Page 1,317«..1020..1,3161,3171,3181,319..1,3301,340..»

Sports Man of the Future – The Good Men Project

Posted: October 14, 2019 at 1:48 pm

Im at a challenging place in my manhood. Im developed enough to know that sports dont really matter, at all. In a world threatened by global warming and profound political corruption, while being transformed by quantum technological advancement, the Super Bowl, for example, is so obviously irrelevant that even having an opinion about who wins is basically absurd.

I know this. I read books. I write plays. I publish essays like this one. Companies hire me to create their communications strategies. Im a thinking person, dammit. But I really wanted the Rams to kick the Patriots asses. And I dont even follow football.

My partner Bernie relieves herself instantly of any potential sports angst by simply switching allegiance to whoevers winning. Even the Dodgers. She has no idea why I object to this. Why do I object to this? Im a transhumanist. I see us using technology to take charge of our destinies, create abundance, and live unlimited lifespans. Why should we be subject to the whims of sports?

It helps that the hometown Phoenix Suns are so hideously, perpetually incompetent that I cant bear to care. But thats a bit like a smoker being too depressed to light up, isnt it? Eventually, things will turn around and then where are you?

Growing up in Washington DC, my oldest brother taught me to play basketball in fifth grade and I loved everything about it. The sounds alone quickened me the thump of dribbling, the sneaker squeak of cutting, the swish of a made shot. And I loved, just as much the movement the full court sprint, the change of direction, and the jumping, always the jumping, filling walls then ceilings all over the house with my fingerprints. I loved the ball itself, its size and heft and subtle texture, which spoke to my fingertips in a language that so exquisitely bypassed my brain.

I poured my solitude into basketball, even when asthma made my lungs feel like sacks of sand. When I wasnt playing at school, I played at the playground in my DC neighborhood. I idolized the lanky high school-aged black kids that played in that smooth style that is DC basketball. They didnt think and then move; they played at the speed of spontaneity, out of their minds. I wanted that freedom.

A little white kid, I looked like the type who worked tirelessly to develop a pure jump shot, his one ticket to be on the court. But I was at my best on the move, driving to the basket. This consistently surprised the black kids, who had their own stereotypes. Plus, who wanted to defend a whirling, wheezing white kid who played as if his very self-worth depended on beating you to the spot?

In high school, I finally outgrew asthma and developed physically. By tenth grade, I was winning trophies. I played in a kind of mental bubble, holding my brain at bay, so that it would not block me from moving freely through the game. I had my best games when I was sick; the weakness forced me to an extreme focus, which shut out thought entirely, and the points came in a seemingly automatic flow.

But one day the schools athletic director made a point of taking me aside to inform me that I wasnt as good as I thought and that I would never play at the next level. I had dreamed of being great. It may have always been just a fantasy, but I had already taken a little boys vision of being a high school star and birthed it whole out of my heart, so who was to say? I had the love and the legs, and I had no other dream.

But his words instantly jarred me out of that reverie. Perhaps Id never really believed in myself. Or maybe I just didnt understand where belief came from, thinking it originated from others who could be relied upon to accurately inform me of what I could and could not be. But now I know better.

Ive had brushes with real sports stars. I worked at the first PF Changs restaurant in Scottsdale, outside of Phoenix, back when it was the hot spot in town, when Charles Barkley brought in Michael Jordan, who walked through the restaurant like a god, as the Saturday night din noticeably lowered, heads turned, the air buzzing with awareness of him.

I brought the food to their table once, putting a dish of Orange Peel Chicken in front of Jordan. But the server whod taken the order had somehow botched it Jordan didnt want Orange Peel Chicken. The poor girl, of course, apologized profusely and offered to bring him what hed like. Everything was wok preparedit would only take moments. But he wouldnt let her correct her error, and sedately ate nothing while the rest dug in. Asshole.

I played basketball with the Hall of Fame Quarterback Kurt Warner at the YMCA when he was working his way back to the Cardinals from an injury. The first time I saw him, he was reading his leather-bound bible, waiting for his game. Kurt competed hard, sometimes dominating games, but he played clean and fair, more so than some of the regulars.

Of course, it doesnt matter who these stars really are; it matters who we are. This came to me recently as I was listening to sports talk radio on the way to a client meeting. I know, what could be dumber than listening to people who are so moronic they not only think and talk about sports all day, they get intense, even self-righteous about their utterly trivial perspectives on events with no inherent significance in the first place.

Ill tell you what could be dumber, its the desire to call in.

But they were talking about the freshman basketball phenom at Duke, Zion Williamson, and comparing him to Charles Barkley and Sean Kemp. No way! Hes like a young Dominique Wilkins, the Human Highlight Film, who played for the Atlanta Hawks in the 80s and early 90s, after a sterling career at the University of Georgia. Dont they know anything?

I didnt call in. The freeway traffic was roiling around me like a rodeo, which demanded my focus, considering my unlimited, tech-enabled future might be at stake. But it did make me reflect. I mean, what if the Suns, as a reward for their heinousness, got the number one overall draft pick again? What if they drafted Williamson and turned it around and became contenders? Would that make me any more of a human being? Would that advance me in any significant way as a man?

I dont know, but that 2001 World Series victory by the Diamondbacks was pretty sweet! But was all the suffering before and after made good by that one season of fulfillment?

While Im asking myself these questions another part of me, my cerebral cortex perhaps, which is supposed to give humans the ability to self-evolve and innovate, is trying to make the point that these questions are really irrelevant because its all joy or suffering by proxy anyway; because Im not actually a player on a winning or a losing team; Im just a guy watching. So emotionally, sports is just a simulation, like the Matrix. Its not really happening, not to me.

I may be overthinking this.

I get to my appointment and present the communications strategy. The client gets it, they love it, were good. Which is important. Because this is how I actually earn a living. Back to sports.

Driving home on the radio, theyre talking about the very scenario Id run in my own mind, with the Suns tanking so they could draft Williamson. Weird. Is this evidence of a simulation in action?

Another thought: maybe the car radio is the trigger. Maybe when we have self-driving cars and I can nap my way to appointments the future is going to be amazing maybe then I can beat this sports thing.

