Category Archives: Genetic Engineering

While Pfizer's CEO aims for a vaccine by year's end, according to Forbes, USC experts have outlined what is involved with the vaccine development. Experts on the vaccine progress include Professor Pin Wang of the USC Viterbi School of Engineering. Wang is an expert in using molecular engineering to understand immune system responses and develop new targeted treatments, including vaccines, for diseases.In a statement, Wang says: "Right now, were on an accelerated path to vaccine development for coronavirus, while paying sufficient attention to the potential side effects, Wang said. We are cutting a lot of corners because we are desperate, so theres urgency. We have to be sure the product doesnt cause harm. Its a very challenging task, but thats the only option right now. We dont have much choice."While the path to vaccine development is complex and challenging, Wang is of the view that a workable vaccine will be unveiled by the end of 2020. This optimistic appraisal is based on an assessment of data collated from preclinical studies.A further reason relates to the strategy of approaching vaccine development from different tangents, where the coronavirus vaccine research is running across four platforms. The four platforms are taking different trajectories to stimulate immunity to the virus. Involved in the development of the vaccine are advanced technologies, such as genetic engineering and gene sequencing.One platform centers on examining coronavirus antigens, which can be introduced by a DNA/RNA. Other platforms include delivery via protein, hybrid viruses, or inactivated coronaviruses. In each case, the aim is the same in terms of seeking to trigger a response from the bodys natural defenses.There are issues to resolve however, in that even when a successful vaccine is developed it may not entirely counteract all the coronavirus infections or symptoms.

Read this article:
Coronavirus vaccines are coming, but when will they arrive? - Digital Journal

"Agricultural Biotechnology Market"

Agricultural Biotechnology Market: Information by Crop Type (Soybean, Maize, Cotton, and others), Application (Herbicide Tolerance, Stacked Traits, Insect Tolerance, and others), Technique (Genetic Engineering, Molecular Breeding, Molecular Diagnostics and Tissue Culture) and Region (Americas, Europe, Asia-Pacific, and the Middle East & Africa) - Global Forecast till 2022

Global agricultural biotechnology market, including growth rate, key domains, segmentation, etc

The international agricultural biotechnology market is speculated to witness growth at CAGR of 10.10% by 2022. It was estimated to be worth USD 27,778.64 Million in 2018. Agricultural biotechnology market is considered as one of the swiftly advancing segments due to growing cultivation of biotechnology-based products. The growing level of investment in research and development is also touted as among the prime reasons behind the significant prospect of the market all throughout. With growing entrepreneurial emphasis, the market is speculated to advance in a much effective fashion.

Get a FREE Sample with Complete TOC By Considering the COVID-19 impact on Global Market @https://www.marketresearchfuture.com/sample_request/8724

Demand for agricultural biotechnology is witnessing consistent growth. This can be realized through the growing level of cultivation of the biotech crops. Moreover, cultivation has grown all across the globe. In fact, this aspect is speculated to enhance the growth of the international agricultural biotechnology market. It can be seen the level of demand for genetically modified crops has grown in a great way. Especially, the growth has been witnessed in developed parts like Europe.

The international zone for the biotechnology crops was around 190 million hectares, which was 185 million in 2016. In short, the level of cultivation is steadily growing and is expected to remain constant during the forecast period. The amount of land acquired and used for these purposes has grown in all parts, including the US. Above all, more than 70 nations have accepted the biotech crop cultivation. To be specific, India, US, Brazil, Argentina, and Canada are among the leading names in this context.

Agricultural Biotechnology Market Segmentation

International Agricultural Biotechnology Industry can be segmented on the basis of crop Type, Application, And Technique. On the basis of crop type, the global agricultural biotech market can be segmented into soybean, maize, cotton, and others. On the basis of application, the international agricultural biotechnology market is segmented into herbicide tolerance, stacked traits, insect tolerance, and others. In terms of technique, the international agricultural biotechnology is divided into genetic engineering, molecular breeding, molecular diagnostics, and tissue culture. Similarly, the market is segmented on the basis of region as well, is divided into the US, Europe, Asia Pacific, Middle East, and Africa.

Agricultural Biotechnology Market Regional Analysis

On the basis of region, the international agricultural biotech market is segmented into the US, Europe, Asia-Pacific, Middle East, and Africa. The US is considered the global leader in the agricultural biotechnology industry. A consistent boost in the cultivation of biotech crops is said to be the key reason behind the growth.

Asia-Pacific is among the other, a swiftly growing region in the global market. To be specific, the Indian market is the most prominent in this segment. Japan also shows great prospects. UK and Germany are leading European nations. The most significant among others are the African and Middle East market touted to be the most promising.

Agricultural Biotechnology Market Key Players

The Prominent Players in the GlobalAgricultural Biotechnology MarketareArcadia Biosciences (US)., Thermo Fisher Scientific (US), Bayer AG (Germany), Biocentury Transgene Co., Ltd (China), Vilmorin & Cie (France), Eurofins Scientific (Luxembourg), LGC Biosearch Technologies (US), Corteva Agriscience ( US), Dr. Chip Biotech Inc. (Taiwan), Evogene Ltd (Israel), and Yield10 Bioscience, Inc. (US).

Agricultural Biotechnology Industry news

Cole of Duty publishes reports on the global growth perspective of the agricultural biotechnology market. The report figures out all the crucial aspects associated with the market contributing to the market. It also identifies the key domains where the growth prospect is expected to be the most significant. It thus provides wholesome analysis on each aspect associated with the market.

