Page 1,082«..1020..1,0811,0821,0831,084..1,0901,100..»

Stem Cell Assay Market and Forecast Analyzed in a New Research Report – Monroe Scoop

Posted: March 26, 2020 at 8:43 pm

Global Stem Cell Assay Market From PMRs Viewpoint

Decorated with a team of 300+ analysts, PMR Insights serves each and every requirement of the clients while preparing market reports. With digital intelligence solutions, we offer actionable insights to our customers that help them in overcoming market challenges. Our dedicated team of professionals perform an extensive survey for gathering accurate information associated with the market.

PMR, in its latest business report elaborates the current situation of the global Stem Cell Assay market in terms of volume (x units), value (Mn/Bn USD), production, and consumption. The report scrutinizes the market into various segments, end uses, regions and players on the basis of demand pattern, and future prospect.

In this Stem Cell Assay market study, the following years are considered to project the market footprint:

Request Sample Report @ https://www.persistencemarketresearch.co/samples/13462

On the basis of product type, the global Stem Cell Assay market report covers the key segments,

The major players in the global stem cell assay market include GE Healthcare, Promega Corporation, Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc., Merck KGaA, Cell Biolabs, Inc., Hemogenix Inc., Stemcell Technologies Inc., Bio-Rad Laboratories Inc., R&D Systems Inc., and Cellular Dynamics International Inc.

Request Report Methodology @ https://www.persistencemarketresearch.co/methodology/13462

The Stem Cell Assay market research addresses the following queries:

After reading the Stem Cell Assay market report, readers can

Stem Cell Assay market players Player 1, Player 2, Player 3, and Player 4, among others represent the global Stem Cell Assay market. The market study depicts an extensive analysis of all the players running in the Stem Cell Assay market report based on distribution channels, local network, innovative launches, industrial penetration, production methods, and revenue generation. Further, the market strategies, and mergers & acquisitions associated with the players are enclosed in the Stem Cell Assay market report.

For any queries get in touch with Industry Expert @ https://www.persistencemarketresearch.co/ask-an-expert/13462

About us:

PMR is a third-platform research firm. Our research model is a unique collaboration of data analytics and market research methodology to help businesses achieve optimal performance.

To support companies in overcoming complex business challenges, we follow a multi-disciplinary approach. At PMR, we unite various data streams from multi-dimensional sources. By deploying real-time data collection, big data, and customer experience analytics, we deliver business intelligence for organizations of all sizes.

Contact us:

305 Broadway, 7th Floor

New York City, NY 10007

United States

Ph.no. +1-646-568-7751

Continue reading here:
Stem Cell Assay Market and Forecast Analyzed in a New Research Report - Monroe Scoop

Posted in Stem Cell Research | Comments Off on Stem Cell Assay Market and Forecast Analyzed in a New Research Report – Monroe Scoop

How far should genetic engineering go to allow this couple to have a healthy baby? – Sydney Morning Herald

Posted: March 26, 2020 at 8:42 pm

Normal text sizeLarger text sizeVery large text size

One morning in 2005, Shelley Beverley woke up to find that she had gone deaf. She was 21, and living in Johannesburg with her older brother Neil. I was very scared, she says. It was just so sudden. She struggled through the rest of the day, hoping that her hearing would come back, but it didnt. In one sense, her hearing loss wasnt entirely a surprise: Beverleys grandmother had been deaf, Neil had lost his hearing when he was 13, and her mum, Mary, had lost hers when she was 32. We knew it ran in the family, she says, but I thought Id been lucky and not inherited it.

Beverley, 35, lives in Margate, a semi-rural district south of Hobart, with her husband James. The couple migrated to Australia from South Africa in 2010, looking for space, buying 2 hectares of lush green grass at the foot of a forested ridge near the mouth of the Derwent River. We love the wildlife here, says James, looking out the living room window. Weve seen pademelons, echidnas, quolls, blue-tongue lizards, even a Tassie devil. At dusk, hundreds of kangaroos emerge from the forest to gorge on the grass. Its very peaceful, says James. Its really helped us after everything thats happened.

Apart from their deafness, Beverleys family had largely enjoyed good health. Then, in September 2015, her mother, Mary, then 62, started experiencing fatigue and stomach pain. Doctors in Durban ordered a colonoscopy, but the procedure made her worse. Her feet became swollen and purple. Because of their hearing problems, Shelley and Mary had communicated mainly in text messages. But soon I began noticing that her wording got a bit funny, says Beverley. It didnt always make sense.

Loading

Beverley flew to Durban in February 2016, but by that time her mother could no longer talk or walk. She was so weak that she couldnt move her hands or lift her neck. Two days after Beverley arrived in Durban, her mother caught a virus that caused fluid to build up on her lungs. The doctors tried unsuccessfully to drain it. Shortly afterwards, she died. She weighed just 36 kilograms. It was so fast, Beverley says. And we were still in the dark about what she had.

Shortly before Marys death, Neil had also fallen ill. He developed a number of mysterious symptoms, including facial twitches and seizures. He kept falling over and tripping, and experienced vomiting and headaches so severe he lost his vision for weeks at a time. His behaviour became strange showering with his clothes on, and hallucinating.

One day, Dad was driving him around and Neil started talking to all these little people he thought were around his feet, says Beverley. Doctors in Durban had trouble diagnosing him, so they sent a biopsy to London, where he was found to have a type of mitochondrial cytopathy one of a large family of chronic and progressive diseases that affect the muscles, brain and nervous system. As the family soon learnt, the condition has no cure and no effective therapies. One of the common early symptoms is hearing loss.

Neil died in June 2017, aged 34, by which time Beverley had discovered she also had the condition. It was fear, so much fear, she says. She began experiencing symptoms, including migraines and vision loss. She has since developed diabetes, hypertension, gastro-paresis (when your stomach muscles dont work), and pharyngeal dysphagia (difficulty swallowing). Every time I get sick now, the flu or something, I think, When am I going to need a wheelchair or a feeding tube? When will my legs stop working?

Mito has taken everything from me, she says. If I die, at least James will still have a part of me.

Beverley has bright blue eyes and long, straight, ash-brown hair. Shes got a lazy left eye and uncommonly pale skin, which she attributes to her condition. Oh, and I had bunions out in 2010, she says, laughing wryly.

She doesnt know how long shes got left, but she is determined to make it count. She has joined mito awareness groups, and is an active member of the Mito Foundation, which supports sufferers, and funds research. She has exhaustively researched the condition and takes every opportunity to educate doctors. Youd be surprised by how little they know about it, she says.

But her overriding focus has been on a cutting-edge, and currently illegal, procedure called mitochondrial donation, a form of IVF which would allow those with the condition to have children, safe in the knowledge they would not be passing it on. Mito has taken everything from me, she says. If I die, at least James will still have a part of me. I would like him to look at our child, and say, You have your mums smile or your mums eyes.

An IVF treatment known as mitochondrial donation could potentially save up to 60 Australian children a year from being born with the condition. Credit:

Mitochondrial donation has been labelled immoral and unethical, a slippery slope to designer babies, not to mention potentially unsafe. The only country in the world to have legalised it is the UK. A report by medical experts into the technologys potential application in Australia is due to be delivered to Health Minister Greg Hunt this month.

This fight is really personal to me, Beverley says. Short of a cure, people with mito should at least have the option of having healthy children.

Mitochondria are microscopic structures in human cells that provide the body with energy. For this reason, they are often described as the cells powerhouse. They are crucially important: if your mitochondria fail or mutate, your body will be starved of energy, causing multiple organ failure and premature death.

A stylised representation of a mitochondrion, which provides the body with energy. Malfunction can lead to organ failure and death.Credit:Josh Robenstone

Mito, which is maternally inherited, usually affects the muscles and major organs such as the brain, heart, liver, inner ears, and eyes. But it can cause any symptom in any organ, at any age. Indeed, the term mito includes more than 200 disorders, the symptoms of which are maddeningly varied and seemingly unrelated, leading to delayed diagnoses or incorrect diagnoses or, indeed, no diagnosis.

Many of these people have been fobbed off by doctors or laughed off by people who think they are hypochondriacs, says Dr David Thorburn, a mitochondrial researcher at the Murdoch Childrens Research Institute, in Melbourne, who has diagnosed some 700 cases over the past 28 years. Most people are relieved to finally know what it is, because that is the end of that part of their journey.

Its sometimes said babies produced as a result of mitochondrial donation would have three parents the mother, the father, and the donor.

Up to two million people worldwide have some form of mito. - Others, like Beverley, who have a less severe type of the disease, will get adult onset, and can expect to become ill in their 30s, 40s or 50s.

According to Thorburn, One of the things that most dismays families with mito is the lack of control they have over passing the condition down to future generations of their family.

Remaining childless is one way to stop the condition from being passed down, as is adopting, but as Thorburn acknowledges, There is an innate desire in many individuals to have their own children. For these people, mito donation offers the very real prospect that the condition is eliminated from future generations.

Mitochondrial replacement is a highly specialised procedure, requiring a level of manual dexterity sufficient to manipulate a womans egg, which is roughly the width of a human hair. Within that egg is a nucleus, where a persons genes are located, and the cytoplasm, the jelly-like substance that surrounds it. Mitochondria are found in the cytoplasm.

