Islands in the sun at Jerusalem Design Week – ISRAEL21c

The sixth annual Jerusalem Design Weekwill take place June 8 to 15, 2017, across multiple venues in Jerusalems Talbiyeh neighborhood.

More than 150 Israeli and international designers will participate in 40 exhibitions and projects set up in Hansen House Center for Design, Media and Technology; the Natural History Museum; the Museum of Islamic Art; and the Bezeq telephone companys large industrial complex. Popup coffee shops and picnic areas will be opened at all the venues.

Public exhibitions, street performances, music and live shows will kick off Jerusalem Design Week on the evening of June 8, between 7:30 and 11. On Saturday, a childrens island will open on the lawn of Hansen House, where Hakaron Theater will lead workshops and family activities.

Hansen House photo via Facebook

The main exhibition at Bezeq, Islands, explores Jerusalems social, cultural and political role in light of the Western worlds isolationist trend that conflicts with the utopian concept of the global village.

The 40 works in the Islands exhibit were created by five Israeli designers teamed up with five designers from Europe.

For example, Jonathan Hope and Peter Orntoft made a 3D model of a glacier in Antarctica that is separating from the mainland and transforming into an island. Erez Nabi Pena and Marlne Huissoud created a string wall that is dipped in wax and lights up momentarily, meant to evoke walls around the world.

A Fashion Design Island will include a huge wardrobe installation with about 100 different versions of a jacket, some of which will be worn by participants in Design Week, and some for visitors to try on.

Itai Ohalys Product Design Island will function as a dynamic interactive display space where new objects will be created for visitors to Jerusalem Design Week. Photo: courtesy

Hadassah College Jerusalem will present Cultural Islands: Local Interpretation of the Tree Cultures of Japan, Africa and the United States, focusing on woodworking techniques common in those areas.

Every evening at Hansen Cinema, international design films will be screened alongside local films. In the attic of Hansen House, a popup store will offer event-themed merchandise and a selection of products from the participating designers.

This crayon carpet made by the Dutch Mu Gallery in Eindhoven with the Jerusalem Grotesca Studio, is on display at Jerusalem Design Week. Photo by Boudewijn Bollmann

The Jerusalem Design Cooperative encompassing eight local designers from the disciplines of illustration, industrial design, ceramics, glass, textiles and fashion will change and redesign the appearance of local storefronts along Aza Street during the week of the show.

In conjunction with Jerusalem Design Week, special design tours are planned at the Israel Museum and Museum of Islamic Art.

Jerusalem Design Week is the flagship project of the Hansen House and is made possible by the Jerusalem Development Authority in cooperation with the Jerusalem Ministry of Affairs & Heritage and Jerusalem Municipality.

An information and visitor center will be set up at Hansen House, 14 Gedalyah Alon Street.

For more information, click here.

Read the rest here:

Islands in the sun at Jerusalem Design Week - ISRAEL21c

Indonesia is Counting All of Its Islands to Make Sure It Hasn’t … – Newsweek

Indonesia can boast that it is the worlds largest archipelago, but when it gets down to the numbers, details are a little vague.Its estimated to have 17,508 islands, of which around 8,000 are inhabited but no-one knows for sure, so this year the Southeast Asian nation that stretches to 300 miles off the coast of northern Australia has set out to count them all.

The goal is to register Indonesias islands with the U.N., which will guarantee protection for inhabitants living on the smaller islands. Indonesias aim is to secure territory and resources to support a rapidly-growing population. But as the worlds seventh largest country by sea and land mass, Jakarta, Indonesias capital, has its work cut out.

As competition for territory across the region ratchets up, Indonesia has decided its high time to figure out just how many islands fall under its sovereignty.

Subscribe to Newsweek from $1 per week

Its not so easy. It can take up to six days to get to some of these faraway islands and then many people disagree on the name. Traditionally, it might have been called X but the people who live there call it Y and the nearby fishermen call it Z. Brahmantya Satyamurti Poerwadi, head of the spatial management department at the Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries, told the FT.

If an island is named by two locals then its name can be recognized officially, according to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (Unclos).

Indonesia is a nation of more than 300 languages and tribes, providing a challenge for a cohesive, centralized government to manage. Some islands in the archipelago have sunk or disappeared over time, while others have been gifted to neighbors: During a territorial dispute in 2002 Indonesia gave Malaysia two islands.

Cataloging islands would help prevent future conflicts over land in an increasingly tense maritime region. The survey will be carried out for the remainder of 2017.

Follow this link:

Indonesia is Counting All of Its Islands to Make Sure It Hasn't ... - Newsweek

Researchers develop new EcoCity model for mitigating urban heat islands – Phys.Org

June 7, 2017 The structure of the EcoCity model. Credit: Dr. KUANG Wenhui

Urban land-use/cover changes and their effects on the eco-environment have long been an active research topic in the urbanization field. Prof. KUANG Wenhui's group at the Chinese Academy of Sciences has developed the EcoCity model for regulating urban land cover structures and thermal environments, and has established eco-regulation thresholds for urban surface thermal environments.

This research has shown that the difference in thermal environments among urban functional areas is closely related to the proportion of land-cover components. This work was published in Science China Earth Sciences.

The EcoCity model is based on the multidisciplinary integration of urban geography, urban climatology and urban ecology. The model is closely linked to "spatial location theory" in urban geography, "radiation and energy balance" in urban climatology, and provided the parameterization program for regulating land-cover components and thermal environment in urban planning and management application.

The EcoCity model can simulate the future urban expansion under different scenarios and predict the proportions of urban impervious surface areas and greenness, and the induced urban heat island effect. The core function of this model is spatially explicated information acquisition, including the proportion of impervious surface areas in different functional zones, the intensity of the urban heat island, and the indexes of human comfort.

The results provide fundamental data for regulating the impervious surface ratios in different functional zones and supporting urban heat island mitigation in future urban expansion.

Using Beijing as a study area, the researchers found significantly different surface temperatures in different functional zones, especially between urban impervious surfaces and green space. What's more, the temperatures in various surface covers were different.

"The difference in thermal environments among various urban functional zones is closely related to the composition of major land covers," said Prof. KUANG.

"The analysis of ecological thresholds of impervious surfaces and green space within various functional zones shows their different roles in thermal regulation effects. The urban-rural frontier and urban interior structure are characterized by high dynamics, structural complexity, and land-cover mosaics, resulting in challenges in obtaining accurate results for urban land cover components."

The EcoCity model and associated high-precision data and map products have been applied in different fields such as environmental protection, urban planning, and earthquake recovery.

Explore further: New Hampshire leads nation in percent tree cover

More information: WenHui Kuang et al, An EcoCity model for regulating urban land cover structure and thermal environment: Taking Beijing as an example, Science China Earth Sciences (2017). DOI: 10.1007/s11430-016-9032-9

Tree cover in the nation's Lower 48 states covers 659 million acres, more than one-third of the nation, according to a U.S. Forest Service study of national tree cover and impervious surfaces. New Hampshire leads the nation ...

(HealthDay)The prevalence of arthritis is 31.8 percent in the most rural areas and 20.5 percent in the most urban areas of the United States, according to research published in the May 26 issue of the U.S. Centers for ...

Researchers in the Singapore-ETH Centre's Future Cities Laboratory developed a method to quantify ecosystem services of street trees. Using nearly 100,000 images from Google Street View, the study helps further understanding ...

Scientists from Macao Polytechnic Institute are pioneers in exploring urban temperature in Hong Kong using seasonal econometric models. In particular, the characterization of the urban temperature trend was investigated using ...

A new study of native bumblebee populations in southeastern Michigan cities found, surprisingly, that Detroit has more of the large-bodied bees than some surrounding, less urbanized locations.

A heads-up to New York, Baltimore, Houston and Miami: a new study suggests that these metropolitan areas and others will increase their exposure to floods even in the absence of climate change, according to researchers from ...

Rising seas are making flooding more common in coastal areas around the country. Now, a new study finds that sea-level rise will boost the occurrence of moderate rather than severe flooding in some regions of the United States, ...

India is now two and a half times more likely to experience a deadly heat wave than a half century ago, and all it took was an increase in the average temperature of just 0.5 degrees Celsius (less than 1 degree Fahrenheit), ...

Using seismic data and supercomputers, Rice University geophysicists have conducted a massive seismic CT scan of the upper mantle beneath the Tibetan Plateau and concluded that the southern half of the "Roof of the World" ...

Scientists at The Australian National University (ANU) have found that independent estimates from geology and biology agree on the timing of the breakup of the Pangaea supercontinent into today's continents.

Offshore wind turbines built according to current standards may not be able to withstand the powerful gusts of a Category 5 hurricane, creating potential risk for any such turbines built in hurricane-prone areas, new University ...

Scientists at The University of Texas Institute for Geophysics (UTIG) have found that a devastating combination of global warming and El Nio is responsible for causing extreme temperatures in April 2016 in Southeast Asia.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Read more from the original source:

Researchers develop new EcoCity model for mitigating urban heat islands - Phys.Org

The Science Behind the Discovery of the Oldest Homo Sapien – Smithsonian

According to the textbooks, all humans living today descended from a population that lived in east Africa around 200,000 years ago. This is based on reliable evidence, including genetic analyses of people from around the globe and fossil finds from Ethiopia of human-like skeletal remains from 195,000165,000 years ago.

Now a large scientific team that I was part of has discovered new fossil bones and stone tools that challenge this view. The new studies,published in Nature, push back the origins of our species by 100,000 years and suggest that early humans likely spanned across most of the African continent at the time.

Across the globe and throughout history, humans have been interested in understanding their originsboth biological and cultural. Archaeological excavations and the artefacts they recover shed light on complex behaviourssuch as tool making, symbolically burying the dead or making art. When it comes to understanding our biological origins, there are two primary sources of evidence: fossil bones and teeth. More recently, ancient genetic material such as DNA is also offering important insights.

The findings come from the Moroccan site ofJebel Irhoud, which has been well known since the 1960s for its human fossils and sophisticated stone tools. However, the interpretation of the Irhoud fossils has long been complicated by persistent uncertainties surrounding their geological age. In 2004, evolutionary anthropologistsJean-Jacques Hublin andAbdelouahed Ben-Ncerbegan a new excavation project there. They recovered stone tools and newHomo sapiensfossils from at least five individualsprimarily pieces of skull, jaw, teeth and some limb bones.

To provide a precise date for these finds, geochronologists on the team used athermoluminescence dating methodon the stone tools found at the site. When ancient tools are buried, radiation begins to accumulate from the surrounding sediments. Whey they are heated, this radiation is removed. We can therefore measure accumulated radiation to determine how long ago the tools were buried. This analysis indicated that the tools were about 315,000 years old, give or take 34,000 years.

Researchers also appliedelectron spin resonance dating, which is a similar technique but in this case the measurements are made on teeth. Using data on the radiation dose, the age of one tooth in one of the human jaws was estimated to be 286,000 years old, with a margin of error of 32,000 years. Taken together, these methods indicate thatHomo Sapiensmodern humanslived in the far northwestern corner of the African continent much earlier than previously known.

But how can one be sure that these fossils belonged to a member of our species rather than some older ancestor? To address this question, the anatomists on the team used high-resolutioncomputed tomography(CAT scans) to produce detailed digital copies of the precious and fragile fossils.