Alternatively, several decades down the road, because Im still alive and well, maybe Ill look back on this moment and be so evolved, so advanced, not just technologically, but emotionally, spiritually even, that the whole thing will seem like some kindergarten drama Ive so far outgrown I cant even grasp now what it was about.

Or maybe, just maybe, a millennium from now, Ill have lived long enough to see the Suns get their act together, and build not just a contender, but a champion, no a repeat champion, and it will all have been worth it.

Excerpted from Outlier Heart by Joe Bardin

Shutterstock

Continue reading here:
Sports Man of the Future - The Good Men Project

Posted in Transhumanist | Comments Off on Sports Man of the Future – The Good Men Project

Comparison of Merus N.V. (MRUS) and Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc. (NASDAQ:BCLI) – MS Wkly

Posted: October 14, 2019 at 1:47 pm

Merus N.V. (NASDAQ:MRUS) and Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc. (NASDAQ:BCLI) compete with each other in the Biotechnology sector. We will analyze and contrast their profitability, analyst recommendations, institutional ownership, risk, dividends, earnings and valuation.

Earnings & Valuation

Table 1 shows the top-line revenue, earnings per share and valuation for Merus N.V. and Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc.

Profitability

Table 2 shows the return on equity, net margins and return on assets of the two firms.

Liquidity

Merus N.V.s Current Ratio and Quick Ratio are 6.4 and 6.4 respectively. The Current Ratio and Quick Ratio of its competitor Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc. are 1 and 1 respectively. Merus N.V. therefore has a better chance of paying off short and long-term obligations compared to Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc.

Analyst Ratings

The next table highlights the shown recommendations and ratings for Merus N.V. and Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc.

Merus N.V.s upside potential currently stands at 37.03% and an $22.5 average price target.

Insider and Institutional Ownership

The shares of both Merus N.V. and Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc. are owned by institutional investors at 65.8% and 11.4% respectively. Merus N.V.s share held by insiders are 30.47%. Comparatively, 0.6% are Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc.s share held by insiders.

Performance

In this table we show the Weekly, Monthly, Quarterly, Half Yearly, Yearly and YTD Performance of both pretenders.

For the past year Merus N.V.s stock price has smaller growth than Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc.

Merus N.V., a clinical-stage immuno-oncology company, engages in developing bispecific antibody therapeutics. Its lead bispecific antibody candidate is MCLA-128, which is in Phase I/II clinical trials in Europe for the treatment of various solid tumors, including breast, gastric, and ovarian cancers. The company also develops MCLA-117, a bispecific antibody candidate that is expected to commence a Phase I/II clinical trial for the treatment of patients with acute myeloid leukemia, as well as for the treatment of myelodysplastic syndrome in pre-clinical studies, as well as developing MCLA-158, a bispecific antibody candidate, which is designed to bind to cancer stem cells for the potential treatment of colorectal cancer. Its pre-clinical bispecific antibody candidates include MCLA-134 and MCLA-145, as well as other early research projects. The company has a strategic collaboration with Incyte and ONO Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. to develop bispecific antibody candidates based on Biclonics technology platform. Merus N.V. was founded in 2003 and is headquartered in Utrecht, the Netherlands.

Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc., a biotechnology company, develops adult stem cell therapies for neurodegenerative disorders that include amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, multiple sclerosis, Parkinsons disease, and others. The company holds rights to develop and commercialize its NurOwn technology through a licensing agreement with Ramot of Tel Aviv University Ltd. Its NurOwn technology is based on a novel differentiation protocol, which induces differentiation of the bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells into neuron-supporting cells and secreting cells that release various neurotrophic factors, including glial-derived neurotrophic factor, brain-derived neurotrophic factor, vascular endothelial growth factor, and hepatocyte growth factor for the growth, survival, and differentiation of developing neurons. The company was formerly known as Golden Hand Resources Inc. and changed its name to Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc. in November 2004 to reflect its new line of business in the development of novel cell therapies for neurodegenerative diseases. Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc. was founded in 2000 and is headquartered in Hackensack, New Jersey.

Receive News & Ratings Via Email - Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of the latest news and analysts' ratings with our FREE daily email newsletter.

Read the original:
Comparison of Merus N.V. (MRUS) and Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc. (NASDAQ:BCLI) - MS Wkly

Posted in New Jersey Stem Cells | Comments Off on Comparison of Merus N.V. (MRUS) and Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc. (NASDAQ:BCLI) – MS Wkly

Comparing of NewLink Genetics Corporation (NLNK) and Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc. (NASDAQ:BCLI) – MS Wkly

Posted: October 14, 2019 at 1:47 pm

As Biotechnology companies, NewLink Genetics Corporation (NASDAQ:NLNK) and Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc. (NASDAQ:BCLI) are our subject to contrast. And more specifically their analyst recommendations, profitability, risk, dividends, institutional ownership, earnings and valuation.

Earnings and Valuation

Table 1 showcases the top-line revenue, earnings per share and valuation of NewLink Genetics Corporation and Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc.

Profitability

Table 2 shows us NewLink Genetics Corporation and Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc.s net margins, return on equity and return on assets.

Volatility & Risk

NewLink Genetics Corporations current beta is 1.31 and it happens to be 31.00% more volatile than Standard and Poors 500. Competitively, Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc.s 19.00% volatility makes it more volatile than Standard and Poors 500, because of the 1.19 beta.

Liquidity

The current Quick Ratio of NewLink Genetics Corporation is 13.3 while its Current Ratio is 13.3. Meanwhile, Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc. has a Current Ratio of 1 while its Quick Ratio is 1. NewLink Genetics Corporation is better positioned to pay off its short-term and long-term debts than Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc.

Institutional and Insider Ownership

NewLink Genetics Corporation and Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc. has shares held by institutional investors as follows: 34.6% and 11.4%. 0.1% are NewLink Genetics Corporations share held by insiders. On the other hand, insiders held about 0.6% of Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc.s shares.

Performance

In this table we show the Weekly, Monthly, Quarterly, Half Yearly, Yearly and YTD Performance of both pretenders.

For the past year NewLink Genetics Corporation has stronger performance than Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc.

Summary

NewLink Genetics Corporation beats on 7 of the 10 factors Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc.