Mitochondrial replacement involves taking a donor females healthy egg, removing its nucleus and replacing it with the nucleus of the woman affected by mitochondrial disease, but whose nucleus is healthy. The egg is then fertilised using her partners sperm. (Another option is to fertilise the egg first, and then swap the nucleus.) The resulting embryo is then implanted into the mother.

Researcher David Thorburn: "Mito donation offers the very real prospect that the condition is eliminated from future generations."Credit:Josh Robenstone

Since more than 99.9 per cent of our genes are found in the eggs nucleus, which remains unaffected, the procedure will have no impact on the childs height, hair colour or mannerisms. Despite that, its sometimes said that babies produced as a result of mitochondrial donation would have three parents the mother, the father, and the donor.

The technology has been tested in mice for more than 30 years, but only since 2009 has research been done on human embryos, mainly in the UK. Almost from the start, the research was subject to sensational headlines about scientists playing God, and the possibility of genetic engineering, with much of the hysteria being fuelled by anti-abortion groups. The Catholic Church described it as a further step in commodification of the human embryo and a failure to respect new individual human lives.

In 2012, the Human Genetics Alert, an independent watchdog group in London, wrote a paper comparing any baby produced with mitochondrial replacement to Frankensteins creation, since they would be produced by sticking together bits from many different bodies. According to the Conservative British MP Jacob Rees-Mogg, the procedure was not a cure for disease, it is the creating of a different person.

Regulators subjected the technology to four separate scientific reviews, together with rounds of ethical debate and community consultation. In 2015, the UK Parliament voted to legalise the technology for use in humans, on the proviso that it only be available to those women at high risk of passing on the disease. Since then, 13 couples in the UK have received the go-ahead to undergo the procedure.

Its unclear how many children, if any, have been born: the parents have asked that details not be published. Meanwhile, scientists like Thorburn wait eagerly for news of any developments. I know the UK researchers well and have asked several of them, and they are keeping completely quiet about it in respecting the families wishes, he says.

Loading

If there have been babies born in the UK using the procedure, they arent the first. In April 2016, a child was born using the technique in Mexico, to a Jordanian mother who carried a fatal mitochondrial condition known as Leigh syndrome. The doctor in charge, an American fertility specialist called Dr John Zhang, later admitted that he had gone to Mexico because the procedure is illegal in America. In Mexico, he admitted, There are no rules.

Even those who want mitochondrial donation legalised in Australia concede that much remains unknown about the procedure. Its long-term risks can only be understood through lifelong health check-ups, but this is impossible until any children conceived via this procedure become adults. Implications for subsequent generations also remain unclear.

No medical procedure is 100 per cent safe, says Sean Murray, CEO of the Mito Foundation. But we think we are at the stage now where the benefits of the technology are greater than the risks.

One of the issues around safety concerns the compatibility of the donors mitochondria with the recipients nuclear genes. A 2016 study in mice suggested that mismatched mitochondria affected their metabolism and shortened their lives. Another concern is known as carryover, whereby a tiny amount of mutant mitochondria is inevitably transferred from the affected mothers egg into the donor egg during the procedure.

Instead of it being wiped out, the mutation might then reappear in the descendants of any girls born as a result. For this reason, some people have proposed that the procedure be restricted to male embryos only, but this raises all kinds of ethical issues around selective breeding and sex selection.

Loading

Indeed, it often seems as if the term ethical minefield was coined especially with mitochondrial donation in mind.

My primary ethical concern has to do with the sanctity of human life, says Father Kevin McGovern, a Catholic priest and member of the National Health and Medical Research Councils Mitochondrial Donation Expert Working Committee.

If mitochondrial donation is permitted here, the technique most likely to be used is pronuclear transfer, which requires that both the donors egg and the affected mothers egg be fertilised. [This is to ensure that both eggs are at the same developmental stage.] But once the nucleus is removed from the donors fertilised egg, it is discarded. For people who believe that life begins at conception, this is akin to murder. You are creating two lives and destroying one for spare parts.

The Catholic Church has consistently opposed mitochondrial donation. In a Senate inquiry into the technology in 2018, Dr Bernadette Tobin, director of the Plunkett Centre for Ethics at the Australian Catholic University, suggested the process was intrinsically evil.

The inquiry also heard from Father Anthony Fisher, Catholic Archbishop of Sydney, who raised concerns about the moral right of the child to know how he or she was conceived the problem of what he called genealogical bewilderment and the donors right to remain anonymous. He also worried that women might effectively become egg vending machines: The availability of human ova is often assumed when people talk about reproductive technology as if they were somehow there in a cupboard to be used. In fact, it means women have to be used to obtain these eggs. They are extracted by invasive procedures that do carry some risk.

A report by medical experts into mitochondrial donation and its potential application in Australia is due to be delivered to Health Minister Greg Hunt this month. Credit:Alex Ellinghausen

Equally troubling for the Australian Catholic Bishops Conference, the peak national body for the churchs bishops, was the fact that mitochondrial donation involved conceiving babies not by marital intercourse [but by] a technical procedure.

Most of these concerns are redundant, argues the Mito Foundations Sean Murray. We already have a well defined regulatory framework for dealing with all this, he says. As far as the donors right to remain anonymous, we would defer to the appropriate federal or state and territory regulations that apply for sperm or egg donations. In regard to a kids right to know they had a mitochondrial donor, societally there seems to be a preference to inform kids. Its important for them to understand their genetic lineage.

Then theres the matter of consent. The parents can wrestle with the ethical issues and weigh up all the risks, but the only person who cant consent to the procedure is the unborn child. Well, says Murray, they cant consent to being born with mito, either.

The Mito Foundations Sean Murray: "In regard to a kids right to know they had a mitochondrial donor, societally there seems to be a preference to inform kids."Credit:Joshua Morris

Murray, 47, is one of the founding directors of the Mito Foundation, which was established in Sydney in 2009. Mito runs in my family, he says. My older brother, Peter, died of it in 2009 at 45, and my mum passed away in 2011, at 70. What people often dont understand is that even in families that have mito, each member can have different mutational loads basically, different amounts of bad mitochondria. Peter got a high load, but I didnt. Thats why Im still here.

A computer scientist by training, Murray now works full-time on the foundation. Much of his job involves travelling around the country, explaining mito to politicians, journalists and philanthropists, raising funds for research and, most crucially, advocating for a change to the laws.

Mitochondrial donation falls foul of two pieces of legislation: the Research Involving Human Embryos Act 2002, and the Prohibition of Human Cloning for Reproduction Act 2002. The laws prohibit the implantation of a human embryo that contains more than two peoples genetic material. The laws were subject to a mandatory review in 2010, but the then Labor government recommended they remain the same.

In 2013, the Mito Foundation urged the government to revisit its decision. Two years later, it began lobbying in earnest. What we tried to get across was that the science around mito donation has come a long way since 2010, says Murray. Also, the process that the UK went through to legalise it really reassured us that the procedure is safe and effective.

Loading

In the past five years, Murray and his colleagues have consulted with more than 100 MPs and senators. Only one of them, according to Murray, said I dont like this. They have also talked to dozens of industry experts, including academics and medical and research bodies, about the benefits of mitochondrial donation. Most of them get it straight away, he says. We are talking about a technique that will prevent the chance of having a morbidly ill child.

Now, a breakthrough appears imminent. In February 2019, Health Minister Greg Hunt asked the National Health and Medical Research Council to look into the matter, review the science and conduct public consultation. The NHMRC is due to hand its report to Hunt this month. The expectation among the mito community is that he will recommend the laws be changed. Any proposals would then need to be debated in Parliament, where issues around reproductive medicine have, in the past, been hotly contested.

Murray expects some opposition from more conservative MPs, but nothing like the rancour seen in the NSW Parliament during last years debate over legalising abortion. Shadow health minister Chris Bowen has, for his part, said that Labor will support changing the laws.

Mitochondrial sufferer Shelley Beverley at home in Tasmania. This fight is really personal to me. Credit:Peter Mathew

Whether this will help people like Shelley Beverley is unclear. If Hunt gives it the green light, it will take two years at least for mitochondrial donation to become available to prospective parents, given the time involved in drafting and passing legislation, establishing a regulatory regime and getting doctors up to speed with the technology.

This will probably be too late for Beverley. I really only have about a year left to give it a go, she tells me. After that, my symptoms may progress and biologically things get worse after 35. She says she would consider going to the UK for the treatment, but that at present they are not accepting international patients.

Loading

In the meantime, she watches TV, and reads a little, but not too much. (It puts me to sleep.) She gardens: she has a bed of huge white and pink roses out the back of her house, as a memorial to her mother and brother. And she eats. James cooks for me. He lets me choose the best meat and potatoes! Ive put on weight since I met him. She describes James as something close to an angel. He will listen to every problem I have or feeling I experience. He will always put me first.

Beverley started going out with James when she was 21, right around the time she first went deaf. I was so scared that he wouldnt like me as much. I remember calling him and saying I was scared he would leave me. But James is still here. Im very lucky to have him, she says. If I go, I want him to have a part of me.

To read more from Good Weekend magazine, visit our page at The Sydney Morning Herald, The Age and Brisbane Times.

Tim Elliott is a senior writer with Good Weekend.

See more here:
How far should genetic engineering go to allow this couple to have a healthy baby? - Sydney Morning Herald

Posted in Genetic Engineering | Comments Off on How far should genetic engineering go to allow this couple to have a healthy baby? – Sydney Morning Herald

Books about pandemics to read in the time of coronavirus – Milford Daily News

Posted: March 26, 2020 at 8:42 pm

What to read while youre self-isolating to avoid the coronavirus? How about books about all the various plagues humankind has survived before?

