The artificial sweeteners used in diet drinks may stimulate the appetite and cause increased cravingsespecially for women and people with obesity, according to a study published in JAMA Network Open.

Want to help your patients lose weight? 3 reasons why commercial diet programs alone won't cut it.

For the study, researchers conducted a randomized crossover trial involving 74 participants over the course of three visits to determine if higher BMI and female sex are associated with increased brain reward activity or hunger response.

All participants were right-handed, nonsmokers, non-dieters, not taking medication, had a stable body weight for at least three months, and had no history of eating disorders, illicit drug use, or medical diagnoses. In addition, 58% of study participants were women. The average age of participants was 23.40 years old, and the BMI range was 19.18-40.27.

Notably, according to the study, most previous research on diet soda has focused mainly on males and people of normal weight.

As part of the randomized crossover design, participants consumed drinks containing sucrose, sucralose, or water. Then, the researchers measured the participants' responses to diet soda three ways, including:

According toKatie Page, a physician specializing in obesity at the University of Southern California and co-author of the study, the results showed that "females and people with obesity had greater brain reward activity" after they consumed the artificial sweetener.

Both females and people with obesity also experienced a reduction in the hormone that inhibits appetiteand they consumed more food after they had drinks with artificial sweeteners, compared with after they had drinks with sugar.

In comparison, male participants and people of healthy weight didn't experience an increase in brain reward activity or hunger response, which the researchers said suggests they aren't affected in the same way.

"I think what was most surprising was the impact of body weight and biological sex," Page said. "They were very important factors in the way that the brain responded to the artificial sweetener."

While some previous studies have shown benefits of artificially sweetened beverages, long-term research suggests that diet soda consumption islinked to increased weight gainand experts said the latest study should shed some light on this "false promise," NPR's "Shots" reports.

"This study offers some clues as to why," Laura Schmidt, a professor of health policy at the University of California, San Francisco, said. "Artificial sweeteners could be priming the brains of people with obesity to crave high-calorie foods," thereby disadvantaging people who may benefit most from a lower-calorie diet.

According to NPR's "Shots," one hypothesis as to why this disconnect occurs posits that the body may be confused by artificial sweeteners, making it believe sugar is coming.

As Susan Swithers, a behavioral scientist at Purdue University who was not involved in the study, put it, we're "supposed to get sugar after something tastes sweet. [Our bodies have] been conditioned to that." As a result, when we consume artificial sweeteners and the sugar never comes, our body's anticipatory responses are confusedwhich could throw off our ability to efficiently metabolize sugar that we consume later.

If this consistently happens to individuals who drink diet soda, it could increase the risk of Type 2 diabetes because when blood sugar rises, so does the body's insulin levels, Swithers added. "So what you're doing is you are kind of pushing the system harder," she said.

Given the results from this new research, Schmidt suggested, "People with obesity might want to completely avoid diet sodas for a couple of weeks to see if this helps to reduce cravings for high-calorie foods." (Aubrey, "Shots," NPR, 10/7; Yunker et al., JAMA Network Open, 9/28)

See the original post:
Is the 'diet' in diet drinks a 'false promise?' Here's what one study suggests. - The Daily Briefing

Recommendation and review posted by Bethany Smith

The booming U.S. egg donation industry requires more regulation to safeguard donor welfare.

Earn up to $50,000 dollars! Help a family! Donate your eggs!

Such slogans appear regularly on college bulletin boards and the social media feeds of many young women across the United States, advertising the altruisticand financialbenefits of donating their eggs to would-be parents.

But behind these advertisements lies a poorly regulated industry that buys and sells human eggs, with potential negative health effects for donors.

Unlike countries such as the United Kingdom and Canada, the United States has no federal regulations that specifically address advertising to potential egg donors. No U.S. agency tracks the long-term health effects of egg donation. And there is little oversight of the donation processwhich involves injecting someone with hormones for at least ten days, and then piercing the vaginal wall with a thick needle to extract eggs from the ovary.

Initially, it may seem that egg donation businesses are at least somewhat regulated. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), after all, oversees any establishment that recovers, processes, or distributes human reproductive tissue, including eggs. These clinics must register with FDA and list their tissue-based products in accordance with federal standards, which also require that egg donors be tested for infectious diseases.

But although FDA has published guidance documents on egg donor eligibility, it has taken few steps to ensure that donors are treated fairly by egg donation businesses. In short, FDA regulates who can be an egg donorbut does not regulate how the for-profit egg donation industry treats donors.

And although payments for organ donation have been outlawed in the United States since 1948, paying egg donors is entirely legal. Economic inducements are potentially limitless, despite egg donation businesses insistence that the industry is driven by altruism and women helping women.

Certainly, the thousands of donors who pay off student loans and other expenses through egg donation payments understand the industrys economic value. Compensation for a single donation can range from about $5,000 to $50,000depending on factors such as a donors physical profile, SAT scores, and athleticism.

The advertisements that recruit these donors are also underregulated. Although federal agencies enforce general truth in advertising laws, rarely if ever have these general requirements been applied to advertising for egg donors. Only one state has moved to clarify what truth in advertising means in the egg donation context. Passed in 2009, a California law requires that egg donor advertisements with compensation information must also feature warnings about health risks.

Unfortunately, such health risks may be haphazardly disclosed and are not well-studied. A survey of egg donors concluded that most donors were not informed fully of health risks prior to their donation. Short-term side effects from donationsuch as bleeding and infectionsare often not reported, as clinics rarely follow up with donors. Although some donors later report health problems such as ovarian cysts and infertility issues, the potential long-term risks of egg donation are not well-known. Some studies have also linked an increased risk of cancer with hormone stimulation of egg production.

These uncertainties persist as the egg donation market continues to grow. The number of women donating their eggs soared from 10,801 in 2000 to 18,306 in 2010a 70 percent rise, motivated in part by the growing practice of delaying pregnancies and an increasing demand for assisted reproductive technology. By 2018, industry analysts valued the U.S. market for egg donations at $487 million. Prominent egg donation businessesbearing names such as Extraordinary Conceptions and Premier Egg Donorshave engaged in a series of investor-driven mergers and acquisitions in recent years.

Yet government regulation has failed to keep pace with this industry growth. Two professional organizations have tried to create self-regulatory guidelines for egg donation businessesbut only with mixed success.

The Society for Assisted Reproductive Technologys minimum training standards for clinic employees have been largely uncontroversial. But another organization, the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM), faced litigation after it attempted to restrict egg donor compensation. ASRM advised that payments above $5,000 require justification and that sums above $10,000 are not appropriate. In response, four egg donors sued the organization, arguing that the price caps undercompensate women for a painful and risky procedure. After four years of litigation, in 2016 the organization agreed to strip the financial caps from its guidelines.

ASRM also insists that egg donors are owed the same duties present in the ordinary physician-patient relationship. But the egg donation model complicates this duty of care, as doctors employed by egg donation businesses are financially motivated to ensure that women donate their eggs. One researcher posing as a potential egg donor observed that physicians were focused primarily on the infertile recipients of the eggsand less on the donor undergoing invasive surgery.

These ethical issues in the egg donation industry may be addressed by a variety of regulatory solutions. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services could establish a National Egg Donor registry and initiate more government-funded studies on the long-term effects of donation. Such efforts may provide potential donors with unbiased information, rather than forcing them to rely on egg donation businesses for advice. In addition, the Department could use rulemaking to elevate private health organizations physician-patient care and compensation cap guidelines into federal law.

On a more structural level, the fragmentation of the U.S. healthcare system may impede better tracking of the health effects of egg donation. The uninsured, financially driven donation process used by U.S. egg donation businesses disconnects donors from their general healthcare provider. In contrast, by prioritizing the health of donors and providing insurance coverage for egg donation, Scandinavian countries with nationalized health care systems have produced robust data on the health effects of reproductive technology procedures.

Although the future of egg donation regulation may be uncertain, for now it is clear that the allure of up to five-figure payments provides fertile ground for ongoing ethical and medical concerns that merit better regulation to protect donors.

The rest is here:
Cracking the Egg Donation Market - The Regulatory Review

Recommendation and review posted by Bethany Smith

In 2019, Anne Fulenwider, a former Marie Claire editor-in-chief, was surprised while speaking with her friend Monica Molenaar, who'd had her ovaries removed as a preventive measure against breast cancer. The procedure essentially kick-starts menopause Fulenwider explainedto Insider, but Molenaar hadn't been able to find suitable options for treating her new symptoms, like hot flashes, for nearly five years.

"I couldn't believe that it took her five years to figure it out," Fulenwider told Insider. "I just thought we have to fix this."

In 2020, Fulenwider, 49, and Molenaar, 47, cofounded Alloy, a direct-to-consumer digital-health company that treats menopause symptoms. On Wednesday, the company raised $3.3 million in seed funding from PACE Healthcare Capital and Kairos HQ, where the two women had incubated the company.

"This group of millennial men said, 'Yes, we've been looking at this space,' and I just about fell off my chair," Fulenwider said of starting the company with Ankur Jain, Kairos HQ's cofounder and CEO.

Alloy is still a rarity. While women's-health companies have broken fundraising records this year, Rock Health's third-quarter report said, menopause startups remain overlooked, Fulenwider said.

Alloy says it's working with a select group of customers in a small trial phase and plans to fully launch its website and mail-order hormone treatment in November. Fulenwider said Alloy planned to start by using low-dose estrogen to treat hot flashes, the most-complained-about menopause symptom among the women she knew. Over time, she hopes to add treatments for the full range of menopause symptoms, which can include weight gain and mood changes.

Alloy provided Insider the presentation it used to raise the seed funding from Kairos HQ and PACE Healthcare Capital. The presentation has been edited to remove sensitive financial data and outdated information.

Originally posted here:
See the Presentation Menopause Startup Alloy Used to Raise $3.3 Million - Business Insider

Recommendation and review posted by Bethany Smith

Questions About Vaccines

Dear Editor,

I am not anti-vaccine. However, I believe the COVID-19 vaccine being so new (heck, COVID has only been around for less than three years) should be something an individual decides along with their physician if it is right for them.

We dont know the long term effects of COVID, much less the long term effects of the COVID vaccine.

When the chicken pox vaccine first came out my pediatrician advised against giving it to my children. Their reason, it was unknown at that time how long the vaccine would last and chickenpox in children is less severe than getting it as an adult. Now it is a vaccine routinely given and was given to my grandchild.

There are several things that were deemed safe when they first came out but proved problematic in the long term. Thalidomide, DES (diethylstilbestrol), hormone replacement therapy for all women and heroin as the safe way to get off opium are just a few examples.

There are so many aspects of the policies and mandates that dont make sense. Why was hydroxychloroquine not allowed to be given when COVID first appeared? It was a drug that had been around for years, the side effects were well known and physicians could have prescribed off label use. It became forbidden to prescribe or dispense for COVID. Why? Same thing happened with ivermectin. What other disease have we forbidden doctors to use treatments they feel are in the best interest of their patients? Why are we not studying how long immunity may last if someone recovers from a COVID infection?

Covid has been around for almost two-and-a-half years and we are still proclaiming emergency orders. Why? The greater good? I know a lot of people look with derision upon those espousing individual freedoms over the greater good, but our country was founded on upholding individual freedoms. Young people have been shown to be very unlikely to get sick with COVID. The vaccine can produce severe long lasting effects on this cohort yet we are pushing mandates on this age group. Why?

The unvaccinated are being blamed for the spread of COVID and its variants. How do we know for sure vaccinated people cant spread COVID? What about the possibility that universal vaccine may cause a more virulent mutation of the virus since the current vaccine only causes an immune response to the spike protein? What happens if the virus mutates to evade that? What does over vaccination cause? Viruses have been mutating for years and if this is a man engineered virus how do we know more rapid mutations arent part of the process?

There are many things we could force people to do for the greater good. Giving blood comes to mind. It would save millions of lives. What about forced organ donation? Is it really such a leap from the mandates now in effect?

If COVID scares you beyond living then you can isolate yourself but please dont force me. I recommend washing hands, disinfecting surfaces, getting vaccinated if you want (it has been proven to be an excellent idea for specific groups) and spending a lot of time outdoors if you are able.

We can choose to live in fear or we can choose to live. Let us not give up our right to choose.

Susan Smoot

Universal Vaccine Mandate Needed

Dear Editor,

To prevent further spread of the coronavirus, we should require everyone to get fully vaccinated, (including a possible third dose) unless exempted by a sincerely held religious belief or medical condition. We should write to our legislators and executives at all levels of government.

Alvin Blake

Go here to read the rest:
Letters To The Editor: Oct. 12, 2021 - The Rhino Times of Greensboro - The Rhino TImes

Recommendation and review posted by Bethany Smith

Tick, tick, tick. If you, like me, are a woman in her childbearing years, you may recognize that sound as your biological clock.

The noise isnt so bad in your mid-to-late 20s, a faint hum, maybe. But once you turn 30, the volume gradually turns up, and if youre anywhere around the age of 35, the ticking has likely turned into a booming echo that drowns out a lot of other stuff.

Its a still-common belief for many women that they need to have their reproductive life figured out before the big 3-5, out of fear that their ability to get pregnant and stay pregnant will take a massive hit and only get grimmer from there. And that age has been referred to as the fertility cliff, by medical experts, articles, you name it. Anyone who is 35-plus is considered to be of advanced maternal age and experiences a geriatric pregnancy in (quite harsh) medical terms. Women structure their lives around that dreaded numberwhich is not old at all in the grand scheme of things!

The pandemic only made matters worse for anyone with a shred of anxiety who was considering kids. For many, 2020 felt like a year when they couldnt move the dial forward or make any personal progress, says Taraneh Nazem, MD, a reproductive endocrinology and fertility specialist in New York. The worries led to increased interest in fertility preservation services, like egg and embryo freezing, in the past year. One clinic example: At Shady Grove Fertility (which has several dozen locations in the U.S.) there was a 50 percent jump in the number of egg freezing cycles started between June and November 2020, compared to the same time period the year before.

But the truth is, what we *think* we know about a womans age and fertilityand the root cause of much of this time-clock stressis, uh, pretty inaccurate. More and more experts are coming forward to say the research that the fertility cliff is originally based on is actually outdated, and point to newer studies that show much more promising results. Take this one out of the University of North Carolina School of Medicine that found that 81 percent of 38- and 39-year-old women (who had been pregnant before) got pregnant naturally within a year of trying at those ages. Eighty-one percent! That development is just one of many reasons you should detangle yourself from the cliff conceptand the heavy anxiety that comes with it. Instead, let doctors explain the latest perspectives; their take should leave you feeling assured and empowered about your future outlook.

Sure, its true that fertility (a.k.a. the quantity and quality of your eggs) declines as you age. But theres a big misconception that that happens significantly and universally at 35, says W. Spencer McClelland, MD, assistant professor of obstetrics and gynecology at Denver Health/University of Colorado. In fact, in one of the largest studies on fertility and age in Fertility and Sterility, researchers studied the length of time to conception, and found that while 84 percent of women ages 20 to 34 will get pregnant within a year of trying, that number is 78 percent for women who are 35 to 40on average, not a big differenceand still good chances!

Fertility is much more individual than people realize, says Dr. McClelland. For some, 30 could be the age at which things become more difficult; for others, it could be 45. Whats more, a variety of factors play a role in fertility, a few being lifestyle-driven, says Jaclyn Tolentino, DO, a physician at Parsley Health who specializes in hormone optimization. Its hard to know if someones struggles are age-related or whether they would have had them if they started trying to conceive when they were younger too, Dr. McClelland adds.

So why is 35 seared into our brains as the time when chances plummet? First, the emphasis placed on 35 as advanced maternal age comes from outdated research related to pregnancy complicationswhich is not the same thing as fertility, or the likelihood of getting pregnant, says Dr. McClelland.

Lets take a trip down memory lane, shall we? In the 70s, genetic testing became more widely available for women to find out about chromosomal abnormalities in the fetus (mainly, ones that indicate Down syndrome), and doctors had to determine when it was worth recommending that women have these tests. The risk of genetic abnormalities goes up with a pregnant persons age, but the test is invasive and can lead to miscarriage, so it only made sense to recommend it when the odds of Down syndrome were higher than the risk of miscarriage from the testing procedure. That tipping point, as you can guess, ended up around age 35. But what we know about the test has changed since then, says Dr. McClelland, and alsoit doesnt have much to do with fertility or pregnancy complications.