NewLink Genetics Corporation, a biopharmaceutical company, focuses on discovering, developing, and commercializing immunotherapeutic products for the treatment of cancer. Its portfolio includes biologic product candidates based on its HyperAcute cellular immunotherapy technology, which is designed to stimulate the human immune system to attack cancer cells; and small-molecule product candidates that are focused on breaking the immune system's tolerance to cancer by inhibiting the indoleamine-2, 3-dioxygenase pathway and the tryptophan-2, 3-dioxygenase pathway. The company is developing IDO pathway inhibitors comprising indoximod that is in multiple Phase I and Phase II clinical trials for patients with melanoma, pancreatic cancer, malignant brain tumors, metastatic breast cancer, acute myeloid leukemia, prostate cancer, and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC); and GDC-0919 and atezolizumab (MPDL3280A) that is in Phase Ib clinical trials for patients with locally advanced or metastatic solid tumors. Its clinical development products include NLG2101 for metastatic breast cancer; NLG2102 for refractory malignant brain tumors; NLG2103 for advanced melanoma; NLG2104 for metastatic pancreatic cancer; NLG2105 for pediatric patients with refractory malignant brain tumors; and NLG2106 for acute myelogenous leukemia. The companys HyperAcute cellular immunotherapy product candidates under clinical development include tergenpumatucel-L, is being investigated in Phase Ib/II clinical trial for patients with advanced NSCLC; and dorgenmeltucel-L, is being investigated in a Phase II clinical trial for patients with advanced melanoma. Its infectious disease program includes replication-competent recombinant vesicular stomatitis virus, a vaccine technology to treat Ebola and Marburg viruses. The company has license and collaboration agreements with Genentech, Inc. and Merck, Sharpe and Dohme Corp. NewLink Genetics Corporation was founded in 1999 and is headquartered in Ames, Iowa.

Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc., a biotechnology company, develops adult stem cell therapies for neurodegenerative disorders that include amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, multiple sclerosis, Parkinsons disease, and others. The company holds rights to develop and commercialize its NurOwn technology through a licensing agreement with Ramot of Tel Aviv University Ltd. Its NurOwn technology is based on a novel differentiation protocol, which induces differentiation of the bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells into neuron-supporting cells and secreting cells that release various neurotrophic factors, including glial-derived neurotrophic factor, brain-derived neurotrophic factor, vascular endothelial growth factor, and hepatocyte growth factor for the growth, survival, and differentiation of developing neurons. The company was formerly known as Golden Hand Resources Inc. and changed its name to Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc. in November 2004 to reflect its new line of business in the development of novel cell therapies for neurodegenerative diseases. Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc. was founded in 2000 and is headquartered in Hackensack, New Jersey.

Receive News & Ratings Via Email - Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of the latest news and analysts' ratings with our FREE daily email newsletter.

See more here:
Comparing of NewLink Genetics Corporation (NLNK) and Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc. (NASDAQ:BCLI) - MS Wkly

Posted in New Jersey Stem Cells | Comments Off on Comparing of NewLink Genetics Corporation (NLNK) and Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc. (NASDAQ:BCLI) – MS Wkly

Reviewing Curis Inc. (CRIS)’s and Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc. (NASDAQ:BCLI)’s results – MS Wkly

Posted: October 14, 2019 at 1:47 pm

This is therefore a contrasting of the risk, analyst recommendations, profitability, dividends, earnings and valuation, institutional ownership in Curis Inc. (NASDAQ:CRIS) and Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc. (NASDAQ:BCLI). The two are both Biotechnology companies that compete with one another.

Valuation and Earnings

Table 1 demonstrates Curis Inc. and Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc.s top-line revenue, earnings per share (EPS) and valuation.

Profitability

Table 2 shows us Curis Inc. and Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc.s return on assets, return on equity and net margins.

Risk and Volatility

A 2.47 beta means Curis Inc.s volatility is 147.00% more than Standard and Poors 500s volatility. Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc.s 1.19 beta is the reason why it is 19.00% more volatile than Standard and Poors 500.

Liquidity

The Current Ratio and a Quick Ratio of Curis Inc. are 9.8 and 9.8. Competitively, Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc. has 1 and 1 for Current and Quick Ratio. Curis Inc.s better ability to pay short and long-term obligations than Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc.

Institutional & Insider Ownership

Institutional investors held 24.7% of Curis Inc. shares and 11.4% of Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc. shares. 17.28% are Curis Inc.s share held by insiders. Insiders Comparatively, held 0.6% of Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc. shares.

Performance

Here are the Weekly, Monthly, Quarterly, Half Yearly, Yearly and YTD Performance of both pretenders.

For the past year Curis Inc. was more bullish than Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc.

Summary

Curis Inc. beats on 7 of the 9 factors Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc.

Curis, Inc., a biotechnology company, engages in the discovery and development of drug candidates for the treatment of human cancers in the United States. The company develops CUDC-907, an oral small molecule inhibitor of histone deacetylase and phosphatidylinositol-3-kinase enzymes, which is in Phase II clinical trials for relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, as well as in Phase I clinical trials for patients with solid tumors; CA-170, an oral small molecule drug candidate that is in Phase I clinical trials in patients with advanced solid tumors and lymphomas; CA-4948, an oral small molecule drug candidate, which is in preclinical stage for the treatment of hematologic cancers; and CA-327, an oral small molecule drug candidate that is in preclinical stage for the treatment of cancers. It is also developing Erivedge, an orally-administered small molecule hedgehog pathway inhibitor for advanced basal cell carcinoma, idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, and myelofibrosis. The company has collaboration agreement with Aurigene Discovery Technologies Limited for the discovery, development, and commercialization of small molecule compounds in the areas of immuno-oncology and precision oncology; and collaboration and license agreement with F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. and Genentech Inc. for the development and commercialization of Erivedge. Curis, Inc. was founded in 2000 and is headquartered in Lexington, Massachusetts.

Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc., a biotechnology company, develops adult stem cell therapies for neurodegenerative disorders that include amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, multiple sclerosis, Parkinsons disease, and others. The company holds rights to develop and commercialize its NurOwn technology through a licensing agreement with Ramot of Tel Aviv University Ltd. Its NurOwn technology is based on a novel differentiation protocol, which induces differentiation of the bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells into neuron-supporting cells and secreting cells that release various neurotrophic factors, including glial-derived neurotrophic factor, brain-derived neurotrophic factor, vascular endothelial growth factor, and hepatocyte growth factor for the growth, survival, and differentiation of developing neurons. The company was formerly known as Golden Hand Resources Inc. and changed its name to Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc. in November 2004 to reflect its new line of business in the development of novel cell therapies for neurodegenerative diseases. Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc. was founded in 2000 and is headquartered in Hackensack, New Jersey.