There are classics like Giovanni Boccaccios 1353 classic The Decameron, about Italian aristocrats who flee the bubonic plague in Florence, or Daniel Defoes 1722 novel A Journal of the Plague Year, an account of the Black Death in London half a century before.

There are many more recent works about pandemics, some nonfiction, some historical fiction, some speculative fiction. On March 8, Stephen King resisted comparisons of the current crisis to his 1978 novel The Stand, set in a world where a pandemic has killed 99% of the population. King tweeted, No, coronavirus is NOT like THE STAND. Its not anywhere near as serious. Its eminently survivable. Keep calm and take all reasonable precautions.

Despite Kings protestations, readers often look to books to help explain real-world phenomena, especially in bewildering times like these. Here are a few more plague books to consider.

Fiction

Pale Horse, Pale Rider (1939) by Katherine Ann Porter is a short novel set during the influenza pandemic of 1918, which killed five times as many Americans as did World War I. Its main character, Miranda, is a young reporter who falls in love with a soldier; the books fever-dream style captures the experience of the disease.

The Andromeda Strain (1969) by Michael Crichton is a bestselling techno-thriller that begins when a military satellite crashes to earth and releases an extraterrestrial organism that kills almost everyone in a nearby small town. Then things get bad.

Love in the Time of Cholera (1985) by Gabriel Garca Mrquez is the great Colombian authors beguiling tale of a 50-year courtship, in which lovesickness is as debilitating and stubborn as disease.

The MaddAddam Trilogy by Margaret Atwood, which includes Oryx and Crake (2003), The Year of the Flood (2009) and MaddAddam (2013), is a masterwork of speculative fiction by the author of The Handmaids Tale. Set in a near future in which genetic engineering causes a plague that almost destroys humanity, its savagely satirical, thrilling and moving.

The Road (2006) by Cormac McCarthy is a bleak, beautifully written, Pulitzer Prize-winning novel set after an unspecified extinction event has wiped out most of humanity. An unnamed man and boy travel on foot toward a southern sea, fending off cannibals and despair.

Nemesis (2010) by Philip Roth is the authors 31st and last novel, a sorrowful story set in Newark, N.J., in 1944, as the United States is in the grip of the polio epidemic that killed and disabled thousands of children.

Station Eleven (2014) by Emily St. John Mandel is a bestselling novel about a group of actors and musicians traveling through the Great Lakes region in future years after a mysterious pandemic called the Georgian flu has killed almost everyone.

The Old Drift (2019) by Namwalli Serpell is a dazzling debut novel set in Zambia, spanning a century but focusing in part on the disaster wrought in that country by the HIV/AIDS epidemic.

Nonfiction

The Coming Plague: Newly Emerging Diseases in a World Out of Balance (1995) by Laurie Garrett is a Pulitzer Prize-winning reporters clear-eyed look at how rapidly the modern world has changed the nature of disease, how important preparedness is and how endangered we are without it.

Spillover: Animal Infections and the Next Human Pandemic (2013) by David Quammen is the great science writers fascinating look at zoonotic diseases, such as AIDS and Ebola (and now coronavirus), that jump from animal species to ours.

Read more:
Books about pandemics to read in the time of coronavirus - Milford Daily News

Posted in Genetic Engineering | Comments Off on Books about pandemics to read in the time of coronavirus – Milford Daily News

Timeline Shows 3 Paths To COVID-19 Treatment And Prevention (INFOGRAPHIC) – Forbes

Posted: March 26, 2020 at 8:42 pm

In uncertain times, we are witnessing one of the greatest moments in the history of science.

A projected timeline for treatment and prevention of the novel coronavirus. Although we are living ... [+] through uncertain times, we are also witnessing one of the greatest moments in science history.

Scientists are breaking speed records in their race to develop treatments for the new coronavirus. Some are panning through old molecules hoping to find effective drugs. Others are applying the latest breakthroughs in synthetic biology to engineer sophisticated treatments and vaccines.

Ive previously talked about some synthetic biology companies are racing to create treatments. Others like Mammoth Biosciences are developing much-needed testing. Every day brings additional reports of the latest breakthroughs from around the world. But how can we make sense of all this information?

To provide a big-picture perspective, SynBioBeta and Leaps by Bayer have partnered to help visualize the overall progress of the research community. At the heart of the project is an infographic showing the timeline to the various treatments and preventions (click here to download it). Its based on data from The Milken Institute, which recently released a detailed tracker to monitor the progress of each of the more than 60 known COVID-19 treatments and preventions currently in development.

One takeaway: the progress to develop coronavirus treatments and preventions is moving at an unprecedented pace, with historic records being broken nearly every week.

The crisis response from the global biotech community has been truly inspiring, says Juergen Eckhardt, SVP and Head of Leaps by Bayer, a unit of Bayer AG that leads impact investments into solutions to some of todays biggest challenges in health and agriculture. We are excited to partner on this visual timeline to help a broader audience understand how and when scientific innovation may bring us through this deeply challenging time.

COVID19: Projected timeline for treatment and prevention. Three paths: pre-existing drugs, antibody ... [+] therapies, and vaccines.

There are standard stages to getting a drug approved. In Phase 1 trials, a drugs safety is assessed in a small group of healthy subjects. In later stages (Phase II & III), efficacy is measured in a larger number of people, often versus a placebo. The situation with COVID-19 is predicted to become so dire so quickly, however, that many are looking to fast-track testing. This could include granting experimental drugs expanded access, for compassionate use, which would allow physicians to give them to patients who are critically ill before testing is complete.

The fastest way to safely stop COVID-19 would be to discover that an already-approved medication works against it. Repurposed drugs do not require the same extensive testing as novel medicines and may already be available in large quantities. The Milken Institutes tracker identifies 7 candidate drugs in this category.

One is the malarial medicine chloroquine, which in recent days has been touted by some as a possible miracle drug against the coronavirus. German pharmaceutical company Bayer last week donated three million tablets of chloroquine to the U.S. The FDA and academics are together investigating whether it can provide relief to COVID-19 patients.

There are hundreds if not thousands of other FDA-approved drugs on the market that are already proven safe in humans and that may have treatment potential against COVID-19, so many scientists are rapidly screening the known drug arsenal in hopes of discovering an effective compound.

Antibodies are proteins that are a natural part of the human immune system. They work around the clock in blood to block viruses and more. The problem at the moment is that because the novel coronavirus (known as SARS-CoV-2) is new, no one has had time to develop antibodies against it.No one, that is, except those who have recovered from COVID-19.

Antibodies taken from those people could help patients who are still infected. Such patient-to-patient transfers can be performed without extensive testing or lengthy approval processes so long as standard protocols are followed. It is yet unknown whether this treatment option will work for COVID-19, nor whether there will be enough recovered donors to deal with the infection at scale.

To improve this process, companies like Vancouver, Canada-based AbCellera are applying new biotechnologies.

AbCellera is using proprietary tools and machine learning to rapidly screen through millions of B cells from patients who recovered from COVID-19. B cells are responsible for producing antibodies. The company has announced a partnership with Eli Lilly on this project and aims to bring its hottest antibodies those that neutralize the virus to the clinic.

AbCellera's platform has delivered, with unprecedented speed, by far the world's largest panel of anti-SAR-CoV-2 antibodies," said Carl Hansen, Ph.D., CEO of AbCellera, in a statement. "In 11 days, we've discovered hundreds of antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2 virus responsible for the current outbreak, moved into functional testing with global experts in virology, and signed a co-development agreement with one of the world's leading biopharmaceutical companies. We're deeply impressed with the speed and agility of Lilly's response to this global challenge. Together, our teams are committed to delivering a countermeasure to stop the outbreak."

James Crowe at Vanderbilt University is also sifting through the blood of recovered patients. Using a new instrument called Beacon from a company called Berkeley Lights. Crowes team has been scouring through B cells to find antibodies that neutralize SARS-CoV-2. The technology behind this project was developed in recent years with funds from the Department of Defense.

Normally this would be a five year program, Crowe told me. But in the rapid process his team is following, animal studies could be done in as fast as two months.

This morning, Berkeley Lights announced a Global Emerging Pathogen Antibody Discovery Consortium (GEPAD) to attack COVID-19 and other viruses. It is partnering with Vanderbilt University, La Jolla Institute for Immunology, and Emory University to accelerate the work above to the broader research community.

This collaboration also included commercial partners, including Twist Bioscience, who synthesized DNA for the project.

Our mission is to provide the raw material needed for biologists to make breakthroughs, said Twists CEO Emily Leproust. If DNA is needed, we want to make it, quickly and perfectly

Another company that specializes in DNA synthesis, SGI-DNA, is offering its tools at much reduced cost to researchers developing COVID-19 treatments. The company said that people from around the world are coming to them for help.

"There is zero time to waste," said Todd R. Nelson, Ph.D., CEO of SGI-DNA. He said that researchers need synthetic DNA and RNA, which its Bio-XP machine can provide in as little as eight hours.

Nelson continued, "In a matter of a day or two, we have built the genes thought to be critical to the development of successful vaccines against SARS-CoV-2. SGI-DNA has made them available in the form of different genetic libraries, which researchers can use to find druggable targets in a matter of hours, dramatically accelerating the time to market for therapeutics and vaccines.

