Anatomical Venuses! Anthropomorphic Taxidermy! Books Bound in Human Skin! Announcing "The Morbid Anatomy Anthology"

We at Morbid Anatomy are so very excited to announce the forthcoming Morbid Anatomy Anthology--a lavish, illustrated book which will immortalize in print some of the best of the Morbid Anatomy Presents lecture series from the past 5 years. The book, to be co-published by Morbid Anatomy and Strange Attractor Press, will be edited by Morbid Anatomy's Joanna Ebenstein and author, polymath, and many time Observatory-presenter Colin Dickey. By pressing play on the video above, you can learn more.

If you are interested in securing a copy of the book, you can make a donation to our Kickstarter campaign by clicking here; a pledge of $25 or more works essentially as a pre-order, and will secure you a copy of the book, while higher bids will get you a copy of the book as well as additional books by esteemed contributors Zoe Bellof, Mark Dery, Stephen Asma, and Empire of Death's Paul Koudounaris, or signed limited-editions photographs by Morbid Anatomy creator Joanna Ebenstein. Click here to see full list.

The Morbid Anatomy Anthology will cover such topics as anthropodermic bibliopegy (ie. books bound in human skin), 19th Century "Diableries", Henry Wellcome's collections of preserved human tattoos, 19th century death-themed Parisian cabarets, extreme taxidermy, popular wax anatomical models, "collecting death," the uncanny allure of the Anatomical Venus, Santa Muerte and Death in MexicoL'Inconnue de la Seine, "artist of death" Frederik Ruysch, macabre collections, "human zoos," and much, much, MUCH more.

The rogue scholars, artists, writers, museologists, morticians and scientists whose works will fill this volume will include (in no particular order):

Also, for those in the NYC area, tonight we have a fundraising party for the book; this event will feature four mini-lectures by a few of our contributors; Morbid Anatomy's Joanna Ebenstein will give an "Ode to an Anatomical Venus;" Mark Dery will expound on "When Animals Attack!: An Aesop's Fable About Anthropomorphism;" Colin Dickey will regale us with "Some Extraneous Thoughts on Medieval Witches;" and Shannon Taggart will elucidate us with "Documenting the Invisible: Spiritualism, Mediumship and T
alking to the Dead." There will also be free cocktails and music complements of the fabulous Friese Undine, and giveaways of wonderful anatomical cutting boards from Kikkerland.

Full details for the event follows, and again, that Kickstarter link is here. Thanks to all of you for your support!

"The Morbid Anatomy Anthology" Publication Fundraiser Party
Fundraising Party for "The Morbid Anatomy Anthology" with contributor mini-lectures. complementary artisinal cocktails, music, and giveaways from Kikkerland
Date: Friday, October 26
Time: 8:00 PM
Admission: $20
Presented by Morbid Anatomy

We are very pleased to announce the forthcoming Morbid Anatomy Anthology--a lavish, illustrated book which will immortalize in print some of the best of the Morbid Anatomy Presents lecture series from the past 5 years. The book, to be co-published by Morbid Anatomy and Strange Attractor Press, will be edited by Morbid Anatomy's Joanna Ebenstein and author, polymath, and many time Observatory-presenter Colin Dickey.

Tonight's party-- the proceeds of which will go towards the printing and production costs of The Morbid Anatomy Anthology--will feature 15 minute mini-lectures by 4 contributors to the volume: Mark Dery, Colin DickeyShannon Taggart and Joanna Ebenstein. There will also be a Midnight Archive screening, complementary artisinal cocktails and music provided by Friese Undine and giveaways of wonderful anatomical cutting boards from Kikkerland.

Special thanks to Ronni Thomas, creator of The Midnight Archive, for donating his significant talent to creating the video component of this campaign.

Source:
http://morbidanatomy.blogspot.com/2012/10/anatomical-venus-anthropormphic.html

On Inflammation in Mouse Longevity Mutants

Chronic inflammation is a bad thing, walking hand in hand with the frailties and degenerations of aging. Rising inflammation contributes to a very broad range of fatal age-related conditions, and the progressive decline of the immune system itself causes ever greater chronic inflammation, even as it fails to protect the body from pathogens and errant cells. Further, visceral fat tissue is a potent source of inflammation, and this is one of the mechanisms thought to link excess fat with lowered life expectancy and greater risk of age-related disease.

There is plenty in the Fight Aging! archives on the subject of inflammation and its role in aging. To pick a handful of examples:

Some of the best known genetically engineered mutant mice with extended longevity are those in which growth hormone and its receptor are suppressed. They are small, need careful husbanding because they don't generate enough body heat to survive well on their own, and live 60-70% longer than ordinary members of their species. As noted in the following review paper, reduced inflammation has some role to play in this extended healthy life span:

Growth hormone, inflammation and aging:

The last 200 years of industrial development along with the progress in medicine and in various public health measures had significant effect on human life expectancy by doubling the average longevity from 35-40 to 75-80. There is evidence that this great increase of the lifespan during industrial development is largely due to decreased exposure to chronic inflammation throughout life. There is strong evidence that exposure of an individual to past infections and the levels of chronic inflammation increase the risk of heart attack, stroke and even cancer.