Receive News & Ratings Via Email - Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of the latest news and analysts' ratings with our FREE daily email newsletter.

Read the original here:
Reviewing Curis Inc. (CRIS)'s and Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc. (NASDAQ:BCLI)'s results - MS Wkly

Posted in New Jersey Stem Cells | Comments Off on Reviewing Curis Inc. (CRIS)’s and Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc. (NASDAQ:BCLI)’s results – MS Wkly

Reviewing Morphic Holding Inc. (MORF)’s and Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc. (NASDAQ:BCLI)’s results – MS Wkly

Posted: October 14, 2019 at 1:47 pm

Morphic Holding Inc. (NASDAQ:MORF) and Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc. (NASDAQ:BCLI), both competing one another are Biotechnology companies. We will compare their risk, analyst recommendations, profitability, dividends, institutional ownership, earnings and valuation.

Valuation & Earnings

We can see in table 1 the earnings per share (EPS), top-line revenue and valuation of Morphic Holding Inc. and Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc.

Profitability

Table 2 shows us the return on equity, return on assets and net margins of both businesses.

Liquidity

The current Quick Ratio of Morphic Holding Inc. is 4.6 while its Current Ratio is 4.6. Meanwhile, Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc. has a Current Ratio of 1 while its Quick Ratio is 1. Morphic Holding Inc. is better positioned to pay off its short-term and long-term debts than Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc.

Analyst Recommendations

In next table is given Morphic Holding Inc. and Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc.s ratings and recommendations.

The average price target of Morphic Holding Inc. is $32, with potential upside of 134.78%.

Institutional & Insider Ownership

Morphic Holding Inc. and Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc. has shares held by institutional investors as follows: 49.9% and 11.4%. Insiders held roughly 26.4% of Morphic Holding Inc.s shares. Comparatively, Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc. has 0.6% of its share held by insiders.

Performance

Here are the Weekly, Monthly, Quarterly, Half Yearly, Yearly and YTD Performance of both pretenders.

For the past year Morphic Holding Inc.s stock price has bigger growth than Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc.

Summary

Morphic Holding Inc. beats Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc. on 6 of the 8 factors.

Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc., a biotechnology company, develops adult stem cell therapies for neurodegenerative disorders that include amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, multiple sclerosis, Parkinsons disease, and others. The company holds rights to develop and commercialize its NurOwn technology through a licensing agreement with Ramot of Tel Aviv University Ltd. Its NurOwn technology is based on a novel differentiation protocol, which induces differentiation of the bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells into neuron-supporting cells and secreting cells that release various neurotrophic factors, including glial-derived neurotrophic factor, brain-derived neurotrophic factor, vascular endothelial growth factor, and hepatocyte growth factor for the growth, survival, and differentiation of developing neurons. The company was formerly known as Golden Hand Resources Inc. and changed its name to Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc. in November 2004 to reflect its new line of business in the development of novel cell therapies for neurodegenerative diseases. Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc. was founded in 2000 and is headquartered in Hackensack, New Jersey.

Receive News & Ratings Via Email - Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of the latest news and analysts' ratings with our FREE daily email newsletter.

Go here to read the rest:
Reviewing Morphic Holding Inc. (MORF)'s and Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc. (NASDAQ:BCLI)'s results - MS Wkly

Posted in New Jersey Stem Cells | Comments Off on Reviewing Morphic Holding Inc. (MORF)’s and Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc. (NASDAQ:BCLI)’s results – MS Wkly

Reviewing PTC Therapeutics Inc. (PTCT)’s and Inovio Pharmaceuticals Inc. (NASDAQ:INO)’s results – MS Wkly

Posted: October 14, 2019 at 1:47 pm

We will be contrasting the differences between PTC Therapeutics Inc. (NASDAQ:PTCT) and Inovio Pharmaceuticals Inc. (NASDAQ:INO) as far as dividends, analyst recommendations, profitability, risk, earnings and valuation, institutional ownership are concerned. The two businesses are rivals in the Biotechnology industry.

Valuation and Earnings

Table 1 shows gross revenue, earnings per share and valuation of the two companies.

Profitability

Table 2 represents PTC Therapeutics Inc. (NASDAQ:PTCT) and Inovio Pharmaceuticals Inc. (NASDAQ:INO)s return on equity, return on assets and net margins.

Volatility and Risk

PTC Therapeutics Inc. is 74.00% more volatile than Standard & Poors 500 because the company has a beta of 1.74. Inovio Pharmaceuticals Inc. has a 2.01 beta and it is 101.00% more volatile than Standard & Poors 500.

Liquidity

PTC Therapeutics Inc.s Current Ratio and Quick Ratio are 3.3 and 3.2 respectively. The Current Ratio and Quick Ratio of its competitor Inovio Pharmaceuticals Inc. are 4.9 and 4.9 respectively. Inovio Pharmaceuticals Inc. therefore has a better chance of paying off short and long-term obligations compared to PTC Therapeutics Inc.

Insider & Institutional Ownership

The shares of both PTC Therapeutics Inc. and Inovio Pharmaceuticals Inc. are owned by institutional investors at 85.61% and 44% respectively. 0.3% are PTC Therapeutics Inc.s share held by insiders. Comparatively, insiders own roughly 2.5% of Inovio Pharmaceuticals Inc.s shares.

Performance

In this table we show the Weekly, Monthly, Quarterly, Half Yearly, Yearly and YTD Performance of both pretenders.

For the past year PTC Therapeutics Inc. had bullish trend while Inovio Pharmaceuticals Inc. had bearish trend.

