Manufacturing Biotherapeutics Based On Synthetic Biology Lessons Learned – BioProcess Online

By Antoine Awad, chief operating officer, Synlogic, Inc.

The rise of high-throughput molecular biology and DNA sequencing, in parallel with the increased sophistication of computational models, has enabled the field of synthetic biology, where precision genetic engineering is used to program bacterial cells in much the same way we program computers to perform different functions. In 2014, our co-founders, Jim Collins and Tim Lu, recognized world experts in synthetic biology, pitched the idea to Atlas Ventures of forming the first company that would apply the principles of synthetic biology to the creation and development of biotherapeutics. The idea was that this approach would allow us to address significant medical needs using a completely new approach based on our drug candidates, which we call synthetic biotics. Within eight years, Synlogic opened five INDs with the FDA, dosed more than 350 patients, and built a clinical-stage pipeline focused on metabolic and immunological diseases. This includes achieving proof of concept in one program (in phenylketonuria, or PKU), and proof of mechanism in another (hyperoxaluria, or HOX). From the beginning, we knew that as pioneers, manufacturing would present challenges and also would be a critical success factor.

Our drug candidates to date have used the same starter strain, or chassis, a well-studied probiotic called E. coli Nissle 1917. As live potential biotherapeutics, these present unique challenges. As is the case with many biotechnology companies, especially those advancing innovative therapeutic approaches, we evaluated the benefits of outsourcing manufacturing to third parties that have specialized expertise in producing medicines based on synthetic biology. We started discussions early in our development programs and assessed all our options to determine the optimal pathway that would deliver the levels of quality and precision that are essential in development of drugs based on synthetic biology.

Using E. coli Nissle (ECN) has advantages in a history of robust safety data validated in more than 100 years of clinical research. A challenge, however, when producing ECN as synthetic biotics is the need to strike a balance between increasing cell densities and inducing target enzymes. A disproportionate focus on one of these parameters can have an adverse effect on the other. While the technology to grow cells is very effective, the cells need to be kept alive and able to maintain high viability, which is imperative to their proper function in disease targeting. Fermenting bacteria for protein production is common, but expertise in maintaining high cell viability is both essential and rare.

To help address these challenges, we reached out to contract development and manufacturing organizations (CDMOs) with specialized expertise. While many CDMOs were using fermentation techniques for industrial purposes, these technologies would not meet good manufacturing practice (GMP) standards and FDA compliance guidelines for production of biotherapeutics. Many also do not have both fermentation and lyophilization (freeze drying) capabilities under one roof. The ones that do often have limited lyophilization capacity that does not align with fermentation scaling. Among the limited number of CDMOs that will work with live bacteria, most have long lead times and high costs, especially following demands on production associated with the COVID-19 pandemic.

Given the limited options for third-party support available, Synlogic invested in manufacturing to meet our needs at every phase of development and to keep a vigilant focus on product viability. Our drugs include cells that must remain metabolically active; over time, they will die unless they are formulated into a stable powder. To minimize the duration of our processing time, we decided to co-locate fermentation and downstream processing and lyophilization to prevent cell death and maintain high drug viability. We also implemented a lyophilization step that enhances the shelf life of our therapies and allows for more patient-friendly presentation as an oral powder.

In operations involving fermenters, lyophilizers, and analytical instruments in quality control settings, automation is critical to make processes efficient and minimize production costs. For example, a fermenter for E. coli Nissle must run between 16 and 22 hours. Without automated capabilities, this process would require manufacturing operators to be on-site around the clock. Automated technologies also play a central role in helping us meet both demand and quality control (QC) requirements at every stage of the product life cycle.

Our ambr 15 and ambr 250 high-throughput automated bioreactors or fermenters are used in process development, process optimization, and scale down models. With these systems, we can test different conditions and process parameters in a short timeframe and at low volumes, which gives us a quicker path to an established process while reducing costs per experiment. We have another high-throughput automatic analyzer that enables screening and analysis of fermentation metabolites. With this production system in place, we can better understand what is required to keep cells healthy, growing, and active. The technology also allows us to be faster and more confident in our decision-making and potentially reduce cycle time.