Centenarians represent exceptional longevity in human populations and it is already known that many of these individuals are escaping from major common diseases such as cancer, diabetes etc. There is ongoing interest in investigating the mechanisms that allow these individuals to reach this exceptional longevity. There are several animal mutants used to study longevity with hope to determine the mechanism of extended lifespan and more importantly protection from age related diseases. In our laboratory we use animals with disruption of growth hormone (GH) signaling which greatly extend longevity.

Mutant animals characterized by extended longevity provide valuable tools to study the mechanisms of aging. Growth hormone and insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) constitute one of the well-established pathways involved in the regulation of aging and lifespan. Ames and Snell dwarf mice characterized by GH deficiency as well as growth hormone receptor/growth hormone binding protein knockout (GHRKO) mice characterized by GH resistance live significantly longer than genetically normal animals.

During normal aging of rodents and humans there is increased insulin resistance, disruption of metabolic activities and decline of the function of the immune system. All of these age related processes promote inflammatory activity, causing long term tissue damage and systemic chronic inflammation. However, studies of long living mutants and calorie restricted animals show decreased pro-inflammatory activity with increased levels of anti-inflammatory adipokines such as adiponectin. At the same time, these animals have improved insulin signaling and carbohydrate homeostasis that relate to alterations in the secretory profile of adipose tissue including increased production and release of anti-inflammatory adipokines.

This suggests that reduced inflammation promoting healthy metabolism may represent one of the major mechanisms of extended longevity in long-lived mutant mice and likely also in the human.

Source:
http://www.fightaging.org/archives/2012/10/on-inflammation-in-mouse-longevity-mutants.php

Spermidine Levels Measured in Centenarians

Spermidine has been noted to boost autophagy and promote greater longevity to some degree in laboratory animals. Its activities are in the process of being advanced by some researchers as candidate drug mechanisms for slowing aging. Given that, it makes sense for researchers to investigate spermidine levels in longer lived individuals to see if there is any association:

Polyamines (putrescine, spermidine and spermine) are a family of molecules deriving from ornithine, through a decarboxylation process. They are essential for cell growth and proliferation, stabilization of negative charges of DNA, RNA transcription, translation and apoptosis.

Recently, it has been demonstrated that exogenously administered spermidine promotes longevity in yeasts, flies, worms and human cultured immune cells. Here, using a cross-sectional observational study, we determined whole-blood polyamines levels from 78 sex-matched unrelated individuals divided into three age groups: group 1 (31-56 years, N=26, mean age: 44.6±6.07), group 2 (60-80 years, N=26, mean age: 68.7±6.07) and group 3 (90-106 years, N=26, mean age: 96.5±4.59).

Polyamines total content is significantly lower in group 2 and 3 compared to group 1. Interestingly, this reduction is mainly attributable to the lower putrescine content. Group 2 displays the lowest levels of spermidine and spermine. On the other hand, [nonagenarians and] centenarians (group 3) display significant higher median relative percentage content of spermine with respect to total polyamines, compared to the other groups.

For the first time we report polyamines profiles from whole blood of healthy [nonagenarians and] centenarians, and our results confirm and extend previous findings on the role of polyamines in determining human longevity. However, although we found an important correlation between polyamines levels and age groups, further studies are warranted to fully understand the role of polyamines in determining life-span. Also, longitudinal and nutritional studies might suggest potential therapeutic approaches to sustain healthy aging and to increase human life-span.

Link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/rej.2012.1349

Source:
http://www.fightaging.org/archives/2012/10/spermidine-levels-measured-in-centenarians.php

A Small Step Towards Tissue Engineered Kidneys

Tissue engineers have been inching closer to building a kidney from stem cells in the past couple of years. Here is a recent example of the ongoing work in this field:

Investigators can produce tissues similar to immature kidneys from simple suspensions of embryonic kidney cells, but they have been unsuccessful at growing more mature kidney tissues in the lab because the kidneys' complicated filtering units do not form without the support of blood vessels.

Now, from suspensions of single kidney cells, [researchers] have for the first time constructed "organoids" that can be integrated into a living animal and carry out kidney functions including blood filtering and molecule reabsorption. Key to their success was soaking the organoids in a solution containing molecules that promote blood vessel formation, then injecting these molecules into the recipient animals after the organoids were implanted below the kidneys. The organoids continued to mature and were viable for three to four weeks after implantation.

Link: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/10/121018184850.htm

Source:
http://www.fightaging.org/archives/2012/10/a-small-step-towards-tissue-engineered-kidneys.php

Putting Aside What You'd Rather Do Because You're Dying

Many dubious arguments are fielded in support of aging and involuntary death: every status quo, no matter how terrible, gathers its supporters. This is one of the deeper flaws inherent in human nature, the ability to mistake what is for the most desirable of what is possible. A hundred thousand deaths each and every day and the suffering of hundreds of millions is the proposal on the table whenever anyone suggests that human aging should continue as it is.

Massive campaigns of giving and social upheaval have been founded on the backs of a hundredth of this level of death and pain - but the world has a blindness when it comes to aging. Such is the power of the familiar and the long-standing: only heretics seek to overturn it, no matter how horrid and costly it is.