PTC Therapeutics, Inc., a biopharmaceutical company, focuses on the discovery, development, and commercialization of orally administered, small molecule drugs that target post-transcriptional control processes. The companys lead product is Translarna (ataluren), for the treatment of nonsense mutation Duchenne muscular dystrophy in ambulatory patients; and which is in phase III clinical trials to treat cystic fibrosis caused by nonsense mutations. It also develops Translarna, which is in Phase II clinical trials for the treatment of mucopolysaccharidosis type I caused by nonsense mutation, nonsense mutation aniridia, and nonsense mutation Dravet syndrome/CDKL5; and RG7916 that is in Phase I clinical trials to treat spinal muscular atrophy. In addition, the companys product candidate in cancer stem cell program include PTC596, an orally bioavailable and potent small molecule, which has completed phase I clinical trials that targets tumor stem cell populations by reducing the activity and amount of a protein called BMI1. PTC Therapeutics, Inc. has collaborations with F. Hoffman-La Roche Ltd and Hoffman-La Roche Inc., and the Spinal Muscular Atrophy Foundation to develop and commercialize compounds identified under its spinal muscular atrophy sponsored research program; and research collaboration with Massachusetts General Hospital for the treatment of rare genetic disorders resulting from pre-mRNA. The company was founded in 1998 and is headquartered in South Plainfield, New Jersey.

Inovio Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a clinical stage biopharmaceutical company, develops active DNA immunotherapies and vaccines in combination with proprietary electroporation delivery devices to prevent and treat cancers and infectious diseases. Its SynCon immunotherapy design has the ability to break the immune systems tolerance of cancerous cells; and SynCon product design is also intended to facilitate cross-strain protection against known, as well as new unmatched strains of pathogens, such as influenza. It has completed, current or planned clinical programs of its proprietary SynCon immunotherapies for HPV-caused pre-cancers and cancers, influenza, prostate cancer, breast/lung/pancreatic cancer, hepatitis C virus, hepatitis B virus, HIV, Ebola, Middle East Respiratory Syndrome, and Zika virus. The companys partners and collaborators include MedImmune, LLC, the Wistar Institute, University of Pennsylvania, Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, GeneOne Life Science, Plumbline Life Sciences, ApolloBio Corporation, Drexel University, the National Institutes of Health, HIV Vaccines Trial Network, National Cancer Institute, Genentech, and U.S. Military HIV Research Program. Inovio Pharmaceuticals, Inc. was founded in 1979 and is headquartered in Plymouth Meeting, Pennsylvania.

Receive News & Ratings Via Email - Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of the latest news and analysts' ratings with our FREE daily email newsletter.

See the article here:
Reviewing PTC Therapeutics Inc. (PTCT)'s and Inovio Pharmaceuticals Inc. (NASDAQ:INO)'s results - MS Wkly

Posted in New Jersey Stem Cells | Comments Off on Reviewing PTC Therapeutics Inc. (PTCT)’s and Inovio Pharmaceuticals Inc. (NASDAQ:INO)’s results – MS Wkly

Comparing of Osmotica Pharmaceuticals plc (OSMT) and VistaGen Therapeutics Inc. (NASDAQ:VTGN) – MS Wkly

Posted: October 14, 2019 at 1:47 pm

Since Osmotica Pharmaceuticals plc (NASDAQ:OSMT) and VistaGen Therapeutics Inc. (NASDAQ:VTGN) are part of the Biotechnology industry, they are influenced by contrast. The influences particularly affect the risk, analyst recommendations, institutional ownership, profitability, dividends, earnings and valuation of both companies.

Valuation and Earnings

Table 1 shows top-line revenue, earnings per share (EPS) and valuation of the two companies.

Profitability

Table 2 shows the return on equity, net margins and return on assets of the two firms.

Liquidity

The Current Ratio and Quick Ratio of Osmotica Pharmaceuticals plc are 1.7 and 1.4 respectively. Its competitor VistaGen Therapeutics Inc.s Current Ratio is 4.9 and its Quick Ratio is 4.9. VistaGen Therapeutics Inc. can pay off short and long-term obligations better than Osmotica Pharmaceuticals plc.

Institutional & Insider Ownership

Osmotica Pharmaceuticals plc and VistaGen Therapeutics Inc. has shares owned by institutional investors as follows: 50.4% and 20.4%. 4% are Osmotica Pharmaceuticals plcs share owned by insiders. Comparatively, VistaGen Therapeutics Inc. has 0.2% of its share owned by insiders.

Performance

Here are the Weekly, Monthly, Quarterly, Half Yearly, Yearly and YTD Performance of both pretenders.

For the past year Osmotica Pharmaceuticals plc was less bearish than VistaGen Therapeutics Inc.

Summary

On 5 of the 9 factors VistaGen Therapeutics Inc. beats Osmotica Pharmaceuticals plc.

Osmotica Pharmaceuticals plc, an integrated biopharmaceutical company, develops, manufactures, and commercializes specialty products that target markets with underserved patient populations. The company's promoted approved products include specialty neurology products, such as M-72 to treat ADHD; Osmolex ER to treat Parkinson's and drug-induced extrapyramidal reactions in adults; Lorzone to treat muscle spasms; and ConZip for pain, as well as women's health products, including Divigel for menopause; and OB Complete, a dietary supplement for prenatal, pregnancy, and postnatal periods. Its non-promoted approved products comprise Methylphenidate ER for ADHD; Venlafaxine ER tablets for major depressive disorder and social anxiety disorder; Hydromorphone ER for pain; Nifedipine ER for hypertension; Sodium Benzoate/Sodium Phenylacetate for hyperammonemia; Oxybutynin ER for overactive bladder; and prescription prenatal vitamins for nutritional requirements during pregnancy. The company's products under development include Ontinua ER, which is in Phase III clinical trials to treat multiple sclerosis spasticity, and Phase I clinical trials to treat opioid and alcohol use disorders; RVL-1201, which is in Phase III clinical trials to treat Blepharoptosis; and Osmodex and other ANDAs for various indications. Osmotica Pharmaceuticals plc is based in Bridgewater, New Jersey.

VistaGen Therapeutics, Inc., a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company, engages in developing and commercializing medicines for depression and other central nervous system (CNS) disorders. The company's lead product candidate is AV-101, which is in Phase II development stage, an adjunctive treatment used for major depressive disorder. It also focuses on potential commercial applications of its human pluripotent stem cell (hPSC) technology platform to discover, rescue, develop, and commercialize new chemical entities (NCEs) for CNS and other diseases; and regenerative medicine involving hPSC-derived blood, cartilage, heart, and liver cells. In addition, the company develops CardioSafe 3D, an in vitro cardiac bioassay system for predicting human heart toxicity of small molecule NCEs. VistaGen Therapeutics, Inc. has licensing, sublicensing, and collaboration agreements with BlueRock Therapeutics, LP; U.S. National Institutes of Health; Cato Research Ltd.; and University Health Network. The company was founded in 1998 and is headquartered in South San Francisco, California.