Yet the idea of 35 being advanced maternal age stuck, and several population studies on fertility furthered the notion, but again, not in the way you might assume. They tended to show that the risk of infertility as well as miscarriage, conditions like preeclampsia and gestational diabetes, and fetal chromosomal abnormalities climbs more significantly at 35. But the numbers dont skyrocket. The perceived change in fertility is much more extreme than the reality of it, says Dr. Nazem.

Also alarming: The studies reported on in the past are based on (disturbingly) antiquated research. Its commonly stated that one in three women ages 35 to 39 will not be pregnant after a year of trying, but those stats are based on a study from 2004 that uses French birth records from 1670 to 1830 (!). Seems borderline impossible to believe, but we still rely on historical data in the fertility discussion because its difficult to perform large and accurate studies on the topic.

This isnt to say that fertility and complications shouldnt be a concern at all for women as they agesimply that the level of concern may be overblown, says Dr. Nazem, particularly when it comes to the ease of getting pregnant. Its important to be aware of risks you may be facing, yet also understand that stressing about how your age might impact your pregnancy isnt helpful either.

So, despite what weve been taught, doctors and researchers do know that a woman doesnt go from perfectly fertile at 34 to suddenly doomed to struggle at 35. But, for the sake of simplicity, many docs treat 35 as a time when pregnant women become high-risk based on age, not individual health and history, and offer increased testing throughout those pregnancies.

This would seem harmless and maybe even like a good idea, but again, testing comes with its own risks. For instance, women who are 35 or older are often told to have extra ultrasounds to check their babys progress, says Dr. McClelland. Essentially, early testing may detect an abnormality that, for some women, will clear up before routine testing, and that can unnecessarily prompt another test that can increase risk of miscarriage, as well as anxiety. Theres something to be said for the pressure women feel about trying to conceive or becoming pregnant at 35 and beyondthat anxiety might be more detrimental to fertility and pregnancy than age itself. Stress certainly doesnt help overall health, fertility, and pregnancy, says Dr. McClelland. And people arent even worrying for a valid reason.

This perception may be so prevalent because fertility specialists, in particular, are constantly surrounded by people who are having fertility troubles, so theyre more likely to be aggressive in how they counsel anyone coming in with concerns about their future. Theres also the fact that no one wants to have a patient who regrets not taking action. Its always easier to do something than do nothing when it comes to testing and treatment, says Dr. McClelland. If you try, and something goes wrong, that feels more defendable than trying nothing, and something still going wrong, even though often, doing nothing is the smarter move. Its also undeniable that fertility is a $25 billion dollar industry globally that, while life-changing for some, leaves others feeling disappointed.

Information Overload Knowing that fertility is incredibly individual, the idea of testing it probably sounds pretty great. Several at-home kits and fertility clinics promise to help you see where you stand. Unfortunately, they cant actually tell you much.

One common test in question is the anti-mllerian hormone (AMH) blood test, which is meant to determine ovarian egg reserve (how many eggs you have left). Studies show these tests are notoriously unreliable, says Dr. McClelland.

They can only tell you if your reserve is above or below whats normal for the decade of life youre in, and theres no way to know how it might change. And your reserve says nothing about egg quality. Evaluating fertility is a bit of a misnomer, says Dr. Nazem. It can really only be proven by trying to conceive. One way to get data on how that might go? Track your cycle, says Dr. Tolentino. Irregular periods, heavy bleeding, painful cycles, and PMS can indicate issues (diagnosed or not) like PCOS, endometriosis, or fibroids, which can make getting and staying pregnant harder.

Look, everybody wants to put the ticking to rest. But worrying about your age, testing your fertility, and planning your life around those things isnt the way to do that. What it really comes down to is accepting that the ease with which youll be able to conceive and have a healthy pregnancy is a bit of a mysterybut its actually more likely that youll have success at any childbearing age. And hopefully that provides some relief.

If were going to let population data guide us, we should feel optimistic, because chances of getting pregnant on your own are still very high from 35 to 40, says Dr. McClelland. Think back to that positive stat from earlier: If you ask me, an 81 percent chance of getting pregnant is really good odds, says Dr. McClelland. Most people dont believe theyre in that group, and as medical professionals, we need to rewire that automatic pessimism. A lot of those assumptions come from the fact that youre more likely to hear about fertility struggles than someone who got pregnant quickly when they were older because thats just not talked about, he adds. For every patient I have who is 37 or 38 and trying for the first time and having trouble that may or may not be age-related, I have 10 to 20, if not more, stressing out about issues they think theyre going to have, but dont, says Dr. McClelland. I cant tell you how many patients have gone through unsuccessful IVF then gotten pregnant naturally; theyd pulled the trigger for IVF after only six months or a year of trying, which probably wasnt quite long enough, but everyone is afraid to keep trying because they think their chances will only get worse.

Ultimately, the decision of when to have kids and preserve your fertility, if at all, is an extremely personal one, and no one wants to have any regrets about not trying every single option they could have put into place when they were younger. But one thing is for sure: Fertility is much more complex than weve been made to believe, and the constant obsession and ongoing discussion about how age will impact it doesnt actually seem to be helping anyone. So once and for all, lets put the idea of falling off the fertility cliff to bed. Taking a walk down a gradual hill seems like a more accurate metaphorand sounds much better to me.

This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io

See more here:
Why The Fertility Cliff Concept Needs To Go, According To Doctors - Women's Health

Recommendation and review posted by Bethany Smith

New research presented at the 2021 North American Menopause Society (NAMS) Annual Meeting in Washington, DC, held September 2225, 2021, highlighted how many of the conditions and symptoms experienced in menopause are linked, and how they may impact our health as we age.

New data identified a link between the density of the fat around the heart and cognitive function in midlife women, and how it might affect Black women differently.

The findings provide further clues on how the declining cardiovascular health that happens after menopause may contribute to the increased prevalence of dementia in women. Nearly two-thirds of Americans with Alzheimer's are women, according to the Alzheimers Association.

What's new We know that fat around the midsection, including the heart, isnt good, says Stephanie S. Faubion, MD, the director of the Center for Womens Health at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota. Waist circumference alone is an important marker for cardiovascular disease; even normal-weight women who have a thicker waistline are at higher risk, she says.

RELATED: 12 Ways to Beat Menopausal Belly Fat

Research details In this new study, investigators used data fromSWAN (Study of Women's Health Across the Nation) to assess the associations of heart fat volume and radiodensity (the density of fat measured with a special machine) with future cognitive performance among midlife women.

Of the nearly 500 participants, 30.6 percent were post-menopausal and 35.9 percent were Black. Racial differences in the associations were specifically analyzed to further investigate a seeming contradiction; on average, Black Americans have lower cardiovascular fat volume but have a higher risk of heart disease and a higher prevalence of Alzheimer's disease compared with white Americans, according to the researchers.

Study results showed that a higher perivascular adipose tissue (PVAT) radiodensity (higher density) was significantly associated with a worse performance in working memory. Researchers also found a significant interaction between fat around the heart and race. A higher baseline PVAT radiodensity at midlife was associated with lower future performance in verbal episodic memory among Black women, but not white women. Those associations remained even after researchers controlled for the volume of heart fat, as well as waist circumference and other known confounders.

RELATED: Sexual Violence Can Have Long-Term Physical Effects

Why it matters This study is furthering our understanding about fat around the heart, says Dr. Faubion, who is also the medical director of theNorth American Menopause Society (NAMS). Its not just how much fat, but also the quality of fat around the heart that could determine health risk, and not just for heart disease; now were seeing it connected to dementia risk, too. Its all tied together, she says.

A higher vascular risk is bad for the brain because a lot of dementia risk really has to do with blood vessel health, adds Faubion.

RELATED: Help for Midlife Hair Thinning, Hair Loss

The results suggest that the density of fat around the heart could serve as a novel biomarker of cognitive function status in women later in life, says Samar El Khoudary, PhD, MPH, a researcher at the University of Pittsburgh School of Public Health and a lead author of the study. Dr. El Khoudary has published other studies that look at heart fat accumulation in women and how it impacts the arteries.

We still need more research to better understand what we have reported. At this stage, we can only stress the importance of thinking about risk factors of heart diseases, including visceral fat around vasculature, as shared risk factors that could also be related to brain health, she says. Interventions that address these shared risk factors may benefit both the heart and the brain, adds El Khoudary.

Right now, we dont know why higher density fat is worse, says Faubion. It may be because its more active, she says.

Is fat density modifiable or is it more like breast tissue density and cant be changed? Thats a good question. I dont know if you can change the density of the fat, says Faubion. Given what we currently know, the goal should be to have a healthy amount of fat, she says.

RELATED: Predicting How Long the Menopausal Transition Will Last, and When Youll Reach Menopause

Even if you spend eight or nine hours in bed, you may still accrue poor-sleep-related outcomes unless you fix your WASO, saidHadine Joffe, MD, the executive director of the Connors Center for Womens Health and Gender Biology, who presented on the topic during a symposium at NAMS.

What's new WASO, short for "wake time after sleep onset," is associated with adverse consequences for mental health, daytime well-being, and metabolic health for women during midlife, said Dr. Joffe, who is also the director of the Womens Hormone and Aging Research Program at Brigham and Womens Hospital and Harvard Medical School, during her presentation.

Research details Data suggests that menopause-pattern sleep fragmentation may impact metabolism and contribute to an increase in body fat, which happens in about half of all women during and after menopause, she said.

The focus has always been on getting enough sleep; we always ask, Have you been getting at least seven hours of sleep? says Kristi Tough DeSapri, MD, an assistant professor of medicine at Northwestern University and a physician at the Northwestern Medicine Center for Sexual Medicine and Menopause in Chicago.

Thats often the public service message that is out there get enough sleep but during the menopause transition it may be more beneficial to focus on sleep quality, she says. Finding ways to improve sleep efficiency, less waking during the night, whether thats from menopause symptoms or other reasons, are important to consider, rather than simply the number of hours we sleep, says Dr. DeSapri.

RELATED: To Boost Your Sex Life, Try Getting Better Sleep

Why it matters There is a connection between menopausal symptoms, such as hot flashes and night sweats, and WASO, and it might be appropriate to try hormone therapy or management of hot flashes to address those, says Faubion. There are also a number of reasons that have nothing to do with your health that could interrupt your sleep as well, everything from your partner snoring to your old dog getting up to pee every hour, she says. Alcohol, bladder issues, and mood may also be behind interrupted sleep, says Faubion.

WASO is absolutely worth working on either on your own or with the help of your provider, she adds.

A new study from Mayo Clinic confirms a link between a history of migraine and hot flashes and highlights the association of both phenomena with an increased risk of heart disease.

A prior study from SWAN showed a connection, and we wanted to see if our data would corroborate that finding, says Faubion, the lead author of the study.

RELATED: New Therapies for Hot Flashes Are on the Horizon

What's new We found that the correlation between hot flashes and migraine was significant, and the correlation with the severity of hot flashes was significant: The more severe your hot flashes were, the more likely you were going to report severe migraines, says Faubion.

Research details The cross-sectional analysis used theData Registry on the Experiences of Aging, Menopause, and Sexuality (DREAMS), which was completed by women ages 45 to 60 who visited one of the Mayo Clinic locations in Minnesota, Arizona, and Florida. A total of 3,308 women were included; the population was 94.5 percent white, 93 percent had at least some college, and 27 percent reported a history of migraine.

The nature of the relationship is still unknown, Faubion says. Its also unclear [whether] migraine and hot flashes are separate things that are both tied to heart disease risk or if they share a common pathophysiology, says Faubion.

RELATED: Coping With Hot Flashes and Menopausal Symptoms: What 10 Celebrities Said

Why it matters These findings could help us be more proactive in offering treatment and lifestyle interventions for menopause symptoms in women with a history of migraine, she says.

More research is needed to determine whether having both a history of migraine and hot flashes in midlife predict greater heart disease risk than either factor on its own, and whether these female-specific factors could be used to enhance the accuracy of CVD risk calculations for women, says Faubion.

See the rest here:
Menopause Symptoms Predict Risk of Heart, Memory Trouble - Everyday Health

Recommendation and review posted by Bethany Smith

Type 2 diabetes is a chronic disease that prevents your body from being able to properly use insulin. Its the result of increased insulin resistance and your pancreas not making enough insulin to manage your blood sugar (glucose) levels.

About 1 in 10 Americans has diabetes, and type 2 diabetes represents 90 to 95 percent of those cases, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

There are many symptoms of type 2 diabetes. Its important to know what they are because diabetes because the condition can be prevented or delayed if caught early.

Read on for the most common symptoms of type 2 diabetes.

The symptoms of type 2 diabetes vary from person to person. They can develop slowly over many years and might be so mild that you dont notice them.

Polyuria, or excessive urination, is one of the 3 Ps of diabetes.

Your kidneys eventually cant keep up with the extra glucose in your bloodstream. Some of the glucose ends up in your urine and draws in more water. This leads to more frequent urination.

Adults naturally produce 1 to 2 liters of urine per day (a liter is about a quart). Polyuria is defined as more than 3 liters per day.

Excessive thirst, or polydipsia, is often a result of frequent urination. Your body urges you to replace lost fluids by making you feel thirsty.

Of course, everyone gets thirsty sometimes. Extreme thirst is uncharacteristic and persistent, no matter how often you replenish.

Excessive hunger is called polyphagia.

If you have type 2 diabetes, your body has a hard time turning glucose into energy. This makes you feel hungry. Eating introduces even more sugar that cant be processed, and it doesnt alleviate the hunger.

Diabetes increases your risk of several eye conditions, including:

The increased blood sugar from diabetes can damage blood vessels, including those in the eye, leading to blurry vision.

Fatigue can be a mental or physical tiredness that doesnt improve with rest. There are many causes of fatigue.

Its a difficult symptom to research, but a 2016 study concluded that people with type 2 diabetes may experience fatigue as a result of fluctuations between high and low glucose levels.

If you have type 2 diabetes, regular cuts and scratches can take longer to heal. Wounds on your feet are common and easy to overlook. Slow healing foot ulcers occur due to poor blood supply as well as damage to the nerves responsible for blood flow to the feet.

A 2020 study showed that diabetic foot ulcers dont mobilize the immune cells needed for proper inflammation and healing.

High glucose can damage the blood vessels that supply nutrients to your nerves. When your nerves dont receive enough oxygen and nutrients, they cannot function properly.

This is called diabetic neuropathy and is most common in your extremities.

Insulin resistance causes glucose to build up in the bloodstream instead of being turned into energy. This can cause your body to consume other energy sources, like muscle or fat tissue.

Your weight might naturally fluctuate a little. An unexplained loss of at least 5 percent of your body weight is generally agreed as a need to talk with your healthcare professional.

In addition to nerve damage and a weakened immune system, poor blood circulation also increases the chance of developing an infection in people with diabetes. Having more sugar in your blood and tissues allows infections to spread faster.

People with diabetes commonly develop infections of the:

Acanthosis nigricans is a skin condition that can be a symptom of diabetes. It appears as dark bands of skin that may have a velvety texture.

This is most common in body folds such as your armpits, neck, and groin, but can also occur elsewhere.

Continue reading here:
Type 2 Diabetes Symptoms in Women and Men: What to Know - Healthline

Recommendation and review posted by Bethany Smith

The Male Breast Cancer Market report examines the short- and medium-term economic and profitability prospects of the Male Breast Cancer industry. The Global Male Breast Cancer Market Report is a professional and comprehensive research report on the market situation in the worlds major regions, focusing on the main regions (North America, Europe, and Asia-Pacific) and the main countries (USA, Germany, UK, Japan, South Korea, and China).

Over the years, the Male Breast Cancer market has grown exponentially, driven by the demand from baby boomers. Most people feel comfortable in their own homes, and leaving their comfort zone to seek treatment or care in a facility seems daunting to many. Male Breast Cancer has emerged as a reliable alternative when many seniors who have lived their entire lives at home struggle to adjust to a new institution/facility.

Request Illustrative PDF Brochure (Contains- Keyplayers, Growth Value, Segments, etc):https://www.worldwidemarketreports.com/sample/556539

Market leaders mentioned in this report:

Pfizer, Roche, GlaxoSmithKline, Sanofi, Novartis, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, AstraZeneca, Teva Pharmaceutical, Sun Pharmaceutical, BioNumerik Pharmaceuticals, Seattle Genetics, Accord Healthcare

Male Breast Cancer Market Segmentation by Type:

Medication, Chemotherapy, Others

Male Breast Cancer Market Segmentation by Applications:

Hospitals, Clinics, Others

The report provides an in-depth and broad understanding of the Male Breast Cancer market. The report provides dominant data for key players with accurate data covering all key features of the dominant market. An audit of the state of the market by the availability of accurate historical data for all segments during the forecast period is mentioned. Driving forces, restraints, and opportunities are provided to help provide an improved picture of investments in this market during the forecast period 2021-2027.