They then used virtual techniques to reconstruct the face, brain case and lower jaw of this groupand applied sophisticated measurement techniques to determine that these fossils possessed modern human-like facial morphology. In this way, they could be distinguished from all other fossil human species known to be in Africa at the time.

The high-resolution scans were also used to analyse hidden structures within the tooth crowns, as well as the size and shape of the tooth roots hidden within the jaws. These analyses, which were the focus of my contribution, revealed a number of dental characteristics that are similar to other early fossil modern humans.

And although more primitive than the teeth of modern humans today, they are indeed clearly different from, for example,Homo heidelbergensisandHomo neanderthalensis. The discovery and scientific analyses confirm the importance of Jebel Irhoud as the oldest site documenting an early stage of the origin of our species.

**********

As a palaeoanthropologist who focuses on the study of fossil bones and teeth, I am often asked why we dont simply address thesequestions of human origins using genetic analyses. There are two main reasons for this. Although incredibly exciting advances have been made in the recovery and analysis of genetic material from fossils that are several hundreds of thousands of years old, it seems that this is only likely to be possible under particular (and unfortunately rare) conditions of burial and fossilisation, such as a low and stable temperature.

That means there are fossils we may never be able to get genetic data from and we must rely on analyses of their morphology, as we do for other very interesting questions related to the earliest periods of human evolutionary history.

Also, understanding the genetic basis of our anatomy only tells us a small part of what it means to be human. Understanding, for example, how behaviour during our lives can alter the external and internal structure of hand bones can help reveal how we used our hands to make tools. Similarly, measuring the chemical composition and the cellular structure of our teeth can tell us what we were eating and our rate of development during childhood. It is these types of factors that help us really understand in what ways you and I are both similar and different to the first members of our species.

And of course, we should not forget that it is the archaeological record that is identifying when we started to make art, adorn our bodies with jewellery, make sophisticated tools and access a diverse range of plant and animal resources. There have been some intriguing suggestions that human species even older thanHomo sapiensmay have displayed some of these amazing behaviours.

More such research will reveal how unique we actually are in the evolutionary history of our lineage. So lets encourage a new generation of young scientists to go in search of new fossils and archaeological discoveries that will finally help us crack the puzzle of human evolution once and for all.

Matthew Skinner, Senior Lecturer in Evolutionary Anthropology, University of Kent

Like this article? SIGN UP for our newsletter

Here is the original post:

The Science Behind the Discovery of the Oldest Homo Sapien - Smithsonian

Biology Prof: Trump Presidency Is So Traumatic It Will Change Human Genome Forever – Heat Street

A biology professor has claimed that the mass trauma of Donald Trumps presidency will bring about permanent changes to the human genome.

Peter Ward, an academic at the University of Washington, predicted an evolutionary consequence because of the stress Trumps term in the White House is causing the American population.

He asserted that the process by which human genetics could change is analogous to post-traumatic stress disorder in soldiers or the the victims of domestic abuse.

The unconventional view came in a discussion of human capacity to mutate with the science blog (andGawker offshott)Gizmodo.

Ward was one of seven academics asked to bring their expertise to bear on the question of whether and how X-Men-stylesuperhuman mutants could develop.

After speculating about using gene therapy to develop super-soldiers, Ward went on to posit that permanent genetic changes canoccur as a result of horrendous episodes people go through.

He was not asked about Trump, but brought him up as an example, alongside combat trauma and violence at home:

Were finding more and more that, for instance, people who have gone through combat, or women who have been abusedwhen you have these horrendous episodes in life, it causes permanent change, which is then passed on to your kids. These are actual genetic shifts that are taking place within people. Its called epigenetics, and that too can cause huge evolutionary change.

On a larger scale, the amount of stress that Americans are going through now, because of Trumpthere is going to be an evolutionary consequence.

Go here to read the rest:

Biology Prof: Trump Presidency Is So Traumatic It Will Change Human Genome Forever - Heat Street

Crispr May Cure All Genetic DiseaseOne Day – WIRED

vF7_c[$e53~IzdDJfb5qs;+9nHDY32 _U=7|]Gs!;KR$[t]gG.9AHwtWW7*Qwwwi/ {7(Q$xUsUhU+N+hPmj;n^H t'Gt*Xyz(9J{$w<'AUz*O$oD{%?~_i}Q~~%%;><2G2(Q)[v %T%O^eBkK^~LOO G ;'}OO#u]}"O#oJ3`$$>7kq!i~4 X8M+[{^Y='%GmB(r`!Fd7"aIY%u#iv??[hl6;ik[veM:xVj|>LIF)5%wf/(Sw2{m91)Zo+ysY)Gh-Adz>? e_/mmGCtIadok))3V<*zSugun;_|]/d S}*zB"E~<_W3}{zNp{3QrH"huGI=}4^"pF}s "TGqpHkBpL=QnGxW%~ZjyDt[{Cw~'/FmZ>3h0(y<&Vn3Kz-GIW}{M S={?wJ~^#yT?jTmIi^]JnBsWKJt==;<[~P 5?|{WH_.J#~np*?~XymkFK m)hz?l_9lD+d%NP;{{KLG(;k}tMDdc;wD_"w/G{NeL&J .0*Ulw/[H{`o~T?Oz3 ? }Q6Px/m ^kl:}KGQ(7}j="%s!<9M!Y7WX fO[_so2/"TObOM*kj5$+^4D(m2CY|$8yZxp*4;_ #Vm|"@H:{7{U&&K ?,N95dG3zZeg ;3:.qHVsu,._wk5[553{k`;H'::/xb=RzVOHo#l~xF+<=.}>b-)u;#!6Mreb`oron&4voy/566E31qrO4zI5HAf Va^l}'.|{Eprnzc3$:8WuM5V}W(-wFE}jns>N-/)F>j+4!jWwFkD`wh%p"xKW"`X yrj[*9`r256bt?3%q78(<0cq1;5reM?n}>m;lI+a94.zy28jI~y9JxB%.ENBg"qXnWex1gPOF$cB!021@+dO=}Fam|AZwic@>$B%@z0U&vhVKk3*x-%y+qZA>ud(!f%6#r7su K9`O*K,:CF1 {a*w3#_QG~%n@k- RNVdl3.O _x_I,hJdCtd?QYDLbv^6'KRM-;5|}C7jc}b#.kz5SECZ>gHCfMM<}MC2ApgB(Og :)E*5]sD'~D@ ">=JE=X}NtP8_"sYBp)8`x`k4'[cC28Oui-'||1^.y)$t R2Unbr(hg-OrF:(GiJm G24zCs)oe7$icG%2ZB8Y"qcoX-t5I1Wu%F-]y jZK+Oh2^G^8b Tkf/I UkqFwloR4X&%v`LiVcc%:8Q I'I7GB'!/^u,Fo#v~"8yF ~:TTy2q-Hg}:t|'#}vo"n2qh=A[qRJ#% )((84YEY"" Ngek$OYMVimQ; &%DboH) rrocE{r{4uM'zA%HEq:`Nzy*y`hKlB/aB~r 1RWiMYL$|::/8AI%9Tm2>"qpF>kXgS`=x.gx(Tk:^!b:<[MdGae.?3 PzZXc5&|rki@h] @K1vw!0U$^8,DwOfr89[e8^_%z9=]%'9gn)>:O`6t\[NEd3~K<+zn5f}!'DC>"}T:s9bGN%2t;H`: -%}[2Tz>V.gGdP#x%ZwGqh3M0Xyg&GA *U:(zKhD|i9b_ZvIn^A#=bZ6|@+Xd0 {HCl.I=m*b}a6eLdqDloNW 2bkL& RT.[>9S]qsP H-x7OEq?X&.w%)Q't.2QJlTT@)Xs7nm#S4/[c5T]6EN3FAm@EF7(d6bB?(3}D!/"dmm4Xu>&{% /n~Msy46 T@N1QB[+p~H~:oSrMeKKLE D=WUcAc msUi! co t-pT*y}q$DTJn)h`8)wz8h40y?8}Z:8ij#wi?)u= v%e_A+?((TPYRt@$R^<*>@kq}qM&d,4 g1B^d`'[afl](;]!a#|kmJ[fXm_4iAjD)aqd8anaQquM}%NK)Vo`LZZXbjjA8'Y Ub*q,x f<;cqsp1A_j-y})EQqA4*C,D}$.17(e7^G XRuo6}oOdHGNz$Ww ['LJ:YK1ih]~kw6p<'FV?4uWO}1}j&g2S*?39{2LkL1whH.AN$.n?DleR6vory_.5X7M#TL8ArCiGHF|$L &>dBrue67s 4{8UT2D2fuU+ U3?'&7G>YZVg-/98-*m?&?Mc7Ud>1W7Iy$ co3g{,]ppeCyq%9z1MKt T+ 3Qy zH8BTv/FsEN6G @kra[,pwG_ sV9.U(qujg2UK>7:O3Yo|%_ ~s< zgz/2*ieqHu7jRg$e&&bY}5@H.bP*qI$;sRLwT)Vey[VX`i29e@ekT2ds0Gz4e ^Hg$AKgtb{N!#b^cM{0hQl}%pn]UK.L 9zsp4Th{d`LP44 @9IfsE){_z,LP>ajP3uLOQ)dUId2}uF+,MTksU:+LCf|0e&+&8eK>)A+msef):wEF+(`M2M] l&4`C ^n)]K^7%EA%.JI&`)Y,8Af"P(lqI#)h{|'dz8#} GwDf+dq~c~ 1&f~7SvHJNH b4WCjztQ7}PU%:w|ZVtnMvM/fMe?h ~2=S"QN~w`7?A=(UYXo5K :6PfyS1m@53v/JyI]>#.I~:"Icw?S5GSt`oJFPrZ$|KEhW;z~mD.E6GZst6jM`vpC>uSCv8& %ws? M; <:L7&@d6d^I&oc^yFptFmrg>"ft7N8/h$ ~ KV%!sI$4sQ|jt*9]adQz>zO3=xb_f65 tb>FOK?,Cx(;EL# '~CJA?$8SS814WAp_P3cSHt3N9*TO{&mPBW(Zxy #~?,s/$TQ{pgy^DQ?I8WwkwG#6G%L}3R[q%,!5%d 3X8:''^=r^M&y vp%- r; `b4p8_N 7Y }X0u10y ,$aEhf/P=hC.)tG adNc[=A6>Or$~:0T0K!I/{F4hMZhXN&Gl,Lf4% <31B*Z"6b-@H1,uMv41-Bqs3*E oTX8x+@MMrWJ> ^.X=lDS_+BhNdkpAE$s8]BMVOJWb`e|ck}dAY.e{pm,6ay6b"2YLA_dcw+mVW0Wb|B^&h;YImyB|V#S+ ~ M8rXUrQu:p&BN 3mn6_LS#W(meuJ5f' Xt;^.I7LW|zgxpgJ@?GycO 6*74^}p`noRJ_Z