Nonetheless, this is an age of biotechnology in which aging might be conquered. There are plans and proposals, set forth in some detail, and debate over strategy in the comparatively small scientific community focused on aging research. So arguments over whether the development of means of rejuvenation should take place at all, reserved for philosophers and futurists in the past, now have concrete consequences: tens of millions of lives and untold suffering whenever progress is delayed. It should always be feared that a society will somehow turn to block or impede research into therapies for aging - worse and more outright crimes have been committed in the past by the members of so-called civilized cultures.

One of the arguments put forward in favor of a continuation of aging and mass death is that without the threat of impending personal extinction we'd collapse into stagnation and indolence. As the argument goes, only death and an explicitly limited future gives us the incentive to get anything done, and so all progress depends upon aging to death. I state the proposition crudely, but this is the essence of the thing, flowery language or no.

This is a terribly wrong way of looking at things: it denies the existence of desire independent of need. It casts us as nothing more than some form of Skinner box, unable to act on our own. This is another example of the way in which many humans find it hard to look beyond what is to see what might be: we live in a state of enforced urgency because we are all dying, because the decades of healthy life are a time of frantic preparation for the decline and sickness that comes later. It is normal, the everyday experience, for all of us to know we are chased by a ticking clock, forced to put aside the things that we would rather do in favor of the things that we must do. We cannot pause, cannot follow dreams, cannot stop to smell the roses.

Some people seem to manage these goals, but only the lucky few - and then only by twining what they would like to do with what they must do. It's hard to achieve that end, and it is really nothing more than an ugly compromise even when obtained. Yet like so much of what we are forced into by the human condition, it is celebrated. One more way in which what is triumphs over what might be in the minds of the masses.

Given many more healthy years of life in which to do so, we would lead quite different lives. Arguably better lives, not diverted by necessity into a long series of tasks we do not want to undertake, carried out for the sake of what will come. We could follow desire rather than need: work to achieve the aims that we want to achieve, not those forced on us. Because of aging and death, we are not free while we are alive - and in any collection of slaves there are those who fear the loss of their chains. The longer they are enslaved, the less their vision of freedom. Sadly, in the mainstream of our culture, it is those voices that speak the loudest.

Source:
http://www.fightaging.org/archives/2012/10/putting-aside-what-youd-rather-do-because-youre-dying.php

Putting Aside What You’d Rather Do Because You’re Dying

Many dubious arguments are fielded in support of aging and involuntary death: every status quo, no matter how terrible, gathers its supporters. This is one of the deeper flaws inherent in human nature, the ability to mistake what is for the most desirable of what is possible. A hundred thousand deaths each and every day and the suffering of hundreds of millions is the proposal on the table whenever anyone suggests that human aging should continue as it is.

Massive campaigns of giving and social upheaval have been founded on the backs of a hundredth of this level of death and pain - but the world has a blindness when it comes to aging. Such is the power of the familiar and the long-standing: only heretics seek to overturn it, no matter how horrid and costly it is.

Nonetheless, this is an age of biotechnology in which aging might be conquered. There are plans and proposals, set forth in some detail, and debate over strategy in the comparatively small scientific community focused on aging research. So arguments over whether the development of means of rejuvenation should take place at all, reserved for philosophers and futurists in the past, now have concrete consequences: tens of millions of lives and untold suffering whenever progress is delayed. It should always be feared that a society will somehow turn to block or impede research into therapies for aging - worse and more outright crimes have been committed in the past by the members of so-called civilized cultures.

One of the arguments put forward in favor of a continuation of aging and mass death is that without the threat of impending personal extinction we'd collapse into stagnation and indolence. As the argument goes, only death and an explicitly limited future gives us the incentive to get anything done, and so all progress depends upon aging to death. I state the proposition crudely, but this is the essence of the thing, flowery language or no.

This is a terribly wrong way of looking at things: it denies the existence of desire independent of need. It casts us as nothing more than some form of Skinner box, unable to act on our own. This is another example of the way in which many humans find it hard to look beyond what is to see what might be: we live in a state of enforced urgency because we are all dying, because the decades of healthy life are a time of frantic preparation for the decline and sickness that comes later. It is normal, the everyday experience, for all of us to know we are chased by a ticking clock, forced to put aside the things that we would rather do in favor of the things that we must do. We cannot pause, cannot follow dreams, cannot stop to smell the roses.

Some people seem to manage these goals, but only the lucky few - and then only by twining what they would like to do with what they must do. It's hard to achieve that end, and it is really nothing more than an ugly compromise even when obtained. Yet like so much of what we are forced into by the human condition, it is celebrated. One more way in which what is triumphs over what might be in the minds of the masses.

Given many more healthy years of life in which to do so, we would lead quite different lives. Arguably better lives, not diverted by necessity into a long series of tasks we do not want to undertake, carried out for the sake of what will come. We could follow desire rather than need: work to achieve the aims that we want to achieve, not those forced on us. Because of aging and death, we are not free while we are alive - and in any collection of slaves there are those who fear the loss of their chains. The longer they are enslaved, the less their vision of freedom. Sadly, in the mainstream of our culture, it is those voices that speak the loudest.