Analysis of the Impact of COVID-19:The full version of the report includes projected changes to the impact of COVID-19 and the future outlook of the industry, taking into account political, economic, social, and technological parameters.

Get the Covid 19 version of this report:https://www.worldwidemarketreports.com/covidimpact/556539

The global Male Breast Cancer market is expected to grow at a healthy pace through 2020. The growth of the global baby boom generation population is expected to be a key driver of the global Male Breast Cancer market growth. Also, awareness of the benefits of receiving home care is expected to further propel the growth of this market.

Key Drivers and Regions of Global Male Breast Cancer Market

History Future Analysis and AssessmentHistory: 2015-2020Base year: 2021Estimated Year:2021Forecast Year: 2021-2027

In-depth qualitative analysis involves the identification and investigation of the following aspects:Male Breast Cancer Market Structure, Growth Drivers, Limitations and Challenges, Emerging Product Trends and Male Breast Cancer Industry Opportunities, Porters Five Forces.

The Asia Pacific, the USA, and Western Europe are expected to be major regions for global Male Breast Cancer market growth. The surging elderly population in the densely populated countries of Asia Pacific, particularly India and China, is expected to drive the demand for the Male Breast Cancer market. The easy availability of home care service providers and the increasing number of chronic diseases are expected to be the reasons to revitalize the global Male Breast Cancer market. The cost-effectiveness of Male Breast Cancer is expected to have a good impact on the growth of the Male Breast Cancer market in Western Europe.

Key Challenges of the Global Male Breast Cancer Market

The shortage of trained workers remains a major challenge for the growth of the global Male Breast Cancer market. The leading players in the global Male Breast Cancer market have strict hiring procedures and focus on providing the right training for their employees. However, new entrants to the market are lax about the history of workers and do not have the resources or budget to train them. This remains a key challenge for the growth of the global Male Breast Cancer market.

Key Questions in the Male Breast Cancer Market Report:-

The report analysts have focused on answering some key questions about the Male Breast Cancer market. It is intended to help the reader gain a clear knowledge of the growth of the Male Breast Cancer market and the ongoing changes that will diversify the market in the coming years.

Report Customization https://www.worldwidemarketreports.com/quiry/556539If you have any questions or custom requirements, please contact our experts to make sure your requirements are met.

View original post here:
Male Breast Cancer Market: Established Keyplayers Will Try to Generate New Growth Opportunities in the Upcoming Years: Pfizer, Roche, GlaxoSmithKline ...

Recommendation and review posted by Bethany Smith

National Breast Cancer Awareness Month

By: Grecia Romero

Para leer en Espaol

A pink ribbon is distinct. Its unique meaning strikes in a millisecond.

The well-known ribbon and its distinctive color has become the official symbol of commitment and awareness in the global fight against breast cancer in October. Organizations and people interested in the cause use it to represent hope for the future while honoring those who have suffered from the disease. The ribbon joins people from all backgrounds in solidarity with those who are currently suffering from it.

This color is not a fashion trend. Its a visible form of awareness and education on prevention, early detection, and treatment of this disease.

Breast Cancer Does Not Discriminate

Breast cancer continues to be the most common type of cancer in women. About 1 in 8 women in the United States will be diagnosed with this cancer in her lifetime, and 1 in 39 will die from the disease. According to the 2021 Cancer Facts & Figures report published last month by the American Cancer Society, it is estimated that by December of this year, there will be 281,550 new cases, which represents 30% of all possible cancer diagnoses.

Breast cancer is not exclusive to women. Men can also suffer from the disease although at a lesser extent. The same report estimates that 2,650 new cases of men will be diagnosed this year with a risk of life of 1 in 1000 cases.

Mary Ann Orlang works as a clinical nurse specialist in genetics at the Regional Cancer Center in Florida. She helps patients with genetic cancer tests that might be inherited. Orlang said that cancer is a disease that does not distinguish between sex and age.

We see a wide range of people with this condition on a daily basis. We serve very young women, in their twenties or thirties, as well as older women, said Orlang. We have also had male patients who have been diagnosed with breast cancer, although their risk is not as high as women.

As Orlang said, learning how this type of cancer behaves plays a very important role in prevention and treatment.

Awareness is importantespecially with risk factors like family history of breast cancer or prostate cancer since prostate cancer is also associated with BRCA genes.

Orlang also said that breast self-exam is highly recommended and should be started as early as 18 years of age for women with high-risk families. This allows the young woman to learn to distinguish what is normal for her and to recognize in time if there is something wrong. This is also true for men because, as Orlang points out, although the detection of breast cancer in men is much easier, it is common that the diagnosis comes as a result of a medical evaluation for the presence of lumps, secretions, or change in the appearance of the breasts.

Risk Factors: What Should You Know?

Breast cancer is not an infectious, bacterial, or transmissible disease like the human papilloma (HPV). Statistics from the American Cancer Society show that approximately 10% of all cases of this type of cancer are hereditary, an additional 10 to 30% have a close family member who also had cancer suggesting a familial link, and 60 to 80% are sporadic cases.

Although it is not possible to point to a direct and specific cause for its occurrence, several studies have verified the relationship of certain factors, some of them controllable, with the appearance of this disease.

The American Cancer Society lists all risk factors that increase the chances of getting the disease: the womans age (risks increase considerably after age 50), starting menstrual periods early, or having her first child at an advanced age, not having breastfed, a personal history of cancer, and direct family inheritance.

Potentially modifiable factors include obesity, physical inactivity, use of alcohol or tobacco, prolonged use of hormones, and excessive radiation exposure.

Prevention: What should be done?

Living a healthy lifestyle is the key to preventing cancer and multiple diseases. This requires different adjustments, but that will be undoubtedly of great benefit in the long term. According to the American Cancer Society, some preventive tips are:

Awareness Breast Cancer Month: Where Do We Start?

The keyword of October is action!

There are several things that can be done to fight this disease and really make an impact on the lives of those who suffer from it.

See the original post here:
Pink Ribbon is not a fashion trend: It is a Symbol of a fight! - Doral Family Journal

Recommendation and review posted by Bethany Smith

This is a rush transcript of "The Ingraham Angle" on October 1, 2021. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

LAURA INGRAHAM, FOX NEWS HOST: I'm Laura Ingraham. This is THE INGRAHAM ANGLE from Washington tonight.

The pandemic of the unvaccinated narrative gets a reality check. My medicine cabinet is here and they'll expose why cases are surging in highly vaccinated areas. And it's not just Texas, Arizona now is under a massive strain from illegals crossing the border there. We're going to bring you a dramatic report from Yuma.

Plus, Pelosi becomes a dancing queen and James Bond gets a makeover from the woke left. Oh say it, ain't so, Raymond Arroyo is here for Friday Follies.

But first, last night special counsel John Durham dropped his second bombshell in just the last two weeks. He issued subpoenas to one of the most politically connected law firms in the country. It's called Perkins Coie.

Now, in 2016, that law firm represented the DNC and the Clinton campaign, who then, of course, used the firm to funnel money to former British spy Christopher Steele. Now Steele, in turn, used the funds to finance his phony dossier on then candidate Donald Trump.

Now, this comes just two weeks, by the way, the subpoena after the federal grand jury indicted former Perkins Coie lawyer Michael Sussman for lying to the FBI during a 2016 meeting that helped spark the Trump Russia probe. Now, we're not sure why it's taken Durham this long to do this. But we may finally, finally be close to learning just how far the Clintons and their allies went, and all their efforts to destroy Donald Trump, his campaign and his presidency.

And when the truth finally comes out, we'll also see how invested the Deep State was in deep siccing Trump. Their goal was to frustrate the Trump agenda, and put them on the defensive from day one.

And as we all remember, the main villains here were aided and abetted by a corrupt left wing media complex that fan the fraudulent Russian collusion accusations for years. By the way, remember, none of those media folks decided to resign after their role in all of this. There were no (inaudible). And as far as I can tell, there's been no accountability. Sound familiar, or sounds like just what's happening at the Biden Pentagon.

And when the Durham subpoena news did break, Hillary's collaborators in the press, they kind of just decided to downplay it or just ignore it entirely. So last night, ABC and CBS fond over Biden's moves to save his mega spending bill and also to keep our borders wide open. And the Durham probe didn't make NBC Nightly News either, but, well, they did find time to do a very important feature on the lineup for the Super Bowl halftime show.

But come on, it's understandable. Eminem, Snoop Dogg over here versus boring old Durham and Perkins Coie over there. Maybe it's time to strike the whole word, news, from NBC Nightly News at this point, more like NBC Nightly Distraction. Of course, the news blackout extended to MSNBC, which spent years dining out in the twisted Russian conspiracies.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Donald Trump was trying to do business with Russia. And then six months later, Russia is trying to help the Trump campaign. It's not very complicated.

JEFFREY TOOBIN, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: This is not how presidents behave. It's a dark moment in American history today.

DEXTER FILKINS, THE NEW YORKER CONTRIBUTOR: Eric Lichtblau of the 'New York Times' calls Alpha Bank's lobbyists in Washington. 48 hours later, the Trump domain vanishes from the internet. And--

RACHEL MADDOW, MSNBC HOST: One thing, if the alpha side of it disappeared, they called alpha and the Trump side disappear.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Ok, ok. But surely CNN gave the Durham developments their due.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It seems like he's not delivering that big fish that former President Trump and Attorney General Bill Barr promised.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Right. Exactly after 2.5 years or so, there's only been these two indictments. And they frankly have been very thin.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Now, what's really thinnest here is their credibility and objectivity. It's not existent. Wolf Blitzer even trotted out one of the slimiest guys in this ongoing drama, former FBI Director Andrew McCabe.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

WOLF BLITZER, CNN HOST: Is this the action of a special counsel, who after once again two years of investigating has found essentially not much, at least not yet?

ANDREW MCCABE, FORMER FBI DEPUTY DIRECTOR: Well, that's absolutely right. There's really very little here relevant to what he supposedly was hired to investigate. The recent indictment and these subpoenas really hold the FBI more in the position of victim rather than subject of an investigation.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: The spin just never ends. Just remember, Andy's always going to play the victim though. So the FBI, our Intel agencies, the media, and dishonest Democrats, they did incalculable harm to the office of the presidency and the people's faith in these institutions. And none of the guilty parties in this saga, not the press, the DOJ, certainly not the Intel community, have learned anything over the last few years.

Since we discovered that the Russia probe was a fraud from the outset, they've just moved on to targeting innocent Americans, who oppose the Biden agenda, while dismissing Biden's conflicts of interests on China and his general incompetence and managing the affairs of our nation. It's a complete an ongoing disservice to the hard working people of America who deserve to know the truth about the lengths to which our own government and media will go to take and keep power.

Joining me now is Mollie Hemingway, senior editor at the Federalist; and Ari Fleischer, former White House press secretary, both Fox News contributors.

Mollie, this attempt to gloss over the Durham news, as if the first thing they're going to announce is that they have Jim Comey, or somehow Andy McCabe is going to be marched out in handcuffs. That's not how investigations ever work.

MOLLIE HEMINGWAY, SENIOR EDITOR, THE FEDERALIST: Well, the thing about this conspiracy is that it was complicated and very difficult to unravel. There are three different sets of bad actors. There are the Clinton campaign and their law firm who made up the hoax, invented it, mostly out of whole cloth. There are the corrupt intelligence officials, who weaponized it. And then there are the completely reprehensible media, who uncritically regurgitated it.

There is some accountability that can be had for the corrupt FBI officials and for the Clinton campaign. But the media are really the bad actors. They're the ones who reported this day in and day out for years, undermining administration affecting the 2016 election, the 2018 election, and the 2020 election. And because of the laws of our land, there's not so much you can do even though they probably knowingly lied about all of this. But one thing that can be done is that conservatives and victims and Republicans, who were victims of this need to hold them accountable.

And here's one way you don't hold them accountable. Chuck Todd, who's at a different network, lied about the Russia collusion for years. He brutally attacked Republicans who tried to fight back. He defended deep state actors as they lied. The Virginia Republicans had him host their gubernatorial debate, where they allowed that to happen where their candidate debated with him moderating. There is no reason that conspiracy theorist and liar at that level should have any access to Republicans.

And Republicans need to have greater self respect for themselves, that they don't allow these people to continue to act like nothing happened. What happened to this country was evil and wrong, and they need to be held accountable.

INGRAHAM: Ari, do you agree? It seems like Republicans are so quick to forgive what are frankly unforgiveable moves by an independent media, supposedly independent media. So they're basically just now an extended comm shop of the Democrat Party. So why shouldn't they at some point be treated as such?

ARI FLEISCHER, FORMER WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Yes, Laura. I'm not willing to forgive or move beyond. I'm actually writing a book about it and how much the media has led America down. But let's reset the table here.

First and foremost, the Democrats and much of the media never accepted the results of the 2016 presidential election in which Donald Trump won. And as a result of Trump's win, they did everything in their power to undermine the win and make the claim that it was somehow illegitimate that he's not the duly elected president, that the only reason he won was because of Russian interference in America's election. And they perpetrated that myth, and it became the dominant theme of the early years of the Trump era.

Everything Donald Trump did seem to be tainted by the press, falling over themselves, to make it lead the evening news, front page coverage, websites, everywhere about Donald Trump and Russia, and went as far as I'm accepting much of the Steel Dossier too. And so what do you have now with what happened last night in this revelation about subpoenas, a total media hypocritical approach.

Every time a subpoena was issued by Bob Mueller and his investigation of Donald Trump, it was hysteria in the media about this and where it could lead. And now, in the case of a subpoena issued to the Clinton law firm, 'The New York Times' and 'The Washington Post' buried it. One paragraph in each of those papers.

And as you pointed out, Laura, the network's poo-pooed it, made it act like it was nothing. A total hypocrisy by those who said the election was stolen by Donald Trump.

INGRAHAM: Now, moving on to another issue, which is I think, really hurting Biden is his approach to the border and immigration. And Mollie, the AP is reporting that "The administration announced new rules that require authorities to only pursue migrants who recently crossed into the country since November 1 without permission - or they're deemed to pose a threat to public safety".

Mollie, what message does that send to the 60,000 Haitians plus, who are making their way to our southern border?

HEMINGWAY: It sends the same message that the Biden administration has sent since before it was even in office. When Biden campaigned, he encouraged people to illegally cross the border. He tore down all of the rules and restrictions that we had put in place, kind of patchwork that we had in place, in other countries, in our country to ensure that some of the trafficking that we've seen would be controlled.

And so it's not - you know, it's a crisis of his own making. He chose this, he wants this. And so it's very difficult to solve, because he doesn't actually view this as a problem, even as much of the country is having to pay for this and deal with the consequences of his open borders policy.

INGRAHAM: And, Ari, yesterday's hearing on Capitol Hill in Congress was meant to strike back against Texas and other states that are putting abortion restrictions in place. And a lot of people didn't believe what they were seeing. Watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. RASHIDA TLAIB (D-MI): Black Lives Matter should be very much at the forefront and every policy that we ever do in this country.

REP. AYANNA PRESSLEY (D-MA): Abortion bans like this are rooted in patriarchy, white supremacy, and perpetuate systemic racism.

GHAZALEH MOAYEDI, OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY SPECIALIST: I know firsthand that abortion saves lives. Abortion is a blessing. Abortion is an act of love. Abortion is freedom.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Ari, does that help the Democrats with those kind of working class Democrats, a lot of Catholic voters and others. But Congresswoman came up when they basically told their abortion stories and others, and it's an act of love now. Is that going to fly? What happened to safe legal and rare under Clinton?

FLEISCHER: Yes. And Hispanic voters too, Laura, between immigration and this. That's another reason the Democrats are suffering erosion in the Hispanic community. But now, that type of rhetoric, that type of extremist language never works on either side.

And that's why I've made a career of trying to carve out treating people with respect, understanding two different sides of an argument, coming down on a principal position and holding to it. But you don't vilify and demonize the other side. And on a host of issues, that's the only Democratic approach they have left, demonize and vilify. And that's why they're not getting majorities for anything they're doing on the Capitol Hill these days.

INGRAHAM: Mollie, does that work, that abortion tech they took?