<'i4PG_k1&' &[( { ss|0um bx]_LA@npHDS#2$x0*V Gi:9B1v:]u4Z9:&C B E -EzgnECoh'?rx!`RY~ksOdwMGyAUB2 ^#1rid65`,_/*Ah_qqBF$~R 9DKPR8mlvu(Mm"mE9C@Be<0e3^_HQ& ;v 1-Df-4&OyrZ qXK L/~G8$m/G)AiBR8ZC^yoCXmV,iiw~:m!Stbg4`q:T Y, k325pf7$aLzEV9JyJE$# {$PY6O*Il{(NXL.Ww"b,,vzFJTl|]0#u,.k.-[JS09bnkoOL}h"h~f4o&r 3gVC"BKeD*i.Zg!Sg}qJ.}m$m$'D|':ouq''u.kz0y# p/Ls ;A>@CI+p!F(.[3Ch}mT6mlSWQ s(E6q.OR=0jzC]8]9t@F|yEu`W-Z(-aYf6,fG=vv=wb+x@BUG4CfDA$^B*0)+~O[C0|H duGi De?' ~KH!Bs.T (a{ip#~<@N0*O0u[zgWmn^d=U *k8?rO&p&NC#$-5QK.pu~b#(ZBzO%XT*$6I>,$Ba[Dgg0lfMw@VC{o0_Z#?}"9mv#2+9XD8N#mRFJrlj]z'HrE[HxcD27n?8{@8!4F6~8"'TBX]BLcEm8bHH=5O=y: D Ak0j@kh$I(AU0uAQ1R IiR8qmiSR1v0`V@hN"XY8GO_:DqvO&N rVgD*l,PI1uW@jHL3;@M+Q4HXzR8@Oy_Z*P7C1&^OSB!S FExbb*P)L`JjZHHC "TL3xM#S.ORg^f:c^xl>{|L&224!, gO:q _j`RkCc`aTs,&X*F,'>b,e3IqaN8RL>K;Cr`,J PgZJdH0nQGj([ B"$N2"V>76*iiuiT3l/dxE=y~94+"G3Q,e1hEpS@(w-LRw< g|Y% 74En)~y EfE+1b.}?_oyO^`Ux}s`jbw,ZoZK'[<`zP&yv3)$(&ap.qec }}8jqy>1A+W40pO4~'q^*nTv}wl27?0G,K0vMhmu^}C@vcag+H1> LxI?Pw)*oIJ>saFmsh >I`tAStK@LQ!J{sA@82Sr*`nQfi|0VG-a^)uiz^#y/J Cc=: AYPO i,"%=`+Y #uhtmi*}& X>$$IG*4MxIK-#Rt{'Q)eLRO163bh;vFJ2( j6/{D$T]1qMX pv$gbR" GA:7 9h`AJ`/%`HH5(#Z {t ?j* h6=%"-+rjr>9=I& lk?{5:@F:g]}8r/=J0 X kc4N:OP4L6RmHrLU43,'PfJL _<7Ukb:{yY]01~1-qa>}iJ%I4riis2JUdi6)B{NM/{: kRAD>1pQpEDcK,4b&,I&}4q4Z1D;8#sg0`n.2GZnK'V^iH~,XkUs$0L]m|%A

Read this article:

Crispr May Cure All Genetic DiseaseOne Day - WIRED

Lab-grown organoids hold promise for patient treatments – Medical Xpress

June 7, 2017 by Claire Conway Zev Gartner is growing breast organoids with precise ratios of normal and tumor cells (shown at left) to understand how cell-cell interactions contribute to tumor growth. Credit: Photo by Elisabeth Fall, Cell Image by Gartner Lab

Ophir Klein is growing teeth, which is just slightly less odd than what Jeffrey Bush is growing tissues that make up the face. Jason Pomerantz is growing muscle; Sarah Knox is growing salivary glands; and Edward Hsiao is printing 3-D bone using a machine that looks about as complex as a clock radio.

Together, these members of the UC San Francisco faculty are cultivating organs of the craniofacial complex the skull and face which too often go terribly wrong during fetal development. Deformities of these bones or soft tissues, the most common of birth defects, can cut life short by blocking the airway or circulation. Or they can disfigure a face so profoundly that a child struggles to see, hear, or talk. Perhaps most painful of all, such deformities render children physically other, potentially leading to a lifetime of corrective surgeries and social isolation.

As director of the UCSF Program in Craniofacial Biology, Klein orchestrates a multisite research endeavor to translate basic science findings in tissue regeneration into improved treatments for these kids. Using stem cells from patients with craniofacial deformities, Klein, Bush, Pomerantz, Knox, Hsiao, and their colleagues are growing tiny functioning segments of organs, called organoids, to figure out exactly when and how in fetal development such design flaws occur.

They are among scientists across UCSF who are cultivating cellular systems such as miniature brains and breasts from patient cells. They serve as dioramas of disease models derived from human cells either displacing or complementing the mouse models that have served science well, though inexactly, for many years. The effort is one of the most obvious and viable payoffs to date from stem cell science. With these organoids, physicians and scientists can not only trace the pathways of normal and abnormal development, but also test drugs and other treatments for their effectiveness in humans. Organoids are also one tiny step toward the ultimate goal of generating complete organs, as a way to circumvent rejection issues and save the lives of those who now die waiting for transplants.

As the reservoirs of human development, stem cells take it upon themselves to tirelessly renew and differentiate into the myriad cell types required to build out a body from an embryo. In creating an organoid, typical construction metaphors do not apply. There are no building blocks to nail, stack, or solder and no job-site supervisor barking orders. "That's not how biology works," says Zev Gartner, PhD, an associate professor of pharmaceutical chemistry.

"It is a self-organizing process," he explains, a process that starts in the womb with embryonic stem cells (ESCs) or, in the case of organoids, induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs). iPSCs are mature cells that are stripped back to their earliest stage of development using a process devised by UCSF Professor of Anatomy Shinya Yamanaka, MD, PhD, who won a Nobel Prize for discovering the process. To make organoids, iPSCs are put through a series of solutions, then added to a gel that mimics the squishy 3-D cellular matrix of the embryo. The gel provides the right conditions for them to get to work.

"Take an organ like the lung. Its basic functional units are a tube and a sac, and outside that sac are capillaries that allow gas exchange. Hundreds of millions of tubes and sacs make a lung," explains Gartner. "You can make the little sacs and the tubes in a dish as an organoid model. But we don't know how to drive the self-organization of those units into much more complex, elaborate, highly ramified structures." The fundamental limitation of organoids is that they lack the vasculature that brings nutrient-laden blood to fuel the evolution of the larger structure.

Gartner notes that people who work with stem cells tend to focus on either regenerative medicine or disease modeling. Those interested in disease make models of tissues so that they can understand how diseases work, while those interested in regenerative medicine try to make models of healthy tissue that could be transplanted. Gartner straddles both camps. He grows breast organoids. "The mammary gland is great because we can simultaneously think about these two phenomena as two sides of the same coin," he says. "One is regenerative medicine through self-organization, and the other is understanding the progression of breast cancer through a breakdown in self-organization."

So there's potentially a triple payoff in stem cell science: By deducing how a breast forms itself, Gartner might figure out how to grow the entire organ. By tracing how cancer throws a wrench in the works, he may be able to target ways to stop that process. And by growing a human organ in a dish, he avoids making cross-species assumptions or putting animals or humans at risk in testing potential drugs to cure breast cancer, greatly accelerating the push toward a cure.

Regenerate

On Klein's team, Jeffrey Bush, PhD, an assistant professor of cell and tissue biology, looks at organoids through the lens of disease.

The video will load shortly

The organoids he grows model craniofrontonasal syndrome a birth defect that is caused by a mutation in a single gene and that dramatically impacts the shape of the face and head. He knows from studies reproducing craniofrontonasal syndrome in mice that the first place something goes wrong is in a cell type called the neuroectoderm. To create an organoid to study this, he obtained skin cells from Pomerantz, an associate professor of surgery, who has patients with the syndrome who were willing to donate tissue samples. Such collaborations between basic scientists and clinicians are key to bringing research out of the lab and into patient care.

"We studied this simple system to see how this mutation affected the organization of these cells," says Bush. His group has filmed cells as they rush about to self-organize when they're mixed together. In those films, he explains, "you can see that the mutated cells, which are dyed red, segregate from the normal cells, which are green they are like oil and water." In other words, the mutated cells completely disrupt the behavior of all the cells. By contrast, in the films of cells without the mutation, all the cells circulate easily among one another, like fish in an aquarium. This understanding has allowed Bush to begin to think about a drug that blocks this separation. He has several promising candidates that his team will test in pregnant mice. "Right now," he says, "there isn't a single drug that we can use for any kind of structural birth defects. If we could show that a medication blocks the effects of this mutation, it would serve as proof of principle that something besides surgery can be done. But we would have to know that it was safe for mother and child and that we could catch it early enough."

Reconstruct

Jason Pomerantz, MD, a plastic surgeon, falls into the regeneration camp. His clinical work is typified by a recent eight-hour operation on a 17-year-old boy with Crouzon syndrome, a severely disfiguring condition affecting every organ in the craniofacial structure muscle, bone, and skin. "My patient is excited for the outcome, but not about the process," says Pomerantz, surgical director of the UCSF Craniofacial Center. For three months, the patient will wear a large metal frame on his head with wires that will pull the bones in his face forward. Prior to the surgery, the boy's face was nearly concave, collapsed inward at the nose.

Yet bone is not all Pomerantz needs to work with to restructure a face. The subtle bends, creases, and curves of expression that make a face one's own are the work of tiny muscles. "Right now we can move a big muscle say, from the thigh to the face so that people can smile," he says. "But we can't reconstruct the fine ones that enable people to move their eyebrows up or move the eyeballs around. That requires little muscles. This is where we can make headway with stem cell biology.

"We have actually made a humanized organ in an animal," he continues, pointing to a picture of a mouse on his wall. Pomerantz is now considering incubating small human muscles in animals for use in his patients' faces. In a recent project, he inserted stem cells from human muscles into a mouse whose own muscle stem cells had been incapacitated. He then perturbed the muscle to stimulate regeneration. As the muscle healed, the cells created new muscle tissue, which the mouse's nerves innervated to make a functioning muscle. It's exactly the size of the muscles Pomerantz needs for full articulation of expression and function in a human face or hand.

Create

Muscles are part of a vast and intricate system strewn throughout the body. Teeth, on the other hand, are islands unto themselves. "Teeth intrigue me from a regeneration perspective," says Ophir Klein, MD, PhD, chair of the Division of Craniofacial Anomalies, the Hillblom Professor of Craniofacial Anomalies, the Epstein Professor of Human Genetics, and a resident alumnus. "They are discrete organs all the parts are there." More intriguing still is the fact that many rodents have the ability to grow their front teeth continuously. Elephants and walruses also have ever-growing tusks, and even some primates lemurs can regrow their teeth.

A tooth can be regenerated in parts. Stem cells can be used to grow the root, and then a crown can be added to complete the tooth. To generate a whole organ at once, Klein's colleagues are planning to partner with bioengineers who can produce a biocompatible material that could serve as a framing device to jump-start the creation of dentin, one of the hard components of a tooth. If they start with the right cells, then the scaffolding will give the cells the shape information they need to create the right design. But even that isn't Klein's endgame. "In my lab, we're interested in figuring out why humans can't regrow teeth," he says. "In studying species that can, we hope to unlock the regenerative potential in our own cells that might be turned off."