Source:
http://www.fightaging.org/archives/2012/10/putting-aside-what-youd-rather-do-because-youre-dying.php

More on Young Blood and Old Mice

Some of the effects of aging are driven by signaling changes in important parts of our biochemistry - such as in stem cell niches, collections of cells that provide necessary support to the stem cells that maintain and repair tissue. Niches increasingly act to suppress the stem cells they contain in response to rising levels of cellular and other damage connected to aging. The stem cells themselves also suffer damage, and this evolved response is likely a way to minimize the risk of cancer at the cost of maintaining tissues, but the declining function of the stem cells so far seems to be far more a property of signals from the niche.

In the course of investigating this and similar effects, researchers have been moving blood between young and old mice. Transfusions and joining the bloodstreams of young and old mice are a way to change the signaling environment in order to see what the effects are. The outcome is that a range of measures of aging are reversed:

Experiments on mice have shown that it is possible to rejuvenate the brains of old animals by injecting them with blood from the young. ... blood from young mice reversed some of the effects of ageing in the older mice, improving learning and memory to a level comparable with much younger animals.

[Researchers] connected the circulatory systems of an old and young mouse so that their blood could mingle. This is a well-established technique used by scientists to study the immune system called heterochronic parabiosis. When [researchers] examined the old mouse after several days, [they] found several clear signs that the ageing process had slowed down. The number of stem cells in the brain, for example, had increased. More important, [they] found a 20% increase in connections between brain cells.

One of the main things that changes with ageing are these connections, there are a lot less of them as we get older. That is thought to underlie memory impairment - if you have less connections, neurons aren't communicating, all of a sudden you have [problems] in learning and memory. ... the young blood most likely reversed ageing by topping up levels of key chemical factors that tend to decline in the blood as animals age. Reintroduce these and [all] of a sudden you have all of these plasticity and learning and memory-related genes that are coming back.

Link: http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/oct/17/young-blood-reverse-effects-ageing

Source:
http://www.fightaging.org/archives/2012/10/more-on-young-blood-and-old-mice.php

California Stem Cell Agency Boosting Disease Team Program to $543 Million


Directors of the California stem cell
agency are set to give away $20 million next Thursday and authorize
a handsome addition to their signature disease team effort, bringing
its total to $543 million.

It is all part of the $3 billion
agency's push to develop therapies prior to running out of money for
new grants in 2017.
The $20 million is expected to go to
the first two winners in the agency's new strategic partnership
program. CIRM says the effort is aimed at
creating “incentives and processes that will: (i) enhance the
likelihood that CIRM funded projects will obtain funding for Phase
III clinical trials (e.g. follow-on financing), (ii) provide a source
of co-funding in the earlier stages of clinical development, and
(iii) enable CIRM funded projects to access expertise within
pharmaceutical and large biotechnology partners in the areas of
discovery, preclinical, regulatory, clinical trial design and
manufacturing process development.”
CIRM reviewed six applications with two winning approval. The agency's governing board is expected to ratify the decision next week. None of the applicants have been identified by the agency, which routinely withholds that information prior to
board action even when applicants have identified themselves.
Addition of a new $100 million
disease team round will come on top of the second, $213 million disease
team awards approved last this summer. The first round, awarded in
2009, totaled $230 million.  The size of the new round could be altered by CIRM directors prior to approval. Also before the board is a $40 million
proposal to expand the industry-friendly strategic partnership effort
into a second round.
The thrust of the disease team effort
is to speed the process of establishing clinical trials and to finance
efforts that might founder in what the biotech industry calls a
valley of death – a high risk financial location, so to speak,
where conventional financiers fear to tread.
The new disease team round will require
“co-funding” from applicants but the agency did not specify what
it means by the term. The matter of matching funds has become an issue in awards to StemCells, Inc., of Newark, Ca., in this summer's
disease team round.
Next week's agenda additionally
contains a plan to tighten review of proposed research budgets in
grant applications, making it clear that CIRM staff will be
negotiating such matters even after the board approves grants and
loans.
So far no researchers have testified in
public on the budget plan although it could well have a significant
impact on their future efforts.
Additional matters will discussed as
well at the meeting in Burlingame, which also has a teleconference
location in La Jolla that will be open to the public. The address
and additional material can be found on the agenda.  

Source:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/blogspot/uqpFc/~3/1gFmBSDEYCU/california-stem-cell-agency-boosting.html

BioTime Makes Bid for Geron’s Stem Cell Assets


Biotime, Inc., and two men who were
leading players in history of Geron Corp. today made a surprise,
public bid for the stem cell assets of their former firm.