Receive News & Ratings Via Email - Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of the latest news and analysts' ratings with our FREE daily email newsletter.

Read the original:
Comparing of Osmotica Pharmaceuticals plc (OSMT) and VistaGen Therapeutics Inc. (NASDAQ:VTGN) - MS Wkly

Posted in New Jersey Stem Cells | Comments Off on Comparing of Osmotica Pharmaceuticals plc (OSMT) and VistaGen Therapeutics Inc. (NASDAQ:VTGN) – MS Wkly

PTC Therapeutics Inc. (PTCT) and MacroGenics Inc. (NASDAQ:MGNX) Comparing side by side – MS Wkly

Posted: October 14, 2019 at 1:47 pm

This is a contrast between PTC Therapeutics Inc. (NASDAQ:PTCT) and MacroGenics Inc. (NASDAQ:MGNX) based on their institutional ownership, earnings and valuation, profitability, risk, dividends, analyst recommendations. The two companies are Biotechnology and they also compete with each other.

Valuation & Earnings

Demonstrates PTC Therapeutics Inc. and MacroGenics Inc. earnings per share (EPS), top-line revenue and valuation.

Profitability

Table 2 shows the return on assets, net margins and return on equity of the two firms.

Volatility & Risk

PTC Therapeutics Inc.s 1.74 beta indicates that its volatility is 74.00% more volatile than that of Standard & Poors 500. MacroGenics Inc. has a 2.3 beta and it is 130.00% more volatile than Standard & Poors 500.

Liquidity

PTC Therapeutics Inc.s Current Ratio is 3.3 while its Quick Ratio is 3.2. On the competitive side is, MacroGenics Inc. which has a 6.5 Current Ratio and a 6.5 Quick Ratio. MacroGenics Inc. is better positioned to pay off short and long-term obligations compared to PTC Therapeutics Inc.

Analyst Recommendations

PTC Therapeutics Inc. and MacroGenics Inc. Recommendations and Ratings are available in the next table.

PTC Therapeutics Inc. has a 21.85% upside potential and a consensus price target of $43. Competitively the consensus price target of MacroGenics Inc. is $27, which is potential 137.26% upside. Based on the results shown earlier, MacroGenics Inc. is looking more favorable than PTC Therapeutics Inc., analysts view.

Institutional and Insider Ownership

PTC Therapeutics Inc. and MacroGenics Inc. has shares owned by institutional investors as follows: 85.61% and 95.8%. About 0.3% of PTC Therapeutics Inc.s share are owned by insiders. Comparatively, 0.1% are MacroGenics Inc.s share owned by insiders.

Performance

Here are the Weekly, Monthly, Quarterly, Half Yearly, Yearly and YTD Performance of both pretenders.

For the past year PTC Therapeutics Inc. has stronger performance than MacroGenics Inc.

Summary

On 7 of the 12 factors PTC Therapeutics Inc. beats MacroGenics Inc.

PTC Therapeutics, Inc., a biopharmaceutical company, focuses on the discovery, development, and commercialization of orally administered, small molecule drugs that target post-transcriptional control processes. The companys lead product is Translarna (ataluren), for the treatment of nonsense mutation Duchenne muscular dystrophy in ambulatory patients; and which is in phase III clinical trials to treat cystic fibrosis caused by nonsense mutations. It also develops Translarna, which is in Phase II clinical trials for the treatment of mucopolysaccharidosis type I caused by nonsense mutation, nonsense mutation aniridia, and nonsense mutation Dravet syndrome/CDKL5; and RG7916 that is in Phase I clinical trials to treat spinal muscular atrophy. In addition, the companys product candidate in cancer stem cell program include PTC596, an orally bioavailable and potent small molecule, which has completed phase I clinical trials that targets tumor stem cell populations by reducing the activity and amount of a protein called BMI1. PTC Therapeutics, Inc. has collaborations with F. Hoffman-La Roche Ltd and Hoffman-La Roche Inc., and the Spinal Muscular Atrophy Foundation to develop and commercialize compounds identified under its spinal muscular atrophy sponsored research program; and research collaboration with Massachusetts General Hospital for the treatment of rare genetic disorders resulting from pre-mRNA. The company was founded in 1998 and is headquartered in South Plainfield, New Jersey.

MacroGenics, Inc., a biopharmaceutical company, focuses on the discovery and development of antibody-based therapeutics for the treatment of cancer primarily by modulating the human immune system, as well as various autoimmune disorders and infectious diseases in the United States. The companys advanced clinical product candidate is Margetuximab, a monoclonal antibody, which is in Phase III clinical trial that targets human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-expressing tumors, such as various breast and gastroesophageal cancers. It also develops Enoblituzumab, a monoclonal antibody, which is in Phase 1 clinical trial as monotherapy in multiple solid tumor types, as well as in combination therapy with either an anti-PD-1 antibody or an anti-CTLA-4 antibody; Flotetuzumab, a DART molecule that targets CD123 and CD3; MGD007, a DART molecule, which targets glycoprotein A33 and CD3; Duvortuxizumab, a DART molecule that targets both CD19 and CD3; MGD009, a molecule in its B7-H3 franchise; MGA012, a monoclonal antibody, which targets PD-1; MGD013, a DART molecule that enables the co-blockade with a single recombinant agent of two immune checkpoint molecules; and MGC018, a B7-H3 antibody-drug conjugate. In addition, the companys products include MGD010, a DART molecule designed to address limitations of existing B cell-targeted therapies by binding to the CD32B and CD79B proteins found on human B cells; Teplizumab, an anti-CD3 monoclonal antibody to treat type 1 diabetes; and MGD014, a DART molecule that targets human immunodeficiency virus, or HIV-infected cells, and CD3-expressing T cells. It has collaboration and license agreements with Janssen Biotech, Inc.; Les Laboratoires Servier and Institut de Recherches Servier; Boehringer Ingelheim GmbH; Pfizer, Inc.; and Green Cross Corp. MacroGenics, Inc. was founded in 2000 and is headquartered in Rockville, Maryland.