We also implemented a range of single-use technologies throughout our facility as well as customized processes to address specific challenges in manufacturing our biotherapeutics. Single-use technology allows us to switch between programs faster by minimizing required cleaning and risk of cross-contamination. It also reduces the facility footprint, thus decreasing the necessary up-front capital investment. We also established a cleanroom that incorporates procedures and layouts that reduce the risk of microbial contamination and product cross-contamination through an air pressure cascade, segregation of product operations, and cleaning requirements.

One of the major challenges with any new technology or therapeutic approach is the ability to rapidly scale manufacturing as needed from early-stage research through to commercialization. Recognizing our needs in terms of scaling up as well as the challenges in considering both in-house capabilities and engagement of CDMOs, we quickly recognized the potential benefits of a hybrid approach.

Our physical cleanrooms come with a menu of services that can be handled by CDMOs, including inventory control, warehousing, environmental monitoring, and other support areas. Meanwhile, we built an internal infrastructure at Synlogic that is able to meet product needs based on available resources and our own highly experienced staff who are trained in GMPs. Our in-house capabilities include process development, analytical development, formulation, current GMP production, packaging and labeling, QC, and quality assurance. In a hybrid model, we have the flexibility to outsource some of the required tests and assays to labs/CROs when needed. The facility was also designed to handle our process needs with the ability to readily scale up and expand further as our development programs advance.

When planning a manufacturing strategy, it can be advantageous for biotechnology companies to co-establish research and CMC process development in the same facility, allowing for more efficient exchange of technical expertise. Generally, companies advancing a program into clinical development can often handle production needs related to Phase 1 or Phase 2 clinical trials internally when required scales are more modest.

It is important that companies consider investing in automated processes wherever feasible and recognize that scaling up can require larger equipment and potentially exponential increases in the need for raw materials and consumables, many of which can have long procurement times. Planning early is essential to address potential supply chain issues and avoid bottlenecks. It can also often be advantageous to consider collaborating with regulators and other stakeholders early in the development process. Early input from regulatory agency contacts and consultants can support smoother transitions as companies advance to later stage clinical development.

Whether companies decide to establish in-house manufacturing capabilities, outsource to CDMOs, or build a hybrid model, planning to meet production goals at every stage can require significant levels of innovation and flexibility. Teams must be prepared to address new challenges and make quick, thoughtful decisions throughout the product life cycle to be successful. These demands can be even more important in emerging areas of research such as synthetic biology that can require development of entirely new and previously untried strategies and technologies to keep manufacturing on track.

About the Author:

Antoine (Tony) Awad is chief operating officer at Synlogic. He has more than 18 years of experience in the biotech and pharma industry with substantial experience in the development and manufacturing of novel therapeutics from pre-IND studies through global commercialization. Prior to joining Synlogic, he was most recently at Abpro Therapeutics and served as senior vice president of CMC and operations, where he was responsible for the development of bi-specific antibodies for oncology and leading corporate operational functions. Previously, he was at L.E.A.F. Pharmaceuticals and Merrimack Pharmaceuticals. Awad is a graduate of Boston University and holds a bachelors degree in biochemistry and molecular biology and conducted graduate research at Boston University School of Dental Medicine.

View post:

Manufacturing Biotherapeutics Based On Synthetic Biology Lessons Learned - BioProcess Online

Bitcoin: Why Environmentalists Need to Relax, It’s Better Than You Think – BeInCrypto

Bitcoin isnt the great evil we have been led to believe. Until youve looked deeply into something, youre not in a position to judge it, says Daniel Batten.

John Lennon once said, Life is what happens when youre busy making other plans. I remembered this line today when I recalled the plans I was making for this year, and what actually happened.

For as long as I can remember, protecting the environment was my #1 value. At drama school, a friend affectionately teased me by christening me Daniel loves trees more than people Batten. In my teenage years and twenties, I was a regular on protest marches: against the confiscation of indigenous land, against Genetic Engineering, and against the logging of native forest to name a few. The most recent one I went on was 9 years ago against Deep Sea Oil Drilling off New Zealands coast.