Michael West
West photo
Tom Okarma
AP file photo
The men are Michael West and Thomas
Okarma
. West founded Geron in 1990 and was its first CEO. West is
now CEO of Biotime. Okarma was CEO of Geron from 1999 to 2011.
Okarma joined Biotime on Sept. 28 to lead its acquistion efforts.
Both Geron, based in Menlo Park, Ca., and Biotime, based in Alameda,
Ca., are publicly traded.
West and Okarma sent an open letter this morning to Geron shareholders and issued a press release making
a pitch for the Geron's stem cell assets. Geron jettisoned its hESC
program nearly a year ago and closed its clinical trial program for
spinal injuries. The move shocked the California stem cell agency,
which just a few months earlier had signed an agreement to loan the
firm $25 million to help fund the clinical trial. The portion of the
loan that was distributed was repaid with interest.
At the time, Geron said it would try to
sell off the hESC program, but no buyers have surfaced publicly.
Personnel in the program have been laid off or found employment
elsewhere.
The West-Okarma letter to shareholders
said that under the deal,

“Geron would transfer its stem cell
assets to BAC(a new subsidiary of Biotime headed by Okarma), in
exchange for which you along with the other Geron shareholders would
receive shares of BAC common stock representing approximately 21.4%
of the outstanding BAC capital stock. BioTime would contribute to BAC
the following assets in exchange for the balance of outstanding BAC
capital stock:

  • “$40 million in BioTime common
    shares;
  • “Warrants to purchase BioTime
    common shares (“BioTime Warrants”);
  • “Rights to certain stem cell
    assets of BioTime, and shares of two BioTime subsidiaries engaged in
    the development of therapeutic products from stem cells.”
The letter asked Geron shareholders to
write the firm's board of directors to urge them to approve the
offer.
Geron had no immediate response to the
proposal. Asked for comment, Kevin McCormack, spokesman for the
California stem cell agency, said the deal “had nothing to do with
us.” However, in the past, CIRM has indicated that it could find a
way to transfer the loan to an entity that would continue spinal
injury clinical trial. CIRM President Alan Trounson was also involved
at one point in trying to assist in a deal.
Geron's shares rose 12 cents to $1.54
today while Biotime's shares lost four cents to $3.95.
Here are links to the two news stories
that have appeared so far on the proposed deal: Associated PressMarketwatch.

Source:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/blogspot/uqpFc/~3/v1bas6eGZF0/biotime-makes-bid-for-gerons-stem-cell.html

BioTime Makes Bid for Geron's Stem Cell Assets


Biotime, Inc., and two men who were
leading players in history of Geron Corp. today made a surprise,
public bid for the stem cell assets of their former firm.

Michael West
West photo
Tom Okarma
AP file photo
The men are Michael West and Thomas
Okarma
. West founded Geron in 1990 and was its first CEO. West is
now CEO of Biotime. Okarma was CEO of Geron from 1999 to 2011.
Okarma joined Biotime on Sept. 28 to lead its acquistion efforts.
Both Geron, based in Menlo Park, Ca., and Biotime, based in Alameda,
Ca., are publicly traded.
West and Okarma sent an open letter this morning to Geron shareholders and issued a press release making
a pitch for the Geron's stem cell assets. Geron jettisoned its hESC
program nearly a year ago and closed its clinical trial program for
spinal injuries. The move shocked the California stem cell agency,
which just a few months earlier had signed an agreement to loan the
firm $25 million to help fund the clinical trial. The portion of the
loan that was distributed was repaid with interest.
At the time, Geron said it would try to
sell off the hESC program, but no buyers have surfaced publicly.
Personnel in the program have been laid off or found employment
elsewhere.
The West-Okarma letter to shareholders
said that under the deal,

“Geron would transfer its stem cell
assets to BAC(a new subsidiary of Biotime headed by Okarma), in
exchange for which you along with the other Geron shareholders would
receive shares of BAC common stock representing approximately 21.4%
of the outstanding BAC capital stock. BioTime would contribute to BAC
the following assets in exchange for the balance of outstanding BAC
capital stock:

  • “$40 million in BioTime common
    shares;
  • “Warrants to purchase BioTime
    common shares (“BioTime Warrants”);
  • “Rights to certain stem cell
    assets of BioTime, and shares of two BioTime subsidiaries engaged in
    the development of therapeutic products from stem cells.”
The letter asked Geron shareholders to
write the firm's board of directors to urge them to approve the
offer.
Geron had no immediate response to the
proposal. Asked for comment, Kevin McCormack, spokesman for the
California stem cell agency, said the deal “had nothing to do with
us.” However, in the past, CIRM has indicated that it could find a
way to transfer the loan to an entity that would continue spinal
injury clinical trial. CIRM President Alan Trounson was also involved
at one point in trying to assist in a deal.
Geron's shares rose 12 cents to $1.54
today while Biotime's shares lost four cents to $3.95.
Here are links to the two news stories
that have appeared so far on the proposed deal: Associated PressMarketwatch.

Source:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/blogspot/uqpFc/~3/v1bas6eGZF0/biotime-makes-bid-for-gerons-stem-cell.html

Los Angeles Times: StemCells, Inc., Award 'Redolent of Cronyism'


The Los Angeles Times this
morning carried a column about the “charmed relationship” between
StemCells, Inc., its “powerful friends” and the $3 billion
California stem cell agency.