Beyond searching for antibodies in recovered patients, biotechnologists have other tricks up their sleeves.

One approach involves genetically engineering laboratory mice to mimic the human immune system. These animals can then be presented with the virus or parts of the virus and allowed to recover. The hope is that their B cells would then produce effective antibodies. Because this happens in a controlled setting, biologists can better understand and engineer the process.

A company called GenScript was pursuing this strategy as early as February 4, when police escorted 8 transgenic mice immunized with the 2019 nCoV antigen to research labs in China. In 12 hours, its researchers successfully found specific antibodies in the mice that could recognize the novel virus and potentially block it from binding to cells. In less than 24 hoursagain using Berkeley Lights new Beacon instrument for working with thousands of individual, live cellsGenScript completed a series of steps that would have taken three months using previous technology.

Yet another approach involves computational approaches and artificial intelligence. Firms like Distributed Bio are using computers to reengineer antibodies to better target SARS-CoV-2. The company is optimizing antibodies that are known to target SARS-CoV-1, the virus behind the 2003 outbreak of SARS.

We believe broadly neutralizing antibodies with engineered biophysical properties will become key weapons to win the war against all coronaviruses said Jake Glanville, CEO of Distributed Bio.

Vaccines work by simulating infection, which allows the body to mount its own defense against a virus. Effective vaccines take time to develop, and they can take even longer to test. But recent progress in biotechnology is again accelerating these efforts.

Notably, Moderna has launched a Phase 1 vaccine trial against COVID-19 in record time. Patients in Seattle have already begun receiving injections of an experimental mRNA vaccine. Moderna cranked out doses of this and won approval from the FDA for testing in just 44 days an all-time record.

These programs show a massive focus on a common enemy, and a coming together of disparate firms.

Ginkgo Bioworks, a giant in the emerging field of synthetic biology, has announced a $25 million fund to help spur even more collaboration. The company is offering its laboratory equipment and know-how to anyone with a good idea of how to stop COVID-19. We dont want any scientists to have to wait. The pandemic has already arrived, so the time for rapid prototyping and scale-up is right now, said Jason Kelly, CEO of Ginkgo.

These effortsand the infographic aboveshould give you hope. Although we are all now living in uncertain times, we are also witnessing one of the greatest moments in the history of science.

It's a terrible time, and simultaneously a fantastic time to see the global science community working together to conquer this very hard and challenging disease, said Berkeley Lights CEO Eric Hobbs. We are also learning and developing the tools and technologies to ensure that we can react faster to the next threat, so that we don't get to this point again in the future.

Follow me on twitter at @johncumbers and @synbiobeta. Subscribe to my weekly newsletters in synthetic biology.

Thank you to Ian Haydon and Kevin Costa for additional research and reporting in this article. Im the founder of SynBioBeta, and some of the companies that I write aboutincluding Leaps by Bayer, Mammoth Biosciences, Distributed Bio, Twist Bioscience, SGI-DNA, Genscript, Berkeley Lights, and Ginkgo Bioworksare sponsors of the SynBioBeta conference and weekly digest heres the full list of SynBioBeta sponsors.

More:
Timeline Shows 3 Paths To COVID-19 Treatment And Prevention (INFOGRAPHIC) - Forbes

Posted in Genetic Engineering | Comments Off on Timeline Shows 3 Paths To COVID-19 Treatment And Prevention (INFOGRAPHIC) – Forbes

Is the Indian COVID-19 strain weaker? – Times of India

Posted: March 26, 2020 at 8:42 pm

COVID-19 has not only caused a worldwide disruption but has also infected large numbers of people around the world. While scientists are trying their best to find a cure or vaccine to the disease, a report on the study of the COVID-19 (SARS-CoV2) strain is doing rounds on Twitter. Dr. Subramanian Swamy, Rajya Sabha MP recently tweeted that his US based friends have informed him that the COVID-19 strain in India is a less virulent mutation. The tweet also stated that the Indian immune system can more effectively target it. Here is his tweet: After this a lot of people questioned the authenticity of the tweet and also trolled him for the same. In response to the trolls, many people tweeted the link to the report which is a Comparative analyses of SAR-CoV2 genomes from different geographical locations. Link to the report:

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.21.001586v1.full.pdf

Disclaimer: The below given findings are from a preliminary report which has not been peer-reviewed. These abstracts are directly taken from the report.

The ongoing pandemic of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an infectious disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2). Various researchers from Translational Bioinformatics Group, International Center for Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology (ICGEB) and Department of Biochemistry, Jamia Hamdard, New Delhi, performed an integrated sequence-based analysis of SARS-CoV2 (2019 virus) genomes from different geographical locations in order to identify its unique features absent in SARS-CoV (2003 virus) and other related coronavirus family genomes, conferring unique infection, facilitation of transmission, virulence and immunogenic features to the virus.

See the original post here:
Is the Indian COVID-19 strain weaker? - Times of India

Posted in Genetic Engineering | Comments Off on Is the Indian COVID-19 strain weaker? – Times of India

Cannabis Compound CBD Acts as Helper to Boost Antibiotic Effectiveness – Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology News

Posted: March 26, 2020 at 8:42 pm

Research by a University of Southern Denmark team has found that the cannabis compound cannabidiol (CBD) may act as a helper compound to boost the effectiveness of antibiotics against drug-resistant Gram-positive bacteria. A study headed by Janne Kudsk Klitgaard, PhD, associate professor, clinical microbiology, found that combining CBD with the antibiotic bacitracin (BAC) had a more powerful effect against bacteria including Staphylococcus aureus, than BAC alone. Based on these observations, the combination of CBD and BAC is suggested to be a putative novel treatment in clinical settings for treatment of infections with antibiotic-resistant Gram-positive bacteria, the researchers stated in their published paper in Scientific Reports, titled, Cannabidiol is an effective helper compound in combination with bacitracin to kill Gram-positive bacteria.

Since the discovery of penicillin by Sir Alexander Fleming in 1928, antibiotics have saved millions of lives from fatal infections worldwide, the authors wrote. However, over time, bacteria have developed mechanisms to escape the effects of one or more antibioticsmultidrug resistance (MDR)leading to an increasing global health threat. With fewer antibiotics available to treat MDR bacterial infections, the possibility of entering a pre-antibiotic era is looming ahead, the team stated.

Among alternative strategies that are being explored to help address antibiotic resistance, helper compounds, also known as antibiotic potentiators or resistant breakers, are gaining attention. Such helper compounds are non-antibiotic compounds that act as adjuvants for antibiotics, operating synergistically through mechanisms including efflux pump inhibition, enzyme inhibition, or changing membrane permeability, which can contribute to improving antibiotic efficacy.

Given that overuse of antibiotics is the main cause of antibiotic resistance, the combination of an antibiotic with a helper compound could reduce the amount of antibiotic needed to achieve bacterial growth inhibition or killing than if the antibiotic was used alone. This strategy may, therefore, decrease the likelihood of resistance development, and investigations to identify efficient helper compounds are thus important, the investigators suggested.

CBD, from the cannabis plant Cannabis sativa, acts as an antagonist of both the cannabinoid type 1 and 2 (CB1 and CB2) receptors, and has been shown to have anti-sedative, anti-psychotic, and anxiolytic effects, the team noted. The compound has also been linked with a variety of effects, including inhibiting cancer cell growth, neuroprotection in neurodegenerative diseases such as Parkinsons disease, and post-ischemia, and anti-inflammatory effects, as in type 1 diabetes.

CBD has also been observed to inhibit bacterial growth, but the use of cannabidiol as an antibiotic adjuvant hasnt yet been investigated, the team continued. Not much is known regarding antimicrobial effects of cannabinoids and even less on the mechanism of action the use of cannabidiol as an antibiotic adjuvant has not been studied so far.

For their reported study, the researchers evaluated whether CBD could act as a potential helper compound to increase the effectiveness of the antibiotic bacitracin, which is a mixture of cyclic peptides that interfere with the bacterial cell wall and interrupt biosynthesis of peptidoglycan, leading to cell lysis. The team first validated the antimicrobial effect of cannabidiol against the Gram-positive bacteria methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), and also against Enterococcus faecalis, Listeria monocytogenes, and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus epidermidis (MRSE). They then tested the effects of combining CBD and BAC against different Gram-positive bacteria, providing initial indication that CBD could potentiate the antimicrobial effects of the antibiotic.

Further tests with the combination of CBD and BAC against S. aureus showed that dual treatment caused morphological changes in the bacterial cells that affected cell division, so that the bacteria could no longer divide normally. the combination of CBD and BAC affects the cell envelope causing irregular cell division visualized by multiple septa formations and irregular cell membrane. These effects werent seen with either treatment on its own; CBD and BAC alone caused no morphological changes, they wrote.

The combined treatment was also found to decrease autolysis in S. aureus, while CBD was shown to cause depolarization of the cytoplasmic membrane. Gene expression analysis confirmed that treatment using CBD in combination with BAC resulted in reduced expression of key cell division and autolysis genes in the bacteria. The combination of BAC and CBD was, however, and as expected, not effective in Gram-negative bacteria. As a mixture of cyclic peptides that interrupt cell wall synthesis in Gram-positive bacteria, the antibiotic is probably unable to cross the outer membrane in Gram-negative bacteria, the researchers pointed out.