Receive News & Ratings Via Email - Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of the latest news and analysts' ratings with our FREE daily email newsletter.

Read this article:
PTC Therapeutics Inc. (PTCT) and MacroGenics Inc. (NASDAQ:MGNX) Comparing side by side - MS Wkly

Posted in New Jersey Stem Cells | Comments Off on PTC Therapeutics Inc. (PTCT) and MacroGenics Inc. (NASDAQ:MGNX) Comparing side by side – MS Wkly

Cell therapy startup raises $16 million to fund its quest for the Holy Grail in regenerative medicine – Endpoints News

Posted: October 14, 2019 at 1:45 pm

In 2006, Shinya Yamanaka shook stem cell research with his discovery that mature cells can be converted into stem cells, relieving a longstanding political-ethical blockage and throwing open medical research on everything from curbing eye degeneration to organ printing.

But that process still has pitfalls, including in risk and scalability, and some researchers are exploring another way first hinted at years ago: new technology to convert mature cells directly into other mature cells without the complex and time-consuming process of first making them into stem cells.

One of those companies, Mogrify, just raised $16 million in Series A financing to bring its overall funding to over $20 million since its February launch. Led by CEO Darrin Disley, the funding will help expand their new base in Cambridge to a 60-strong staff and push forward their direct-conversion approach to cell therapy through research and licensing. Investors include Parkwalk Advisors and Ahren Innovation Capital.

They list potential applications as treatments for musculoskeletal and auto-immune disorders, cancer immunotherapy, and therapies for ocular and respiratory diseases. For example, you could use it regenerate cartilage in arthritis patients.

If you could take a cell from one part of the body and turn it into any other cell at any other stage of development for another part of the body, you effectively have the Holy Grail of regenerative medicine, Disley told Labiotech.eu in April.

Mogrifys advantage over the Yamanaka method called induced pluripotent stem cells (iPS), is that in theory it can be more scalable and avoid the problems associated with iPS. These include instabilities arising from the induced immature state and an increased risk of cancer if any pluripotent cells remain in the body.

The concept behind Mogrify actually predates, by nearly 19 years, Yamanakas discovery, which fast won him the 2012 Nobel Prize in Medicine. A 2017 Nature study on transdifferentiation, as the process is called, of fibroblasts into cardiac tissue traced the idea to a 1987 findingthat a master gene regulator could convert mice fibroblasts into skeletal muscle.

The problem though, according to Mogrify, is that most current efforts rely on an exhausting guess-and-check process. With hundreds of cell types and an even greater number of transcription factors the program that recodes the cell finding the right factor for the right cell can be like a custodian with a jangling, unmarked key ring trying to get into a building with thousands of locks.

Mogrifys key tech is a computer model they say can predict the right combination. The scientists behind the platform published a 2016 study in Nature applying the model to 173 human cell types and 134 tissues.

Before Mogrify, Disley led the Cambridge-based gene-editing company Horizon Discovery.

See original here:
Cell therapy startup raises $16 million to fund its quest for the Holy Grail in regenerative medicine - Endpoints News

Posted in Stem Cells | Comments Off on Cell therapy startup raises $16 million to fund its quest for the Holy Grail in regenerative medicine – Endpoints News

Stem cell therapy helped Owen Franks but there’s still plenty to prove – Stuff.co.nz

Posted: October 14, 2019 at 1:45 pm

Stem cell therapy, which All Blacks prop Owen Franks used to help fix a damaged shoulder, is raising hopes of a whole range of medical breakthroughs.

But there's a way to go before the medical establishment is convinced.

In late 2017, US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner ScottGottliebhad this to say:"We're at the beginning of a paradigm change in medicine with the promise of being able to facilitate regeneration of parts of the human body, where cells and tissues can be engineered to grow healthy, functional organs to replace diseased ones; new genes can be introduced into the body to combat disease; and adult stem cells can generate replacements for cells that are lost to injury or disease."

REGEN CELLULAR

Dr Hassan Mubark takes blood from All Blacks prop Owen Franks.

Yet, as an indication of how far there is still to go, the FDA has also warnedpeople in the USagainst "unscrupulous providers" offering stem cell products that were unapproved and unproven.

READ MORE:*Rugby World Cup 2019: All Black Owen Franks thrown a stem cell lifeline*Owen Franks hits back at critics following omission from Rugby World Cup squad*Stem cell therapy for All Black Israel Dagg as he hits comeback trail with Crusaders*Experimental stem cell treatment shows results for Waikato woman with MSA Cerebella*Stem cell clinics accused of taking advantage of patients*Reported stem cell treatment could give hope to Michael Schumacher

"Researchers hope stem cells will one day be effective in the treatment of many medical conditions and diseases," it said, thenadded: "Stem cells have been called everything from cure-alls to miracle treatments. But don't believe the hype."

Looking at just the area of deteriorating joints, it's easy to see how stem cell therapies, if they deliver on the promise,could make life much better for many people with osteoarthritis who are in pain and have restricted movement.

Last week, Otago University researchers predictedthe number of knee replacement surgeries needed for osteoarthritis would increase from around 5000 a year in 2013 to abut9000 in 2038.

AP

Former Formula One champion Michael Schumacher received devastating head injuries in a ski accident six years ago. Last month it was reported he has undergone stem cell treatment in Paris.

Osteoarthritis is the area where ReGen Cellular,the clinic where Franks had the therapy, has done most of its work in the past two to three years, although ithas recently expanded its services to include a range of diagnosed auto-immune conditions, among them rheumatoid arthritis, multiple sclerosis, and type 1 diabetes.

ReGensaid 55 per cent of its patients were aged over 60, 35 per cent were 40-60 and 10 per cent were sports-based.

Theclinic usesPure Expanded Stem Cell (PESC) therapy, which involves taking 40 grams - about a teaspoon - of fat from around a patient's stomach. Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs)in that sample are then multiplied in the clinic's Queenstown laboratory for about eight weeks. At the end of that process 100 million to 200 million cells have been produced.