The article was written by
Pulitzer prize winner and author Michael Hiltzik, who has been
critical of the agency in the past. The piece was the first in the major
mainstream media about a $20 million award to StemCells, Inc., that was approved in September by the agency's board. The bottom line of the
article? The award was “redolent of cronyism.”
Hiltzik noted that
StemCells, Inc., now ranks as the leading corporate recipient of cash
from the agency with $40 million approved during the last few months.
But he focused primarily
on September's $20 million award, which was approved despite being
rejected twice by grant reviewers – “a particularly
impressive” performance, according to Hiltzik. It was the first
time that the board has approved an award that was rejected twice by
reviewers.
Hiltzik wrote,

What was the company's
secret? StemCells says it's addressing 'a serious unmet medical need'
in Alzheimer's research. But it doesn't hurt that the company also
had powerful friends going to bat for it, including two guys who were
instrumental in getting CIRM off the ground in the first place.”

The two are Robert Klein,
who led the ballot campaign that created the agency and became its
first chairman, and Irv Weissman of Stanford, who co-founded
StemCells, Inc., and sits on its board. Weissman, an internationally
known stem cell researcher, also was an important supporter of the
campaign, raising millions of dollars and appearing in TV ads. Klein,
who left the agency last year, appeared twice before the CIRM board
this summer to lobby his former colleagues on behalf of Weissman's
company. It was Klein's first appearance before the board on behalf
of a specific application.
The Times piece continued,

But private enterprise
is new territory for CIRM, which has steered almost all its grants
thus far to nonprofit institutions. Those efforts haven't been
trouble-free: With some 90% of the agency's grants having gone to
institutions with representatives on its board, the agency has long
been vulnerable to charges of conflicts of interest. The last thing
it needed was to show a similar flaw in its dealings with private
companies too.”

Hiltzik wrote,

(Weissman) has also
been a leading beneficiary of CIRM funding, listed as the principal
researcher on three grants worth a total of $24.5 million. The agency
also contributed $43.6 million toward the construction of his
institute's glittering $200-million research building on the Stanford
campus.”

CIRM board approval of the
$20 million for StemCells, Inc., came on 7-5 vote that also required
the firm to prove that it had a promised $20 million in matching
funds prior to distribution of state cash.
Hiltzik continued,

The problem is that
StemCells doesn't have $20 million in spare funds. Its quarterly
report
 for the period ended June 30 listed about $10.4
million in liquid assets, and shows it's burning about $5 million per
quarter. Its prospects of raising significant cash from investors
are, shall we say, conjectural.

As it happens, within
days of the board's vote, the
firm downplayed
 any pledge 'to raise a specific amount of
money in a particular period of time.' The idea that CIRM 'is
requiring us to raise $20 million in matching funds' is a
'misimpression,' it said. Indeed, it suggested that it might count
its existing spending on salaries and other 'infrastructure and
overhead' as part of the match. StemCells declined my request that it
expand on its statement.
 

CIRM spokesman Kevin
McCormack
says the agency is currently scrutinizing StemCells'
finances 'to see what it is they have and whether it meets the
requirements and expectations of the board.' The goal is to set
'terms and conditions that provide maximum protection for taxpayer
dollars.' He says, 'If we can't agree on a plan, the award will
not be funded.'"

Hiltzik wrote,

The agency shouldn't be
deciding on the spot what does or doesn't qualify as matching funds.
It should have clear guidelines in advance.

Nor should the board
overturn the judgment of its scientific review panels without
clear-cut reasons....The record suggests that the handling of the
StemCells appeal was at best haphazard and at worst redolent of
cronyism.” 

Source:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/blogspot/uqpFc/~3/6qvBfSLP3RE/los-angeles-times-stemcells-inc-award.html

Los Angeles Times: StemCells, Inc., Award ‘Redolent of Cronyism’


The Los Angeles Times this
morning carried a column about the “charmed relationship” between
StemCells, Inc., its “powerful friends” and the $3 billion
California stem cell agency.

The article was written by
Pulitzer prize winner and author Michael Hiltzik, who has been
critical of the agency in the past. The piece was the first in the major
mainstream media about a $20 million award to StemCells, Inc., that was approved in September by the agency's board. The bottom line of the
article? The award was “redolent of cronyism.”
Hiltzik noted that
StemCells, Inc., now ranks as the leading corporate recipient of cash
from the agency with $40 million approved during the last few months.
But he focused primarily
on September's $20 million award, which was approved despite being
rejected twice by grant reviewers – “a particularly
impressive” performance, according to Hiltzik. It was the first
time that the board has approved an award that was rejected twice by
reviewers.
Hiltzik wrote,

What was the company's
secret? StemCells says it's addressing 'a serious unmet medical need'
in Alzheimer's research. But it doesn't hurt that the company also
had powerful friends going to bat for it, including two guys who were
instrumental in getting CIRM off the ground in the first place.”

The two are Robert Klein,
who led the ballot campaign that created the agency and became its
first chairman, and Irv Weissman of Stanford, who co-founded
StemCells, Inc., and sits on its board. Weissman, an internationally
known stem cell researcher, also was an important supporter of the
campaign, raising millions of dollars and appearing in TV ads. Klein,
who left the agency last year, appeared twice before the CIRM board
this summer to lobby his former colleagues on behalf of Weissman's
company. It was Klein's first appearance before the board on behalf
of a specific application.
The Times piece continued,

But private enterprise
is new territory for CIRM, which has steered almost all its grants
thus far to nonprofit institutions. Those efforts haven't been
trouble-free: With some 90% of the agency's grants having gone to
institutions with representatives on its board, the agency has long
been vulnerable to charges of conflicts of interest. The last thing
it needed was to show a similar flaw in its dealings with private
companies too.”