Klein's work to generate teeth is inspired by his patients with ectodermal dysplasia, a congenital disorder characterized by lack of sweat glands, hair, or teeth. Being able to generate the roots of teeth would be remarkable for these patients, since the rest can be done with a crown. Right now, they must be fitted with dentures.

Klein is also taking another tack to help these patients. "We completed a clinical trial of a drug that basically goosed up the development of the organs when they weren't forming properly," he says. The drug a protein developed by Swiss collaborators of Klein's, based on studies of embryonic mice, who develop these organs in early- to mid-gestation was given to infants with the disorder right after birth. The trial was unsuccessful. Now, scientists in Germany are running a trial of the same drug, giving it instead to mothers carrying babies with this genetic disorder. The scientists will try to gauge what the best timing is for delivering the drug.

"What's great about this drug is that it doesn't seem to have any effects on any other organs besides teeth, hair, and sweat glands," says Klein. "Drugs for other conditions are far riskier, because they affect pathways that are important in the development of many organs."

Maintain

Sarah Knox, PhD, an assistant professor of cell and tissue biology, is using stem cells to figure out how to regenerate salivary glands compromised by radiation treatments for head and neck cancers or by craniofacial deformities. Her focus is on how the environment contributes to the activation and maintenance of the gland. The salivary gland, like all organs, is continuously replenishing the supply of cells and tissues it needs to function. Knox's research shows that the gland takes directional cues from nearby nerve cells not only to remain functional, but also to continuously replace itself. Her organoids are made of cells from a patient and nerve cells (ganglia) from a fetal mouse. "We are trying to explore the relationship between the stem cells and the nerves," she says. "How do the nerves know the tissue is there? How do the nerves provide instruction and feedback? Individual cells die off and new cells have to replace them. Organoids are giving us insight as to where those new cells are coming from and how we keep repopulating [them] all our lives."

As head of the UCSF Program in Craniofacial Biology which is based in the School of Dentistry and the Division of Genetics in the School of Medicine Klein stands at one of science's most compelling crossroads: regenerative medicine and genetics. Far in the future, both fields have potential that seem like science fiction today. We live in a world where people die waiting for organ transplants. What if we could pull these organoids from their petri dish and supply them with the fuel they need to become full-blown organs? Such a feat would necessitate either a host embryo perhaps from a pig, because pigs have organs the size of human organs or some other biological foundation. Some scientists are hoping to jump-start organ development with "scaffolding," or cells engineered to speed the developmental process. Others are zeroing in on the genome, particularly in kids with craniofacial anomalies caused by just one mutation, like craniofrontonasal syndrome; for example, a tool called CRISPR could allow scientists to splice that gene out and replace it with a normal gene. But the tool has yet to be used in humans, let alone a human fetus.

Ethical questions pepper either route. At their best, stem cells regenerate tissues; at their worst, they go rogue and grow into a tumor. "Yet with gene editing tools like CRISPR, you literally have the potential to change the species," says Klein. And in both scenarios, the cells can act with unforeseen off-target effects. Klein and his colleagues are in continual discussion about the repercussions of their work with the director of UCSF Bioethics, Barbara Koenig, RN, PhD '88. "Gene therapy is an example of an exciting new treatment that cured one serious pediatric illness severe combined immunodeficiency syndrome (SCID) but the genes unwittingly led to the development of leukemia," explains Koenig. "Genetic and stem cell interventions must be painstakingly studied before application. And, once they are ready, who will regulate them? There are many questions yet to be answered. The challenges are most extreme when we talk about modifying an egg or sperm cell, where the changes are passed on to the next generation."

So Klein and his colleagues proceed with caution, curiosity, and awe. "The next decade will be an incredibly exciting time," says Klein. "With continual advances in human genetics and developmental and cell biology, we hope to be able to make drugs and use genetic tools to appreciably change the lives of our patients."

The Bone Printer

Bone grows like a runaway train in Edward Hsiao's patients with fibrodysplasia ossificans progressiva (FOP). The slightest bump or injury can set off a spurt of bone growth that can fuse their vertebrae, lock their joints, or even freeze up their rib cages, leaving them unable to breathe.

No one, to date, has successfully engineered bone. Hsiao, MD, PhD, is hoping to spark the process with the help of a 3-D printer from Organovo, a firm that specializes in bioprinting technology. From iPSCs, he can make many of the essential ingredients of bone, including mesenchymal stem cells, endothelial cells, and macrophages. "We are putting cells into the equivalent of an ink. Then we will print the structures with the ink, let the ink dissolve, and leave the cells," explains Hsiao. "The hope is that the cells can then recapitulate the normal developmental process."

If the approach is successful, Hsiao hopes to use the resulting models to test drugs and other treatments to halt or prevent bone deformities. Down the line, his progress also stands to transform bone and joint replacements. Through his work with FOP, he's uncovered one mechanism that drives rapid bone growth. "In these patients, we know that mature bone formation can happen in as quickly as two weeks, so it is possible to grow bone in an adult. We need to understand how to modulate that," says Hsiao. "Someday, my dream would be to be able to identify the cells we need, give someone a drug that induces the right genes and recruits the right cells to the correct site, and have the cells rebuild the joint from scratch."

Explore further: New study makes strides towards generating lung tissue

Yale scientists produced increased grooming behavior in mice that may model tics in Tourette syndrome and discovered these behaviors vanish when histaminea neurotransmitter most commonly associated with allergiesis ...

Some bodily activities, sleeping, for instance, mostly occur once every 24 hours; they follow a circadian rhythm. Other bodily functions, such as body temperature, cognitive performance and blood pressure, present an additional ...

Myelomeningocele is a severe congenital defect in which the backbone and spinal canal do not close before birth, putting those affected at risk of lifelong neurological problems. In a preclinical study published June 6th ...

Delivering drugs to the brain is no easy task. The blood-brain barrier -a protective sheath of tissue that shields the brain from harmful chemicals and invaders - cannot be penetrated by most therapeutics that are injected ...

Exactly when does old age begin? Which health markers best predict who will live a long and healthy life versus a life spent in poor health?

A vaccine developed at The Scripps Research Institute (TSRI) to block the "high" of heroin has proven effective in non-human primates. This is the first vaccine against an opioid to pass this stage of preclinical testing.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Go here to see the original:

Lab-grown organoids hold promise for patient treatments - Medical Xpress

Embracing the Hard Realities of Health-Care Reform – National Review

It is an old joke among health-policy wonks that what the American people really want from health-care reform is unlimited care, from the doctor of their choice, with no wait, free of charge. For Republicans, trying to square this circle has led to panic, paralysis, and half-baked policy proposals such as the Obamacare-replacement bill that passed the House last month. For Democrats, it has led from simple disasters such as Obamacare itself to a position somewhere between fantasy and delusion.

The latest effort to fix health care with fairy dust comes from California, whose Senate voted last week to establish a statewide single-payer system. As ambitious as the California legislation is, encompassing everything from routine checkups to dental and nursing-home care, its authors havent yet figured out how it will be paid for. The plan includes no copays, premiums, or deductibles. Perhaps thats because the legislatures own estimates suggest it would cost at least $400 billion, more than the states entire present-day budget. In fairness, legislators hope to recoup about half that amount from the federal government and the elimination of existing state and local health programs. But even so, the plan would necessitate a $200 billion tax hike. One suggestion being bandied about is a 15 percent state payroll tax. Ouch.

The cost of Californias plan is right in line with that of other recent single-payer proposals. For example, last fall, Colorado voters rejected a proposal to establish a single-payer system in that state that was projected to cost more than $64 billion per year by 2028. Voters apparently took note of the fact that, even after figuring in savings from existing programs, possible federal funding, and a new 10 percent payroll tax, the plan would have still run a $12 billion deficit within ten years.

Similarly, last year Vermont was forced to abandon its efforts to set up a single-payer system after it couldnt find a way to pay for the plans nearly $4 trillion price tag. The state had considered a number of financing mechanisms, including an 11.5 percent payroll tax and an income-tax hike (disguised as a premium) to 9.5 percent.

On the national level, who could forget Bernie Sanderss proposed Medicare for All system, which would have cost $13.8 trillion over its first decade of operation? Bernie would have paid for his plan by increasing the top U.S. income-tax rate to an astounding 52 percent, raising everyone elses income taxes by 2.2 percentage points, and raising payroll taxes by 6.2 points. Of course, it is no surprise that Medicare for All would be so expensive, since our current Medicare program is running $58 trillion in the red going forward.

It turns out that free health care isnt really free at all.

How, though, could a single-payer system possibly cost so much? Arent we constantly told that other countries spend far less than we do on health care?

It is true that the U.S. spends nearly a third more on health care than the second-highest-spending developed country (Sweden), both in per capita dollars and as a percentage of GDP. But that reduction in spending can come with a price of its own: The most effective way to hold down health-care costs is to limit the availability of care. Some other developed countries ration care directly. Some spend less on facilities, technology, or physician incomes, leading to long waits for care. Such trade-offs are not inherently bad, and not all health care is of equal value, though that would seem to be a determination most appropriately made by patients rather than the government. But the fact remains that no health care system anywhere in the world provides everyone with unlimited care.

Moreover, foreign health-care systems rely heavily on the U.S. system to drive medical innovation and technology. Theres a reason why more than half of all new drugs are patented in the United States, and why 80 percent of non-pharmaceutical medical breakthroughs, from transplants to MRIs, were introduced first here. If the U.S. were to reduce its investment in such innovation in order to bring costs into line with international norms, would other countries pick up the slack, or would the next revolutionary cancer drug simply never be developed? In the end, there is still no free lunch.

American single-payer advocates simply ignore these trade-offs. They know that their fellow citizens instinctively resist rationing imposed from outside, so they promise unlimited care for all, which is about as realistic as promising personal unicorns for all. In the process, they also ignore the fact that many of the systems they admire are neither single-payer nor free to patients. Above and beyond the exorbitant taxes that must almost always be levied to fund their single-payer schemes, many of these countries impose other costs on patients. There are frequently co-payments, deductibles, and other cost-sharing requirements. In fact, in countries such as Australia, Germany, Japan, the Netherlands, and Switzerland, consumers cover a greater portion of health-care spending out-of-pocket than do Americans. But American single-payer proposals eliminate most or all such cost-sharing.

Adopting a single-payer system would crush the American economy, lowering wages, destroying jobs, and throwing millions into poverty. The Tax Foundation, for instance, estimated that Sanderss plan would have reduced the U.S. GDP by 9.5 percent and after-tax income for all Americans by an average of 12.8 percent in the long run. That is, simply put, not going to happen. So Americans are likely to end up with a lot less health care and than they have been promised.

Santa Claus will always be more popular than the Grinch. But the health-care debate needs a bit more Grinch and a lot less Santa Claus. Americans cannot have unlimited care, from the doctor of their choice, with no wait, for free. The politician that tells them as much will not be popular. But he or she may save them from something that will much more likely resemble a nightmare than a utopian dream.

Michael Tanner is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute and the author of Going for Broke: Deficits, Debt, and the Entitlement Crisis. You can follow him on his blog, TannerOnPolicy.com.