HEMINGWAY: It's extreme, and it's mostly just sad to hear people talk this way about the ending of unborn human life. And it's a reminder that everybody needs to care for the women in their midst and the children that they bear. But this language is so extreme, and it doesn't match with what we know about Americans, which is that they, in general, would like to see restrictions - some restrictions on abortion, and that we have the most radical policies relative to any country on Earth. So not wise on their part.

INGRAHAM: All right. Mollie, Ari, great to see you. Have a great weekend.

And over on Capitol Hill, my next guest was hammering HHS secretary Xavier Becerra for twisting the science on COVID. Watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. RAND PAUL (R-KY): Do you want to apologize to the 100 million Americans, who suffered through COVID, survived, have immunity, and yet you want to hold them down and vaccinate them? Do you want to apologize for calling those people flat earthers?

XAVIER BECERRA, HHS SECRETARY: We follow the facts and the science at HHS, we use the expertise of the medical professionals, scientists at HHS to make decisions. It's a team effort. And we rely on what is on the ground showing us results.

PAUL: Except for the dozens and dozens of studies, in fact, most if not all of this studies, show robust immunity from getting the disease naturally. You're selectively doing this because you want us to submit to your will.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Joining me now, Kentucky Senator Rand Paul. Senator, I had so many friends send me that exchange, texted it to me last night. It is stunning. The bureaucracy uninformed, ignorant, certainly no medical background. What's going to happen here?

Now, Dianne Feinstein has introduced legislation to stop the unvaccinated, prevent them from traveling domestically on an airplane.

SEN. RAND PAUL (R-KY): You know, the truth is actually the opposite. For those of us who have had the disease and survived, we're more at risk in being around only vaccinated people. So these people who are hysterical about the unvaccinated, it's actually the opposite of the truth. The riskiest people to catch it from are people who are vaccinated versus people who have had the disease.

Now, there are some people who are unvaccinated, who haven't had the disease, and I do recommend that they voluntarily get the vaccine. But the thing is, is think of all the doctors, think of all the lawyers, the orderlies in the hospital, who worked for a year and a half to save lives without any vaccine at all. They got COVID, they survived. They now have immunity. And the hospitals are just saying, you're worthless. We're getting rid of you unless you submit to a vaccine. But it doesn't go with the science. The science actually shows greater immunity if you've had the disease than if you've just simply been vaccinated.

INGRAHAM: Well, the court is ultimately going to have to settle this one. They're just not going to change their view on that. But getting back to my point about this radical legislation seeking to isolate and punish unvaccinated Americans to prevent them from flying domestically.

Dianne Feinstein, when we haven't seen her much lately, but she apparently introduced legislation to do just that. Your reaction, Senator?

PAUL: The ever present, Dr. Fauci agrees with her. He wants to ban people from flying as well, unless they're vaccinated. It totally goes against the science. It's ignoring the 100 million people that already have immunity who got it naturally. It's a terrible idea. It goes against, sort of, the very basic idea of a free society.

I said, yesterday, one of the most incredible, our primary medical rights we have is to decide what goes into our body, what kind of injections we get, which doctor we go to, whether we have surgery, or we don't have surgery. And so everything they're doing is against the science, but also against really the foundation of what are - the freedom that our country was founded upon.

INGRAHAM: And yesterday, on a separate issue, Senator, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, well, she addressed just how bad our national debt is.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JANET YELLEN, TREASURY SECRETARY: The debt held by the public relative to GDP is around 105 percent.

REP. TED BUDD (R-NC): Do you believe that there is a level of debt that is unsustainable in our economy?

YELLEN: If interest rates are zero, and negative in real terms, certainly we could have a substantially higher burden.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: So, I guess if there's no end to the debt we can rack up. That is terrifying. Real quick.

PAUL: Yes. The other way to look at it is that we're approaching the same percentage of debt that Greece had when Greece declared bankruptcy. So, yes, great nations can declare bankruptcy. The checks will all go out. But the question is, will the checks buy anything?

I think inflation is coming back in a big way. And I think the whole bait and switch of Democrats offering you free stuff, you will ultimately pay for it with higher prices. Don't be fooled. Nothing in life is really free.

INGRAHAM: Senator Paul, incredible exchange (inaudible) about yesterday. Thanks for joining us.

PAUL: Thank you, Laura.

INGRAHAM: And you've heard it repeated, ad nauseum. COVID is the pandemic of the unvaccinated, Biden said that, Fauci said it. Well, tonight we're giving that narrative our own INGRAHAM ANGLE reality check. My medicine cabinet is next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

INGRAHAM: Now, just as predicted by anyone who has studied viruses, the Delta variant looks to have run its course in the south. Over the last two weeks, daily caseloads have fallen precipitously in states like Tennessee, Florida, Georgia, Texas and South Carolina.

Meanwhile, it looks like COVID has migrated northward toward more heavily vaccinated states. Maine has seen a jaw dropping 34 percent increase in cases over the last 14 days. Vermont's caseload jumped 29 percent. And even New York, the land of vaccine mandates has seen a surge.

Let's bring in my medicine cabinet. Dr. Steven Smith, founder of the Smith Center for infectious diseases and Urban Health; and Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, Stanford Professor, University Professor of Medicine there.

Dr. Bhattacharya, what should we take away from this COVID trend from south to north? Is it related to the strict mandates, the controls? Or is there something else going on?

JAY BHATTACHARYA, PROFESSOR OF MEDICINE, STANFORD: Laura, there's an illusion of control that we sometimes have with this virus that somehow we - if we just lock down hard enough, if we just bay enough we can stop the virus from spreading.

But, in fact, the virus spreads on a seasonal, regional basis, it's very, very difficult to stop a virus like this from spreading. It's unfortunate fact. That's why it's so important to protect the vulnerable with the vaccine and whatnot. But it's also important to realize that these measures that we take have enormous harms. We have to acknowledge that and we basically get away from it.

INGRAHAM: And, Steve, Dr. Smith, the other thing that's going on, is it not, as it has been reported is that, the vaccines overtime did begin to wane in their effectiveness. So after five months or so, you start to see waning antibodies. Is that also what's going on, because they went early all in on the vaccines in these states?

STEPHEN SMITH, SMITH CENTER FOR INFECTIOUS DISEASES: Of course. And I agree with Jay. He is one of my favorite experts on TV. We don't know what the virus does, or why it does what it does.

But as far as we do know a few things, and one of the things as we know that the vaccine induce immunity or protection against infection and disease, more importantly disease. It wanes overtime, and that's not unexpected at all. We just didn't know what timeframe and we couldn't know what timeframe and in which hosts, older people of course, who is a quicker, without having time.

And with time and, of course, the experience in Israel has shown us that, it does wane and relatively quickly and especially in people that don't have perfect immune systems in other words, the elderly or otherwise. You may have compromised hosts.

INGRAHAM: Dr. Bhattacharya, President Biden chimed in earlier this week on the percentage that would need to be vaccinated, not taking into account any natural immunity, but percentage that would need to be vaccinated to kind of be done with this. Watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: how many Americans need to be vaccinated for us to get back to normal?

JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: I think we get the vast majority by just going on with some of these, some industries and some schools, 97 -- 98 percent. A quarter of the country can't go unvaccinated and us not continue to have a problem.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: OK. Dr. Bhattacharya, the phrase vast majority now means 97 percent. That's kind of almost 100 percent. But he's not taking into account as neither is Fauci nor any of the other public health experts, the fact that a lot of - millions of millions of people have already been infected with this virus, correct?

Visit link:
'The Ingraham Angle' on Durham investigation blackout - Fox News

Recommendation and review posted by Bethany Smith

Our study provides an insight into the similarities and differences between England, France and Germany through a comprehensive literature review focusing on arguments about,and regulations of, prenatal testing and reproductive choices (specifically on NIPT).

Between December 2020 and April 2021, we reviewed approximately250 sources in legal and regulatory texts; public reports of national ethics committees and professional bodies; parliamentary debates; medical press; academic literature in prenatal genetics, bioethics, social sciences; and daily press. The sources covered a wide range of issues related to the implementation of NIPT such as ethical and practical issues; public, political and scientific debates; regulations and guidelines; criteria for offering the test free of charge; and communication of results. We focused on literature regarding the English, French and German context, since 2011, when NIPT became first available in the private sector before several countries decided to fund it within their public health system. We searched the databases of Cairn journals (Humanities and Social Sciences), Google Scholar, PubMed and SAGE journals. The review of documents and terminologies was guided by the following questions: how is NIPT regulated in each country? Who are the main stakeholders and institutions involved in the offer of NIPT? What are the ethical arguments used by stakeholders in public, political, parliamentary and professional debates? What are the meanings of these arguments in each context? We identified differences with regard to the ethical questions associated with NIPT and the ways these are discussed in each country.

This analysis is part of a wider comparative study combining literature review, empirical research (semi-structured interviews with stakeholders) and conceptual analysis to explore the ethical issues arising from prenatal genetics in England, France and Germany [5].

We propose to start with an overview of the practical regulations defining how and to whom NIPT is (or will) be offered as a publicly funded screening test in the three countries studied. In France, since January 2019, NIPT is reimbursed as a second-tier screening test, between the 11 and 14th week for pregnancies with a probability of trisomy 21 (T21) (between 1:51 and 1:1000), following cFTS (UK National Screening Committee (UK NSC)). In England, in 2016, UK NSC has recommended that NIPT should be offered to women with an increased probability of having a baby with T21, T13 and T18 with a higher cut-off than in France, at 1:150, following first trimester combined (1114 weeks) or second trimester quadruple screening (1420 weeks). This recommendation was implemented in June 2021 as part of the NHS Fetal Anomaly Screening Programme (FASP). Similarly, in Germany, it was decided in 2019 to cover NIPT for pregnancies with an increased likelihood of T21, T13, and T18 through the publicly funded health insurance system from 2021. Unlike in France and in England, the risk cut-off is determined individually and is independent of a quantifiable risk calculation [6, 7]. In Germany, a statistically increased risk is not seen as a sufficient criterion to reimburse the test [8]. It is stated that only a particular situation, where the pregnancy and its consequences present a burden to the pregnant woman and could lead to serious harm of her mental health, can justify the test; hence offering the test requires a case-by-case decision [6].

In the three countries, pregnant women are usually referred by their gynaecologistobstetrician, midwife or general practitioner to fetal medicine units, prenatal clinics or medical genetics service that offer NIPT. Because of the high accuracy of NIPT in detecting the common chromosomal trisomies (T21, T13 and T18), and in particular for T21, all three countries have decided to publicly fund the test only for these trisomies, and not for other conditions or traits for which the test is less accurate.Footnote 1

NIPT for T21, T18 and T13 is not used as a diagnostic test at present, and so a positive NIPT test requires further testing for confirmation in the second trimester (e.g. amniocentesis or chorionic villus sampling (CVS)) [9]. However, because of its higher accuracy than cFTS in detecting trisomies, fewer women will need to undergo such confirmatory tests, which may involve some, albeit minimal, risk of miscarriage for amniocentesis and CVS (0.11% and 0.22% respectively) [10]. This clinical advantage has been one the main arguments mobilised for its use in routine prenatal care in the three countries, but also in other countries where NIPT is implemented.

Despite the advantages of the test, offering NIPT as part of routine clinical service raises important ethical questions. Through our literature review, we identified similarities among issues raised in England, France and Germany, for example by patient associations, national ethics committees, medical experts, politicians and journalists. The issues presented here are also largely discussed in the international literature on NIPT and are not particular to the three countries. For example, while it is acknowledged that NIPT offers a range of benefits such as earlier and more accurate results compared to cFTS, better understanding of fetal aneuploidies and, ultimately, better informed reproductive decision-making, concerns are expressed that its use in routine antenatal care may increase the risk of stigmatisation and discrimination of people living with an autosomal aneuploidy, having a negative impact on the support for women who decide to raise a child with a trisomy [11,12,13].

One other major concern discussed in the literature is that NIPT could become a routine test, which could intensify the already existing challenge of prenatal testing, potentially putting pressure on women to undergo testing, and hence undermining informed decision-making, and weakening reproductive autonomy [14]. Other arguments concern the risks of prenatal sex-selection and the risks of screening for less severeconditions, adult-onset conditionsand carrier status [15, 16]. Especially in England, there are concerns about prenatal sex-selection as expressed in parliamentary questions addressed to the Department of Health in 2016, and inthe Labour Partys call to ban early fetal sex testing in 2018 (BBC, Labour calls for ban on early foetus sex test, 2018). There are also ethical questions about the communication of results and information management in cases of misattributed paternity, secondary or incidental findings that may have implications not only for the fetus health but also the health of the mother or other family members [17]. Furthermore, where women use commercial companies, the quality of information returned and the counselling provided by some of these companies is criticised and challenges the idea of informed decision-making [18]. However, ethical issues of direct-to-consumer testing are not the focus of this paper.

Through our comparison, differences emerged in the ways in which the ethical issues related to reproductive autonomy are addressed in each country. First of all, in England, the debate highlights the risk that NIPT could be recommended to women as a standard test, a simple blood test that may not involve the same level of pre-test counselling and information as an amniocentesis or CVS. The concern, which is particularly highlighted in a 2017 report of the Nuffield Council on Bioethics is, that the less invasive nature of NIPT could make it difficult for women to refuse the test [19] and, therefore, undermine informed consent and reproductive autonomy [19, 20]. In order to address this concern, there is a strong focus on understanding and recognising the needs, beliefs and preferences of women in order to enable them to make autonomous decisions. In 2020, a collective of professional bodies (Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, Royal College of Midwives, Society and College of Radiographers) have developed a consensus statement suggesting that information about NIPT is provided by healthcare professionals in a non-directive way so that women are able to make choices that are right for them. In the same way, the Public Health England Fetal anomaly screening programme, the Nuffield Council on Bioethics and NHS England emphasise clarity, accuracy and non-directiveness when informing women on benefits and limitations of the NIPT [19, 21]. Parliamentary questionsFootnote 2 and daily pressFootnote 3 also reflect the importance of helping women to make informed decisions by providing appropriate information, explaining the different options, offering support and respecting their decision. This reflects the autonomy-focused approach in England [22].

Concerns are raised also in France about the negative impact NIPT may have on womens choices, emphasised in a regulatory framework of 2018 stating that: The woman is at the centre of the system and makes all decisions regarding her pregnancy. Her autonomy must be respected [23]. However, unlike England, France puts emphasis on the content of the information (e.g. organisation of screening and timeframes, results communication) rather than on it being non-directive. The focus is less on enabling women to make informed decisions than on the need to protect women from the risks of commercial exploitation of genetic screening tests (NIPT) and leaving couples alone and helpless when faced with non-validated tests [13], as described by the National Ethics Committee (Comit Consultatif National dEthique), in 2013. This concern about women as victims of the commercialisation of risk, the lobby of diagnostic merchants and pregnancy monitoring is present also in the daily pressFootnote 4. According to these accounts, women are described as likely to lack full understanding of complex genetic information and therefore ought to be protected in order to make their own decisions. Consistent with this discourse, empirical studies have confirmed a certain paternalistic attitude among French health professionals when it comes to prenatal decisions and informing women of the choice they have with regard to prenatal testing [24]. In France, the possibility for women to make informed choice is important [13] and has been included in the law (Loi n 2002303 du 4 mars 2002), reflecting an increased focus on a patient-centred approach as part of what is called a health democracy (dmocratie sanitaire) [25, 26]. In the case of NIPT, however, the concern for womens autonomous choice shows itself in the form of a rather protective approach that can be seen as restricting reproductive choice. In contrast, although France insists on free choice and the right to revoke the decision of consent to carry out examinations [23], it puts more emphasis on the content of the information than on the way it is delivered (provide fair and appropriate information, inform about stages of screening and diagnosis, times between the different examinations, distinction between risk and certainty of diagnosis, possibility to continue or not the pregnancy, etc.).