In this study, we found that the antibacterial effects of BAC against S. aureus as well as other Gram-positive bacteria can be enhanced by cannabidiol originating from the cannabis plant, the scientists concluded. They acknowledged that further work will be needed to understand the mechanisms of action of combined CBD and BAC treatment on Gram-positive bacteria. Changes observed in morphology were not caused by compositional changes in the cell wall muropeptide composition. Membrane potential changes for the combination of CBD and BAC compared to either CBD or BAC treatment alone did not reveal the mechanism of action for the combination of CBD and BAC, they wrote. Future studies are therefore focused on the cell division and cell envelope to identify the mechanism of action.

Original post:
Cannabis Compound CBD Acts as Helper to Boost Antibiotic Effectiveness - Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology News

Posted in Genetic Engineering | Comments Off on Cannabis Compound CBD Acts as Helper to Boost Antibiotic Effectiveness – Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology News

If and when it has time, the UK must ponder its post-Brexit biotech options – just-food.com

Posted: March 26, 2020 at 8:42 pm

Johnson has championed deregulation and divergence from the EU on GM

In the three years after the UK's referendum on EU membership, it was often said Brexit had monopolised the political agenda leaving precious little "bandwidth" for anything else. But who would have imagined an issue of such magnitude was about to emerge that would consign Brexit to the "and in other news" section of TV bulletins?

That the biggest Brexit story last week was that EU negotiator Michel Barnier had tested positive for coronavirus and David Frost, his UK counterpart, is self-isolating after showing symptoms, tells its own story.

A few critical and challenging issues had dominated the long debates over the UK's membership of the EU, while undeniably important topics, including the country's differences with Brussels over genetic modification and biotechnology, were relatively little discussed. However, UK prime minister Boris Johnson is going some way to correcting that.

Boris backs British biotech

Since securing his premiership and withdrawal from the EU, Johnson has repeatedly made a point of championing deregulation and divergence from the EU on GM as a Brexit boon for the UK and a priority for his administration. Johnson also appointed George Eustice, a longstanding and vocal critic of the EU approach, as Secretary of State at the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra).

Based rigidly on the precautionary principle, EU regulations both on planting GM crops and commercialising foods made from GMO ingredients are consideredby many scientists overly restrictive and lengthy. Over the years, governments and policymakers from across the political divide have sympathised with that view but could do no more than push for reform in Brussels.

Johnson now has the opportunity to put the UK on a different footing. His intended direction of travel is clear, though GM is a highly contentious issue that could challenge even his libertarian instincts.

There has been strong support for deregulation on biotech in the scientific community for many years, so Johnson's remarks have been welcomed enthusiastically by crop scientists.

Professor Jonathan Jones of The Sainsbury Laboratory crop research institute, a practitioner and energetic proponent of GM technology for three decades, bemoans the "glacial" progress of GM regulation, but says the Johnson rhetoric is "exciting".

However, he cautions: "Of course, he's not delivered everything he's promised in the past but I think he's serious on this one. How rapidly we get there from here I don't know. It's complicated."

Consumer fears easily provoked

A prime challenge is the consumer concern and suspicion GM has always attracted. This has engendered a highly cautionary approach by retailers, as reflected in a comment from Andrew Opie, director of food and sustainability at UK food retail trade body The British Retail Consortium, for this article. "Retailers do not currently sell genetically-modified food under their own brands and would not do so unless there is a change in consumer demand," Opie says.

"Activist groups often behave irresponsibly in terms of inflaming public fears about something that is totally benign"

Others would say consumer fears which, while borne partly out of the understandable natural caution people have about technology related to food, are stoked by misinformation and sensationalised reporting, resulting in the retailers' and public policy being led by the least well informed on the topic. "Activist groups often behave irresponsibly in terms of inflaming public fears about something that is totally benign," Prof. Jones contends.

Food manufacturers have also been somewhat reticent about supporting GM publicly, even if they recognise the benefits of the technology.

Asked by just-food for its view on where the UK should go on biotech, the UK food manufacturing representative body The Food and Drink Federation, states: "FDF believes that modern biotechnology, including genetic modificationand new breeding techniques, offers considerable potential to improve the quality and quantity of [the] food supply and could contribute to sustainability by helping to produce more food using fewer resources and with less impact on the environment. FDF recognises that the impact of biotechnology must be objectively assessed, based on sound science and evidence, and be underpinned by an effective regulatory landscape."

The recognition of the potential benefits but a reluctance to go into battle on behalf of GM can clearly be seen in that statement. While Prof. Jones brands current policies on GM as the "tyranny of the more risk-averse", he says he "totally understands the brand reputation pressures both manufacturers and retailers are under". They see "a little bit of upside in terms of cost reduction but a vast amount of downside in terms of risking damage to my precious brand".

All this means biotech has been somewhat friendless, not receiving the widespread support from the private sector that technological innovation in other fields often can. Its backing by "Big Agri" has obviously been significant globally but the associations within that sector help foster some of the distrust, giving environmental campaigners a potent focus for their activities that has resonated with the public.

Farmer support

The National Farmers Union has generally been more publicly supportive of GM, however. Helen Ferrier, chief science and regulatory affairs adviser at the NFU, says it supports a "proportionate and enabling" regulatory framework on GM.

Vicki Hird of food and environment pressure group Sustain, however, suggests the picture is more mixed. "There's a lot of farmers I know who aren't members of the NFU [who] have a position on GM and biotech which is quite different from the NFU," Hird says, adding that protection of their European market will be a prime concern for many, underlining the influence ongoing negotiations could have on the UK's biotech ambitions.

"The UK currently remains aligned with the EU in its approach to genetically modified food. The UK's stance beyond January 2021 will depend very much on the outcome of trade negotiations," the BRC's Opie says.

Gene-editing move?

Where there could be more immediate progress is in the field of new gene-editing techniques. Dr Richard Harrison, director of Cambridge Crop Research, part of the National Institute of Agricultural Botany (NIAB), is leading research utilising modern gene-editing techniques, including CRISPR-Cas9, to modify the genetic make-up of the Fusarium venenatum fungus, the mycoprotein source for meat substitute brand Quorn, owned by Philippines group Monde Nissin.

"We're trying to understand how the fungus uses different carbon sources, and also how it regulates responses to nitrogen as well, because if we could understand that, then we'd be able to use a far greater range of crop-based carbon sources to produce mycoprotein," Harrison explains.

Being able to vary what mycoprotein is fed on could broaden the options for how and where mycoprotein can be sustainably produced as a meat alternative. The research is funded by the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council, with Quorn manufacturer Quorn Foods, a subsidiary of Monde Nissin,as a project partner and co-funder.

However, Harrison stresses the objective is not to produce a genetically engineered Fusarium venenatum that Marlow Foods might then commercialise, but that the gene-editing techniques are being used as "a research tool to validate our hypotheses".

Speaking to just-food last year, then Quorn Foods CEO Kevin Brennan said the company would "never go anywhere near genetic modification". This is not surprising and is common position among food companies. Owing to a 2018 European Court of Justice ruling, any food produced from ingredients derived from the gene-editing processes Harrison's team is employing would be subject to the EU's GM regulations and would have to be labelled as containing GMOs.

Brennan said the research "provides underpinning science for alternative carbohydrates but also to support feed optimisation". He continued: "If we can understand at a granular level what the organism reacts to we can optimise feedstock to encourage the ideal growth".

Ironically, some older and less accurate mutagenesis techniques, such as using gamma radiation and chemicals to alter genetic profile, fall outside the EU regulation. "All scientists are asking for is an objective evaluation rather than emotive one," Harrison adds.

In common with many scientists, Harrison believes EU regulations on genetic modification and gene editing to be overly restrictive and an impediment to scientific progress, not least as it discourages private-sector investment. So, would there be greater commercial opportunities for food companies, and consequently more investment in research, if the UK were to diverge from EU biotech regulations?

"Would a more proportionate regulatory framework bring in more investment? I think the answer is yes"

Harrison has no doubt there would, and Prof. Jones concurs. "Would a more proportionate regulatory framework bring in more investment? I think the answer is yes."

The NFU's Ferrier also believes regulatory reform will boost investment. "What we're interested in as an organisation is that you're able to move from the research into private-sector R&D and then commercialisation, because as long as seed companies don't see the EU and the UK as somewhere that they want to invest in, then you can do as much brilliant science as you like but the UK, farmers, society, environment, won't get any of the benefit because it will just stay in the research community."

Climate emergency

With regard to the regulation of genetic technologies in food production overall, Harrison urges a strictly evidence-led approach, not least given the challenges posed by climate change.

"There is enormous potential to grow crops with fewer pesticides by using naturally-occurring, disease-resistance genes. You could do that through traditional breeding but that takes a long time and costs a lot of money. Genetic technology makes it a lot faster and we should really have access in the 21st century to those technologies because we rapidly need to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions. Genetic technology could really be a powerful tool to accelerate our decarbonisation of the foodchain."

Prof. Jones adds: "We need every tool in the toolbox to address the perfect storm of rising temperatures, greenhouse gas emissions and rising population."