TABLE OF CONTENT1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY$ 1,350.002 MARKET INTRODUCTION $ 0.003 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY $ 0.004 MARKET DYNAMICS$ 950.005 MARKET FACTOR ANALYSIS$ 950.006 GLOBAL AGRICULTURAL BIOTECHNOLOGY MARKET, BY CROP TYPE$ 1,650.007 GLOBAL AGRICULTURAL BIOTECHNOLOGY MARKET, BY APPLICATION$ 1,650.008 GLOBAL AGRICULTURAL BIOTECHNOLOGY MARKET, BY TECHNIQUE$ 1,650.009 GLOBAL AGRICULTURAL BIOTECHNOLOGY MARKET, BY REGION

...Continued

LIST OF TABLES$TABLE 1 MARKET SYNOPSIS 13TABLE 2 LIST OF ASSUMPTIONS 15TABLE 3 COUNTRY SCENARIO OF GENETICALLY MODIFIED ORGANISM (GMO) CROPS PROHIBITION 28TABLE 4 GLOBAL AGRICUTURAL BIOTECHNOLOGY MARKET, BY CROP TYPE 2013-2022 (USD MILLION) 35TABLE 5 GLOBAL AGRICULTURAL BIOTECHNOLOGY MARKET, FOR SOYBEAN, BY REGION 2013-2022 (USD MILLION) 35TABLE 6 GLOBAL AGRICULTURAL BIOTECHNOLOGY MARKET, FOR MAIZE, BY REGION 2013-2022 (USD MILLION) 35TABLE 7 GLOBAL AGRICULTURAL BIOTECHNOLOGY MARKET, FOR MEDIUMTHROUGHPUT, BY REGION 2013-2022 (USD MILLION) 36TABLE 8 GLOBAL AGRICULTURAL BIOTECHNOLOGY MARKET, FOR OTHER CROPS, BY REGION 2013-2022 (USD MILLION) 36TABLE 9 GLOBAL AGRICULTURAL BIOTECHNOLOGY MARKET, BY APPLICATION 2013-2022 (USD MILLION) 38

...Continued

LIST OF FIGURES$FIGURE 1 GLOBAL AGRICULTURAL BIOTECHNOLOGY MARKET STRUCTURE 15FIGURE 2 BOTTOM-UP AND TOP-DOWN APPROACHES 21FIGURE 3 MARKET DYNAMICS: ANALYSIS OF THE GLOBAL AGRICULTURAL BIOTECHNOLOGY MARKET 24FIGURE 4 GLOBAL AREA OF BIOTECH CROPS, BY REGION, 20152017 (MILLION HECTARES) 25FIGURE 5 CULTIVATION AREA OF BIOTECH CROPS, BY COUNTRY, 2016 & 2017 (MILLION HECTARES) 26FIGURE 6 DRIVERS IMPACT ANALYSIS 27FIGURE 7 RESTRAINT IMPACT ANALYSIS 28FIGURE 8 PORTERS FIVE FORCES ANALYSIS: GLOBAL AGRICULTURAL BIOTECHNOLOGY MARKET 30FIGURE 9 VALUE CHAIN ANALYSIS OF THE GLOBAL AGRICULTURAL BIOTECHNOLOGY MARKET 32

...Continued

Obtain Premium Research Report Details, Considering the impact of COVID-19 @https://www.marketresearchfuture.com/reports/agricultural-biotechnology-market-8724

About Market Research Future:

AtMarket Research Future (MRFR), we enable our customers to unravel the complexity of various industries through our Cooked Research Report (CRR), Half-Cooked Research Reports (HCRR), Raw Research Reports (3R), Continuous-Feed Research (CFR), and Market Research & Consulting Services.

MRFR team have supreme objective to provide the optimum quality market research and intelligence services to our clients. Our market research studies by Components, Application, Logistics and market players for global, regional, and country level market segments, enable our clients to see more, know more, and do more, which help to answer all their most important questions.

In order to stay updated with technology and work process of the industry, MRFR often plans & conducts meet with the industry experts and industrial visits for its research analyst members.

Media ContactCompany Name: Market Research FutureContact Person: Abhishek SawantEmail: Send EmailPhone: +1 646 845 9312Address:Market Research Future Office No. 528, Amanora Chambers Magarpatta Road, Hadapsar City: PuneState: MaharashtraCountry: IndiaWebsite: http://www.marketresearchfuture.com/reports/agricultural-biotechnology-market-8724

Read more:
Coronavirus (COVID-19) Impact on Agricultural Biotechnology Market 2020: Sales, Revenue of Top Companies, Emerging Technology Trends, Future Scope of...

Global Biologic Therapeutics Market: Snapshot

The branch of science that deals with manufacturing medicines and pharmaceutical products based on biological origins is called biological therapeutics. Any pharmaceutical drug product manufactured from semi-synthesized and biological sources is included under this field. Owing to rapid advances experienced by this sector, a distinct biologic therapeutics market has formed. This market is mainly being driven by a rising demand for better healthcare treatments occurring all over the world.

Know the Growth Opportunities in Emerging Markets

The global biological therapeutics market mainly comprises of derivatives extracted from whole blood and other blood components, organs and tissue transplants, stem cell therapy, human breast milk, fecal microbiota, human reproductive cells, and antibodies. Several biological materials could are also extracted from other animals.

The global biological therapeutics market not only deals with extracted biologic materials from the market, but also involves providing treatments based on the use of these materials. Most biologic therapeutic substance include individual components such as thrombolytic agents, interferons, monoclonal antibodies, additional products, interleukin-based products, haematopoietic growth factors, hormones, and therapeutic enzymes. Materials used for producing biopharmaceuticals might also be derived from recombinant E. coli or yeast cultures, mammalian cell cultures, plant cell cultures, and mosses.