In Germany, the debate on reproductive autonomy in the context of NIPT often focuses on the womans right not to know or her right to decline available prenatal tests [27,28,29]. It is also suggested that, in addition to information provided by professionals, a woman should be put in contact with associations or families who have a child living with a trisomy [6, 30], so, she is able to make a fully informed decision about whether to continue or terminate herpregnancy. Furthermore, concerns are raised about the scope and limit of the respect for the dignity of the future child, and its right to life and to be recognised as a human being. The potential conflict between the future childs right to life and the womans right over her own body was also highlighted in the 2019 report of the Committee on Education, Research and Technology Assessment of the German Bundestag, on the current situation and development of prenatal diagnosis [31]. Generally, in the German debate, we notice a strong focus on enabling women to make their own informed decisions as well as a cautious approach with regard to new reproductive technologies that could compromise the dignity of human life from its very beginning. Public debates on bioethical issues in post-war Germany often emphasise the importance of respecting both individual autonomy and human dignity [32], two principles that echo Kants influence on contemporary debates. Policies aim to weigh the autonomy and dignity of one human life, that of the woman, against the autonomy and dignity of another human life, the future child. The first (womans autonomy and dignity) can outweigh the latter (future childs autonomy and dignity) only where there is guarantee that the woman makes a truly informed autonomous decision free of any undue pressure [27].

We have seen how reproductive autonomy is discussed differently in each country, and how it is associated with different ethical concerns, echoing different prevailing norms and values in each country. These aspects and nuances are also reflected in the various public reactions in England, France and Germany, as we will see below.

The incorporation of NIPT into public healthcare systems has led to criticism at different levels depending on perceptions and values associated with disability, new biomedical technologies and reproductive rights. In England, several campaigns have put NIPT on the political agenda. For example, in 2016, the Dont Screen Us Out campaign, led by a Downs syndrome advocacy group, started a petition which was signed by over 900 people with Downs Syndrome and their families denouncing the violation of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). That same year, a documentary by the British actress, Sally Phillips, A World Without Downs Syndrome? (BBC, 5 October 2016) denounced the devaluation of families and children living with Downs syndrome, the biased information given to pregnant women about the condition, and the risk of the decline of members of this community. However, in England, such critical voices are outweighed by the value accorded to the right of women to make independent and informed choices [33, 34]. Furthermore, as evidenced in parliamentary questionsFootnote 5 and the daily press,Footnote 6 the public discourse favours the benefits and technological progress of NIPT such as its safety and accuracy.

In Germany, protests by civil society organisations (German Down Syndrome InfoCenter, KIDS Hamburg, Lebenshilfe, Joint Declaration on World Down Syndrome Day, Network against Selection through Prenatal Diagnostics) emerged in 2011, following an investigation by the weekly newspaper Die Zeit, revealing that the laboratory LifeCodexx had received around 300,000 Euros from the Federal Ministry for Research and Education for test development of NIPT. In response to these protests, the Federal Government commissioned the German Ethics Council to provide an expert opinion on NIPT [35]. The report mainly focuses on arguments in favour or against the public funding of NIPT. It offers an insight into the German context where access to NIPT through individualised genetic counselling is prioritised over the definition of a numerical risk threshold. Following a call for political transparency and a public debate around biotechnological innovations through an Open letter to the Federal Joint Commission (G-BA) by several patient organisations in 2016, there has been a plea for regular evaluations of the new prenatal test, including its ethical and social implications. In Germany, despite the importance given to reproductive autonomy, public attitudes showcase scepticism towards prenatal genetic technologies [36, 37]. As mentioned above, we notice also here a certain criticism and questioning of the use of new technologies, and an emphasis on risk prevention and management in the German debate [37]. These public attitudes reflect on the implementation of prenatal technologies in the public healthcare system; for example, cFTS is not reimbursed if there is no reason for concern such as advanced maternal age, which explains the slightly lower uptake of prenatal screening when compared to other European countries [38].

In France, criticism of NIPT has emerged in different formats within the associative space: examples of this are the organisation of a conference by the Jrme Lejeune Foundation, Stop Discriminating Down, in 2017, aiming to denounce the mass elimination of children with Downs syndrome before birth by the arrival of NIPT; or the publication of the book, Les premires victimes du transhumanisme. Dpistage prnatal de la trisomie 21 (The first victims of transhumanism. Prenatal screening for Downs syndrome), by Jean-Marie Le Mn, president of the Jrme Lejeune Foundation, in reaction to the reimbursement of the test in 2019. Also, a March for Life was organised in 2019, in Paris, to warn against a new step in eugenics as a response to the decision to reimburse NIPT. In France, these public reactions were largely driven by associations and had no impact on policies.

In addition to these critical reactions to NIPT, in the following section, we will discuss how the charges of eugenics have emerged at the centre of public debates in France and Germany, while remaining relatively marginal in England.

In the three countries, the reference to the risk of a drift toward eugenics appears in different forms and is used as an argument, especially in France and Germany, against the implementation of NIPT. While advocates of NIPT emphasise that the use of the test relies on an individual choice [33, 39] and is not linked to eugenic or coercive policy [40], critics express concerns that individual abortion practices could lead to widespread selection of babies and the lack of tolerance and care for people with disability [41].

In England, concerns about the risk to screen out and, hence, significantly reduce the number of births of children with Downs syndrome have been expressed, among others, by the campaign group Dont screen us out, the Church of England,Footnote 7 and in parliamentary questions.Footnote 8 Yet, generally, the public debate in England focuses more on the offer of NIPT and how to guarantee respect for womens decisions, accuracy of information, regular training of health professionals, and designing care pathways for women continuing their pregnancy with a baby who has Downs syndrome [42]. Also the Church of England states that it welcomes medical advances as long as women receive comprehensive and unbiased information about the condition [43]. It is rare in England to hear strong accusations against NIPT as a form of eugenics.

In France, the association between NIPT and eugenics, elimination eradication or selection is more explicit and recurrent. In 2007, prior to the revision of the bioethics laws, Le Monde published an interview with the president of the National Consultative Ethics Committee, Didier Sicard, where he warned against the risk of eugenics and social eradication if prenatal screening becomes routinised. This perspective is also reflected in parliamentary debates on NIPT where representatives of the centre-right refer to eugenicsFootnote 9 or elimination.Footnote 10 Similarly, the risk of increasing fetal selection, a new form of eugenics (no longer through the State, but the individual) and of further discrimination, is highlighted by the National Consultative Ethics Committee in its 2016 report n 124. The question of the re-emergence of eugenics with reference to Nazism is also raised by established media,Footnote 11 the Catholic Church in Paris which denounces the pressure on women to be screened for Downs syndrome [44] and the Jrme Lejeune Foundation which uses the terms elimination [45], disappearance, extinction [46] and eradication [47] to refer to NIPT. Despite the links made between NIPT and eugenics in the French debate, there is no evidence that expecting parents would desire a perfect child rather than just wanting to bring a healthy child into the world [40]. It should therefore be pointed out that there is a fine line between health and expectation of normality and that this should not lead to a search for the improvement of the genetic characteristics of the child, in the sense that we understand the term eugenics here [48]. In Germany, despite its Nazi past, eugenics is not as explicitly referred to as in France. The arguments used against potential discrimination or genetic selection, as a consequence of NIPT, are based on the principle of respect for the dignity of the unborn child [27, 31], which may conflict with the respect for the womans dignity as an autonomous individual [27, 28]. However, the possibility to terminate pregnancy in order to protect the life or the mental or physical health of the woman (Strafgesetzbuch 218a) indicated that the dignity of the unborn child can be suspended in favour of the protection of the dignity of the pregnant woman. As mentioned above, the German discourse is inspired by the Kantian concept of human dignity, and its adoption as the first constitutional principle since 1949.

As prenatal technologies such as NIPT have evolved, all three countries have seen discussions about the potential risk of eugenics. Although each country emphasises that reproductive decisions belong to the woman, critical voices caution against decisions that could be implicit forms of eugenics. To date however, there is no evidence that the introduction of NIPT has led to an increase in termination rates due to fetal anomalies [49]. The results highlight that, in many cases, women accept NIPT to obtain information about the fetus health and prepare for the childs arrival without intending to terminate pregnancy if an aneuploidy is discovered [49].

Here is the original post:
The ethical landscape(s) of non-invasive prenatal testing in England, France and Germany: findings from a comparative literature review | European...

Recommendation and review posted by Bethany Smith

-thalassemia is one of the most common autosomal recessive diseases in the world and researchers are seeking to produce a gene therapy to treat the condition. Scientists are applying a variety of strategies and techniques to correct the underlying genetic imbalance that causes -thalassemia, including using CRISPR to correct the mutated gene. The approach is promising, but scientists are still working to improve CRISPRs editing efficiency, which is still an open question. Consequently, CRISPRs ability to successfully correct mutations associated with -thalassemia is still uncertain. Therefore, researchers need to pair CRISPR editing protocols with a quality control tool such as droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) that accurately detects the presence of successful CRISPR edits.A promising yet complex gene editing approachRoughly 1.5% of the global population carries mutations associated with -thalassemia, with more than 60,000 new cases diagnosed every year. Unfortunately, scientists do not have a straightforward path towards addressing this condition at the genetic level. Adult hemoglobin is composed of two pairs of globin subunits, -globin and -globin, which must be expressed in equal numbers for hemoglobin to develop normally. People with -thalassemia harbor genetic mutations in the gene for -globin, HBB, that lead to downregulation of the gene. Free -globin, then forms toxic precipitates that impair red blood cell development and kill mature red blood cells. As a result, patients experience a wide range of severe symptoms, and the condition often leads to early death.Some research suggests that deleting the -globin gene, HBA, may improve outcomes. Introducing a healthy HBB gene via a lentiviral vector improves patients' clinical outcomes, but only if these patients already express some -globin. A research group based in France and Italy recently combined these two approaches: they used CRISPR to delete HBA and replace it with HBB in hopes of restoring the balance between the two hemoglobin subunits.Performing such an edit is a complex task. First, after designing a guide RNA (gRNA) that locates the gene that needs to be edited, scientists need to introduce it to ones cells using a viral vector. Then, the gRNA must identify the correct cutting sites flanking the HBA gene, while Cas9 must perform the cuts. The same gRNA must facilitate the insertion of the HBB gene at the same locus. This dual edit approach will not work if CRISPR does not successfully remove HBA and introduce the HBB gene in the same spot. Such a multifaceted edit requires rigorous quality control to ensure CRISPR performs the correct edits in the correct locations. This is where ddPCR technology comes in.Advantages of ddPCR assaysddPCR is a highly sensitive tool designed to detect and quantify rare genetic variants, and it can be used to detect outcomes of CRISPR editing. For example, ddPCR assays can detect CRISPR edits via both homology-directed repair (HDR) and nonhomologous end joining (NHEJ). It can also detect excisions and inversions independent of sequence length.ddPCR technology works by partitioning a sample into approximately 20,000 nL-sized droplets and running a separate PCR reaction in each one. Each droplet contains one or a few nucleic acid strands. If a droplet contains a strand featuring the target genetic sequence, that DNA will amplify, and the droplet will release a strong fluorescent signal. If a droplet does not contain the target sequence, the droplet will only emit weak fluorescence. By counting the strongly vs weakly fluorescent droplets, one can detect specific sequences with great sensitivity and measure the concentration of the target sequence in the original sample with great accuracy.Compared to next-generation sequencing, ddPCR is fast, inexpensive, and not labor-intensive, and it can detect rare events without being limited by read depth. ddPCR is also more sensitive and accurate than quantitative PCR (qPCR). While researchers must use a standard curve to interpret qPCR results, exposing the data to amplification bias, ddPCR quantifies genetic variants directly, without a standard curve, and thereby provides an absolute count.The abovementioned European group that developed the dual editing approach for treating -thalassemia used ddPCR assays to assess the success of their edits. The researchers first used ddPCR technology to quantify HBA copy number, which correlates with -thalassemia severity. They also used it to detect the successful insertion of HBB. In human umbilical cord blood-derived erythroid progenitor (HUDEP-2) cells, the team showed robust insertion of the HBB gene; the team confirmed on-target integration of the gene at 0.8 copies per cell.The team could not have detected this integration using qPCR. Because of the inherent variability in how qPCR results are measured, the technique cannot detect gene copies at concentrations lower than two or three copies per cell. Without ddPCR, these researchers would not have been able to show that their CRISPR strategy has potential for future clinical testing.

Future CRISPR applicationsApproximately30clinicaltrialsare in planning or underwayto study whetherCRISPRcan be used to treat genetic diseases, and regulatory agencies might approve the first CRISPR-based gene therapy in less than a decade. But given the continued challenge of developing a reliable CRISPR editing protocol, biopharmaceutical companies developing CRISPR therapies must take extra care to ensure their therapies are safe and effective. ddPCR technology can provide the confidence they need.For example, ddPCR assays can be designed to detect any CRISPR edits by using probes that span the junction between the native genome and the donor sequence. Researchers and biomanufacturers can screen out cell lines containing unsuccessful edits before they even reach patients by analyzing cell lines for specific CRISPR edits. This, in turn, will increase the chance of clinical success for CRISPR-based gene therapies and open the door to a new generation of treatments for difficult-to-treat genetic diseases like -thalassemia.

More:
CRISPR Gene Therapies: Assessing the Success of Gene Edits Using ddPCR - Technology Networks

Recommendation and review posted by Bethany Smith

Simple tasks like riding a bike down the street or driving to the grocery store are a no-go for Carlene Knight. Afflicted with a rare genetic disease called Leber congenital amaurosis type 10 (LCA10), Knight, 55, has been legally blind since birth. She has no peripheral vision. Its an extreme tunnel vision, she told The Daily Beast. I kind of liken it to looking through a window with a tiny hole in it and trying to find something like a building outside. Simple tasks like walking through a crowded room were arduous trials to avoid bumping into something and potentially injuring herself. At her office where she works at a call center, if she tried to walk around without her cane, she was constantly running into cubicles and tables and other objects all the time.

But the Happy Valley, Oregon resident has found her world opening up, ever since doctors literally fixed the DNA in the cells of her eyes.

By now youve probably heard of CRISPR, the gene-editing tool thats taken the biomedicine industry by storm. CRISPR basically allows scientists to find a specific sequence of DNA inside a cell, and alter it. That opens up the possibility of treating and potentially curing a slew of illnesses and disorders caused by genetic mutations, like LCA10, which impairs the function of retinal cells. These kinds of cells cant simply be removed, fixed, and plugged back into the eye. If theyre going to be fixed, it has to be in the body itself.

What happened to Knight is a huge step forward for physicians and researchers looking into CRISPR-related treatments. Up until now, the biggest breakthroughs in the space have revolved around taking unhealthy cells in patients, using CRISPR in the lab to modify them, and then putting them back into the patient. In this instance, CRISPR was used to directly edit the cellular DNA still inside of Knight and the others who participated in the trial.

With any kind of new therapy being used on the human body for the first time, you always have to be cautious, Mark Pennesi, an ophthalmologist at the Casey Eye Institute at the Oregon Health & Science University who led the experiment, told The Daily Beast. There's the things you might know, and then there are the things you don't know. You have to always take a cautious approach.

The trial was conducted jointly by the university and biotech company Editas Medicine, which specializes in gene editing. Preliminary trials on mice and non-human primates were safe and encouraging, so a clinical trial on humans with LCA10 was organized. The initial findings published Wednesday report the results for five participants (the other two having been treated only very recently). Two were given low doses of the new therapy, and three were given mid-range doses.

When I was told about the trial, I was really excited because I wanted to help children whose lives could be enhanced with vision, said Knight. The hope is that if they have the procedure early enough, theyll have a lot more vision later on life, while their neural pathways are developing.

Knight, who received a mid-range dose, and another participant who received the low dose both found their vision significantly improving. Neither has normal vision, but Knight said shes been amazed how much easier it is to do mundane things like find doorways, locate objects on the ground, and simply move around without having to surmount a myriad of hurdles. Colors are brighter and easier to seeto celebrate, shes even dyed her hair green, her favorite color.

It is amazing how the simple things can be so nice when you get them back, she said.

Two out of five success stories is not the ideal outcome Pennesi was hoping for, and his team doesnt have a clear explanation as to why not everyone who was treated saw improved vision. It could be the amount of dose, or factors specific to someones biology. And it might also be that patients need more time before the treatment works. Even if the editing works, the brain kind of has to rewire itself to even recognize the improved cellular function, he said. That could take many more months for some people.

The fact that none of the participants experienced any severe side effects is also a major milestone. Editas has started recruiting participants for higher dose trials, including children with LCA10. And the findings will likely be used as an encouraging sign for groups working on using CRISPR to treat other diseases where cells must be modified directly in the body, like Alzheimers, Huntingtons and Parkinsons.

Knights vision continues to improve bit by bit since the procedure. Its going to be nice if I can see my granddaughter play and ride her bike and stuff like that, she said. I hope I could one day read a childrens book to her, with the large print. That would really be nice.

