S.L.-4 floors are flexible, and can move at a different frequency from the main structure in case of an earthquake. Researchers work in sealed suits, resembling those of astronauts, with a large transparent bubble over the head, supplied with filtered air via a hose connected to the ceiling. If there is a spill, the space is typically decontaminated with chlorine dioxide, and low air pressure maintained in the lab insures that air rushes in rather than out, so that no airborne virus can escape.

Go here to see the original:
The Long Game of Coronavirus Research - The New Yorker

Current research: Exosome Technologies Market Report- Growth with Top Companies Capricor, Codiak and Evox Therapeutics – WhaTech Technology and…

Exosome Technologies Market report is an in-depth research articulated by analysts by analyzing all the key factors such as regional market conditions, market boomers and decliners, opportunities, and size & scope of the market.

The research reports on Exosome Technologies Market report gives detailed overview of factors that affect global business scope. Exosome Technologies Market report shows the latest market insights with upcoming trends and breakdowns of products and services.

This report provides statistics on the market situation, size, regions and growth factors. Exosome Technologies Market report contains emerging players analyze data including competitive situations, sales, revenue and market share of top manufacturers.

Get FREE PDF Sample of the report @ http://www.reportsnreports.com/contactme=1781607

Top Company Profile Analysis in this Report

Capricor, Codiak and Evox Therapeutics

Exosome Technologies Market Report explores the application of exosome technologies within the pharmaceutical and healthcare industries. Exosomes are small cell-derived vesicles that are abundant in bodily fluids, including blood, urine and cerebrospinal fluid as well as in in vitro cell culture.

These vesicles are being used in a variety of therapeutic applications, including as therapeutic biomarkers, drug delivery systems and therapies in their own right. Research within this area remains in the nascent stages, although a number of clinical trials have been registered within the field.

Exosomes have several diverse therapeutic applications, largely centering on stem cell and gene therapy. Exosomes have been identified as endogenous carriers of RNA within the body, allowing for the intercellular transportation of genetic material to target cells.

As such, developers have worked to engineer exosomes for the delivery of therapeutic miRNA and siRNA-based gene therapies. As RNA is highly unstable within the body, a number of different biologic vector systems have been developed to enhance their transport within the circulation, including viruses and liposomes.

Similarly, exosomes derived from stem cells have also been identified for their therapeutic applications, particularly in the treatment of cancer and cardiovascular disease. Exosome technologies offer several advantages over existing biologic-based drug delivery systems.

They have a long circulatory half-life as a result of their high stability and ability to avoid breakdown by the mononuclear phagocyte system and reticuloendothelial systems. Moreover, exosomes have several functional properties that favor their use in therapeutic delivery.

Exosomes can be engineered to incorporate targeting ligands, allowing them to deliver cargo selectively to cells. Their small size allows them to penetrate the blood-brain barrier for the delivery of central nervous system therapies, whereas in cancer they can accumulate within the tumor via enhanced permeability and retention effects.

Finally, clinical trials have shown relatively large-scale production to be possible and indicate that exosome therapies can be safely administered to humans. Additionally, exosomes are being investigated for their potential as prognostic and diagnostic biomarkers for several different disease indications.

Exosomes make good candidates for biomarker research because of two unique characteristics: their presence in various accessible bodily fluids, and their resemblance to their parent cells of origin. R&D in exosome technologies has increased markedly in recent years.

This report provides detailed information on the various healthcare applications of exosomes, and assesses the pipeline, clinical trial and company landscapes.