More:

Embracing the Hard Realities of Health-Care Reform - National Review

Trump Pivots to Health Care, Infrastructure on Eve of Comey Hearing – NBCNews.com

CINCINNATI Continuing the White House's infrastructure week, President Donald Trump took his pitch for rebuilding America to the very people that elected him on Wednesday.

With the Ohio River as his backdrop, Trump marketed his plans as a crucial step to rebuilding a crumbling U.S infrastructure system.

"It's time to recapture our legacy as a nation of builders," Trump said. "And to create new lanes of travel, commerce and discovery."

The future, he predicted, was going to be "beautiful and the future's going to be bright."

"Together we will fix it," the president promised corporations and citizens gathered on the banks of the Ohio. "We will create the first class infrastructure our country and our people deserve."

Related: Both Parties Say Trumps Infrastructure Plan Needs Repair

Trump also pushed another legislative priority: repealing and replacing Obamacare.

Obamacare, Trump said, is "crashing. It's dead, it's in a death spiral."

He blamed Democrats for obstructing the long promised Republican repeal and replace of the Democrats' signature healthcare law, calling them "obstructionists" and lamenting the lack of bipartisanship on "every single thing."

Hours earlier, Adm. Michael Rogers, the director of the National Security Agency, and Daniel Coats, the director of national intelligence, refused during a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing Wednesday to confirm or deny allegations that Trump asked them to interfere in the FBI's probe into Moscow's interference in the 2016 elections.

Trump also surprised some White House staff and Hill lawmakers alike Wednesday by tweeting news that Chris Wray, a former DOJ assistant attorney general and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie's personal attorney during the "Bridgegate" scandal, to replace ousted FBI Director James Comey.

One White House official, speaking on condition of anonymity, told NBC News most of us learned about it from the tweet.

Asked soon after the presidents tweet if there would be a public announcement to come, Principle Deputy Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders told NBC News the president just did it, referring to the tweet.

The White House released an official announcement on Wednesday afternoon.

The nature of Trumps tweets have come under scrutiny of late, with Press Secretary Sean Spicer telling reporters Tuesday that the presidents tweets should be taken as official statements.

Wednesday's "infrastructure week" stop on the Ohio River dovetailed with a push Monday from the White House to privatize Air Traffic Control, separating the entity from the Federal Aviation Administration and making it a non-government non-profit.

We will work directly with state and local governments to give them the freedom and flexibility they need to revitalize our nations infrastructure, he said.

Trump, who is often touted by his vice president as a builder, will stress his campaign promises to rebuild America on Thursday when he meets with state and local leaders to discuss the need for an increased focus on roads and bridges.

That same day, Comey will testify on Capitol Hill.

As Trump wrapped his infrastructure push, Comey's prepared remarks went live online.

Some supporters in Cincinnati, however, scoff at the focus on Comey's testimony and continued media coverage of probes into whether there was improper communication between Trump officials and Russia during the 2016 campaign.

Alex Adams, 19, agreed, discarding "this fake Russian story that there was collusion" and said he was "ticked off" by attempts to discredit Trump's powered-by-the-people win.

Randy Chrisman told NBC News on Wednesday he's "disappointed" that there are "so many distractions" from the Trump is trying to do.

Trump's tweeting can sometimes do more harm than good, some supporters say.

"Sometimes it would be good if he said less, maybe, on Twitter," Chrisman said. "But that's what he chooses to do."

The concern for Chrisman and supporters like him, however, remained squarely on infrastructure.

"You know, we've built some really good things but keeping up with it and keeping the maintenance of it - some of its really hurt the system," he said, anxious to hear what Trump would propose.

Read the original post:

Trump Pivots to Health Care, Infrastructure on Eve of Comey Hearing - NBCNews.com

Small wearable devices may lead to big health care savings – STAT

H

ow to rein in the escalating cost of health care is generating fierce debate across the U.S. Most politicians and health care professionals are focusing on big targets like legislation and the pharmaceutical industry. But the savings were all looking for may well come from far smaller sources, like the personal health devices that many Americans have so readily adopted.

About half of all Americans have one or more chronic conditions heart disease, diabetes, kidney disease, arthritis, and asthma, to name a few. Many chronic conditions arise from unhealthy lifestyles that include the usual suspects: poor diet, little or no exercise, and stress. These conditions account for the majority of deaths in the United States, and up to 86 percent of health care expenditures.

Look at diabetes as an example. Nearly 30 million Americans are now living with diabetes, and another 86 million have prediabetes, a higher-than-normal blood sugar level that can lead to diabetes. This disease accounts for unnecessary loss of vision, amputations, heart disease, kidney damage, and premature death. It also costs Americans $245 billion a year. But chronic diseases like diabetes need not take such huge personal or economic tolls. Easily implemented changes that digitize components of health and health care can lighten the load for people, their doctors, and the country at large.

advertisement

Millions of Americans currently use devices to monitor their health and fitness. These include scales, activity monitors (Fitbit, Apple Watch, Microsoft Band, and the like), heart rate and blood sugar monitors, and more. The data they record can help people take more control over their health and lifestyles. They can also help doctors keep track of their patients health, as information from these devices can be uploaded into electronic health records. Data from such devices could also alert doctors or first-aid workers to a problem that requires immediate attention, like a stroke or heart attack.

Fitbit likely wont improve your health, study says

Personal health devices are already or soon will be sophisticated enough to detect medical conditions. For instance, if your fitness device indicates that your usual activity level has fallen off but your heart rate is higher than usual, it could be a sign that you are coming down with the flu or other infectious disease.

To be sure, the jury is still out on how effective these devices will be. According to one randomized trial, Fitbit wearers did indeed exercise more but not enough to ensure weight loss and improved fitness the keys to battling chronic diseases.

On the other hand, at least 21 ongoing studies are examining how the Fitbit activity tracker could be used to help make cystic fibrosis patients healthier, to diagnose and treat chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, to help teens stop smoking, and more. A trial by Takeda Pharmaceuticals and Cognition Kit is using Apple Watches and Microsoft Bands to monitor physiological signs for indications of oncoming bouts of depression. Poole Hospital in the United Kingdom and its partners are developing a solution using the Band to provide more effective care for people with epilepsy.

For many users, these devices are a fun way to keep track of their performance. Users can connect with and compete with friends, and give themselves pats on the back via badges and positive feedback. In effect, the devices and their associated apps can gamify personal health and fitness.

But whats fun for users could also help curb health care spending. Offering users of personal health devices more tangible incentives, like cash or discounts on health insurance, could encourage more physical activity the most important way to prevent and treat many chronic lifestyle-related diseases.

Employers and insurers are already trying this approach. Under a provision of the Affordable Care Act, employers can offer wellness incentives to their employees (paid for by insurers) if they agree to wear a fitness tracker or pedometer or use a fitness app to record their activity. Incentives such as gift cards and rate discounts are available through some national insurers. UnitedHealthcare, for example, offers employees covered through some of its plans up to $4 a day for meeting certain daily walking goals.

Two years in, what has Apple ResearchKit accomplished?

There is, of course, a potential downside to collecting such personal data. One concern is that smart devices could be used to determine if an individual has a preexisting condition maybe even one he or she wasnt aware of. A company could use that information to dump the individual as a customer or place him or her into a high-risk and high-cost customer pool. Health data collected by an employer as part of a wellness program, or by an insurance company as part of an incentive program, may not be subject to the same privacy laws as health data collected by doctors or hospitals. This information is held in databases that dont necessarily have the same security regulations as electronic health records. It could be sold or hacked.

Employers could also use data from fitness devices to weed out unhealthy employees who might end up costing them more money because of chronic lifestyle-related diseases. And if an employer decides to adopt the gamification approach and make fitness a group effort, it could subject employees to fat shaming, or even discrimination penalizing employees for pounds causing extra stress and possibly contributing to unhealthy lifestyle behaviors and the lack of motivation the program was supposed to resolve.

I believe that despite the dearth of overwhelmingly convincing data on the effectiveness of personal health monitors and their inherent risks, the health industry will turn to them as a way to reduce costs. It must do something. U.S. employers currently insure about 170 million people and spend, on average, more than $12,500 in premiums for each employee and his or her family. By 2025, that figure will reach $24,500. A big chunk of that bill is due to preventable chronic diseases.

Activity trackers and other devices can motivate their users to live healthier lifestyles, especially as technology improves to become more precise and accurate (were not quite there yet). Incentives to use these devices are likely to grow, though employers, insurance companies, and health care providers will have to convince people that the data generated by the devices wont be used against them.

This digital health care revolution may not be the all-encompassing solution to the tsunami of chronic disease that threatens to break the health care bank, but it is one that can doubtlessly have a great and lasting impact.

Yiftah Ben Aharon is co-founder and CEO of GlucoMe, a digital diabetes clinic.

Yiftah Ben Aharon can be reached at yiftah@glucome.com

Trending

The Real World, Diabetes: As cameras roll at a

The Real World, Diabetes: As cameras roll at a Jamaican resort, desperate patients seek healing

The growing diet divide between rich and poor in

The growing diet divide between rich and poor in America

Uterus transplants are no match for the safety of

Uterus transplants are no match for the safety of surrogacy

Recommended

Its time to get serious about the safety of

Its time to get serious about the safety of medical devices

Does Medicares free annual wellness visit do any good?

Does Medicares free annual wellness visit do any good?

We need more data sharing to improve cancer treatment

We need more data sharing to improve cancer treatment

See the rest here:

Small wearable devices may lead to big health care savings - STAT

Live stream: Trump discusses health care during Ohio visit – USA TODAY

6

Let friends in your social network know what you are reading about

The USA TODAY NETWORK will have live coverage of this event.

Try Another

Audio CAPTCHA

Image CAPTCHA

Help

CancelSend

A link has been sent to your friend's email address.

A link has been posted to your Facebook feed.

USA TODAY 12:46 p.m. ET June 7, 2017

President Trump(Photo: Evan Vucci, AP)

The theme of President Trump's trip to Cincinnati today was supposed to be his plan to shore up America's infrastructure, but his list of talking points is getting crowded.

The president announced on Twitter this morning that he'll also meet with "ObamaCare victims" and will discuss health care. Watch the president's speech live in the player above.

Later, White House officials indicated he'd talk jobs and energy, too, and would surround himself with coal miners and steel workers in hard hats.It's also possible the president could talk about his troubles back in Washington, where former FBI Director James Comey is set to testify Thursday before Congress.

Read or Share this story: https://usat.ly/2sTyIOx

Read more here:

Live stream: Trump discusses health care during Ohio visit - USA TODAY

Ossoff and Handel Joust Over Health Care and Who’s the Real Georgian – New York Times


New York Times
Ossoff and Handel Joust Over Health Care and Who's the Real Georgian
New York Times
Channeling Democrats' determination to make health care a central issue in congressional elections, Mr. Ossoff aggressively went after Ms. Handel for the House-backed health care bill, which he said guts protections for Americans with pre-existing ...
Ossoff, Handel Get Into Highly Charged Debate Over Health CareTPM
Livable wages, health care lectures: The most striking 6th District debate momentsAtlanta Journal Constitution (blog)

all 217 news articles »

Excerpt from:

Ossoff and Handel Joust Over Health Care and Who's the Real Georgian - New York Times

The 6 Hottest Startups in Health Care – Inc.com

Health care presents one of the biggest opportunities for startups--as well as some of the biggest frustrations. The market size and the potential to make an impact in people's lives are nearly unrivaled, as is the level of regulation. Still, in 2016, venture investors poured $12.2 billion into health care, backing companies that promise to change everything from cancer care to the process of finding a new doctor. Here are some of the standouts.