While recognising the benefits of separating gene-editing technology from GM, Prof. Jones is concerned arguing in favour of this may unintentionally lend weight to the view that there is still something to be feared in genetic engineering. "There are literally dozens of technologies like that that would be fantastic for the sustainability of agriculture, that you can only really accomplish by moving genes from one plant to another or by moving genes between bacteria and plants which is something that's happened naturally in evolution scores of times," he says, strongly urging the government to follow through on its supportive stance on GM.

Nevertheless, gene editing could be the more immediate movethat is easier to negotiate politically and practically. It is also almost impossible to imagine the UK moving out of the transition period with an ECJ ruling featuring in its legislation. Ferrier believes the UK could also work with other member states, many of which were concerned by the ECJ ruling, to move EU opinion on the issue. "This is the opportunity to work with other member states who are similarly concerned about it. That is an area that the UK research sector can have a strength in and it is a really exciting area for developing products that farmers could grow."

While the UK government is so far holding to its December deadline, the coronavirus pandemic seems highly likely to result in the extension of the transition period. When it does finally leave the EU, the UK is likely, at the very least, to have a different regulatory approach to gene editing, if not immediately on GM overall.

When exactly the transition period will now end, however, may depend more on how successful scientists have been at understanding the genome of Covid-19 than the genetic composition of any food crop.

Read this article:
If and when it has time, the UK must ponder its post-Brexit biotech options - just-food.com

Posted in Genetic Engineering | Comments Off on If and when it has time, the UK must ponder its post-Brexit biotech options – just-food.com

2020-2025 Global and Regional Genetic Engineering Industry Production, Sales and Consumption Status and Prospects Professional Market Research Report…

Posted: March 26, 2020 at 8:42 pm

The global Genetic Engineering market report by HNY Research offers users a detailed overview of the market and all the main factors affecting the market. The study on global Genetic Engineering market, offers profound understandings about the Genetic Engineering market covering all the essential aspects like revenue growth, supply chain, sales, key players and regions. There is a target set in market that every marketing strategy has to reach. This report on Genetic Engineering focusses on different categories that define this market with a systematic approach that addresses the consumer base, researchers and market experts like the stakeholders. It also gives a clear perspective towards the competition and demand and supply chain.

Request a sample of this report @ https://www.orbisresearch.com/contacts/request-sample/4360374

Manufacturer Detail

By Market Players:Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc., GenScript, Amgen Inc., Genentech, Inc., Merck KGaA, Horizon Discovery Group plc, Sangamo Therapeutics, Inc., Transposagen Biopharmaceuticals, Inc., OriGene Technologies, Inc.

By Application

By TypeArtificial Selection, Cloning, Gene Splicing, Others

The Genetic Engineering market report also offers some presentations and illustrations about the market that comprises pie charts, graphs, and charts which presents the percentage of the various strategies implemented by the service providers in the global Genetic Engineering market. This report on Genetic Engineering has been very well drafted to benefit anyone studying it. There are different marketing strategies that every marketer looks up to in order to ace the competition in the Global market. Some of the primary marketing strategies that is needed for every business to be successful are Passion, Focus, Watching the Data, Communicating the value To Your Customers, Your Understanding of Your Target Market. Every market research report follows a robust methodology to define its market value. By doing so, the Genetic Engineering research study by HNY Research offers collection of information and analysis for each facet of the Genetic Engineering market such as technology, regional markets, applications, and types.

Browse the complete report @ https://www.orbisresearch.com/reports/index/2020-2025-global-and-regional-intraductal-papilloma-industry-production-sales-and-consumption-status-and-prospects-professional-market-research-report

This study can benefit investors and business owners in many ways. It studies the business models, strategies, growth, innovations and every information about manufacturers that can help make business predictions and fetch good results. Making right business decisions is an undeniable measure that needs to be taken for market growth. Every market has a set of manufacturers, vendors and consumers that define that market and their every move and achievements becomes a subject of studying for market researchers and other stakeholders. One of the most important aspects focused in this study is the regional analysis. Region segmentation of markets helps in detailed analysis of the market in terms of business opportunities, revenue generation potential and future predictions of the market. For Genetic Engineering report, the important regions highlighted are North America, South America, Asia, Europe and Middle East. Another important aspect of every market research report by HNY Research is the study of the key players or manufacturers driving the market forward. The process helps to analyze the opponent thoroughly.

Make an enquiry of this report @ https://www.orbisresearch.com/contacts/enquiry-before-buying/4360374

About Us:

Orbis Research (orbisresearch.com) is a single point aid for all your market research requirements. We have vast database of reports from the leading publishers and authors across the globe. We specialize in delivering customized reports as per the requirements of our clients. We have complete information about our publishers and hence are sure about the accuracy of the industries and verticals of their specialization. This helps our clients to map their needs and we produce the perfect required market research study for our clients.

Contact Us: Hector CostelloSenior Manager Client Engagements4144N Central Expressway,Suite 600, Dallas,Texas 75204, U.S.A.Phone No.: USA: +1 (972)-362-8199 | IND: +91 895 659 5155Email ID: [emailprotected]

The rest is here:
2020-2025 Global and Regional Genetic Engineering Industry Production, Sales and Consumption Status and Prospects Professional Market Research Report...

Posted in Genetic Engineering | Comments Off on 2020-2025 Global and Regional Genetic Engineering Industry Production, Sales and Consumption Status and Prospects Professional Market Research Report…

Reviewing CRYO-CELL International (OTCMKTS:CCEL) and Harsco (OTCMKTS:HSC) – Redmond Register

Posted: March 26, 2020 at 8:41 pm

CRYO-CELL International (OTCMKTS:CCEL) and Harsco (NYSE:HSC) are both small-cap medical companies, but which is the better business? We will contrast the two companies based on the strength of their analyst recommendations, earnings, institutional ownership, risk, dividends, valuation and profitability.

Risk and Volatility

CRYO-CELL International has a beta of -0.25, meaning that its share price is 125% less volatile than the S&P 500. Comparatively, Harsco has a beta of 2.27, meaning that its share price is 127% more volatile than the S&P 500.

This is a summary of recent ratings and target prices for CRYO-CELL International and Harsco, as provided by MarketBeat.

Harsco has a consensus price target of $26.67, indicating a potential upside of 277.18%. Given Harscos higher probable upside, analysts clearly believe Harsco is more favorable than CRYO-CELL International.

Institutional & Insider Ownership

91.7% of Harsco shares are owned by institutional investors. 54.0% of CRYO-CELL International shares are owned by insiders. Comparatively, 1.8% of Harsco shares are owned by insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that large money managers, endowments and hedge funds believe a stock will outperform the market over the long term.

Profitability

This table compares CRYO-CELL International and Harscos net margins, return on equity and return on assets.

Valuation & Earnings

This table compares CRYO-CELL International and Harscos revenue, earnings per share (EPS) and valuation.

Harsco has higher revenue and earnings than CRYO-CELL International.

Summary

Harsco beats CRYO-CELL International on 8 of the 12 factors compared between the two stocks.

CRYO-CELL International Company Profile

Cryo-Cell International, Inc. engages in the cellular processing and cryogenic cellular storage with a focus on the collection and preservation of umbilical cord blood stem cells for family use. It provides cord tissue service that stores a section of the umbilical cord tissue, a source of mesenchymal stem cells that are used in regenerative medicine to treat a range of conditions, including heart, kidney, ALS, wound healing, and auto-immune diseases. The company also manufactures and sells PrepaCyte CB processing system, a technology used to process umbilical cord blood stem cells. It stores approximately 500,000 cord blood and cord tissue specimens worldwide. The company markets its cord blood stem cell preservation services directly to expectant parents, as well as by distributing information through obstetricians, pediatricians, childbirth educators, certified nurse-midwives, and other related healthcare professionals. Cryo-Cell International, Inc. was founded in 1989 and is headquartered in Oldsmar, Florida.

Harsco Company Profile

Harsco Corporation provides industrial services and engineered products worldwide. The company operates in three segments: Harsco Metals & Minerals, Harsco Industrial, and Harsco Rail. The Harsco Metals & Minerals segment provides on-site services of material logistics, product quality improvement, and resource recovery for iron, steel, and metals manufacturing; and value added environmental solutions for industrial co-products, as well as produces industrial abrasives and roofing granules. The Harsco Industrial segment manufactures and supplies custom-engineered and manufactured air-cooled heat exchangers for the natural gas, natural gas processing, and petrochemical industries; industrial grating products, such as metal bar grating configurations for industrial flooring, and safety and security applications in the energy, paper, chemical, refining, and processing industries. It also offers heat transfer products, such as boilers and water heaters for commercial and institutional applications; and high-security fencing products. The Harsco Rail segment designs and manufactures safety systems for transportation and industrial applications; and equipment, after-market parts, and services for the maintenance, repair, and construction of railway track. It serves private and government-owned railroads, and urban mass transit systems. Harsco Corporation was founded in 1853 and is headquartered in Camp Hill, Pennsylvania.

Receive News & Ratings for CRYO-CELL International Daily - Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of the latest news and analysts' ratings for CRYO-CELL International and related companies with MarketBeat.com's FREE daily email newsletter.

More here:
Reviewing CRYO-CELL International (OTCMKTS:CCEL) and Harsco (OTCMKTS:HSC) - Redmond Register

Posted in Florida Stem Cells | Comments Off on Reviewing CRYO-CELL International (OTCMKTS:CCEL) and Harsco (OTCMKTS:HSC) – Redmond Register

Benefits & Risks of Biotechnology – Future of Life Institute

Posted: March 25, 2020 at 11:52 am

This is a whole new era where were moving beyond little edits on single genes to being able to write whatever we want throughout the genome.