Hiltzik wrote,

(Weissman) has also
been a leading beneficiary of CIRM funding, listed as the principal
researcher on three grants worth a total of $24.5 million. The agency
also contributed $43.6 million toward the construction of his
institute's glittering $200-million research building on the Stanford
campus.”

CIRM board approval of the
$20 million for StemCells, Inc., came on 7-5 vote that also required
the firm to prove that it had a promised $20 million in matching
funds prior to distribution of state cash.
Hiltzik continued,

The problem is that
StemCells doesn't have $20 million in spare funds. Its quarterly
report
 for the period ended June 30 listed about $10.4
million in liquid assets, and shows it's burning about $5 million per
quarter. Its prospects of raising significant cash from investors
are, shall we say, conjectural.

As it happens, within
days of the board's vote, the
firm downplayed
 any pledge 'to raise a specific amount of
money in a particular period of time.' The idea that CIRM 'is
requiring us to raise $20 million in matching funds' is a
'misimpression,' it said. Indeed, it suggested that it might count
its existing spending on salaries and other 'infrastructure and
overhead' as part of the match. StemCells declined my request that it
expand on its statement.
 

CIRM spokesman Kevin
McCormack
says the agency is currently scrutinizing StemCells'
finances 'to see what it is they have and whether it meets the
requirements and expectations of the board.' The goal is to set
'terms and conditions that provide maximum protection for taxpayer
dollars.' He says, 'If we can't agree on a plan, the award will
not be funded.'"

Hiltzik wrote,

The agency shouldn't be
deciding on the spot what does or doesn't qualify as matching funds.
It should have clear guidelines in advance.

Nor should the board
overturn the judgment of its scientific review panels without
clear-cut reasons....The record suggests that the handling of the
StemCells appeal was at best haphazard and at worst redolent of
cronyism.” 

Source:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/blogspot/uqpFc/~3/6qvBfSLP3RE/los-angeles-times-stemcells-inc-award.html

Researcher Alert: Stem Cell Agency to Take Up Grant Appeal Restrictions


The move by the $3 billion California
stem cell agency to curtail its free-wheeling grant appeal process
will undergo its first public hearing next week.

The proposals will mean that scientists
whose applications are rejected by reviewers will have fewer avenues
to pursue to overturn those decisions. The changes could take effect
as early as next year.
The move comes in the wake of a record
number of appeals this summer that left the board complaining about
“arm-twisting,” lobbying and “emotionally charged presentations.”
Among other things, the new "guidelines" attempt to define
criteria for re-review – “additional analysis” – of
applications involved in appeals, also called “extraordinary
petitions.” The plan states that re-review should occur only in
the case of a material dispute of fact or material new information.
(See the end of this item for agency's proposed definitions.)
In addition to alterations in the
appeal process, the CIRM directors' Application Review Task Force
will take up questions involving “ex parte communications.” The
agenda for the Oct. 24 meeting did not contain any additional
information on the issue but it likely deals with lobbying efforts on
grants outside of public meetings of the agency. We understand that
such efforts surfaced last summer involving the $$214 million disease
team round and Robert Klein, the former chairman of the stem cell
agency.
Klein appeared twice publicly before
the board on one, $20 million application by StemCells, Inc., the
first time a former governing board member has publicly lobbied his former
colleagues on an application. The application was rejected twice by reviewers – once
on the initial review and again later on a re-review – but it was
ultimately approved by directors in September on a 7-5 vote.
The board has long been troubled with
its appeal process but last summer's events brought the matter to a
new head. The issue is difficult to deal with because state law
allows anyone to address the CIRM governing board on any subject when
it meets. That includes applicants who can ask the board to approve
grants for any reason whatsoever, not withstanding CIRM rules. The board can also approve a grant
for virtually any reason although it has generally relied on
scientific scores from reviewers.
The proposals to restrict appeals are
designed to make it clear to scientists whose applications are
rejected by reviewers that the board is not going to look with favor
on those who depart from the normal appeals procedure.
While the board almost never has
overturned a positive decision by reviewers, in nearly every round it  approves some applications that have been rejected by reviewers. That has
occurred as the result of appeals and as the result of motions by
board members that did not result from public appeals.
Ten of the 29 board members are classified as patient advocates and often feel they must advance the cause of the
diseases that they have been involved with. Sometimes that means
seeking approval of applications with low scientific scores.
Here is how agency proposes to define
“material dispute of fact:”

“A material dispute of fact should
meet five criteria:(1) An applicant disputes the accuracy of a
statement in the review summary;(2) the disputed fact was significant
in the scoring or recommendation of the GWG(grant review group); (3) the dispute pertains
to an objectively verifiable fact, rather than a matter of scientific
judgment or opinion;(4) the discrepancy was not addressed through the
Supplemental Information Process and cannot be resolved at the
meeting at which the application is being considered; and
(5) resolution of the dispute could affect the outcome of the board’s
funding decision."