Flatiron founders Zach Weinberg (left) and Nat Turner.

CREDIT: Saskia Uppenkamp

Google Ventures-backed Flatiron Health has developed a cloud-based technology platform that's currently used by about 260 cancer clinics. The New York City startup takes the patient data it collects from those centers--without identifying details, of course--and shares it with pharmaceutical companies and researchers. The company raised an $8 million series A round in 2013. A little more than a year later, it raised $130 million, and a year after that, an additional $175 million, bringing its valuation to about $1.2 billion. Flatiron is one of fewer than a dozen billion-dollar-valuation "unicorn" companies in the health care space.

Major Investors: Google Ventures, First Round Capital, Roche, Allen & Co.

CREDIT: Courtesy Company

Freenome, headquartered in South San Francisco, is one of a slew of so-called liquid biopsy (i.e., blood test) companies to break out over the past few years. The goal is to use a patient's DNA, rather than a tissue sample, to diagnose cancer. Freenome says its tests do better than the current options for diagnosing prostate, breast, colorectal, and lung cancers. The company is using a $65 million round of funding, led by Andreessen Horowitz, to head into clinical trials.

Major investors: Andreessen Horowitz, Founders Fund, Charles River Associates

CREDIT: Courtesy Company

Another health care unicorn, Clover Health is an insurance start-up aiming to use data science to improve preventive medicine. The San Francisco-based company tracks dozens of clinical and social data points to help elderly and low-income patients avoid hospital visits. It currently handles claims for about 25,000 Medicare Advantage patients in New Jersey. With a recent $130 million funding round from Google Ventures and other backers, Clover plans to expand, and begin operations in three more states by this fall.

Major investors: First Round Capital, Sequoia Capital, Greenoaks Capital

CREDIT: Courtesy Company

New York City-based ZocDoc allows users to find in-network health care providers, book appointments online, and read reviews from other patients. About 6 million patients in the U.S. use the service each month. Providers pay a subscription fee to be listed, and then ZocDoc integrates with their practice management software. ZocDoc recently added a feature that lets patients type in their symptoms using natural language and then matches them with an appropriate provider, such as a doctor, dentist, nurse practitioner, or physical therapist. The company has raised a total of $223 million.

Major investors: Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, Khosla Ventures, Goldman Sachs

CREDIT: Courtesy Company

In 2013, the FDA ruled that genetic-testing company 23andMe, which has raised a total of $233 million, could no longer sell one of its signature services: test results that indicate a person's propensity to develop inherited diseases. Since then, Mountain View, California's 23andMe has mainly been using its genetic testing services to provide information about ancestry and origin. But in April of this year, the company finally won FDA approval to sell direct-to-consumer tests that provide genetic health risk information for conditions such as Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, and hereditary thrombophilia.

Major investors: Google Ventures, New Enterprise Associates, WuXi Healthcare Ventures

CREDIT: Courtesy Company

London-based Babylon Health, which has raised a total of $85 million, started as a telemedicine company, enabling doctors to make diagnoses via video and allowing patients to rate the quality of each interaction. But it's received more notice lately for another program it's piloting in the U.K.: an AI-powered chatbot that analyzes a patient's condition against a database of symptoms, while incorporating the patient's own medical history and responses to the chatbot's questions.

Major investors: Vostok New Ventures, Hoxton Ventures, Mustafa Suleyman

Read more:

The 6 Hottest Startups in Health Care - Inc.com

Follow These People on Twitter to Understand What’s Happening With Health Care – Lifehacker

In the beginning, there was Obamacare. Since January, weve seen repeal and replace, repeal and repair, a draft American Health Care Act, a near-vote in the house, two new amendments, an actual vote in the house, and now whispers about the Senates rewrite, which should become public any day now.

Its just one of 2017s little surprises that when were feeling overwhelmed and confused, Twitter can be the cure. (Im still trying to process that, but it seems to be true.) If you follow a few knowledgeable folks, youll be able to keep track of whats actually happeningnot just with attempts to pass Trumpcare, but also the ways our current administration is sabotaging the Obamacare markets to manufacture a crisis. Here are my top picks:

Andy Slavitt knows more than probably anyone else about how Obamacare workshe was in charge of it for most of two years, as the administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Since Trump took office, Slavitt has dedicated his time to demystifying health care policy for the public. Hell speak at a town hall if your Republican congressperson wont hold one. And, most usefully for us, hes a great source of insider information on what lawmakers are talking about right now. Hes also on top of picking out obscure details of health care policy and explaining what their real-world effects will be.

Dan Diamond is a reporter for Politico, writing their daily Pulse newsletter about health policy and hosting the Pulse Check podcast. His feed is a good way to keep on top of health-related political newsincluding plenty of links from Politico, of course. A specialty of Diamonds is the brief, pithy statistic, like so:

Topher Spiro was part of the team that drafted the Affordable Care Act. Hes now the vice president for health policy at the Center for American Progress, a left-leaning think tank that publishes lots of analysis on whats going on with Obamacare and what could happen with Trumpcare. For example, theyre the folks who estimated people with cancer could end up paying $140,000 extra per year in premiums. Spiro keeps us up to date on analysis like this, and is another great source of threads that explain policy details in terms of what will happen in real life.

Kliff writes about health policy for Vox. On Twitter, she gives a big-picture view of health care laws across the country: not just Obamacare and Trumpcare, but also whats going on in state legislatures. She also shares a ton of explainers and maps from Vox and elsewhere.

Cox is the associate director of the Kaiser Family Foundation, where her job is figuring out how the ACA affects private insurance and their enrollees. If youve got insurance through your job and think the ACA didnt affect you because youre not on Obamacare, you need to read the kind of stuff Cox is talking about. Right now, thats the stability of insurance markets: Anthem may pull out of a lot of markets, leaving people in many areas with no insurer, because the Trump administration has threatened to cut off some of the ACAs mandated funding.

Following these people may not reduce your total intake of health care doom and gloom (and thats a bipartisan statement; everybody hates something about health policy these days), but theyll help you keep up on the important details that tend to get buried in news stories.

PS. Im sure I missed some great follows; please share your favorites in the comments so we can all learn together.

Read the original:

Follow These People on Twitter to Understand What's Happening With Health Care - Lifehacker

Genetic Testing Paving the Way for Precision Medicine-Based … – PR Web (press release)

Paul Crowe, CEO of NuView Life Sciences, discusses genetic testing to determine cancer treatments.

Park City, UT (PRWEB) June 07, 2017

In 2017, an estimated 1,688,780 new cancer cases will be diagnosed in the United States(1). Up to 10% of these cases will be caused by inherited genetic mutations(2), while almost two thirds of these cases will result from random mutations that occur as cells copy themselves in a process called DNA replication(3). While genetic testing is already being used to explore triggers for cancer development, researchers are now investigating the use of genetic testing to choose specific cancer treatments based on an individuals unique genetic makeup. As this field of genetics grows, companies like NuView Life Sciences are developing innovative technologies that can be used to target cancerous cells.

In recent years, genetic testing for certain mutations, such as BRCA1 and BRCA2, has become a mainstay in cancer diagnostic tests, specifically those that are more likely to occur as a result of genetic abnormalities. However, researchers are now better understanding the role that genetic mutations play in a patients response to treatment. Since certain mutations can make a patient less likely to respond to treatment(4), efforts involving the use of genetic testing to determine patient-specific treatment plans have grown.

Paul Crowe, CEO of NuView Life Sciences, says, Were finding out now that the mutations that lead to cancer can also be used to identify certain treatments that give the patient the best shot at success. At NuView, were already in the process of developing advanced technology, specifically our NV-VPAC1 platform, that will be able to use identified mutations to target cancerous cells and deliver treatment based on the patients unique genetic makeup.

For years, cancer treatment has involved the application of one-size-fits-all treatment methods like chemotherapy and radiation. Instead of delivering treatment directly to cancer cells, these treatments affect all cells that grow and divide, including normal, healthy cells(4). While the patient may benefit from such treatments, there is no guarantee that they will be effective against specific types of cancer(4). These broad-spectrum therapies can also cause many serious side effects that negatively impact the patient and reduces their quality of life through treatment(4).

As the field of precision medicine evolves, genetic testing is proving useful in the identification of cellular targets containing mutations that drive cancer progression(5). It is now possible to identify cancer cells based on abnormal protein levels, or by specific mutations that can easily be identified in a persons chromosomes(5). As cancerous cells are isolated, individual treatments can be determined based on the cells unique mutations. Instead of relying on standard therapies, precision medicine technologies, like NuViews NV-VPAC1, can be used to administer targeted cancer therapies to specific cellular destinations that have been identified as cancerous.

Crowe says, We want patients to be able to receive treatment thats based on their unique circumstances instead of standard therapies that are given with no real regard for a persons individual genetics. We are working toward using our technology to deliver treatment directly to cancer cells, administering precisely determined doses of medications that, based on a persons individual genetic composition, could prove to have the most success in stopping the spread of cancer.

About NuView Life Sciences: Founded in 2005, NuView Life Sciences is a biotechnology company located in Park City, Utah, working to improve the way cancer is diagnosed and treated in our modern healthcare system. NuView is focused on creating precision cancer diagnostics and therapeutics to improve patient outcomes while reducing healthcare costs through the development and clinical application of its exclusive peptide analog technology, NV-VPAC1.

Led by a team of industry experts with decades of combined experience in healthcare and medical imaging technologies, NuView is poised to change how we look for and respond to cancer. To learn more about NuView Life Sciences, please visit http://nuviewinfo.com/site/3/.

Sources: 1.Cancer Facts & Figures 2017. American Cancer Society. https://www.cancer.org/research/cancer-facts-statistics/all-cancer-facts-figures/cancer-facts-figures-2017.html 2.The Genetics of Cancer. National Cancer Institute. https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/genetics 3.Random mutations blamed for big role cancer. CBS News. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/cancer-random-genetic-dna-mutations-two-thirds-of-cases/ 4.Genetic Tests for Targeted Cancer Therapy. Lab Tests Online. https://labtestsonline.org/understanding/analytes/cancer-therapy/ 5.Targeted Cancer Therapies. National Cancer Institute. https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/treatment/types/targeted-therapies/targeted-therapies-fact-sheet

Share article on social media or email:

More here:

Genetic Testing Paving the Way for Precision Medicine-Based ... - PR Web (press release)

A Step Closer to Personalised Medicine for Liver Fibrosis – Technology Networks

Liver fibrosis is the excessive accumulation of scar tissue in the liver. It occurs when chronic damage to the liver causes inflammation and cell death, resulting in an accumulation of extracellular matrix proteins and a hardening of the liver. Diagnosis of the condition can be difficult, and treatment for advanced cases is often limited to liver transplantation. Previous work has identified that there is some genetic variation in response to liver damage and the development of liver fibrosis. Therefore, it is hoped that improvements in diagnostics and a better ability to predict prognosis could help to both identify those most at risk of fibrosis and prevent progression of the disease. A recently published study in Nature Genetics set out to identify the protein responsible for the genetic variations associated with liver inflammation and scarring. We spoke to Dr Mohammed Eslam, from the Westmead Institute, to learn more about the study and how this finding could help pave the future of diagnosis and treatment for patients.