The global biologic therapeutics market is boosted through the presence of cancer, diabetes, and another coronary heart diseases. A growing geriatric population also has been responsible for making the market gain extensive revenue in the form of quality treatment processes. However, the market might be restrained due to high cost of extraction of the biologic materials. Nevertheless, extensive research and development carried out by many businesses in this market might offset the restraints substantially.

Global Biologic Therapeutics Market: Overview

The global biologic therapeutics market is predicted to benefit from the rising applications of biological products. Biological products could be made of sugars, nucleic acids, proteins, or complex combinations of these substances, or may be living components such as cells and tissues. Biological products are used to prevent diseases, diagnose diseases, or treat or cure medical conditions.

Global Biologic Therapeutics Market: Key Trends and Opportunities

First and foremost, increasing reimbursement for biologics is predicted to positively influence the biologic therapeutics market in the upcoming years. Medical insurance companies and state-run insurance schemes are increasingly accepting claims against biologic therapeutics. Biologic therapeutics are gaining popularity due the efficacy of biologic therapeutic drugs and fewer side effects than chemical-based drugs. This is because biologic drugs are obtained from natural sources such as plants, or even living components such as cells and tissues of animals, microorganisms, or humans. These fragments are further treated to make therapeutic products such as blood components, vaccines, and recombinant therapeutic proteins.

Increasing prevalence of chronic diseases such as cancer, diabetes, and coronary artery diseases and a growing geriatric population are some other factors contributing to the biologic therapeutics market. In addition, mounting clinical trials and innovative research and development practices to develop novel drugs is boosting the growth of biologic therapeutics market.

On the flip side, manufacturing difficulties due to complexities of drug molecules is challenging the growth of biologic therapeutics market. Nevertheless, increasing research and development in the pharmaceutical sector and rising applications of biologics is anticipated to provide new opportunities to this market.

Global Biologic Therapeutics Market: Market Potential

The Genetic Technology module for TechVision Opportunity Engine provides the most recent R&D advancements and developments while looking into opportunities for profit in the exploding genetic technology field via joint ventures, acquisitions, and technology transfer. The entire range of genetic technology applications covered in the module includes latest developments in omics technologies, which include genetic, cellular, and alternative therapies; genetically modified plants and animals, and sequencing technologies.

The health and wellness cluster of genetic technology techvision opportunity engine looks into developments across several areas, which include genetic engineering, drug discovery and development, regenerative medicine, cosmetic procedures, nanomedicine, drug delivery, smart healthcare, pain and disease management, and personalized medicine.

Order this Report TOC for Detailed Statistics

Global Biologic Therapeutics Market: Geographical Outlook

As per the reports analysis, the worldwide biologic therapeutics market could see a classification into North America, Europe, Asia Pacific, Latin America, and the Middle East and Africa. North America, among them, could secure a leading position due to a robust research infrastructure and presence of expert researchers and scientists for biotechnology research. Europe is a key market for biologic therapeutics due to high level of biotechnology research and pioneering research in the field of biotechnology. Asia Pacific is likely to emerge as a significant market for biologic therapeutics with increasing advancement in biotechnology research.

Global Biologic Therapeutics Market: Competitive Landscape

The worldwide biologic therapeutics market is predicted to witness the prominence of several key players, namely Pfizer Inc., Novartis Global, Smith Medical, Concord Biotech, H. Lundbeck A/S, AstraZeneca, Merck & Co. Inc., GlaxoSmithKline plc, Aurobindo Pharma Ltd., and Retractable Technologies Inc. Market players could resort to common business strategies, viz. product innovation, cutting-edge developments, and acquisitions to push up growth in the market.

Original post:
Biologic Therapeutics Market Estimated to Flourish at by 2025 - Cole of Duty

This article originally appeared on The Conversation.

This summer, for the first time, genetically modified mosquitoes could be released in the U.S.

On May 1, 2020, the company Oxitec received an experimental use permit from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to release millions of GM mosquitoes (labeled by Oxitec as OX5034) every week over the next two years in Florida and Texas. Females of this mosquito species, Aedes aegypti, transmit dengue, chikungunya, yellow fever and Zika viruses. When these lab-bred GM males are released and mate with wild females, their female offspring die. Continual, large-scale releases of these OX5034 GM males should eventually cause the temporary collapse of a wild population.

However, as vector biologists, geneticists, policy experts and bioethicists, we are concerned that current government oversight and scientific evaluation of GM mosquitoes do not ensure their responsible deployment.

Coral reefs that can withstand rising sea temperatures, American chestnut trees that can survive blight and mosquitoes that cant spread disease are examples of how genetic engineering may transform the natural world.

Genetic engineering offers an unprecedented opportunity for humans to reshape the fundamental structure of the biological world. Yet, as new advances in genetic decoding and gene editing emerge with speed and enthusiasm, the ecological systems they could alter remain enormously complex and understudied.

Recently, no group of organisms has received more attention for genetic modification than mosquitoesto yield inviable offspring or make them unsuitable for disease transmission. These strategies hold considerable potential benefits for the hundreds of millions of people impacted by mosquito-borne diseases each year.

Although the EPA approved the permit for Oxitec, state approval is still required. A previously planned release in the Florida Keys of an earlier version of Oxitecs GM mosquito (OX513) was withdrawn in 2016 after a referendum indicated significant opposition from local residents. Oxitec has field-trialed their GM mosquitoes in Brazil, the Cayman Islands, Malaysia and Panama.