Scope of this Report-

Reasons to accessthis Report-

Access Report-www.reportsnreports.com/purchasme=1781607

Table of Contents

1 Table of Contents 4 1.1 List of Tables 6 1.2 List of Figures 7

2 Exosomes in Healthcare 8 2.1 Overview of Exosomes 8 2.2 Drug Delivery Systems 9 2.2.1 Modified Release Drug Delivery Systems 9 2.2.2 Targeted Drug Delivery Systems 10 2.2.3 Liposomes 12 2.2.4 Viruses 14 2.2.5 Exosomes 17 2.3 The Exosome Lifecycle 18 2.4 Exosomes in Biology 18 2.5 Exosomes in Medicine 19 2.5.1 Biomarkers 19 2.5.2 Vaccines 20 2.6 Exosomes as a Therapeutic Target 20 2.7 Exosomes as Drug Delivery Vehicles 21 2.8 Therapeutic Preparation of Exosomes 21 2.8.1 Isolation and Purification 22 2.8.2 Drug Loading 22 2.8.3 Characterization 23 2.8.4 Bioengineering 23 2.8.5 Biodistribution and In Vivo Studies 23 2.8.6 Advantages of Exosome Therapies 24 2.8.7 Disadvantages of Exosome Therapies 24 2.9 Exosomes in Therapeutic Research 25 2.9.1 Exosome Gene Therapies 25 2.9.2 Exosome in Stem Cell Therapy 26 2.10 Exosomes in Oncology 27 2.10.1 Immunotherapy 27 2.10.2 Gene Therapy 28 2.10.3 Drug Delivery 29 2.10.4 Biomarkers 30 2.11 Exosomes in CNS Disease 30 2.11.1 Tackling the Blood-Brain Barrier 30 2.11.2 Exosomes in CNS Drug Delivery 31 2.11.3 Gene Therapy 32 2.12 Exosomes in Other Diseases 33 2.12.1 Cardiovascular Disease 33 2.12.2 Metabolic Disease 33

3 Assessment of Pipeline Product Innovation 36 3.1 Overview 36 3.2 Exosome Pipeline by Stage of Development and Molecule Type 36 3.3 Pipeline by Molecular Target 37 3.4 Pipeline by Therapy Area and Indication 38 3.5 Pipeline Product Profiles 38 3.5.1 AB-126 - ArunA Biomedical Inc. 38 3.5.2 ALX-029 and ALX-102 - Alxerion Biotech 39 3.5.3 Biologics for Autism - Stem Cell Medicine Ltd 39 3.5.4 Biologic for Breast Cancer - Exovita Biosciences Inc. 39 3.5.5 Biologics for Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis and Non-alcoholic Steatohepatitis - Regenasome Pty 39 3.5.6 Biologic for Lysosomal Storage Disorder - Exerkine 39 3.5.7 Biologics for Prostate Cancer - Cells for Cells 40 3.5.8 CAP-2003 - Capricor Therapeutics Inc. 40 3.5.9 CAP-1002 - Capricor Therapeutics Inc. 41 3.5.10 CIL-15001 and CIL-15002 - Ciloa 42 3.5.11 ExoPr0 - ReNeuron Group Plc 42 3.5.12 MVAX-001 - MolecuVax Inc. 43 3.5.13 Oligonucleotides to Activate miR124 for Acute Ischemic Stroke - Isfahan University of Medical Sciences 44 3.5.14 Oligonucleotides to Inhibit KRAS for Pancreatic Cancer - Codiak BioSciences Inc. 44 3.5.15 Proteins for Neurology and Proteins for CNS Disorders and Oligonucleotides for Neurology - Evox Therapeutics Ltd 44 3.5.16 TVC-201 and TVC-300 - Tavec Inc. 45

4 Assessment of Clinical Trial Landscape 48 4.1 Interventional Clinical Trials 48 4.1.1 Clinical Trials by Therapy Type 48 4.1.2 Clinical Trials by Therapy Area 49 4.1.3 Clinical Trials by Stage of Development 50 4.1.4 Clinical Trials by Start Date and Status 50 4.2 Observational Clinical Trials 51 4.2.1 Clinical Trials by Therapy Type 51 4.2.2 Clinical Trials by Therapy Area 51 4.2.3 Clinical Trials by Stage of Development 52 4.2.4 Clinical Trials by Start Date and Status 53 4.2.5 List of All Clinical Trials 54

5 Company Analysis and Positioning 67 5.1 Company Profiles 67 5.1.1 Capricor Therapeutics Inc. 67 5.1.2 Evox Therapeutics Ltd 72 5.1.3 ReNeuron Group Plc 73 5.1.4 Stem Cell Medicine Ltd 77 5.1.5 Tavec Inc. 78 5.1.6 Codiak Biosciences Inc. 80 5.1.7 Therapeutic Solutions International Inc. 81 5.1.8 ArunA Biomedical Inc. 83 5.1.9 Ciloa 85

6 Appendix 86 6.1 References 86 6.2 Abbreviations 91 6.3 About GBI Research 93 6.4 Disclaimer 93

This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

See the original post here:
Current research: Exosome Technologies Market Report- Growth with Top Companies Capricor, Codiak and Evox Therapeutics - WhaTech Technology and...