I still remember the day a friend from Greenpeace, an organization I supported over 4 decades, rang me up to ask me to lead an action against one of McDonalds environmental practices. Together with a flock of humans dressed as chickens, we stormed the McDonalds HQ and I, dressed in Ronald McDonald-like regalia, announced my resignation. Oh, and there is a slight chance youll be arrested he mentioned at the end. I was CEO of a technology company Id founded at the time. Without telling my board what I was planning, I said yes.

Slowly it dawned on me though, I was a better supporter of technology than I was a protestor. What if I used that skill to make a difference? That led me to create a ClimateTech VC fund.

It was an easy decision. Id been investing in technology companies for 19 years, so I knew what to look for, what to avoid and how to optimize a founding teams chance of success.

We invested in companies that not only made commercial sense but who we felt proud of. One company is on a mission to decarbonize the entire Zinc industry by 2045. Another has a goal to remove 50% of all CO2 emissions from the Greenhouse industry by 2030. The way theyre going, theyll probably make it.

About the same time, a friend of mine started talking to me a lot more about Bitcoin. I felt conflicted. On one side, I could see the social good: how it helped build a world where wealth transfer from the poor to the rich via quantitative easing was no longer possible.But as an environmentalist, Id heard the stories about its energy usage and was unconvinced if it did enough good to justify its carbon emissions.

When Greenpeace came out against Bitcoin the inner conflict intensified. My Bitcoiner friend was telling me that it helped build out the renewable grid. My friends at Greenpeace were saying this was Greenwash propagated by greedy Bitcoin investors who would say anything to increase the user-adoption upon which their returns depended.

I realized I had to do my own research.

I didnt know what Id find, but I suspected the truth would lie somewhere in the middle.

For the first time in my life, I spent an extended period of time simply researching something I was curious about and wanted the answer to.

My research led me to read more about Climate Change, CO2 emissions, and methane emissions than Id ever read. Ill be honest: discovering the true enormity of the climate crisis and the task ahead of us was not easy reading. I forced myself to understand physics, energy, the jargon of the electrical grid, energy trading, and Bitcoin mining. I interviewed or listened to interviews with climate scientists, solar engineers, grid operators, analysts at utility companies, utility scale wind operators, solar installers, battery experts and onchain analysts.

Slowly but surely, a picture started to emerge from the haze. It was a consistent picture, consistently espoused by all the people I spoke to who had looked into it deeply.

The conclusion was this:

1. Bitcoin mining can be used in a way that is bad for the environment. Examples of this include the re-opening of a gas plant in NY State for the sole purpose of Bitcoin mining.

2. Bitcoin mining can also be used in a way that is good for the environment. Examples of this include the solar and wind operators I discovered who would not have got financing to build their plants had it not been for having a Bitcoin mining customer.

That looks like a neutral outcome, some arguments for and against. The outcome was anything but neutral.

I also found out

1. That the direction Bitcoin mining is heading is towards renewable energy

2. That the rate at which it is transitioning to renewable energy is faster than any other industry Id seen (as a VC who sees around 50 cleantech pitches a year, wed seen a whole stack!)

3. The current % of renewable energy use is also higher than any other industry

4. All the solar engineers, battery engineers, grid operators and utility analysts I spoke to, people whod widely studied how you build out a renewable grid, said the same thing.

1. You cannot build a renewable grid without having flexible load customers

2. Bitcoin miners are the best flexible load customers theyve seen

3. Bitcoin mining is increasingly using energy that would have otherwise been wasted (such as solar energy at midday or wind at midnight when people didnt need it)

4. Bitcoin mining provided a path to retire all fossil fuel-based turbines needed as backups during peak load times

5. Bitcoin mining helped with maintaining the frequency and voltage regulation of the grid (which become progressively harder with every 10% of variable renewable energy you add)

6. Bitcoin mining could make power more affordable to consumers by reducing the curtailment fees that utilities otherwise had to pay to renewable operators for not taking their surplus power.

There were a host of other benefits too. But this would require some deeper analysis (and jargon) about how electrical grids work.

But really, the first two points say it all: grids built on variable renewable energy must have flexible customers who can adjust their usage according to generation supply. They must also be able to reduce their usage given minutes notice. Bitcoin miners are the only customers who provide this flexibility.