Credit: Westmead Institute

ME: In 2015, we identified that common genetic variations associated with liver inflammation and fibrosis (scarring) were located on chromosome 19 between the IFNL3 and IFNL4 genes. However, the causative protein of this genetic area association with inflammation and fibrosis was obscure. This information was critical for any further trials to translate this finding into a potential therapeutic option. In our latest work, we discovered that IFN-3 is the causative protein of hepatic inflammation and fibrosis.

Full details of the study can be found here.

AM: What implications does this study have for the future treatment of liver fibrosis?

ME: Now that weve identified IFNL3 as the cause of liver scarring, we can work towards developing novel treatments specifically targeting this gene. This could be medicine targeting IFNL3 that is tailored to an individuals genetic makeup, but could also include modifying usual treatment depending on whether a patient has IFNL3 risk genes. Furthermore, this could be possibly even helpful in scarring in other organs such as the heart, lung and kidneys. Overall, these outcomes fulfil several promises in the modern era of precision medicine.

AM: What are some of the current challenges of detecting liver fibrosis in patients?

ME: A liver biopsy, which is a procedure in which a small needle is inserted into the liver to collect a tissue sample, is still the golden standard of assessment of liver biopsies. However, due to the limitations of this method, an active area of research is to find a non-invasive method which can predict liver fibrosis with a high degree of accuracy, with some options is currently available. Also, another challenge is the ability to predict the patients fibrosis progression rates (i.e. slow or fast) rather than just the fibrosis level at particular time point. AM: Can you tell us about the diagnostic tool you have developed, and how this will help clinicians?

ME: To translate these findings and using machine learning techniques, we have designed a diagnostic tool that incorporates IFNL3 genotyping with other simple clinical variables, which is freely available (www.fibrogene.com) for all doctors to use, to aid in predicting liver fibrosis risk.

AM: What future work do you have planned?

ME: Our team is working to extend this work to further understand the fundamental mechanisms of how IFNL3 contributes to liver disease progression and hopefully we could translate these findings into new therapeutic treatments. Mohammed Eslam was speaking to Anna MacDonald, Editor for Technology Networks.

See the original post:

A Step Closer to Personalised Medicine for Liver Fibrosis - Technology Networks

Rooting out Flawed Genetic Classificationsand the Racial Bias Behind Them – Penn Current

Despite numerous studies debunking the belief that race is biologically determined, scientists continue to use race as a tool for genetic classification. But two Penn Integrates Knowledge professorsone a sociologist and legal scholar, the other an anthropologist and genomic scientisthave joined together to find a more accurate, inclusive way to study human genetic variation.

George A. Weiss University Professor Dorothy Roberts, who holds appointments inPenn Lawand theSchool of Arts & Sciences (SAS), is a leader in transforming public thinking and policy on reproductive health, child welfare, and bioethics.

David and Lyn Silfen University Professor Sarah A. Tishkoff, who holds appointments in thePerelman School of Medicineand SAS, created the worlds largest database of African diversity, addressing disparities in human genomic studies and advancing knowledge about modern human evolutionary history.

Roberts says that the prevailing view of race as a genetically determined category gives false credence to the idea that human beings are naturally divided into a handful of groups that embody fundamental biological differences. Besides being scientifically incorrect, the belief reinforces a politicized view of race that continues to treat social inequalities as if they were biologically determined, helping to bolster unjust institutions and policies. This view of race is also manipulated by white supremacists to support their claims of racial purity.

Tishkoff, who has been contacted by a number of journalists researching such claims, suggests that new technologies being used in genomics could soon make such race-based classifications obsoletebecause they empower researchers to draw useful inferences based on raw genetic data, without needing to create artificial means of classifying people.

Roberts points out another reason that such classifications are inherently problematic, and that is their subjectivity: Scientists may think about race as if it were a self-evident biological category when, as sociologists know, it can have different meanings for different people.

And conversely, if sociologists dont engage with the science that biologists are investigating, we might not be able to explain our social perspective to them, so for researchers, both perspectives are really important, she says.

In addition to utilizing erroneous genetic classifications that bias against people of color, minority populations are grossly underrepresented in human genomics research. According to Tishkoff, only one to two percent of all genomic and medical genetic research represent diverse populations.

It was shocking, she says of her initial response to discovering this.

Also shocking is why, despite considerable attention to racial disparities in health, there hasnt been more improvement.

Part of it is because the old ways of doing science have continued, says Roberts, noting that the old conceptions of racial difference dont fully take into account the myriad ways in which social inequities affect health and genes and lived environments impact each other.

It is a problem that can be tracedculturally and politicallyall the way back to the slave ships that brought captive African men, women, and children to America. Whether it can be traced back that far genetically is another story.

According to Roberts, many African Americans have turned to ancestry testing companies in an effort to make up for the loss, disconnect, and rupture caused by the slave trade.

I personally believe that African Americans identity is rooted more in a common struggle for racial equality; [more] cultural, social, and political factors [than biological ones], she says. But I do understand how many people see these technologies as providing a lost part of their identities.

Both Roberts and Tishkoff have voiced concerns publicly about the scientific flaws and limitations of current genetic testing technology.

Tishkoff says that she has received numerous emails from people in the African American community whove told her that different ancestry testing companies gave them different answers about their heritage.

Which one of them is true? they ask me. The truth is, you can have more variation amongst two ethnic groups in Africa that you have between someone from East Asia and someone from Europe, she says, [which] blows apart any idea of an African race.

Tishkoffs and Roberts joint research is among the latestand most convincingto show that the whole concept of biological race was, in fact, invented by scientists.

Its an example of how combining good genomic research and sociological understandings of race can finally help to do away with these false groupings of human beings that end up being used to support dangerous views about human inequality, says Roberts, emphasizing that, in order to combat racism on a national scale, its important for the public to understand the science of human genetic variation as well as the politics of it.

Read Full Transcription of Audio Files

Homepage photo: Wharton Business Radio host Dan Loney interviews Penn Integrates Knowledge (PIK) professors Sarah Tishkoff (middle) and Dorothy Roberts (right) about their collaborative research on race and human genetic variation.

Photo at top: PIK professors Dorothy Roberts (left) and Sarah Tishkoff (right) with host Dan Loney in SiriusXM's Studio for Business Radio powered by the Wharton School.

The rest is here:

Rooting out Flawed Genetic Classificationsand the Racial Bias Behind Them - Penn Current

Mouse lemur could serve as ideal model for primate biology and human disease – Phys.Org

June 7, 2017

The mouse lemurthe world's smallest primatehas the potential to transform the field of genetics and serve as an ideal model for a wide range of primate biology, behavior and medicine, including cardiovascular disease and Alzheimer's disease, Stanford University School of Medicine researchers say.

For decades, scientists have relied on mice, fruit flies and worms as genetic models, but despite all their success, these organisms routinely fail to mimic many aspects of primate biology, including many human diseases, said Mark Krasnow, MD, PhD, professor of biochemistry.

Frustrated by the lack of a good study model, Krasnow and his colleagues turned to the mouse lemur and began conducting detailed physiologic and genetic studies on hundreds of these petite, docile creatures in the rainforests of Madagascar.

Working in a Stanford-funded lab on the island country, the scientists report that they already have identified more than 20 individual lemurs with unique genetic traits, including obesity, high cholesterol, high blood sugar, cardiac arrhythmias, progressive eye disease and motor and personality disorders. Their hope is that continued study of these abundant primates could lead to a better understanding, and possibly better treatments, of these and other conditions in lemurs and humans.

'Huge potential'

"I think mouse lemurs have great potential for our understanding of primate biology, behavior and conservation, in the same way that fruit flies and mice over the last 30 or 40 years have transformed our understanding of developmental biology and many other areas of biology and medicine," Krasnow said. "Some of the most fascinating and important questions that need to be answered are primate-specific. For those, we really need something besides humans to complement the work that has been done in fruit flies and mice."

A paper describing the researchers' findings will be published online June 9 in Genetics. Krasnow is the senior author. Lead authorship is shared by graduate student Camille Ezran and postdoctoral scholar Caitlin Karanewsky.

The project began in 2009 when Krasnow, frustrated by the lack of a good animal model for lung diseasehis area of expertisecommissioned three high school interns to search the animal world for something better. By the end of the summer, the interns had come up with the mouse lemur, which fits all the necessary criteria: Like mice, these animals are small (about twice the size of a mouse), develop quickly, reproduce rapidly, produce many offspring, and are inexpensive and easy to maintain and manage. In genetic terms, the mouse lemur is about midway between humans and mice, Krasnow said.

"When I talk to scientists, their faces light up when I tell them about mouse lemurs because they are about the size of a mouse but they are primates, so that makes a huge difference," said Ezran, who was one of the high school interns. "I think they really do present such great potential for biological, behavioral and medical research in general."

Early on in the project, Krasnow sought out the perspective of Stanford veterinarians, ultimately recruiting Megan Albertelli, DVM, PhD, assistant professor of comparative medicine. A geneticist and primate specialist, Albertelli said she was initially skeptical of the idea of lemurs as animal models, but soon became enthusiastic after realizing their enormous potential for contributions in understanding neurologic problems, eye disease and other conditions where mouse models have fallen short.

Trip to France

She accompanied the group on a trip to France to visit with scientists who had been studying lemurs in the laboratory for years. A French team had found that some aging lemurs develop a form of dementia and accumulate plaques in the brain that resemble those of Alzheimer's patients.

"I saw that they were promising models for Alzheimer's disease," Albertelli said. "Alzheimer's is a condition that is hard to model in other animal species, so that was very exciting."

Mouse lemurs live exclusively on Madagascar, where they are found in great abundance. Tens of millions of them populate the island. While lemurs generally are endangered due to habitat destruction, mouse lemurs are not under threat and freely roam the island, said Ezran, who calls them the "rodents of Madagascar."

The Stanford researchers began to develop collaborations with other scientists studying lemurs, including those at the Centre ValBio near the Ranomafana National Park in Madagascar, who have been examining lemur ecology, family structure and behavior for decades.

During periodic visits to the island, Krasnow and his colleagues learned how to catch brown mouse lemurs in the rainforest just outside the research station, using a tiny banana slice inside a trap as a lure. The scientists then tagged and photographed each animal, gave them a thorough physical examination, analyzed them for behavioral issues and abnormalities and removed a drop of blood for detailed genetic and serum studies. The animals then were released back into the wild so the researchers could follow them over time to see how their environments may influence their progress and health. In 2013, Stanford built a sophisticated molecular biology and genetics lab within the ValBio complex, where these studies could be carried out.

'Distinctive personalities'

Lemurs have distinctive personalities, Krasnow said, and the researchers gave each one a name, based on his or her looks or behavior. For instance, one was named Feisty for his unusually aggressive nature; most lemurs are docile.