View post:
Gene Editing Gave This Blind Woman Some of Her Vision Back - The Daily Beast

Recommendation and review posted by Bethany Smith

The gene editing tool CRISPR is now being used to generate a range of traits in a variety of farmed aquatic species including salmonids, crustaceans and carp but there is still a way to go before it is likely to be financially and regulatorily viable in commercial aquaculture.

CRISPR is a modern, high-tech method of editing genes, but its based on a simple natural defence system found in many bacteria. Like higher organisms, bacteria also have to cope with a number of viruses and plasmids that can invade and take over their cells. The bacteria maintain a sort of genetic library within their DNA, containing key bits of gene sequences from past encounters with pathogens they might normally have to contend with. CRISPR refers to Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats, which is basically what the bacterial libraries use to catalogue various viral and plasmid threats. These sequences, in conjunction with special enzymes, can serve as templates for precise molecular scissors that hunt down and cut DNA or RNA to destroy intracellular invaders before they can replicate. The trick to avoid any self-inflicted damage to the genetic sequence on file in the bacteriums library is that, in addition to the specific viral genetic sequence, the scissors also look for what is called protospacer adjacent motif (PAM), which is found in the invaders genetic material but not in the bacteriums.

Once scientists learned how to programme the molecular scissors of CRISPR using their own custom-designed genetic sequences they could target specific points on DNA strands to turn off, or knock out certain genes in almost any organism.

Once scientists learned how to programme the molecular scissors of CRISPR using their own custom-designed genetic sequences rather than those from a bacteriums library, they could target specific points on DNA strands to turn off, or knock out certain genes in almost any organism. This type of whack-a-mole research still continues in many aquatic species, especially with regard to health and immunity questions. But, after a brief period of somewhat exploratory research based on a knock stuff out and see what happens approach, a number of maybe we can turn stuff on applications began to emerge.

If modifications from gene editing are to be heritable, however, they usually must take place very early in the development of an animal or plant (ideally at the one-cell stage) so that they can be incorporated in its gametes once it matures. With this caveat comes the need for specialised methods like microinjection to deliver the CRISPR constructs and enzymes on a microscopic scale. An annoying side-effect of this approach is that the CRISPR effect can continue within the developing embryo well beyond the one-cell stage, often resulting in mosaicism (when various cells display different genetic makeups).

To date, most CRISPR research in farmed aquatic organisms reflects the same emphases as more traditional genetic improvement initiatives, namely growth, disease resistance and sterility, although some interesting work has also been done with regard to colouration patterns in various fishes.

A review of the science and the step-by-step details of how CRISPR has advanced are beyond the scope of this article (and the expertise of this author, for that matter), but suffice it to say that the potential applications for the technology now seem limited only by the imaginations of the scientists that have mastered it. Some examples include altering mosquitos so they cannot find human targets, breeding coffee beans with all the flavour and none of the caffeine, developing hangover-free wine with health benefits, creating tomatoes with the same spice producing genes as chili peppers (the genes are already present, just not expressed), molecular sleuthing for pathogens in natural or man-made environments and even bringing back the extinct wooly mammoth (well, actually creating a sort of mammoth/elephant hybrid, depending how one looks at it).

To date, most CRISPR research in farmed aquatic organisms reflects the same emphases as more traditional genetic improvement initiatives, namely growth, disease resistance and sterility, although some interesting work has also been done with regard to colouration patterns in various fishes. Problems with applying the technology to complex traits such as growth and disease resistance remain, since a number of genes are involved and many of them might require editing to attain desired outcomes. Fortunately advances in genomic selection continue in many aquatic species and this may provide shortcuts for the application of CRISPR, but significant work will be required to determine which versions of which genes should be targeted through editing. Editing to insert artificial alleles or genetic sequences from other species is now possible, but it will most likely face the same resistance observed toward the commercialisation of transgenic aquatic organisms.

Her keynote address on the subject at Aquaculture Europe in Dubrovnik in 2017 attracted over 500 delegates. Rob Fletcher

In salmonids, much of the work to date has focused on Atlantic salmon. While CRISPR can be used to produce sterile salmon by targeting the dead end gene, more effort will be required to apply this approach commercially because by default it cannot be transmitted to subsequent generations. Nonetheless, prior work with laboratory species (zebrafish and medaka) suggests that a method to restore fertility for breeding stocks might be possible. In other research, the dead end gene has been used to produce sterile fish which can then be implanted with germ cells from closely related donor fish (either endangered or more commercially valuable species). One example in Japan involves using edited grass puffer fish (Takifugu alboplumbeus) to serve as surrogate broodstock for the more valuable tiger puffer (T. rubripes).

Enhancing resistance to various pathogens may seem like fertile ground for the application of CRISPR in aquaculture, but disease resistance is a complex phenomenon involving the interaction of host species with both pathogens and the production environment, and many genes are usually involved. One research focus that shows commercial promise involves identifying genes that confer enhanced sea lice resistance in Pacific salmon species and then establishing similar attributes in Atlantic salmon through editing.

Japanese researchers reported in 2018 on the use of CRISPR techniques for the development of a line of red sea bream with enhanced muscle mass and a relatively short overall body length. Mutations were created by deletions in the Pm-mstn myostatin gene, and no exogenous genetic constructs were used. Compared to non-edited bream, the line exhibited a 16 percent increase in edible muscle tissue, and within two years a stable breeding population was established. As is the case in many other efforts with aquaculture species, this work built on prior research in laboratory populations of medaka and zebrafish. Two years later, Chinese investigators reported on a strain of yellow catfish (Pelteobagrus fulvidraco) that was also produced through editing of the myostatin gene. At 210 days post-fertilisation, fish from the edited line were 37 percent heavier than regular P. fulvidraco, with increased muscle mass.

Dr Masato Kinoshita, Kyoto-University and Dr Keitaro Kato, Kindai University

Editing myostatin genes has also been reported to significantly increase muscle mass in common carp, olive flounder, blunt snout bream, Sea bream, mud loach and channel catfish over the past five years, and scientists are now beginning to look at other genes in efforts to enhance growth rates in aquatic species. In the past several months, another group of researchers from China reported on the use of CRISPR to knock out the PI3K gene in Gibel carp. Disruption of this gene improves insulin sensitivity in mammals, but edited carp exhibited no alteration of plasma and hepatic glucose levels or uptake. They did, however, have improved somatic growth and feed conversion efficiency. Another recent study in China established that deletion of the t1r1 gene significantly improved acceptance of plant proteins in zebrafish.

Colouration and colour patterns are also important considerations in some aquaculture species. In China, researchers used CRISPR to disrupt carotenoid transport genes to alter red and white colour patterns in ornamental common carp. Another group used the technology to alter two agouti signalling protein (ASIP) genes to eliminate black patches in Oujiang common carp. Also in China, in a study to be published shortly, researchers used CRISPR to knock out the tyrosinase gene in a line of red tilapia. Once a true breeding population was established, continuous production of uniformly red fish with no black pigment was possible. And Israeli scientists recently published results (in The CRIPSR Journal) detailing the use of CRISPR to produce true albino Nile tilapia (pink eyes and all). They disrupted the slc45a2 gene, which mediates melanin biosynthesis, to produce zygotes with up to 99 percent albinism, including lack of melanin in the eyes.

Dr Jakob Biran

Use of CRISPR technology has also been demonstrated in crustaceans. Researchers from China reported in 2016 on the first genome editing of a decapod, the ridgetail white prawn Exopalaemon carinicauda. The primary objective of the work was to clarify the function of the chitinase compound EcChi4, by knocking out the gene responsible for its production. Since this species carries the fertilised eggs prior to hatching, one-cell stage embryos were collected from newly spawned females, stored in sterilised seawater at 4 C to halt further development and then microinjected. After 15 days of artificial incubation at room temperature, the shrimp hatched and were raised through the juvenile phase. Genomic DNA was extracted from both mysis larvae and juveniles to determine whether CRISPR methods resulted in mutation of the target gene. Results indicated different mutations were induced in the target gene, and that mosaic shrimp had been produced. The rate of mutation was calculated at 7.3 percent, and when individuals that were heterozygous for the induced mutation were crossed with normal shrimp, Mendelian inheritance (with a simple pattern where genes segregate into gametes at equal frequencies) was observed. When heterozygous offspring of the mutant shrimp were crossed, roughly one quarter of their offspring were homozygous for the mutation. In the case of EcChi4 in E. carinicauda, the induced mutation was heritable and did not influence survival or growth. Other crustaceans that have successfully been modified using CRISPR include Daphnia magna and the amphipod Parhyale hawaiensis.

To approach a CRISPR-based strategy, some knowledge of an organisms genome is required. While few and far between, some bivalve genomes are tentatively available for this type of research, including those of the Pacific oyster, eastern oyster, pearl oyster, Sydney rock oyster, Mediterranean mussel, Philippine horse mussel, king scallop and Yesso scallop. Nonetheless, work on bivalve gene editing has been quite difficult to date. Researchers have reported on the use of CRISPR targeting the myostatin gene in the Pacific oyster, with some success using microinjection methods.

For the time being, applying CRISPR to aquatic species will continue to be a pursuit of academic and research institutions. Its one thing for a university to develop the molecular technology and expertise required, but for private concerns to establish such high-tech capabilities a tremendous investment in equipment and staff will be required. Nevertheless, CRISPR is cheaper and more precise than other gene editing alternatives and usually provides better results.

Future applications and implications for CRISPR-related research in aquaculture species are currently debated, sometimes passionately, in many scientific and social contexts. One thing we can be certain of is the steady progress in our understanding of the genomes and complex physiological interactions of many important aquatic species, which in turn will allow more precisely targeted gene editing to improve production characteristics. And all with the potential to actually minimise genetic impacts on wild fisheries.

His career has included experience with numerous aquatic species in a number of countries. Dr Lutz is also the author of the book Practical Genetics for Aquaculture.

Original post:
The use of CRISPR in aquaculture - The Fish Site

Recommendation and review posted by Bethany Smith

The first CRISPR gene-edited food has gone on sale in Japan recently, in the form of a tomato packed with an alleged increase innutritionalcontent. TheSicilian Rouge High GABA tomato, created bystartup SanatechSeed,sold gene-edited seedlings to any farmers that wanted them earlier in the year, and 4,200 farmers tookup the offer. Now, the tomatoes are ripe for sale.

As far asSanatechSeed and media outlets cantell, this marks the first-ever CRISPR-edited food on sale to the public.

According to the company, the original plan was to sell the puree to begin with, but due to many requests they have begun selling tomatoes ahead of schedule.However, the tomatoes are just the beginning of the edited array of fruit and vegetables, with many more variants to come in the future.

As a seedling development company that utilizes genome editing technology, we are pleased with consumers and producers. We will continue to develop varieties that can be enjoyed, said SanatechSeed in their announcement.

The tomatoes in question are modified to have reduced levels of an enzyme that breaks down GABA, an inhibitory neurotransmitter that blocks signals between nerve connections. As a result, the tomatoes have around five times as much GABA in them, whichsome research suggests has a calming effect on the body and may improve stress and sleep. This research is debated, with many such studies having a conflict of interest, butso far evidence suggests supplemental GABA provides a limited effect on improvements in this area.

While gene editing may sound scary and is often used as a buzzword for those against genetically modified organisms, most produce we consume today has gone through gene alteration in some way.Modern bananas, for example, are a result of centuries of hybridization with other varieties, with wild bananas being filled with large seeds. Throughout this process, the farmers are altering characteristicsasthey wish via selective breeding CRISPR simply gives scientists far more control over which genes are introduced, silenced, or activated.

Japan does not consider these tomatoes as genetically modified, due to the fact that similar changes can occur naturally, and so they are available for purchase now.

TheSicilian Rouge High GABA tomato is almost definitely not the last consumers will see of CRISPR-modified food.The UK is currently undergoing alaw rework in the wake of their exit from the European Union, in which they are expected torelax gene editing lawsfor food. Should this go forward, plant biologists based in the UK have announced plans for a genetically-edited wheat plant, which should produce lower amounts of a possible carcinogen when toasted or fried.

[H/T:New Scientist]

Read the rest here:
Tomato In Japan Is First CRISPR-Edited Food In The World To Go On Sale - IFLScience

Recommendation and review posted by Bethany Smith

ZUG, Switzerland and CAMBRIDGE, Mass., Oct. 01, 2021 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- CRISPR Therapeutics (Nasdaq: CRSP), a biopharmaceutical company focused on creating transformative gene-based medicines for serious diseases, today announced two poster presentations at the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) 36th Annual Meeting, to be held both virtually and at the Walter E. Washington Convention Center in Washington, D.C., from November 10 to 14, 2021. The Company also announced an oral presentation at the SITC 2021 Pre-Conference Program, The Evolution of Immunotherapy: An Exploration of Immunity Beyond T cells, CAR T in Solid Tumors and Novel Combinations, which will be held from 2:00 p.m. 6:00 p.m. ET on November 10, 2021.

CRISPR Therapeutics presentation:

Title: CRISPR/Cas9 gene-edited allogeneic CAR-T cells targeting CD33 show high preclinical efficacy against AML without long-term hematopoietic toxicityAbstract Number and Type: 133, posterDate and Time: Friday, November 12, 2021, 7:00 a.m. 8:30 p.m. ETLocation: Walter E. Washington Convention Center, Hall E, or https://www.sitcancer.org/2021/home

Presented jointly with Nkarta:

Title: A combined strategy of CD70 CAR co-expression with membrane-bound IL-15 and CISH knockout results in enhanced NK cytotoxicity and persistence Abstract Number and Type: 16439, oralDate and Time: Wednesday, November 10, 2021, 2:40 p.m. ETLocation: Walter E. Washington Convention Center, or https://www.sitcancer.org/2021/program/pre-conference-programs/industryprogram

Title: CISH gene-knockout anti-CD70-CAR NK cells demonstrate potent anti-tumor activity against solid tumor cell lines and provide partial resistance to tumor microenvironment inhibition Abstract Number and Type: 113, posterDate and Time: Friday, November 12, 2021, 7:00 a.m. 8:30 p.m. ETLocation: Walter E. Washington Convention Center, Hall E, or https://www.sitcancer.org/2021/home

About CRISPR TherapeuticsCRISPR Therapeutics is a leading gene editing company focused on developing transformative gene-based medicines for serious diseases using its proprietary CRISPR/Cas9 platform. CRISPR/Cas9 is a revolutionary gene editing technology that allows for precise, directed changes to genomic DNA. CRISPR Therapeutics has established a portfolio of therapeutic programs across a broad range of disease areas including hemoglobinopathies, oncology, regenerative medicine and rare diseases. To accelerate and expand its efforts, CRISPR Therapeutics has established strategic collaborations with leading companies including Bayer, Vertex Pharmaceuticals and ViaCyte, Inc. CRISPR Therapeutics AG is headquartered in Zug, Switzerland, with its wholly-owned U.S. subsidiary, CRISPR Therapeutics, Inc., and R&D operations based in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and business offices in San Francisco, California and London, United Kingdom. For more information, please visit http://www.crisprtx.com.

Story continues

CRISPR THERAPEUTICS word mark and design logo are trademarks and registered trademarks of CRISPR Therapeutics AG. All other trademarks and registered trademarks are the property of their respective owners.

Investor Contact:Susan Kim+1-617-307-7503susan.kim@crisprtx.com

Media Contact:Rachel Eides+1-617-315-4493rachel.eides@crisprtx.com

More here:
CRISPR Therapeutics to Present Preclinical Data at the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) 36th Annual Meeting - Yahoo Finance

Recommendation and review posted by Bethany Smith

The idea of gene editing was once a thing of the future but today, it soon could be saving the lives of people all over the world. CRISPR is a gene editing system that bacteria have been using for possibly a few billion years. When a virus attacks a bacterium, this system takes a mug shot and keeps a snippet of the viruss DNA in order to remember it. If the same virus ever attacks again, the bacterium can fight off the virus before it causes harm.

Accompanied with 21st century tech, thats no longer all CRISPR can do. Scientists have since learned how to repurpose this system to cut our own DNA, wherever we tell it to, in order to edit our genes.

Is gene editing something we need to worry about? Some scientists think so. If we move too fast and over-indulge in this technology, its possible that we could be making permanent changes to the human species. But as of today, CRISPR is being used for good editing genes in people living with chronic diseases, helping patients around the world live healthy, normal lives.