The public forum on Oxitecs recent permit application garnered 31,174 comments opposing release and 56 in support. The EPA considered these during their review process.

However, it is difficult to assess how EPA regulators weighed and considered public comments and how much of the evidence used in final risk determinations was provided solely by the technology developers.

The closed nature of this risk assessment process is concerning to us.

There is a potential bias and conflict of interest when experimental trials and assessments of ecological risk lack political accountability and are performed by, or in close collaboration with, the technology developers.

This scenario becomes more troubling with a for-profit technology company when cost- and risk-benefit analyses comparing GM mosquitoes to other approaches arent being conducted.

Another concern is that risk assessments tend to focus on only a narrow set of biological parameterssuch as the potential for the GM mosquito to transmit disease or the potential of the mosquitoes new proteins to trigger an allergic response in peopleand neglect other important biological, ethical and social considerations.

To address these shortcomings, the Institute for Sustainability, Energy and Environment at University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign convened a Critical Conversation on GM mosquitoes. The discussion involved 35 participants from academic, government and nonprofit organizations from around the world with expertise in mosquito biology, community engagement and risk assessment.

A primary takeaway from this conversation was an urgent need to make regulatory procedures more transparent, comprehensive and protected from biases and conflicts of interest. In short, we believe it is time to reassess risk assessment for GM mosquitoes. Here are some of the key elements we recommend.

First, an official, government-funded registry for GM organisms specifically designed to reproduce in the wild and intended for release in the U.S. would make risk assessments more transparent and accountable. Similar to the U.S. database that lists all human clinical trials, this field trial registry would require all technology developers to disclose intentions to release, information on their GM strategy, scale and location of release and intentions for data collection.

This registry could be presented in a way that protects intellectual property rights, just as therapies entering clinical trials are patent-protected in their registry. The GM organism registry would be updated in real time and made fully available to the public.

Second, a broader set of risks needs to be assessed and an evidence base needs to be generated by third-party researchers. Because each GM mosquito is released into a unique environment, risk assessments and experiments prior to and during trial releases should address local effects on the ecosystem and food webs. They should also probe the disease transmission potential of the mosquitos wild counterparts and ecological competitors, examine evolutionary pressures on disease agents in the mosquito community and track the gene flow between GM and wild mosquitoes.

To identify and assess risks, a commitment of funding is necessary. The U.S. EPAs recent announcement that it would improve general risk assessment analysis for biotechnology products is a good start. But regulatory and funding support for an external advisory committee to review assessments for GM organisms released in the wild is also needed; diverse expertise and local community representation would secure a more fair and comprehensive assessment.

Furthermore, independent researchers and advisers could help guide what data are collected during trials to reduce uncertainty and inform future large-scale releases and risk assessments.

The objective to reduce or even eliminate mosquito-borne disease is laudable. GM mosquitoes could prove to be an important tool in alleviating global health burdens. However, to ensure their success, we believe that regulatory frameworks for open, comprehensive and participatory decision-making are urgently needed.

Written by Brian Allan, Associate Professor of Entomology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign; Chris Stone, Medical Entomologist, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign; Holly Tuten, Vector Ecologist, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign; Jennifer Kuzma, Goodnight-NCGSK Distinguished Professor, North Carolina State University; Natalie Kofler, Levenick Resident Scholar in Sustainability, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Read the rest here:
Genetically Modified Mosquitoes Could be Released in Florida and Texas This Summer - The Daily Beast

From Mendel who a century ago formulated his famous laws of heredity to Khorana who has just succeeded in producing a synthetic gene, the biochemical unit of inheritance, is a long and exciting story. But the first, major breakthrough was achieved only in the past decade with the discovery and isolation of the mysterious D.N.A. (deoxiribonucleic acid) and R.N.A. (ribonucleic acid), the basic substances in the living cell, respectively carrying the predestined pattern of life (or the genetic code) and the means of its communication to final expression. The remarkable achievement of the team of scientists of the Wisconsin University, headed by Dr. H. G. Khorana, takes these probes into the very nature of life a big step forward. Whether it will also bring within man's grasp, in the foreseeable future, the means of tinkering with the genetic code to alter his very being to desired ends is too soon to say. And yet such possibilities of genetic engineering, thrown open by the virtuoso Khorana performance, can be both exciting and frightening.

Excerpt from:
From the Archives (June 8, 1970): When man plays god - The Hindu

This summer, for the first time, genetically modified mosquitoes could be released in the U.S.

On May 1, 2020, the company Oxitec received an experimental use permit from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to release millions of GM mosquitoes (labeled by Oxitec as OX5034) every week over the next two years in Florida and Texas. Females of this mosquito species, Aedes aegypti, transmit dengue, chikungunya, yellow fever and Zika viruses. When these lab-bred GM males are released and mate with wild females, their female offspring die. Continual, large-scale releases of these OX5034 GM males should eventually cause the temporary collapse of a wild population.

However, as vector biologists, geneticists, policy experts and bioethicists, we are concerned that current government oversight and scientific evaluation of GM mosquitoes do not ensure their responsible deployment.

Coral reefs that can withstand rising sea temperatures, American chestnut trees that can survive blight and mosquitoes that cant spread disease are examples of how genetic engineering may transform the natural world.

Genetic engineering offers an unprecedented opportunity for humans to reshape the fundamental structure of the biological world. Yet, as new advances in genetic decoding and gene editing emerge with speed and enthusiasm, the ecological systems they could alter remain enormously complex and understudied.