The work has led to a whole new way of doing genetic studies, said Krasnow, who is also a Howard Hughes Medical Institute investigator. Instead of using the traditional method of introducing genetic mutations into mice to create "knockout" miceor animals with customized genesthey found they were able to find naturally occurring variants among animals in the wild. Moreover, in working with lemurs in their native habitats, the researchers could better understand how the animals interact with their surroundings and the relationship between genes and the environment.

"Instead of introducing mutations in mice or fruit flies, we are doing something much more similar to what is done in humans," he said. "We are looking at all the wonderful genetic variation already existing in nature, since there are so many millions of mouse lemurs out there. We calculate that most 'knockout' mutations are already present in nature, and all we have to do is find them. And because the cost of sequencing a genome is rapidly dropping, it's now possible to sequence the genomes of thousands of mouse lemurs to see what mutations they are carrying."

In doing so, the researchers could accomplish in a few years for a tiny fraction of the cost what the International Knockout Mouse Consortium will accomplish in 10 years, at a cost of nearly $1 billion, he said.

But the project could use some additional staff, as the process of capturing the animals and screening them in the laboratory is labor-intensive, he said. He and his colleagues have come up with a multipurpose solution that will contribute to the local educational system while helping preserve the lemur populations in Madagascar, whose habitats are threatened by farming, mining and logging interests, he said.

Help from students

The group is developing a science curriculum for use in Malagasy high schools in which students learn about biology by exploring the rich environment right outside their school houses. Among the instructors is Manu Prakash, PhD, assistant professor of bioengineering at Stanford and a pioneer in the field of "frugal science," who has brought his powerful $1 paper microscopes to Madagascar and taught students how to explore the microscopic world in which they live, including the lice in their hair, the pathogens in their water and the disease-causing parasites in their environment. The curriculum was first introduced among university students, some of whom now are screening lemurs at the Stanford lab in Madagascar.

"We saw this as an opportunity because we are going over there to study the unique animals and biology and ecology of Madagascar, which is unsurpassed in the world," Krasnow said. "It is the No. 1 hotspot for biodiversity, but most of the students don't realize what they have in their backyards because they are being taught from textbooks and from teachers who have learned from Europeans."

He said the researchers hope to expand scientific curricula at all levels of education, helping train the Malagasy scientists of the future and build scientific capacity in the country, all the while creating an appreciation among the local population of the need to understand and preserve lemurs and other species for the future.

"We are trying to do this in a way that is respectful and will help the lemurs and the people of Madagascar, while enlightening many aspects of primate biology and human disease," he said.

The researchers plan to make the genetic sequencing and phenotyping information they obtain from the lemurs publicly available so that researchers around the world can take advantage of this trove of knowledge, Albertelli said.

Explore further: Three new primate species discovered in Madagascar

Scientists from the German Primate Center (DPZ), the University of Kentucky, the American Duke Lemur Center and the Universit d'Antananarivo in Madagascar have described three new species of mouse lemurs. They live in the ...

The ring-tailed lemur, an iconic primate that is emblematic of the wild and wonderful creatures inhabiting the tropical island of Madagascar, is in big trouble.

Scientists have identified two new species of mouse lemur, the saucer-eyed, teacup-sized primates native to the African island of Madagascar.

A Malagasy-German research team has discovered a new primate species in the Sahafina Forest in eastern Madagascar, a forest that has not been studied before.

Facial recognition is a biometricsystem that identifies or verifies a person from a digital image. It's used to find criminals, identify passport and driver's license fraud, and catch shoplifters. But can it be used to ...

Today, Madagascar is home to a mosaic of different habitatsa lush rainforest in the east and a dry deciduous forest in the west, separated by largely open highlands. But the island off the southeast coast of Africa hasn't ...

Economists agree that natural ecosystems store large quantities of wealth, but the challenge of measuring that wealth has prevented it from being included in typical accounting systems.

According to recent studies, declines in wild and managed bee populations threaten the pollination of flowers in more than 85 percent of flowering plants and 75 percent of agricultural crops worldwide. Widespread and effective ...

A team led by University of Idaho researchers is calling into question a widely publicized 2016 study that concluded eastern and red wolves are not distinct species, but rather recent hybrids of gray wolves and coyotes. In ...

In 1859, Charles Darwin included a novel tree of life in his trailblazing book on the theory of evolution, On the Origin of Species. Now, scientists from Rutgers University-New Brunswick and their international collaborators ...

You've been there: Trying to carry on a conversation in a room so noisy that the background chatter threatens to drown out the words you hear. Yet somehow your auditory system is able to home in on the message being conveyed ...

Worms, it appears, are good at keeping secrets.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Read the rest here:

Mouse lemur could serve as ideal model for primate biology and human disease - Phys.Org

Kevin Folta: Please say no to the term ‘GMO’ – AGDAILY

In science and medicine the terminology applied can be the difference between life and death, success and failure. Words have precise meanings, and a productive dialogue in the sciences requires adherence to a common set of mutually recognized terms. Shared meaning is like a verbal handshake that ensures a positive connection where information can flow.

Genetic engineering, familiarly known by the slippery colloquialism GMO, has been central to the production of drugs like insulin, enzymes used in cheese making, and laboratory-produced fibers. The widest-recognized successes have been the adoption of the technology by 20 million farmers onto almost half a billion acres of farmland, most of those in the developing world. Some 70 percent of grocery store products now contain ingredients from genetically engineered plants. And while scientists and farmers acknowledge concerns arising from the overuse of the technology, such as weed and insect resistance, there remains zero credible evidence of health-related concerns.

Still the most beautiful and altruistic applications of this technology remain to be deployed. The innovations geared to solve specific issues in hunger, environment or consumer health have not left university laboratories or government greenhouses.

This cutting edge has not been dulled due to technical problems or clandestine dangers. Instead, technology has been stalled because of high deregulation costs and negative public perception founded on misinformation.

Could part of the problem simply be the bad branding of a good technology? Our social psyche has been saturated with fear-based manufactured risk and misinformation. Could cleaning up our vocabulary advance the publics understanding of the science and help illuminate its actual risks and benefits, while curing the tales of fear mongering?

Goodbye, GMO

Take for instance the abbreviation GMO. The term appears to have been first used thirty-three years ago this week, appropriately in the New York Times, a venue that regularly uses language to blur scientific reality in food space. Over the last decades the term has been adopted as nomenclature of derision; after all, who would want to feed their child an alien organism?

GMO is not a scientific term. Scientifically speaking, genetic modification is ambiguous, applying to many situations. Genetic modification is what happens upon a sexual crossing, mutation, multiplication of chromosomes (like in a seedless watermelon or banana), introduction of a single new gene from an unrelated species or the tweaking a genome with new gene editing techniques. These are all examples of genetic modification, but not all offer the predictability and precision of the process of genetic engineering.

This is why actual scientists rarely (if ever) use the GMO designation in technical parlance. It first regularly was highlighted in rhetoric opposing the technology, and since has sadly been adopted by mainstream media. Works that apply the term tend to disparage the technology, and opt for GMO rather than a scientifically precise term to stoke the negative perception.

For instance, the term GMO is prominently presented in the 2012 publication (retracted) by French biologist Gilles-Erich Seralini and colleagues, juxtaposed with tumor-ridden suffering animals. Their intent was to label the sad and grotesque figures of suffering animals with the three letters, G-M-O. A valid scientific effort would have labeled a figure with the gene installed that made the plant unique, not a catch-all term for an engineered plant. Seralinis work met tremendous outcry from a scientific community that saw this as being a political and manipulative use of the scientific literature to advance an agenda.

The use of the term GMO in the figures is consistent with that interpretation.

In order to help advance the public discussion, we should agree to abandon the meaningless term GMO. This is especially important for academics, scientists, farmers, dietitians and physiciansprofessionals the public relies upon to answer questions about food and farming. It is time for the science-minded community to adopt a common vocabulary to enhance effective discussion and enjoy more meaningful dialogue.

Toward a new phrasebook

Here are my suggestions for how we can adopt a common vocabulary to make sure were all speaking the same language about these technologies.

1. Stop using GMO. It is imprecise. Everything not arising as a clone is genetically modified from previous forms, as is anything changed by mutation. You are a unique genetic modification of your parents combined genes. A dachshund is a genetic modification of an ancestral gray wolf. Instead we should replace GMO with Genetic Engineering. Genetic engineering is adding, subtracting, or adjusting genes in the lab that change a trait in the resulting plant, animal or microbe. It satisfies the very definition of engineering the application of science and mathematics to affect properties of matter or the sources of energy in nature to be made useful to people.

However, the term GMO is something people recognize. Effective communication depends on shared meaning, so scientists or journalists should use the term once in a presentation or article parenthetically, then switch to genetic engineering. Experts should make it clear that GMO is not an acceptable term when discussing science.

The flawed GMO must also still be included in keywords, image tags, or in any online content. If it is not present, someone searching the internet for credible information with this non-scientific term may encounter a higher proportion of scientifically questionable information. Providing a parenthetical mention or brief reference ensures that those seeking science-based answers can find them.

2. An All-Encompassing Term. A better term for the scientific processes used to produce new varieties or breeds, or the intermediate steps, would be best referred to as crop or animal genetic improvement. In other words, when we use traditional breeding methods to make plants or animals better, it takes many steps and lots of selection. Thats genetic improvement, whether it is done by sexual exchange, breaking DNA strands with radiation or doubling chromosomes with chemistry.

3. The Newest Technologies. New technologies are now being used that allow scientists to make incredibly specific changes to DNA sequence, without leaving foreign DNA sequences (that some find objectionable) behind. These techniques should be collectively referred to as gene editing. Especially avoid referring to the technology by its technical name like CRISPR/Cas 9 or TALEN, which are specific types of gene editing. It is important because the list of gene editing methods is inevitably growing. Gene editing is also more precise than the often-used genome editing.

The purpose of this brief new glossary is not to provide a mandate based on my narrow experience and observations. Instead, my goal is to offer a proposal so a scientific community eager to precisely engage the public can challenge the pros and cons of these terms to hone an optimal vocabulary. My hope is to ultimately derive an agreed-upon terminology that can be adopted and consistently applied by experts in science, medicine and agriculture. Journalists and science communications may then adopt the precise wording of the discipline for improved precision in communication.

Concrete, unambiguous terms can help curious and concerned people understand the realities of genetic engineering. Certainly medicine has benefited from precise language, such as how childhood cognitive disabilities are now characterized with greater sensitivity and improved medical precision. This change improved social stigma of various developmental disorders, brought compassionate understanding to the conditions, and enhanced treatment for those affected.

Better scientific literacy and precision in terminology around genetic engineering would lead to a more productive discourse that ultimately could enable more rapid deployment of safe technologies that can help people and the planet. The individuals that insist on adhering to antiquated, divisive and imprecise terms will be automatically characterized as antiquated, divisive and imprecise.

The first step is to stop using the archaic, imprecise term GMO.

Kevin Folta is a land-grant scientist exploring ways to make better food with less input, and how to communicate science. This article was published with his permission. All of Dr. Foltas funding can be found at kevinfolta.com/transparency.

The AGDAILY Digest is the information superhighway for your country road.

Read this article:

Kevin Folta: Please say no to the term 'GMO' - AGDAILY