WALTER ISAACSON: Early on, I thought, I'm gonna write a book about the great adventure of understanding gene editing. You know, I've written about the physics revolution that dominated the first half of the 20th century. And then of course I was deeply immersed in the digital revolution, which was the second half of the 20th century. But what happened in the past few years is we've found easy to reprogram tools that will allow us to edit our genes. Man, that's going to be 10 times more impactful than the digital revolution was.

So whenever you have a wonderful tale of adventure, it's always good to have one central character that helps bring the narrative along. And for me, Jennifer Doudna was perfect for that. When she was a young scientist and graduate student in the 1990s, all the men in science and biology, they were all running after the soccer ball, focusing on DNA and the human genome project. But she became fascinated with RNA. And it turns out that's a molecule that actually does more work. She was able to discover how RNA could replicate itself, which gets to one of the big questions in life. Which is, how did life begin on the planet? Then she discovered how to take this tool that bacteria use to fight viruses, called CRISPR, and repurpose it by reprogramming the RNA to edit our own human genes.

So all of these things come out of Jennifer's work in understanding the structure of RNA. CRISPR is a system that bacteria have been using for a billion years. And they learned a simple trick. If a virus attacks them, they take a mugshot, and they wrap it into their own bacterial code. If the virus ever attacks them again, they got that mugshot, and they take a guide, and take a pair of scissors known as an enzyme, and they chop up the virus. But what Jennifer Doudna

and Emmanuelle Charpentier and others did, was figure out, we can repurpose this so that the guide doesn't just chop up the viruses attacking bacteria, we'll reprogram it so that it cuts our own DNA wherever we tell it to. And thus, it becomes a tool to edit our genes.

Right after Jennifer invented this technology, she had a nightmare. And it's somebody who wanted to learn how to use the technology. She walks into the room, and in the nightmare, it's Hitler. So she starts gathering scientists to answer your question, which is, what are the perils

we need to worry about? Now, the perils to me, are that we go too fast down the road and make inheritable edits in the human genome in a way that affects our whole species. And I think that's a ethical line we have to pause and be very careful before we cross. We know ways to use this

in individual patients for deeply important medical needs, like sickle cell, cystic fibrosis, Huntington's, Tay-Sachs, muscular dystrophy. I think we should focus on those, and be careful about doing things that would allow rich people to buy better genes for their children. Because if people could go to a genetic supermarket, and say, what color eyes, what color hair, what height, I think we would harm the human species.

You know, we think of these as futuristic technologies, but we've already had CRISPR

be used for a real person, Victoria Gray. They use CRISPR technology to take her stem cells, edit them, reinsert them into her body, so that she is now makinG healthy blood cells. We're already using this to help the human species. So all these things are about the unbelievable excitement of the journey of science. And that open inquiry, that ability to approach things with an open mind, we sometimes lose that. We go into our ideological corners and we have knee jerk reactions to things without saying, "Show me the evidence." So one of the things I wish

people would think about, is it's not just about science, it's about the scientific method. Which means you're open to changing your mind.

NARRATOR: Get smarter faster with videos from the world's biggest thinkers. And to learn even more from the world's biggest thinkers, get Big Think Plus for your business.

Continue reading here:
CRISPR: The future or undoing of humanity? - Big Think

Recommendation and review posted by Bethany Smith

A Japanese startup is now selling the first food edited using CRISPR a gene-edited tomato that may be able to lower your blood pressure.

GABA boost: Gamma aminobutyric acid (GABA) is a compound produced naturally in our brains. Because its been linked to reduced feelings of anxiety, some people take supplements or eat foods with high levels of GABA to relieve stress, sleep better, and lower blood pressure.

Some plants are even cultivated to have higher-than-normal GABA levels, but the farming techniques used to do that can be labor intensive and affect crop yields.

The gene-edited tomato contains four to five times as much GABA as its unedited counterpart.

Gene-edited tomato: Now, Japanese researchers have used CRISPR to create a tomato that produces less of an enzyme that breaks down the plants natural GABA. The resulting gene-edited tomato contains four to five times as much GABA as its unedited counterpart.

Because the researchers didnt add anything to the tomatoes genome, Japanese authorities decided in December that the fruits neednt be regulated as genetically modified crops, saving the team from a long and expensive approval process.

In early 2021, the researchers started giving away Sicilian Rouge High GABA seedlings, and on September 17, they announced plans to begin selling the tomatoes themselves through the Sanatech Seed startup.

A 6.6 pound box of the gene-edited tomatoes costs about $68.

The tomatoes arent considered genetically modified because nothing was added to their genomes.

The bigger picture: The tomatoes appear to be the first CRISPR-edited food to be sold commercially anywhere in the world (a CRISPR-edited fish is being sold on a trial basis through a Japanese crowdfunding campaign).

However, the gene-edited tomato isnt the first edited food to hit consumers plates a cooking oil made from soybeans, edited using a different tech, went on sale in the U.S. in 2019.

CRISPR is lauded for its precision and ease of use compared to other gene-editing technologies, though, and now that one food developed using the technology is out in the world, we could see many more follow suit.

Wed love to hear from you! If you have a comment about this article or if you have a tip for a future Freethink story, please email us at tips@freethink.com.

Visit link:
This gene-edited tomato may help lower your blood pressure - Freethink

Recommendation and review posted by Bethany Smith

Dedicated pre-seed and seed firm NFX has closed on fund 3 at $450 million, its largest seed fund to date.

Subscribe to the Crunchbase Daily

We spoke with the team to understand its evolution as a fund over the last four years.

We are singularly focused on being the best and first institutional investor, said Pete Flint, one of the firms founding partners. Given how early NFX invests were very comfortable with a great team and a rough concept, he said.

The firm, based in San Francisco and Israel, raised its first seed fund in 2017 at $150 million. Its second fund, raised in 2019, was $275 million, close to double the first fund. And fund 3 is even larger at $450 million, tripling its first fund size.

We count over 190 portfolio companies it has invested in to date, per Crunchbase data.

The three founding partners James Currier, Pete Flint and Gigi Levy-Weiss added a fourth general partner, Morgan Beller, over a year ago. Beller, who worked on Diem (previously Libra) at Facebook, will lead investments in crypto, amongst other sectors. Omri Amirav-Drory, promoted to general partner as part of that announcement, signals the firms increased interest in tech-bio.

NFX plans to invest in 70-plus additional companies with this new fund, with around 50 percent of it reserved for pro rata follow-on funding.

What gets me really excited about fund 3, and the fact that were bringing on Omri to do bio, [is that] were [also] doing proptech and crypto and fintech and gaming, and they actually all overlap, said Beller on the firms wide enough aperture, to not miss the best founders who might be playing around in weird places.

On what it takes to be successful at seed, Beller said You need to get into the best deals, and then you need to do a good job so that the best founders tell their friends to go back to you.

To support companies at seed, NFX has 45 staff members, with a platform team that it has built to help with recruiting, marketing, growth strategies, financial and legal support as well as a community platform to connect founders to share best practices.

We spoke with Amirav-Drory about the firms wide-ranging tech-bio practice, including therapeutics, diagnostics, food-ag, chemicals, materials and energy. The firm likes to invest in platform technologies and the intersection of tech and bio, said Amirav-Drory.

The firm is a seed investor in Mammoth Biosciences, recently valued at over $1 billion in a Series D funding. Mammoth has a diagnostic DNA sequencing platform as well as unique IP for small CRISPR proteins, he said.

NFX is also an investor in drug delivery companies, namely Nano Carry, which can deliver antibodies to the brain. Antibodies are an important modality for curing diseases, but 98 percent of antibodies dont reach the brain, said Amirav-Drory.

Another portfolio company, EdiTy Therapeutics is modifying T-cells as a CRISPR delivery platform. Delivery is one of the most important problems to solve for CRISPR, he said.

C2i Genomics, a fund 2 investment that recently raised a $100 million Series B, detects cancer through a liquid biopsy. Every cancer patient has its own unique biomarker that you can track, said Amirav-Drory. So instead of waiting months to see if a different intervention actually works, you can see every two weeks.

In 2021, multistage venture firms are raising large dedicated seed funds. Andreessen Horowitz announced a $400 million fund in August 2021, and Greylock announced a $500 million dedicated seed fund a month later. Sequoia Capital closed on its fourth dedicated seed fund of $195 million in early 2021 targeting U.S. and European startups.

With larger seed funds announced this year, we expect seed to become more competitive.

Photo courtesy of NFX: General Partners at NFX from left, Omri Amirav-Drory, Morgan Beller, James Currier, Gigi Levy-Weiss and Pete Flint.

Stay up to date with recent funding rounds, acquisitions, and more with the Crunchbase Daily.

Read the rest here:
NFX Closes On Pre-seed And Seed Fund 3 At $450M - Crunchbase News

Recommendation and review posted by Bethany Smith

The pressure to produce results quickly during the drug discovery and development process continues to increase as does the role of genetically engineered custom mouse models. However, even the fastest custom mouse model generation projects take about 6 months to reach the stage when a few F1 heterozygous mice are available for experiments or breeding. This timeline increases if more than a few heterozygotes or homozygotes are needed. Taconics ExpressMODEL portfolio of products shifts the deliverable of a model generation project from a few heterozygous F1 mice to a much larger cohort of 10-100 mice while reducing the timeline to obtaining data, adding predictability, all without compromising essential quality control steps. By applying innovative thinking and leveraging our ability to seamlessly integrate custom model generation, embryology and colony management services, the ExpressMODEL portfolio achieves the industry's fastest timelines to study cohort with no compromise in quality for models generated using embryonic stem cell (ESC), CRISPR, or random integration transgenic (RITg) methodology.

Regardless of the methodology used to generate the founder animals, ExpressMODEL is built around the concept that using in vitro fertilization (IVF) rather than conventional breeding to generate the F1 mice from founders has a number of distinct advantages including:

However, ExpressMODEL is more than simply using IVF to produce F1 mice because the quality of the male founders needs to be high in order to fully realize the advantages IVF provides. High quality means that founder males need to have both a high percentage of the desired genetically-modified gene and a high fertility rate. Thus, the candidate founder males need to be well-characterized. Because the different methodologies used for model generation produce founders with different characteristics, we have developed unique founder analysis protocols to fit the three different methodologies. The founders produced from injection of ESCs into blastocyst-stage embryos are called chimeras because they are derived from two different populations of genetically distinct cells that originated from different embryos. The founders produced by introducing CRISPR reagents or transgenic DNA into one-cell embryos (zygotes) are mosaics meaning they are composed of two or more different populations of genetically distinct cells that originated from the same embryo.

ExpressMODEL: Embryonic stem cell (ESC)

ESC-mediated mouse model generation remains the gold standard and best choice for complex projects such as genomic replacement humanizations. Using ExpressMODEL: ESC, the timeline for a typical project that would take 66 weeks to deliver a homozygous study-size cohort is reduced to 54 weeks, saving at least 3 months. The key components of ExpressMODEL: ESC are:

The data from these analyses facilitate the choice of founder male(s) to be utilized for the IVF to produce an F1 heterozygous cohort that is sized to meet the customers downstream goals and timeline requirements. It is important to note that all quality control steps in vector construction and ES cell targeting are preserved.

ExpressMODEL: CRISPR

Two great advantages of CRISPR methodology are the speed at which a genetically engineered model can be generated and the ability to modify a wide range of genetic backgrounds, including existing genetically-engineered models. Using ExpressMODEL: CRISPR, the timeline for a typical project that would take 48 weeks to deliver a homozygous study-size cohort is reduced to 36 weeks, saving at least 3 months. ExpressMODEL: CRISPR combines our ability to produce founders with a low degree of mosaicism and to accurately estimate the degree of mosaicism of each founder male. The key components of ExpressMODEL: CRISPR are:

ExpressMODEL: Random Integration Transgenic (RITg)

More than 30 years since the first RITg model was generated, the method continues to be a favored path to quickly generate gain of function models that express an ectopic gene. However, because genomic integration of the transgene is random in each injected embryo, the resulting founder line are unique and may or may not perform to the desired specifications. Additionally, each founder often has transgene insertions at multiple sites and the configuration and copy number of those insertions differs. Thus, RITg founders can be more genetically complex than CRISPR founders. As a result, common practice is to separately propagate multiple lines to generate offspring for extensive transgene expression studies. These data are then used to determine which founder line(s) to propagate. The cost and time of this downstream breeding and characterization of multiple founder lines greatly exceeds the original cost to generate the lines and takes significant additional time. Because transgene expression is assessed in founder animals, ExpressMODEL: RITg takes the guesswork out of the process and allows one to avoid the cost of breeding and characterizing multiple founder lines. Moreover, it reduces project timeline by at least 12 weeks and potentially up to 24 weeks or more. The key components of ExpressMODEL: RITg are:

Additional customizable options are available including the provision of tissue lysates and fixed tissue for protein expression analyses, and transgene mapping analysis to accurately determine the transgene integration site and configuration.

Taconics ExpressMODEL suite of technologies is designed to reduce the custom model generation timeline from project conception to study cohort without taking any shortcuts that compromise quality. Taconic provides a seamless end-to-end solution incorporating industry leading model generation, embryology, and colony management capabilities that allows your project to travel in the express lane.

Interested in learning more about custom animal model generation? Visit Taconic's website at http://www.taconic.com.

See the original post here:
The Role of Quality and Speed in Custom Model Generation - FierceBiotech

Recommendation and review posted by Bethany Smith

North America, July 2021, The CRISPR-PE TechnologyMarket research report includes an in-sight study of the keyGlobal CRISPR-PE Technology Marketprominent players along with the company profiles and planning adopted by them. This helps the buyer of the CRISPR-PE Technologyreport to gain a clear view of the competitive landscape and accordingly plan CRISPR-PE Technology market strategies. An isolated section with top key players is provided in the report, which provides a complete analysis of price, gross, revenue(Mn), CRISPR-PE Technology specifications, and company profiles. The CRISPR-PE Technology study is segmented by Module Type, Test Type, And Region.

The CRISPR-PE Technology market size section gives theCRISPR-PE Technologymarket revenue, covering both the historic growth of the market and the forecasting of the future. Moreover, the report covers a host of company profiles, who are making a mark in the industry or have the potential to do so. The profiling of the players includes their market size, key product launches, information regarding the strategies they employ, and others. The report identifies the total market sales generated by a particular firm over a period of time. Industry experts calculate share by taking into account the product sales over a period and then dividing it by the overall sales of theCRISPR-PE Technologyindustry over a defined period.

Download Full CRISPR-PE Technology PDF Sample Copy of Report:jcmarketresearch.com/report-details/1448402/sample

The CRISPR-PE Technology research covers the current market size of theGlobal CRISPR-PE Technology Marketand its growth rates based on 5 year history data. It also covers various types of segmentation such as by geography North America, Europe, Asia-Pacific etc., by product type CRISPR-PE Technology, by applications CRISPR-PE Technologyin overall market. The in-depth information by segments of CRISPR-PE Technologymarket helps monitor performance & make critical decisions for growth and profitability. It provides information on trends and developments, focuses on markets and materials, capacities, technologies, CAPEX cycle and the changing structure of the Global CRISPR-PE Technology Market.

This CRISPR-PE Technology study also contains company profiling, product picture and specifications, sales, market share and contact information of various international, regional, and local vendors of CRISPR-PE Technology. The CRISPR-PE Technology market competition is constantly growing higher with the rise in technological innovation and M&A activities in the industry. Moreover, many local and regional vendors are offering specific CRISPR-PE Technology application products for varied end-users. The new vendor entrants in the CRISPR-PE Technology market are finding it hard to compete with the international vendors based on quality, reliability, and innovations in technology.

Global CRISPR-PE Technology(Thousands Units) and Revenue (Million USD) Market Split by variousapplication & types:-

Segment by Type Cell Line Engineering Genome Regulation

Segment by Application Biomedical Research Agricultural Research Others

The research study is segmented by Application such as Laboratory, Industrial Use, Public Services & Others with historical and projected market share and compounded annual growth rate.GlobalCRISPR-PE Technology(Thousands Units) by Regions (2021-2029)

Geographically,this CRISPR-PE Technology report is segmented into several key Regions, with production, consumption, revenue (million USD), and market share and growth rate ofCRISPR-PE Technologyin these regions, from 2012 to 2028(forecast), covering

Get Exclusive Discount on CRISPR-PE Technology report on:jcmarketresearch.com/report-details/1448402/discount

There are 15 Chapters to display theCRISPR-PE Technology.