Recently, no group of organisms has received more attention for genetic modification than mosquitoes to yield inviable offspring or make them unsuitable for disease transmission. These strategies hold considerable potential benefits for the hundreds of millions of people impacted by mosquito-borne diseases each year.

Although the EPA approved the permit for Oxitec, state approval is still required. A previously planned release in the Florida Keys of an earlier version of Oxitecs GM mosquito (OX513) was withdrawn in 2018 after a referendum in 2016 indicated significant opposition from local residents. Oxitec has field-trialed their GM mosquitoes in Brazil, the Cayman Islands, Malaysia and Panama.

The public forum on Oxitecs recent permit application garnered 31,174 comments opposing release and 56 in support. The EPA considered these during their review process.

However, it is difficult to assess how EPA regulators weighed and considered public comments and how much of the evidence used in final risk determinations was provided solely by the technology developers.

The closed nature of this risk assessment process is concerning to us.

There is a potential bias and conflict of interest when experimental trials and assessments of ecological risk lack political accountability and are performed by, or in close collaboration with, the technology developers.

This scenario becomes more troubling with a for-profit technology company when cost- and risk-benefit analyses comparing GM mosquitoes to other approaches arent being conducted.

Another concern is that risk assessments tend to focus on only a narrow set of biological parameters such as the potential for the GM mosquito to transmit disease or the potential of the mosquitoes new proteins to trigger an allergic response in people and neglect other important biological, ethical and social considerations.

To address these shortcomings, the Institute for Sustainability, Energy and Environment at University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign convened a Critical Conversation on GM mosquitoes. The discussion involved 35 participants from academic, government and nonprofit organizations from around the world with expertise in mosquito biology, community engagement and risk assessment.

A primary takeaway from this conversation was an urgent need to make regulatory procedures more transparent, comprehensive and protected from biases and conflicts of interest. In short, we believe it is time to reassess risk assessment for GM mosquitoes. Here are some of the key elements we recommend.

First, an official, government-funded registry for GM organisms specifically designed to reproduce in the wild and intended for release in the U.S. would make risk assessments more transparent and accountable. Similar to the U.S. database that lists all human clinical trials, this field trial registry would require all technology developers to disclose intentions to release, information on their GM strategy, scale and location of release and intentions for data collection.

This registry could be presented in a way that protects intellectual property rights, just as therapies entering clinical trials are patent-protected in their registry. The GM organism registry would be updated in real time and made fully available to the public.

Second, a broader set of risks needs to be assessed and an evidence base needs to be generated by third-party researchers. Because each GM mosquito is released into a unique environment, risk assessments and experiments prior to and during trial releases should address local effects on the ecosystem and food webs. They should also probe the disease transmission potential of the mosquitos wild counterparts and ecological competitors, examine evolutionary pressures on disease agents in the mosquito community and track the gene flow between GM and wild mosquitoes.

To identify and assess risks, a commitment of funding is necessary. The U.S. EPAs recent announcement that it would improve general risk assessment analysis for biotechnology products is a good start. But regulatory and funding support for an external advisory committee to review assessments for GM organisms released in the wild is also needed; diverse expertise and local community representation would secure a more fair and comprehensive assessment.

Furthermore, independent researchers and advisers could help guide what data are collected during trials to reduce uncertainty and inform future large-scale releases and risk assessments.

The objective to reduce or even eliminate mosquito-borne disease is laudable. GM mosquitoes could prove to be an important tool in alleviating global health burdens. However, to ensure their success, we believe that regulatory frameworks for open, comprehensive and participatory decision-making are urgently needed.

This article was updated to correct the date that Oxitec withdrew its OX513 trial application to 2018.

[Deep knowledge, daily. Sign up for The Conversations newsletter.]

See more here:
Genetically modified mosquitoes could be released in Florida and Texas beginning this summer silver bullet or jumping the gun? - The Conversation US

Scientists Childrens research center of Seattle has created a new method of treatment of type I diabetes. They used certain types of immune cells that trigger insulin production.

Researchers have proposed a technology that provides the organism with the necessary amount of the named substance. Type one diabetes is a disease in which effector T cells mistakenly attack the immune cell structures in the pancreas that produce insulin. The new method relates to genetic engineering and provides for the use of this mechanism. The function of immune cells is to capture the excess level of glucose in the blood, after that they produce insulin. The destruction of the latter they are not able to isolate this hormone, later in the blood glucose levels. Experts have edited the genes to home in on the genetic structure of FOXP3 in T-cells.

Scientists have created a special manual for these items as they play a crucial in the activation of cells of the pancreas, contributing to the production of the required insulin. In further studies, the experts will prepare a platform for clinical trials of a new method of treatment of diabetes of the first type.

Originally posted here:
Scientists have created a new method of treatment of type I diabetes - The Times Hub

The market research on Global CRISPR-Based Therapeutics Market 2020 by Company, Regions, Type and Application, Forecast to 2025 presents an in-depth analysis of market statistics in terms of revenues, segment-wise data, region-wise data, and country-wise data. The report aims to identify the dynamics of the global CRISPR-Based Therapeutics market and provide recent updates and insights that affect various segments of the global market. The market report sorts the market dependent on the manufacturer, region, type, and application. The report estimates and validates the market size of the global CRISPR-Based Therapeutics market. The report also delivers a forecast, which focuses on the market opportunities for the next five years (2020-2025) for each region. The scope of the study segments the global market by product type, application, end-use, and the region is explained. This research report is expected to enable clients to assess strategies deployed by market leaders.

NOTE: Our analysts monitoring the situation across the globe explains that the market will generate remunerative prospects for producers post COVID-19 crisis. The report aims to provide an additional illustration of the latest scenario, economic slowdown, and COVID-19 impact on the overall industry.