-George Church, Professor of Genetics at Harvard Medical School

Click here to see this page in other languages:JapaneseRussian

How are scientists putting natures machinery to use for the good of humanity, and how could things go wrong?

Biotechnology is nearly as old as humanity itself. The food you eat and the pets you love? You can thank our distant ancestors for kickstarting the agricultural revolution, using artificial selection for crops, livestock, and other domesticated animals. When Edward Jenner invented vaccines and when Alexander Fleming discovered antibiotics, they were harnessing the power of biotechnology. And, of course, modern civilization would hardly be imaginable without the fermentation processes that gave us beer, wine, and cheese!

When he coined the term in 1919, the agriculturalist Karl Ereky described biotechnology as all lines of work by which products are produced from raw materials with the aid of living things. In modern biotechnology, researchers modify DNA and proteins to shape the capabilities of living cells, plants, and animals into something useful for humans. Biotechnologists do this by sequencing, or reading, the DNA found in nature, and then manipulating it in a test tube or, more recently, inside of living cells.

In fact, the most exciting biotechnology advances of recent times are occurring at the microscopic level (and smaller!) within the membranes of cells. After decades of basic research into decoding the chemical and genetic makeup of cells, biologists in the mid-20th century launched what would become a multi-decade flurry of research and breakthroughs. Their work has brought us the powerful cellular tools at biotechnologists disposal today. In the coming decades, scientists will use the tools of biotechnology to manipulate cells with increasing control, from precision editing of DNA to synthesizing entire genomes from their basic chemical building blocks. These cells could go on to become bomb-sniffing plants, miracle cancer drugs, or de-extincted wooly mammoths. And biotechnology may be a crucial ally in the fight against climate change.

But rewriting the blueprints of life carries an enormous risk. To begin with, the same technology being used to extend our lives could instead be used to end them. While researchers might see the engineering of a supercharged flu virus as a perfectly reasonable way to better understand and thus fight the flu, the public might see the drawbacks as equally obvious: the virus could escape, or someone could weaponize the research. And the advanced genetic tools that some are considering for mosquito control could have unforeseen effects, possibly leading to environmental damage. The most sophisticated biotechnology may be no match for Murphys Law.

While the risks of biotechnology have been fretted over for decades, the increasing pace of progress from low cost DNA sequencing to rapid gene synthesis to precision genome editing suggests biotechnology is entering a new realm of maturity regarding both beneficial applications and more worrisome risks. Adding to concerns, DIY scientists are increasingly taking biotech tools outside of the lab. For now, many of the benefits of biotechnology are concrete while many of the risks remain hypotheticals, but it is better to be proactive and cognizant of the risks than to wait for something to go wrong first and then attempt to address the damage.

Satellite images make clear the massive changes that mankind has made to the surface of the Earth: cleared forests, massive dams and reservoirs, millions of miles of roads. If we could take satellite-type images of the microscopic world, the impact of biotechnology would be no less obvious. The majority of the food we eat comes from engineered plants, which are modified either via modern technology or by more traditional artificial selection to grow without pesticides, to require fewer nutrients, or to withstand the rapidly changing climate. Manufacturers have substituted petroleum-based ingredients with biomaterials in many consumer goods, such as plastics, cosmetics, and fuels. Your laundry detergent? It almost certainly contains biotechnology. So do nearly all of your cotton clothes.

But perhaps the biggest application of biotechnology is in human health. Biotechnology is present in our lives before were even born, from fertility assistance to prenatal screening to the home pregnancy test. It follows us through childhood, with immunizations and antibiotics, both of which have drastically improved life expectancy. Biotechnology is behind blockbuster drugs for treating cancer and heart disease, and its being deployed in cutting-edge research to cure Alzheimers and reverse aging. The scientists behind the technology called CRISPR/Cas9 believe it may be the key to safely editing DNA for curing genetic disease. And one company is betting that organ transplant waiting lists can be eliminated by growing human organs in chimeric pigs.

Along with excitement, the rapid progress of research has also raised questions about the consequences of biotechnology advances. Biotechnology may carry more risk than other scientific fields: microbes are tiny and difficult to detect, but the dangers are potentially vast. Further, engineered cells could divide on their own and spread in the wild, with the possibility of far-reaching consequences. Biotechnology could most likely prove harmful either through the unintended consequences of benevolent research or from the purposeful manipulation of biology to cause harm. One could also imagine messy controversies, in which one group engages in an application for biotechnology that others consider dangerous or unethical.

Sugarcane farmers in Australia in the 1930s had a problem: cane beetles were destroying their crop. So, they reasoned that importing a natural predator, the cane toad, could be a natural form of pest control. What could go wrong? Well, the toads became a major nuisance themselves, spreading across the continent and eating the local fauna (except for, ironically, the cane beetle).

While modern biotechnology solutions to societys problems seem much more sophisticated than airdropping amphibians into Australia, this story should serve as a cautionary tale. To avoid blundering into disaster, the errors of the past should be acknowledged.

The world recently witnessed the devastating effects of disease outbreaks, in the form of Ebola and the Zika virus but those were natural in origin. The malicious use of biotechnology could mean that future outbreaks are started on purpose. Whether the perpetrator is a state actor or a terrorist group, the development and release of a bioweapon, such as a poison or infectious disease, would be hard to detect and even harder to stop. Unlike a bullet or a bomb, deadly cells could continue to spread long after being deployed. The US government takes this threat very seriously, and the threat of bioweapons to the environment should not be taken lightly either.

Developed nations, and even impoverished ones, have the resources and know-how to produce bioweapons. For example, North Korea is rumored to have assembled an arsenal containing anthrax, botulism, hemorrhagic fever, plague, smallpox, typhoid, and yellow fever, ready in case of attack. Its not unreasonable to assume that terrorists or other groups are trying to get their hands on bioweapons as well. Indeed, numerous instances of chemical or biological weapon use have been recorded, including the anthrax scare shortly after 9/11, which left 5 dead after the toxic cells were sent through the mail. And new gene editing technologies are increasing the odds that a hypothetical bioweapon targeted at a certain ethnicity, or even a single individual like a world leader, could one day become a reality.

While attacks using traditional weapons may require much less expertise, the dangers of bioweapons should not be ignored. It might seem impossible to make bioweapons without plenty of expensive materials and scientific knowledge, but recent advances in biotechnology may make it even easier for bioweapons to be produced outside of a specialized research lab. The cost to chemically manufacture strands of DNA is falling rapidly, meaning it may one day be affordable to print deadly proteins or cells at home. And the openness of science publishing, which has been crucial to our rapid research advances, also means that anyone can freely Google the chemical details of deadly neurotoxins. In fact, the most controversial aspect of the supercharged influenza case was not that the experiments had been carried out, but that the researchers wanted to openly share the details.

On a more hopeful note, scientific advances may allow researchers to find solutions to biotechnology threats as quickly as they arise. Recombinant DNA and biotechnology tools have enabled the rapid invention of new vaccines which could protect against new outbreaks, natural or man-made. For example, less than 5 months after the World Health Organization declared Zika virus a public health emergency, researchers got approval to enroll patients in trials for a DNA vaccine.

Biotechnology doesnt have to be deadly, or even dangerous, to fundamentally change our lives. While humans have been altering genes of plants and animals for millennia first through selective breeding and more recently with molecular tools and chimeras we are only just beginning to make changes to our own genomes (amid great controversy).

Cutting-edge tools like CRISPR/Cas9 and DNA synthesis raise important ethical questions that are increasingly urgent to answer. Some question whether altering human genes means playing God, and if so, whether we should do that at all. For instance, if gene therapy in humans is acceptable to cure disease, where do you draw the line? Among disease-associated gene mutations, some come with virtual certainty of premature death, while others put you at higher risk for something like Alzheimers, but dont guarantee youll get the disease. Many others lie somewhere in between. How do we determine a hard limit for which gene surgery to undertake, and under what circumstances, especially given that the surgery itself comes with the risk of causing genetic damage? Scholars and policymakers have wrestled with these questions for many years, and there is some guidance in documents such as the United Nations Universal Declaration on the Human Genome and Human Rights.

And what about ways that biotechnology may contribute to inequality in society? Early work in gene surgery will no doubt be expensive for example, Novartis plans to charge $475,000 for a one-time treatment of their recently approved cancer therapy, a drug which, in trials, has rescued patients facing certain death. Will todays income inequality, combined with biotechnology tools and talk of designer babies, lead to tomorrows permanent underclass of people who couldnt afford genetic enhancement?

Advances in biotechnology are escalating the debate, from questions about altering life to creating it from scratch. For example, a recently announced initiative called GP-Write has the goal of synthesizing an entire human genome from chemical building blocks within the next 10 years. The project organizers have many applications in mind, from bringing back wooly mammoths to growing human organs in pigs. But, as critics pointed out, the technology could make it possible to produce children with no biological parents, or to recreate the genome of another human, like making cellular replicas of Einstein. To create a human genome from scratch would be an enormous moral gesture, write two bioethicists regarding the GP-Write project. In response, the organizers of GP-Write insist that they welcome a vigorous ethical debate, and have no intention of turning synthetic cells into living humans. But this doesnt guarantee that rapidly advancing technology wont be applied in the future in ways we cant yet predict.