Chapter 1, to describe Definition, Specifications and Classification ofCRISPR-PE Technology, Applications ofCRISPR-PE Technology, Market Segment by Regions;

Chapter 2, to analyze the CRISPR-PE Technology Manufacturing Cost Structure, CRISPR-PE Technology Raw Material and Suppliers, CRISPR-PE Technology Manufacturing Process, CRISPR-PE Technology Industry Chain Structure;

Chapter 3, to display the CRISPR-PE Technology Technical Data and Manufacturing Plants Analysis ofCRISPR-PE Technology industry, CRISPR-PE Technology Capacity and Commercial Production Date, CRISPR-PE Technology Manufacturing Plants Distribution, CRISPR-PE Technology R&D Status and Technology Source, CRISPR-PE Technology Raw Materials Sources Analysis;

Chapter 4, to show the Overall CRISPR-PE Technology Market Analysis, CRISPR-PE Technology Capacity Analysis (Company Segment), CRISPR-PE Technology Sales Analysis (Company Segment), CRISPR-PE Technology Sales Price Analysis by Beam Therapeutics, CRISPR Therapeutics, GenScript Biotech, Horizon Discovery, Integrated DNA Technologies (IDT, Intellia Therapeutics Inc, Inscripta, Precision Bioscience, Sangoma Therapeutics, Synthego Corporation;

Chapter 5 and 6, to show the CRISPR-PE Technology Regional Market Analysis that includes North America, Europe, Asia-Pacific etc.,CRISPR-PE TechnologySegment Market Analysis by Types;

Chapter 7 and 8, to analyze theCRISPR-PE TechnologySegment Market Analysis (by Application) Major Manufacturers Analysis ofCRISPR-PE Technology;Beam Therapeutics, CRISPR Therapeutics, GenScript Biotech, Horizon Discovery, Integrated DNA Technologies (IDT, Intellia Therapeutics Inc, Inscripta, Precision Bioscience, Sangoma Therapeutics, Synthego Corporation

Chapter 9, CRISPR-PE Technology Market Trend Analysis, CRISPR-PE Technology Regional Market Trend, CRISPR-PE Technology Market Trend by Product Types , CRISPR-PE Technology Market Trend by Applications;

Chapter 10, CRISPR-PE Technology Regional Marketing Type Analysis, CRISPR-PE Technology International Trade Type Analysis, CRISPR-PE Technology Supply Chain Analysis;

Chapter 11, to analyze the Consumers Analysis ofCRISPR-PE Technology;

Chapter 12, to describeCRISPR-PE TechnologyResearch Findings and Conclusion, CRISPR-PE Technology Appendix, CRISPR-PE Technology methodology and CRISPR-PE Technology various data source;

Chapter 13, 14 and 15, to describeCRISPR-PE Technologysales channel, CRISPR-PE Technology distributors, CRISPR-PE Technology traders, CRISPR-PE Technology dealers, CRISPR-PE Technology Research Findings and CRISPR-PE Technology Conclusion, appendix and data source.

Purchasefull report Securely@:jcmarketresearch.com/checkout/1448402

Find more research reports onCRISPR-PE Technology Industry.By JC Market Research.

Thanks for reading this article; you can also get individual CRISPR-PE Technology chapter wise section or region wise report version like North America, Europe or Asia.

About Author:JCMR global research and market intelligence consulting organization is uniquely positioned to not only identify growth opportunities but to also empower and inspire you to create visionary growth strategies for futures, enabled by our extraordinary depth and breadth of thought leadership, research, tools, events and experience that assist you for making goals into a reality. Our understanding of the interplay between industry convergence, Mega Trends, technologies and market trends provides our clients with new business models and expansion opportunities. We are focused on identifying the Accurate Forecast in every industry we cover so our clients can reap the benefits of being early market entrants and can accomplish their Goals & Objectives.

Contact Us:JCMARKETRESEARCHMark Baxter (Head of Business Development)Phone:+1 (925) 478-7203Email:sales@jcmarketresearch.com|Connect with us at LinkedIn

Read the original post:
CRISPR-PE Technology Market Impressive Gains including key players Beam Therapeutics, CRISPR Therapeutics, GenScript Biotech, Horizon Discovery Bulk...

Recommendation and review posted by Bethany Smith

The CRISPR-Based Therapeutics Market analysis outline by Reports Intellect is an exhaustive study of the latest trends leading to this vertical trend in various regions. The report also calculated the market size, revenue, price, revenue, gross profit margin and market share, cost structure, and growth rate. The report will help stakeholders understand the competitive landscape and gain insight to better position their businesses.

Get a Sample PDF copy of the report @ https://www.reportsintellect.com/sample-request/1071136

This report provides a comprehensive view of the competitive environment of the CRISPR-Based Therapeutics market and includes an extensive description of the performance of the major global players completed in the market. This market research report should be used to gain valuable insight into the market in a cost-effective manner. The CRISPR-Based Therapeutics global report is created taking into account all of the business requirements that are essential for successful business growth.

CRISPR-Based Therapeutics Market competition by top manufacturers as follow: Caribou Biosciences, Intellia Therapeutics, Addgene, Merck KGaA, Mirus Bio LLC, CRISPR THERAPEUTICS, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Editas Medicine, Horizon Discovery Group, Takara Bio USA, GE Healthcare Dharmacon.

Segmentation by type:

Genome EditingGenetic EngineeringgRNA Database/Gene LibrarCRISPR PlasmidHuman Stem CellsGenetically Modified Organisms/CropsCell Line Engineering

Segmentation by application:

Biotechnology CompaniesPharmaceutical CompaniesAcademic InstitutesResearch and Development Institutes

Market segmentation, by regions:North America (United States, Canada)Europe (Germany, France, UK, Italy, Russia, Spain, Netherlands, Switzerland, Belgium)Asia Pacific (China, Japan, Korea, India, Australia, Indonesia, Thailand, Philippines, Vietnam)Middle East & Africa (Turkey, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, South Africa, Israel, Egypt, Nigeria)Latin America (Brazil, Mexico, Argentina, Colombia, Chile, Peru)

Questions Answered within the CRISPR-Based Therapeutics Market Report:

Request a discount on the report @ https://www.reportsintellect.com/discount-request/1071136

What youll expect From Our Report:

About Us:-Reports Intellect marketing research, an exploration and business firm providing syndicated likewise as custom reports with precise analysis and future outlook. We tend to at Reports Intellect marketing research believe client satisfaction and propose they take strategic decisions relating to the current and future endeavors. So, whether or not its the newest report from the researchers or a custom demand, our team is here to assist you within the very best method.

Contact Us:

sales@reportsintellect.comPH + 1-706-996-2486US Address:225 Peachtree Street NE,Suite 400,Atlanta, GA 30303

Continued here:
CRISPR-Based Therapeutics Market Predicted to Grow in Future by Focusing on Top Players: Caribou Biosciences, Intellia Therapeutics, Addgene, Merck...

Recommendation and review posted by Bethany Smith

The Global CRISPR Gene Editing Tools Market business is anticipated to grow quickly from 2021 to 2027, according to a recent study by MarketandResearch.biz. The record anticipates a market share evaluation in terms of quantities for the projection period. The research focuses on past and current market trends, which serve as a foundation for predicting the markets future. The research is based on an in-depth examination of a number of factors, including challenges, market dynamics, competitive analyses, market size, issues, and the agencies involved.

The study tackles the essential aspects and difficulties of geographical areas while adhering to the framework of global CRISPR Gene Editing Tools market competency research. The market research examines provincial and national market sizes, division market growth deals, opportunities, international market players, current events, exchange guidelines, and important business development research.

DOWNLOAD FREE SAMPLE REPORT: https://www.marketandresearch.biz/sample-request/175842

Product type segmentation:

Use application segmentation as a guide:

The CRISPR Gene Editing Tools analysis identifies the following major market players:

The following key nations are included in the market research:

ACCESS FULL REPORT: https://www.marketandresearch.biz/report/175842/global-crispr-gene-editing-tools-market-2021-by-company-regions-type-and-application-forecast-to-2026

This section includes information on the market size, volume, and value of each region for the forecast period to aid our clients in attaining a stronger position in the global market. The competitive landscape section includes in-depth case studies on how to overcome challenges in the CRISPR Gene Editing Tools market as well as top market competitors strategies.

Customization of the Report:

This report can be customized to meet the clients requirements. Please connect with our sales team (sales@marketandresearch.biz), who will ensure that you get a report that suits your needs. You can also get in touch with our executives on +1-201-465-4211 to share your research requirements.

Contact UsMark StoneHead of Business DevelopmentPhone: +1-201-465-4211Email: sales@marketandresearch.biz

See the original post:
Global CRISPR Gene Editing Tools Market 2021 Growth Opportunities and Competitive Landscape 2027 Abcam, Inc., Agilent Technologies, Inc., CRISPR...

Recommendation and review posted by Bethany Smith

SAN FRANCISCO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Latch Bio, a company building data infrastructure for the biocomputing revolution, today announced the closing of a $5 million seed funding round led by Lux Capital with participation from General Catalyst, Haystack, Fifty Years, and Asimov co-founder and CEO, Alec Nielsen, Ph.D. The company has also announced the launch of its first-of-a-kind web-based platform which enables any biologist to analyze CRISPR data without any code or cloud infrastructure setup.

Like genomics before it, the CRISPR community is facing a tsunami of data and a dearth of computational tools required for their analyses. As a result, skilled bioinformaticians are in high demand, and researchers are waiting days for what can be completed in a couple hours, said Brandon Reeves, Partner, Lux Capital. The Latch team has made it possible for any researcher in any lab to open a web browser, upload data and execute a powerful computational pipeline without having to enter a single line of code or build any sort of cloud infrastructure. By empowering the researcher, Latch is helping remove a significant bottleneck that is currently slowing down the whole CRISPR research cycle.

Latch Bio was founded in 2021 by Alfredo Andere, Kyle Giffin, and Kenny Workman who met as undergraduates at the University of California, Berkeley. Bringing together their backgrounds in engineering and computer science, they formed Latch Bio to build infrastructure for scientists who need ready-to-run solutions to advance their research. The Latch platform is a web-first solution that addresses some of the primary challenges facing CRISPR researchers, namely access to bioinformatics experts and the implementation of cloud resources.

Since 2015, the ChristianaCare Gene Editing Institute has been at the forefront of innovation in advancing the use of gene editing to support improved human health, said Pawel Bialk, M.S., principal investigator at the Gene Editing Institute. Access to the right tools is essential to our success. The Latch platform, which includes ChristianaCares DECODR program, will provide immediate access to a wide range of popular CRISPR workflows that will further accelerate our discovery and translational research programs.

Using the Latch platform, any researcher can now create a centralized one-stop-shop for storing, transforming and visualizing their data without writing any code. Through the Latch plugins, users can import files from their existing data stack including Amazon S3, Benchling, and Illuminas BaseSpace. Biologists have access to dozens of popular workflows including CRISPResso, MAGeCK, CasTLE, Cas.py, MultiQC, and CasOffinder, among others. After performing a specific workflow, users can further interrogate the results using the built-in genomic visualizer and quality controls. The Latch platform is offered free to academic research users.

With the public launch of the Latch platform, we have officially begun our campaign to build and disseminate the data infrastructure for the biocomputing revolution, said Kenny Workman, co-founder and Chief Technology Officer.

CRISPR scientists who are committed to changing the world deserve the best software, and at Latch we actually listen to them, then build what they want. We want to be their champion and build solutions that make their job easier, said Kyle Giffin, co-founder and Chief Operating Officer.

We look forward to working closely with our users, who are each revolutionizing the capabilities of gene-editing and will be invaluable partners as we continue to improve the Latch platform, said Alfredo Andere, co-founder and Chief Executive Officer. We are at the very beginning of realizing our vision and look forward to working closely with our advisors and growing base of users to further expand the platform's capabilities.

To learn more about access to the Latch platform, please visit http://www.Latch.bio.

About Latch Bio

Founded in 2021, Latch Bio is on a mission to build and disseminate the data infrastructure for the biocomputing revolution. The companys cloud-based platform offers no-code bioinformatics for CRISPR researchers seeking to store, transform and visualize their data. Through any web browser, the global CRISPR community can quickly access popular bioinformatics pipelines and data visualization tools. The company's investors include Lux Capital, General Catalyst, Haystack, and Fifty Years. Latch Bio is based in San Francisco, California and can be found online at http://www.LatchBio.com.

Follow this link:
Latch Bio Emerges from Stealth with Seed Funding Round Led by Lux Capital - Business Wire

Recommendation and review posted by Bethany Smith

DUBLIN, Oct. 4, 2021 /PRNewswire/ -- The "Cell Based Assay & High Content Screening Markets" report has been added to ResearchAndMarkets.com's offering.

Research and Markets Logo

Cell-Based Assays are a mainstay of drug development and scientific research, but growth is now accelerating as the race for a COVID-19 cure gains speed.

On top of this, new technology is allowing Cell-Based Assays to be used to measure any aspect of cell function. This market just keeps on growing with no end in sight. The workhorse of the pharmaceutical industry is becoming a central player in biotechnology.

This is a complex area but this readable report will bring the entire management team up to speed, on both the technology and the opportunity.

The technology is moving faster than the market. Genomics and Immunology are playing a role too. Find the opportunities and pitfalls. Understand growth expectations and the ultimate potential market size.

Industry Overview

Players in a Dynamic Market

Academic Research Lab

Contract Research Organization

Genomic Instrumentation Supplier

Cell Line and Reagent Supplier

Pharmaceutical Company

Audit Body

Certification Body

Market Trends

Factors Driving Growth

Candidate Growth

Immuno-oncology

Genomic Blizzard

Technology Convergence

The Insurance Effect

Factors Limiting Growth

Technology Development

Cell Based Assays Recent Developments

Axxam and FUJIFILM Cellular Dynamics Announce Strategic Alliance

Cancer Genetics to Acquire Organoid Startup Stemonix

Curi Bio Acquires Artificial Intelligence Firm Dana Solutions

CRISPR Screens Uncover Novel Cancer Therapy Targets

ERS Genomics Licenses CRISPR-Cas9 Patents to Axxam

New Transcriptomics Assay Facilitates Compound Screens

Carta Biosciences Betting on Gene Interaction Mapping

High-throughput Identifies cancer drug candidates

Velabs Therapeutics partners with Alytas Therapeutics to develop a novel immune-based therapy for obesity

InSphero platform selected to test Cyclerion's sGC stimulator technology

OcellO to provide in vitro research services to Merus

Charles River Laboratories to acquire Citoxlab

Reaction Biology Corporation Purchases ProQinase GmbH

Cisbio extends its assay portfolio for immuno-oncology drug discovery

STEMCELL Technologies Launches Next-Generation Culture System

Abcam Acquires Calico Biolabs

Evotec announces achievement in Celgene alliance utilizing IPSC screening

Fujifilm Cellular Dynamics Inc. launches iCELL Microglia

Cisbio and Excellerate Bioscience partner

Horizon Discovery extends CRISPR Screening Service to primary human T cells

Profiles of Key Cell Based Assay Companies

Story continues

Abcam

Agilent

Aurora Instruments Ltd

Axxam

Beckman Coulter Diagnostics

Becton, Dickinson and Company

BioIVT

Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc.

BioTek Instruments

BioVision, Inc.

BMG Labtech

Cell Biolabs, Inc

Cell Signaling Technology, Inc.

Charles River Laboratories

Cisbio Bioassays

Corning, Inc

Cytovale

Enzo Life Sciences, Inc

Eurofins DiscoverX Corporation

Evotec AG

Excellerate Bioscience

Fujifilm Cellular Dynamics International

Genedata

Hemogenix

Horizon Discovery

Invivogen

Leica Biosystems

Lonza Group Ltd.

Luminex Corp

Merck & Co., Inc

Miltenyi Biotec

Molecular Devices

Nanion

Ncardia

New England Biolabs, Inc

Olympus

Origene Technologies

Perkin Elmer

Promega

Qiagen Gmbh

Reaction Biology

Recursion Pharma

Roche Diagnostics

Sartorius

Sartorius-ForteBio

Sartorius-IntelliCyt

Sony Biotechnology

SPT Labtech

Stemcells Technologies Canada Inc

Tecan

Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc.

Vitro Biopharma

For more information about this report visit https://www.researchandmarkets.com/r/olr3vr

Read the rest here:
Cell Based Assay & High Content Screening Market Report 2021: The Workhorse of the Pharmaceutical Industry is Becoming a Central Player in...

Recommendation and review posted by Bethany Smith