DOWNLOAD FREE SAMPLE REPORT: https://www.researchstore.biz/sample-request/41907

Company Profiles:

The report provides immense detailing on each and every company. It incorporates their headquarter location, company overview, recent developments, and company strategies. Market share analysis as per different companies, market forecast, demand, price analysis, size, and share as per regional boundaries has been presented in the report. The report gives a study on global CRISPR-Based Therapeutics industry-top players depending on their company profile, product portfolio, ability, cost, and revenue.

Key market players: Caribou Biosciences , Thermo Fisher Scientific , Merck KGaA , Addgene , Takara Bio USA , CRISPR THERAPEUTICS , Intellia Therapeutics , Editas Medicine , Mirus Bio LLC , Horizon Discovery Group , GE Healthcare Dharmacon

On the basis on the end users/applications, this report focuses on the status and outlook for major applications/end users, shipments, revenue (Million USD), price, and market share and growth rate for each application: Biotechnology Companies, Pharmaceutical Companies, Academic Institutes, Research and Development Institutes

On the basis of product type, this report displays the shipments, revenue (Million USD), price, and market share and growth rate of each type: Genome Editing, Genetic Engineering, gRNA Database/Gene Librar, CRISPR Plasmid, Human Stem Cells, Genetically Modified Organisms/Crops, Cell Line Engineering

ACCESS FULL REPORT: https://www.researchstore.biz/report/global-crispr-based-therapeutics-market-41907

Regional Analysis of The Market:

The report represents all the regions as well as countries across the globe, which showcases a regional manufacturing status, such as volume, market size, value, and price details. Regional analysis is given by tracing the historical forecast market size. It provides complete information about the key developed regions as well as major emerging markets depending on the regional growth of the global CRISPR-Based Therapeutics industry. The anticipated development rate to be recorded by every locale over the conjecture years has been expressed in this report. In terms of geography, the report highly focuses on showcase development, development rate, and development potential. The report studies key players and provides a five-year annual trend analysis, which highlights market size, volume, and share for North America (United States, Canada and Mexico), Europe (Germany, France, UK, Russia and Italy), Asia-Pacific (China, Japan, Korea, India and Southeast Asia), South America (Brazil, Argentina, etc.), Middle East& Africa (Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Nigeria and South Africa)

Customization of the Report:This report can be customized to meet the clients requirements. Please connect with our sales team ([emailprotected]), 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.

About Us

Researchstore.biz is a fully dedicated global market research agency providing thorough quantitative and qualitative analysis of extensive market research.Our corporate is identified by recognition and enthusiasm for what it offers, which unites its staff across the world.We are desired market researchers proving a reliable source of extensive market analysis on which readers can rely on. Our research team consist of some of the best market researchers, sector and analysis executives in the nation, because of which Researchstore.biz is considered as one of the most vigorous market research enterprises. Researchstore.biz finds perfect solutions according to the requirements of research with considerations of content and methods. Unique and out of the box technologies, techniques and solutions are implemented all through the research reports.

Contact UsMark StoneHead of Business DevelopmentPhone: +1-201-465-4211Email: [emailprotected]Web: http://www.researchstore.biz

See more here:
Global CRISPR-Based Therapeutics Market 2020 Industry Analysis by Manufacturers, Type, Application, End-User and Forecast 2025 - Jewish Life News

Help us keep OnCuba alive here

Perhaps it is difficult to find a moment in the history of humanity in which, in such a short time, such an enormous volume of information (and disinformation) has been generated about a problem that affects the entire human species, as what has happened with the COVID-19 pandemic. Nor has humanity faced such an uncertain near future.

In addition to the global health emergency, which has caused hundreds of thousands of deaths and more than 2 million infected people worldwide, this pandemic has put on the political table the unsustainability of the capitalist system worldwide, the paradigm of unlimited growth and the culture of growing consumer.

On Earth Day Coronavirus, a pollution hiccup?

Suddenly, the reality that we live on a limited planet, with increasingly scarce resources, and that in the biosphere all existence is interconnected, has unquestionably emerged. The zoonotic nature of the COVID-19 itself tells us of the direct transmission of the virus to humans, most likely due to the contact or consumption of wild species and even due to the natural boundaries being displaced and the loss of biodiversity. The fact that it expands globally also alerts us to the profound environmental changes caused by human action and its techno-industrial culture developed on the basis of fossil energy. We have to think about what can happen when, as a result of climate change, the thaws continue and the paleo viruses frozen thousands of years ago are released, in a period too fast for existing species, and especially humans, to adapt to that change. If we add to the above the unsustainability of production systems and value chains (think of stabled livestock, large extensions of monocultures, the application to these systems of agrochemicals, hormones, antivirals and genetic manipulation), we will have an approximate picture of the world that will emerge after the pandemic

This will be a challenge not only for science, which will have to rethink a series of paradigms, but also for world politics that has taken too long to have global agreements to slow down or minimize these processes; hence, one of the elements that should emerge from this experience at the global level is a more direct relationship between science and political decision-making at the country level.

After this pandemic, there will be no new normal, another world will have to be built and that construction will be carried out by all, with greater solidarity and conscious citizen participation, or it will be exercised through increasingly more authoritarian mechanisms of power; we can already see these trends in some governments.

The world as we have known it was structured from obtaining cheap fossil energy, which allowed a techno-industrial culture to develop in the last 200 years that led to the emergence of large human concentrations in megacities. The United Nations has predicted that the urban population will increase to 6.7 billion; that is, 68% of humanity by 2050. In that decade, if the current rhythm continues, there will be 43 megacities with more than 10 million inhabitants each, really something unsustainable for the planet. Current and future generations will be forced to rethink their lifestyles or be willing to live in a dystopian world of isolation, in which relationships must be mediated by technology.