Here is how the agency proposes to
define “material new information:”

“New information should: (1)be
verifiable through external sources; (2) have arisen since the
Grants Working Group(grant review group) meeting at which the application
was considered; (3) respond directly to a specific criticism or
question identified in the Grants Working Group’s review; and (4)
be submitted as part of an extraordinary petition filed five business
days before the board meeting at which the application is
being considered."

Next week's hearing is scheduled for
Children's Hospital in Oakland with a teleconference location at UC
Irvine
. Addresses can be found on the agenda.

Source:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/blogspot/uqpFc/~3/6sbxGqQJ77Y/researcher-alert-stem-cell-agency-to.html

"We can take care of you better if you understand your disease" – Cleveland Clinic’s project for visual learners

In this White Board Series, Cleveland Clinic cardiothoracic surgeon Eric Roselli, MD, takes us on a tour of the heart that simply illustrates complex problems so everyone can understand. He says, "We can take care of you better if you understand your disease", and I could not agree more. The videos are below:

Posted at Clinical Cases and Images. Stay updated and subscribe, follow us on Twitter and connect on Facebook.


Source:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/CasesBlog/~3/_hIDX8xlMd4/we-can-take-care-of-you-better-if-you.html

Gout – Patrick’s story – NHS video

From NHS Choices YouTube channel: Patrick, 54, was diagnosed with gout (a form of arthritis) 22 years ago. He describes the symptoms, treatment options and how he learned to live with the condition:

Here is a list of some of the new drugs for an old disease (gout):

Febuxostat is a non-purine-analogue inhibitor of xanthine oxidase that opened a new era in the treatment of gout.

Modified uricases

The use of modified uricases to rapidly reduce serum urate concentrations in patients with otherwise untreatable gout is progressing. Pegloticase, a pegylated uricase, is in development.

JAMA update, 08/2011: New Treatment Offers Hope for Patients With Severe Gout: pegloticase (Krystexxa) costs $2,500 per dose (http://goo.gl/gz9sO).

Drugs in development

Transport of uric acid in the renal proximal tubule and the inflammatory response to monosodium urate crystals (shown above) are targets for potential new treatments.

Several pipeline drugs for gout related to the targets above include:

- selective uricosuric drug RDEA594

- various interleukin-1 inhibitors. Canakinumab (trade name Ilaris) is a human monoclonal antibody targeted at interleukin-1 beta. It was rejected by the FDA panel in June 2011.

References:

Gout therapeutics: new drugs for an old disease. The Lancet, Volume 377, Issue 9760, Pages 165 - 177, 8 January 2011.
Diuretics, beta-blockers, ACEi, non-losartan ARBs associated with increased risk of gout vs. CCB lower risk. BMJ, 2012.
With FDA Approval, a Gout Drug Now Costs $5 Instead of Pennies - WSJ, 2011.
FDA Panel Rejects Gout Drug Canakinumab on Safety Concerns http://goo.gl/lO9uy
The strange story that links gout with the birth of the cocktail drinks. Lancet, 2012.

Comments from Twitter:

francis berenbaum @Larhumato: Gout explained by a patient. Very informative for medical students.

Posted at Clinical Cases and Images. Stay updated and subscribe, follow us on Twitter and connect on Facebook.


Source:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/CasesBlog/~3/uP_EGE55sT0/gout-patricks-story-nhs-video.html

2p or not 2p: that is the title…

…of a recent paper from the RSC’s Analyst, followed by the tagline ‘tuppence-based SERS for the detection of illicit materials’.

In the paper, scientists from Manchester explain how they used a UK two pence piece (a.k.a. tuppence) to do some drug detection work!

Royston Goodacre and team from University of Manchester altered the surface of a copper two pence piece with silver to make it suitable for the vibrational spectroscopic technique surface-enhanced Raman scattering (SERS), which they then used to differentiate between the drugs: 4-methylmethcathinone (mephedrone), 5,6-methylenedioxy-2-aminoindane (MDAI) and 3,4-methylenedioxy-N-methylamphetamine (MDMA).

The team made up methanolic solutions of the drugs, soaked the coins in the solutions (the drugs bind to the rough surface) before running SERS on it.

SERS usually works on thin roughened films, but the team says that these are expensive, with the most complex needing specialist equipment to prepare. Their aim in this case was to find a substrate that was cheap and accessible, providing a robust surface that can be used by non-specialists.

US coins have been used for SERS recently to detect melamine in infant formula, but the elemental composition differs from UK coins, say the researchers. It’s this difference in metallic composition that can affect the morphology of deposited silver and SERS enhancement, they add. So, finding the right coin can be tricky. And the team was restricted to pre-1992 coins as these contain 97% copper, unlike the post-1992 coins that are composed of copper-plated steel.

Well, that’s one thing I never thought of doing with my loose change!

Elinor Hughes

Digg This  Reddit This  Stumble Now!  Share on Facebook  Bookmark this on Delicious  Share on LinkedIn  Bookmark this on Technorati  Post on Twitter  Google Buzz (aka. Google Reader)  

Source:
http://prospect.rsc.org/blogs/cw/2012/10/17/2p-or-not-2p-that-is-the-title/