Its nearly impossible to imagine modern biotechnology without DNA sequencing. Since virtually all of biology centers around the instructions contained in DNA, biotechnologists who hope to modify the properties of cells, plants, and animals must speak the same molecular language. DNA is made up of four building blocks, or bases, and DNA sequencing is the process of determining the order of those bases in a strand of DNA. Since the publication of the complete human genome in 2003, the cost of DNA sequencing has dropped dramatically, making it a simple and widespread research tool.

Benefits: Sonia Vallabh had just graduated from law school when her mother died from a rare and fatal genetic disease. DNA sequencing showed that Sonia carried the fatal mutation as well. But far from resigning to her fate, Sonia and her husband Eric decided to fight back, and today they are graduate students at Harvard, racing to find a cure. DNA sequencing has also allowed Sonia to become pregnant, since doctors could test her eggs for ones that dont have the mutation. While most peoples genetic blueprints dont contain deadly mysteries, our health is increasingly supported by the medical breakthroughs that DNA sequencing has enabled. For example, researchers were able to track the 2014 Ebola epidemic in real time using DNA sequencing. And pharmaceutical companies are designing new anti-cancer drugs targeted to people with a specific DNA mutation. Entire new fields, such as personalized medicine, owe their existence to DNA sequencing technology.

Risks: Simply reading DNA is not harmful, but it is foundational for all of modern biotechnology. As the saying goes, knowledge is power, and the misuse of DNA information could have dire consequences. While DNA sequencing alone cannot make bioweapons, its hard to imagine waging biological warfare without being able to analyze the genes of infectious or deadly cells or viruses. And although ones own DNA information has traditionally been considered personal and private, containing information about your ancestors, family, and medical conditions, governments and corporations increasingly include a persons DNA signature in the information they collect. Some warn that such databases could be used to track people or discriminate on the basis of private medical records a dystopian vision of the future familiar to anyone whos seen the movie GATTACA. Even supplying patients with their own genetic information has come under scrutiny, if its done without proper context, as evidenced by the dispute between the FDA and the direct-to-consumer genetic testing service 23andMe. Finally, DNA testing opens the door to sticky ethical questions, such as whether to carry to term a pregnancy after the fetus is found to have a genetic mutation.

The modern field of biotechnology was born when scientists first manipulated or recombined DNA in a test tube, and today almost all aspects of society are impacted by so-called rDNA. Recombinant DNA tools allow researchers to choose a protein they think may be important for health or industry, and then remove that protein from its original context. Once removed, the protein can be studied in a species thats simple to manipulate, such as E. coli bacteria. This lets researchers reproduce it in vast quantities, engineer it for improved properties, and/or transplant it into a new species. Modern biomedical research, many best-selling drugs, most of the clothes you wear, and many of the foods you eat rely on rDNA biotechnology.

Benefits: Simply put, our world has been reshaped by rDNA. Modern medical advances are unimaginable without the ability to study cells and proteins with rDNA and the tools used to make it, such as PCR, which helps researchers copy and paste DNA in a test tube. An increasing number of vaccines and drugs are the direct products of rDNA. For example, nearly all insulin used in treating diabetes today is produced recombinantly. Additionally, cheese lovers may be interested to know that rDNA provides ingredients for a majority of hard cheeses produced in the West. Many important crops have been genetically modified to produce higher yields, withstand environmental stress, or grow without pesticides. Facing the unprecedented threats of climate change, many researchers believe rDNA and GMOs will be crucial in humanitys efforts to adapt to rapid environmental changes.

Risks: The inventors of rDNA themselves warned the public and their colleagues about the dangers of this technology. For example, they feared that rDNA derived from drug-resistant bacteria could escape from the lab, threatening the public with infectious superbugs. And recombinant viruses, useful for introducing genes into cells in a petri dish, might instead infect the human researchers. Some of the initial fears were allayed when scientists realized that genetic modification is much trickier than initially thought, and once the realistic threats were identified like recombinant viruses or the handling of deadly toxins safety and regulatory measures were put in place. Still, there are concerns that rogue scientists or bioterrorists could produce weapons with rDNA. For instance, it took researchers just 3 years to make poliovirus from scratch in 2006, and today the same could be accomplished in a matter of weeks. Recent flu epidemics have killed over 200,000, and the malicious release of an engineered virus could be much deadlier especially if preventative measures, such as vaccine stockpiles, are not in place.

Synthesizing DNA has the advantage of offering total researcher control over the final product. With many of the mysteries of DNA still unsolved, some scientists believe the only way to truly understand the genome is to make one from its basic building blocks. Building DNA from scratch has traditionally been too expensive and inefficient to be very practical, but in 2010, researchers did just that, completely synthesizing the genome of a bacteria and injecting it into a living cell. Since then, scientists have made bigger and bigger genomes, and recently, the GP-Write project launched with the intention of tackling perhaps the ultimate goal: chemically fabricating an entire human genome. Meeting this goal and within a 10 year timeline will require new technology and an explosion in manufacturing capacity. But the projects success could signal the impact of synthetic DNA on the future of biotechnology.

Benefits: Plummeting costs and technical advances have made the goal of total genome synthesis seem much more immediate. Scientists hope these advances, and the insights they enable, will ultimately make it easier to make custom cells to serve as medicines or even bomb-sniffing plants. Fantastical applications of DNA synthesis include human cells that are immune to all viruses or DNA-based data storage. Prof. George Church of Harvard has proposed using DNA synthesis technology to de-extinct the passenger pigeon, wooly mammoth, or even Neanderthals. One company hopes to edit pig cells using DNA synthesis technology so that their organs can be transplanted into humans. And DNA is an efficient option for storing data, as researchers recently demonstrated when they stored a movie file in the genome of a cell.

Risks: DNA synthesis has sparked significant controversy and ethical concerns. For example, when the GP-Write project was announced, some criticized the organizers for the troubling possibilities that synthesizing genomes could evoke, likening it to playing God. Would it be ethical, for instance, to synthesize Einsteins genome and transplant it into cells? The technology to do so does not yet exist, and GP-Write leaders have backed away from making human genomes in living cells, but some are still demanding that the ethical debate happen well in advance of the technologys arrival. Additionally, cheap DNA synthesis could one day democratize the ability to make bioweapons or other nuisances, as one virologist demonstrated when he made the horsepox virus (related to the virus that causes smallpox) with DNA he ordered over the Internet. (It should be noted, however, that the other ingredients needed to make the horsepox virus are specialized equipment and deep technical expertise.)

Many diseases have a basis in our DNA, and until recently, doctors had very few tools to address the root causes. That appears to have changed with the recent discovery of a DNA editing system called CRISPR/Cas9. (A note on terminology CRISPR is a bacterial immune system, while Cas9 is one protein component of that system, but both terms are often used to refer to the protein.) It operates in cells like a DNA scissor, opening slots in the genome where scientists can insert their own sequence. While the capability of cutting DNA wasnt unprecedented, Cas9 dusts the competition with its effectiveness and ease of use. Even though its a biotech newcomer, much of the scientific community has already caught CRISPR-fever, and biotech companies are racing to turn genome editing tools into the next blockbuster pharmaceutical.

Benefits: Genome editing may be the key to solving currently intractable genetic diseases such as cystic fibrosis, which is caused by a single genetic defect. If Cas9 can somehow be inserted into a patients cells, it could fix the mutations that cause such diseases, offering a permanent cure. Even diseases caused by many mutations, like cancer, or caused by a virus, like HIV/AIDS, could be treated using genome editing. Just recently, an FDA panel recommended a gene therapy for cancer, which showed dramatic responses for patients who had exhausted every other treatment. Genome editing tools are also used to make lab models of diseases, cells that store memories, and tools that can detect epidemic viruses like Zika or Ebola. And as described above, if a gene drive, which uses Cas9, is deployed effectively, we could eliminate diseases such as malaria, which kills nearly half a million people each year.

Risks: Cas9 has generated nearly as much controversy as it has excitement, because genome editing carries both safety issues and ethical risks. Cutting and repairing a cells DNA is not risk-free, and errors in the process could make a disease worse, not better. Genome editing in reproductive cells, such as sperm or eggs, could result in heritable genetic changes, meaning dangerous mutations could be passed down to future generations. And some warn of unethical uses of genome editing, fearing a rise of designer babies if parents are allowed to choose their childrens traits, even though there are currently no straightforward links between ones genes and their intelligence, appearance, etc. Similarly, a gene drive, despite possibly minimizing the spread of certain diseases, has the potential to create great harm since it is intended to kill or modify an entire species. A successful gene drive could have unintended ecological impacts, be used with malicious intent, or mutate in unexpected ways. Finally, while the capability doesnt currently exist, its not out of the realm of possibility that a rogue agent could develop genetically selective bioweapons to target individuals or populations with certain genetic traits.

Videos

Research Papers

Books

Informational Documents

Articles

Organizations

The organizations above all work on biotechnology issues, though many cover other topics as well. This list is undoubtedly incomplete; please contact us to suggest additions or corrections.

Special thanks to Jeff Bessen for his help researching and writing this page.

See the rest here:
Benefits & Risks of Biotechnology - Future of Life Institute

Posted in Biotechnology | Comments Off on Benefits & Risks of Biotechnology – Future of Life Institute

Page 1,082«..1020..1,0811,0821,0831,084..1,0901,100..»