The advances in technoscience in the last 20 years already present us with a new ethics, in which each human being is aware of their limits of all kinds.

Genetic engineering, with all its potential, implies the application of the precautionary principle for the introduction of each technological advance. We are still unaware of the many effects of new technologies on our health and the global environment, yet we continue to use them too frequently.

Over the past few months we have often seen on social media claims about the short-term recovery of natural spaces and wildlife activity in urban areas, dolphins swimming placidly in Venices canals, goats visiting Scottish historical sites, wild boars rummaging through the garbage in Paris and Barcelona. We have been glad that our brothers of other species recover their ancestral spaces even when it was our presence that expelled them; but this is all a fallacy. The processes of environmental deterioration at the planetary level continue, and their resilience, if they can start being reversed, will take years, but we have to start. Just think about these figures: in 2018, the burning of fossil fuels pumped 37.1 billion tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. If we add to this the net carbon emissions caused by soil oxidation and the most vigorous forest fires, we can see why atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide reached an all-time high of 415 parts per million in early 2019.

Cubas challenges

Cuba has a different but contradictory panorama. A poor country, blocked for 60 years by the worlds greatest power and with a frankly deteriorating open economy (it is estimated that its GDP will decrease between 4 and 7% in 2020), with a large debt, without external financing, with a high rate of illiquidity, with a country risk like never before, perhaps it is the deepest point of the systemic crisis of its economy. This really places it in a very critical situation, above all due to the enormous supply crisis that threatens to become a food crisis as acute as that of the early 1990s. From the economic point of view, the only alternative is unblocking the mechanisms and to rapidly start applying the agreements contained in the Guidelines discussed massively 10 years ago and which inexplicably have not been applied.

I think that all Cubans could agree on the urgency of doing away with obstacles to agricultural production, the inefficiency of this sector and the dreadful methods of administration and management, which contrast with the statistics that show that most of the national food production is generated by small producers, then the assessment still has blank questions. Advancing towards an agriculture with low energy inputs, sustainable management of the soil and crops, rational use of water, that is, organic agriculture will benefit everyone, there are examples and very successful at that.

Cuba has potentialities that must be taken into account from an environmental point of view and that have been gradually implemented. Its energy dependence constitutes an Achilles heel for its economy and attempts are being made, with a very successful intensive policy, to decrease it with an accelerated increase in clean energy; the Cuban aquifer stock is limited, but the country has a very intelligent and well-structured water policy.

The development of the Cuban health policy with the pandemic has been successful so far and there is no indication that wont continue like this; the Cuban experience in the detection and control of epidemics has made it possible to establish mechanisms of local control and primary care that other countries have not been able to implement, just remember that Cuban doctors have participated in the control and treatment of epidemics such as Ebola in Africa and cholera in Haiti, in addition to the epidemics that for decades have been introduced in Cuba by foreign aggressions (swine fever, dengue, etc.). It is possible to think, unlike other countries, that the island will emerge from the pandemic in a relatively short period of time and with minimal impact on its population. For this reason, the greatest complexity will not be precisely the epidemic, but rather the food supply, and in this direction all the nations efforts must be applied; I say the nation, and not only the state. For its part, the government must open the floodgates to diverse productive forces, the effort is everyones.

On June 2, in commemoration of World Environment Day, the director general of the Environment Agency of the Cuban Ministry of Science, Technology and Environment (CITMA) expressed in a television appearance in Holgun a principle that will have to be present in the next designs of Cuban domestic policies, the interconnection of the natural world with society, or what is the same as the eco-social relationship of all the elements that make up and determine our environment. The relationship of science and politics must recognize that the Cuban territory is limited and all relationship we establish on it has a finite character and has a load capacity that cannot be exceeded. The celebration of June 5 this year is curious, because as always, it is a date in which the environmental work carried out for twelve months by each province and municipality is recognized, but now, in 2020 it will have to be done almost virtually due to the epidemic.

Thinking of Pinar del Ro, a province that this year was the best in its environmental work (the parameters established for the evaluation cover all the activities in the province of the different sectors that tend towards environmental sustainability), brings to mind the need to transfer the financing dedicated to the expansion of tourism to the reactivation and development of agriculture. Tourism is recognized in the world as the smokeless industry, but it is still an industry, it requires the import of all kinds of inputs, as well as being an eminently extractive activity. Today Cuba has a capacity per rooms that is far from the market demand for the island, the existing statistics do not exceed more than 30% of linear occupancy in the various destinations of the archipelago. If we add to this the globalized nature of tourism (it arises precisely with the development of capitalism in its last phase) and the physical interconnections that are established with visitors, even immunologically, we approach a portrait of an activity that is very profitable but that creates links of dependency on a specific and very fragile world market.

According to the activitys development plans in the near future, if the developmentalist vision continues to be applied in the tourism sector, Pinar del Ro will have a huge megaproject called Punta Colorada, which will cost billions of dollars and will have an impact, undoubtedly, on the marine-coastal ecosystems of the northwest of the province and in the Guanahacabibes and Viales biosphere reserves.

The COVID-19 epidemic in the world has put the neoliberal capitalist system in check. It will remain to be seen if it is able to resist this onslaught.

For Cuba it means the need and the urgency to consolidate what exists and works well and transform the inefficient, because for Cuba once again the possibility of creating an eco-socialist alternative with citizen participation is opening.