Otago University

Otago University, Christchurch regenerative medicine research team have invented a bio-ink - a gel-like substance mixed with human stem cells - to be used with a bio-printer to make human body parts. Video shows the printer using bio-ink to make a body part.

For the treatment of osteoarthritis, between 50m and 100m stem cells are injected into larger joints, with 25m to 50m into smaller joints. ReGen said the therapy provided immediate pain reduction and increased mobility. MRI scans showed cartilage could and did regenerate.

ReGendescribedMSCs as the cells that "wake up damaged or lazy cells". Slightly more technically, Nature.com said MSCs wereadult stem cells present in multiple tissues, including the umbilical cord, bone marrow and fat.MSCscan self-renew by dividing and can differentiate into multiple tissues including bone, cartilage, muscle and fat cells, and connective tissue.

ReGen director of patient care Marcelle Noble said the clinic believed its treatments, if offered early enough, would save the public health system hundreds of millions of dollars through lessened replacement surgeries, and would save ACC millions of dollars in lengthy rehabilitation programmes.

The treatment for two knees was half the price of one knee replacement surgery within the public health system, she said. ReGen advertises osteoarthritis treatment for a single joint at $12,500 and for two joints at $15,000.

GETTY IMAGES

Former All Black Israel Dagg had stem cell therapy for an injured knee, but in the end had to give the game away because of the injury.

So far mainstream funding hadnot been offered for the therapy, Noble said. But the clinic had a "big breakthrough" earlier this year when two insurers in New Zealand accepted patients'PESC therapy claims. In July, ACC accepted consultation by ReGen's chief medical officer Dr Hassan Mubark.

ReGen only had data for the past five years on the success of its therapy, but the fact patients were returning to have other areas of their body treated was an indication of how people feltthe therapy was improving their quality of life, Noble said.

Globally, "massive" R&D spending was going into stem cell research. More therapies would become available and stem cell treatment would become "commonplace".

At any one time ReGen had 50-75 patients' cells growing in its incubators, Noble said. Of the patients treated, 40 per cent hadailments in therknees, 30 per cent in their hips, 20 per cent in their shoulders. The final 10 per cent were for sports and other issues, including problems with tendons, muscles, cartilage tears, fingers, elbows, ankles and hands.

SUPPLIED

Dr Ron Lopert undergoing part of the PESC treatment.

The first patient to undertake ReGen's PESC therapy was retired GP Dr Ron Lopert, who lives in Tauranga.

For five to 10 years, he had beengetting aches and pains in his hips after playing sport, and the problem was becoming more noticeable, he said. In 2013 he had an x-ray that showed he had moderate to severe osteoarthritis in both hips,more severein his right hip.

He stopped playing all sports and started researching different forms of treatment. Ideally, he wanted to be able to get some of his own cartilage back and reverse the osteoarthritis. It seemedPESCshould do that.

In 2015, aged 61, he had the therapy, with stem cells being injected into each hip joint.Within weeks henoticed an improvement in the range of motion and a decrease in pain, Lopert said.Some of that was just the anti-inflammatory component of stem cell injection, but he thought he also received a longer term benefit from cartilage regeneration.

SUPPLIED

Dr Lopert on his recent travels. He says he has much less hip pain.

He put the success of the procedure at75 per centin terms of symptoms and function, and100 per cent when it came to avoiding invasive surgery."I opted for a much more natural treatment where my own tissue is regenerating, instead of a metal prosthesis," Lopert said.

He was not sure all the improvement came from the stem cell treatment. As well as avoiding overuse of the joints, which meant he hadn't returned to playing sport, he had also switched to an anti-inflammatory diet.

His left hip continued to have hardly any symptomsbut he had started noticing the "odd twinge now and then" in his right hip.

"The vast majority of days it's fine provided I'm just walking and doing ordinary things. On the odd occasion I might carry something heavy, then I would notice it the next day and it (right hip) would stay painfulintermittentlyfor the next couple of days," Lopert said.

Sean Gallup

In this picture from February, German Chancellor Angela Merkel looks through a microscope at brain organoids grown from stem cells.

Some of his stem cells had been retained after the treatment, and he was booked in for a follow-up injection for his right hip at the end of October.

He expected the therapy would become a "go to" treatment, and would become an early intervention for osteoarthritis. But more independent research was needed to confirm the success of the treatment. "The evidence is slowly building up but there needs to be more before the Government will accept it," Lopert said.

In his case, he thought there had been cartilage regeneration in his hips, but that was based on his symptoms. "It would have been nice had I had MRI scans before and after the injection for objective evidence," he said.

From the perspective of the medical establishment, the New Zealand Orthopaedic Association said it supported a position statement on stem cell therapy produced by the Royal Australian College of Surgeons.

That paper, approved in mid-2018,noted stem cell therapy was a "rapidly advancing" area, but many proposed stem cell therapies were experimental and not yet proven. It did not support surgeons administering stem cell therapy outside of an ethically approved registered clinical trial.

"Whilst there may be scope for innovative treatment in the future, currently, the clinical effectiveness and safety of stem cell therapies remain scientifically unproven," RACS said.

In this country, an ACC spokesperson said ACC did not have an official position on stem cell therapy for the treatment of injuries. An internationally standardised evidence-based healthcare approach was used to help ACC decide how it covered injuries and funded treatments.

Dr HassanMubark, ReGen's chief medical officer, was a healthcare provider contracted to ACC in the specialty of rheumatology, and ACC had funded consultation fees with Mubark, the spokesperson said. Those consultations were for diagnostic and treatment planning purposes and did not need prior approval from ACC.

ACC had to consider legislative criteria when deciding whether to fund any particular treatment. There would be many reasons why ACC might decide to fund a client to see a rheumatologist for an opinion on the diagnosis and possible management of their condition. That would not commit ACC to funding any proposed treatment but would provide the client and ACC with information to help decision-making.

Read the original post:
Stem cell therapy helped Owen Franks but there's still plenty to prove - Stuff.co.nz

Posted in Stem Cells | Comments Off on Stem cell therapy helped Owen Franks but there’s still plenty to prove – Stuff.co.nz

Page 1,317«..1020..1,3161,3171,3181,319..1,3301,340..»