Help us keep OnCuba alive here

Excerpt from:
The pandemic, the environment and Cuba - OnCubaNews

(The Conversation is an independent and nonprofit source of news, analysis and commentary from academic experts.)

Brian Allan, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign; Chris Stone, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign; Holly Tuten, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign; Jennifer Kuzma, North Carolina State University, and Natalie Kofler, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

(THE CONVERSATION) This summer, for the first time, genetically modified mosquitoes could be released in the U.S.

On May 1, 2020, the company Oxitec received an experimental use permit from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to release millions of GM mosquitoes (labeled by Oxitec as OX5034) every week over the next two years in Florida and Texas. Females of this mosquito species, Aedes aegypti, transmit dengue, chikungunya, yellow fever and Zika viruses. When these lab-bred GM males are released and mate with wild females, their female offspring die. Continual, large-scale releases of these OX5034 GM males should eventually cause the temporary collapse of a wild population.

However, as vector biologists, geneticists, policy experts and bioethicists, we are concerned that current government oversight and scientific evaluation of GM mosquitoes do not ensure their responsible deployment.

Genetic engineering for disease control

Coral reefs that can withstand rising sea temperatures, American chestnut trees that can survive blight and mosquitoes that cant spread disease are examples of how genetic engineering may transform the natural world.

Genetic engineering offers an unprecedented opportunity for humans to reshape the fundamental structure of the biological world. Yet, as new advances in genetic decoding and gene editing emerge with speed and enthusiasm, the ecological systems they could alter remain enormously complex and understudied.

Recently, no group of organisms has received more attention for genetic modification than mosquitoes to yield inviable offspring or make them unsuitable for disease transmission. These strategies hold considerable potential benefits for the hundreds of millions of people impacted by mosquito-borne diseases each year.

Although the EPA approved the permit for Oxitec, state approval is still required. A previously planned release in the Florida Keys of an earlier version of Oxitecs GM mosquito (OX513) was withdrawn in 2016 after a referendum indicated significant opposition from local residents. Oxitec has field-trialed their GM mosquitoes in Brazil, the Cayman Islands, Malaysia and Panama.

The public forum on Oxitecs recent permit application garnered 31,174 comments opposing release and 56 in support. The EPA considered these during their review process.

Time to reassess risk assessment?

However, it is difficult to assess how EPA regulators weighed and considered public comments and how much of the evidence used in final risk determinations was provided solely by the technology developers.

The closed nature of this risk assessment process is concerning to us.

There is a potential bias and conflict of interest when experimental trials and assessments of ecological risk lack political accountability and are performed by, or in close collaboration with, the technology developers.

This scenario becomes more troubling with a for-profit technology company when cost- and risk-benefit analyses comparing GM mosquitoes to other approaches arent being conducted.

Another concern is that risk assessments tend to focus on only a narrow set of biological parameters such as the potential for the GM mosquito to transmit disease or the potential of the mosquitoes new proteins to trigger an allergic response in people and neglect other important biological, ethical and social considerations.

To address these shortcomings, the Institute for Sustainability, Energy and Environment at University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign convened a Critical Conversation on GM mosquitoes. The discussion involved 35 participants from academic, government and nonprofit organizations from around the world with expertise in mosquito biology, community engagement and risk assessment.

A primary takeaway from this conversation was an urgent need to make regulatory procedures more transparent, comprehensive and protected from biases and conflicts of interest. In short, we believe it is time to reassess risk assessment for GM mosquitoes. Here are some of the key elements we recommend.

Steps to make risk assessment more open and comprehensive

First, an official, government-funded registry for GM organisms specifically designed to reproduce in the wild and intended for release in the U.S. would make risk assessments more transparent and accountable. Similar to the U.S. database that lists all human clinical trials, this field trial registry would require all technology developers to disclose intentions to release, information on their GM strategy, scale and location of release and intentions for data collection.

This registry could be presented in a way that protects intellectual property rights, just as therapies entering clinical trials are patent-protected in their registry. The GM organism registry would be updated in real time and made fully available to the public.

Second, a broader set of risks needs to be assessed and an evidence base needs to be generated by third-party researchers. Because each GM mosquito is released into a unique environment, risk assessments and experiments prior to and during trial releases should address local effects on the ecosystem and food webs. They should also probe the disease transmission potential of the mosquitos wild counterparts and ecological competitors, examine evolutionary pressures on disease agents in the mosquito community and track the gene flow between GM and wild mosquitoes.

To identify and assess risks, a commitment of funding is necessary. The U.S. EPAs recent announcement that it would improve general risk assessment analysis for biotechnology products is a good start. But regulatory and funding support for an external advisory committee to review assessments for GM organisms released in the wild is also needed; diverse expertise and local community representation would secure a more fair and comprehensive assessment.

Furthermore, independent researchers and advisers could help guide what data are collected during trials to reduce uncertainty and inform future large-scale releases and risk assessments.

The objective to reduce or even eliminate mosquito-borne disease is laudable. GM mosquitoes could prove to be an important tool in alleviating global health burdens. However, to ensure their success, we believe that regulatory frameworks for open, comprehensive and participatory decision-making are urgently needed.

[Deep knowledge, daily. Sign up for The Conversations newsletter.]

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article here: https://theconversation.com/genetically-modified-mosquitoes-could-be-released-in-florida-and-texas-beginning-this-summer-silver-bullet-or-jumping-the-gun-139710.

Read the original post:
Genetically modified mosquitoes could be released in Florida and Texas beginning this summer silver bullet or jumping the gun? - Thehour.com