Or to put it even more bluntly: without Bitcoin mining, the renewable grid will simply not happen it will remain an ideal: Grid operators and utilities will say they are working towards it.

So what problem with renewables does Bitcoin uniquely solve?

Grid operators #1 goal is to maintain the stability of the grid. Cost-effectiveness and renewable composition is important, but not as important as stability. Thats because when grids fail, people die and grid operators lose their jobs (as recently happened during the Texas 2021 Winter Blackouts). Even with battery technology, this stability becomes progressively harder to achieve when you base your grid on variable renewable energy.

While we must move away from fossil fuel plant, coal and gas did offer one advantage over renewables: you could increase or decrease the generation of a gas plant at will. Solar and Wind dont have that flexibility. They are also highly unpredictable.

When you add inflexible and unpredictable generators such as solar and wind, unless you counterbalance this with flexible, predictable customers the entire grid will become unstable because of either under-supply or oversupply of electricity and there will be a higher risk of blackouts.

Ironically, as climate change bites, extreme weather events are becoming more common. This means that grid operators are faced with the Herculean task of trying to transition to a grid made up of variable renewable energy at a time when even the existing grid is becoming more unstable due to climate events.

Grid operators have investigated a number of other options: Hydrogen, batteries, pumped hydro, device control programs, and Demand response based on curtailing steel plants. None of them come anywhere close to the flexibility of Bitcoin miners. Even batteries are only a partial solution for reasons I cover in detail in my separate article

Bitcoins location-agnostic and time-of-day agnostic features turn out to make it the ideal way to remove most of the worlds atmospheric methane caused by human intervention too, but thats another story.

In summary: here are some quotes directly from some of the key players.

Never in my wildest dreams would I have imagined a customer as ideal as Bitcoin miners [Utility Scale Wind Operator]

I started off researching batteries as a solution to the intermittency of solar. I soon realized that without another offtaker for surplus power, batteries were incomplete. After testing a number of possible offtakers, I realized the that best one by far was Bitcoin Mining. [Sam Kivi, Solar Engineer]

We can use that cryptocurrency to find a home for more solar and more wind to come to our grid. Then they reduce consumption when we need that power for other customers. So its a great balancing act. [Brad Jones, Interim CEO, ERCOT (The Grid Operator for Texas)]

A big component of how we get [to our 2050 renewable grid goal] is new demand response strategies. And Bitcoin mining is different because you can reduce demand in minutes to the exact level you need with pinpoint precision. You just dont see that level of flexibility or response in these legacy (demand response) programs. [lead analyst, major US Electrical Utility]

So, there you have it. It wasnt what I was expecting to find. I had to put aside everything I thought I knew about Bitcoin. The more I go through life, the more I realize that until youve looked deeply into something, youre not in a position to judge it.

A deeper look at Bitcoin reveals a surprising truth. Bitcoiners sometimes despair that the mainstream media narrative does not take this deeper look. I would encourage these Bitcoiners to not be concerned. Every novel disruptive technology gets attacked because, well, it disrupts some people who do not want to be disrupted.

Meanwhile behind the scenes, Bitcoin is enabling one of the single most important transitions of a generation: the transition to the renewable grid. Sooner or later this truth will become so undeniable that Bitcoin detractors will be forced to choose a different attack vector. In the meantime, as an environmentalist, I could not be more delighted that we have Bitcoin in our world.

There is a phrase in the climate movement: the perfect is the enemy of the good. Solar isnt perfect but its good. So is the case for Wind. For Bitcoin also, its in the same club: not perfect, but good. Bitcoin offers us a practical way to build out the renewable grid at a time were in a footrace against a fast-warming world.

Daniel Batten is a ClimateTech investor, author, ESG analyst and environmental campaigner who previously founded and led his own tech company which exited in 2019.

Got something to say about Bitcoin and the enviroment or anything else? Write to usor join the discussion in our Telegram channel. You can also catch us on Tik Tok, Facebook, or Twitter.

DisclaimerAll the information contained on our website is published in good faith and for general information purposes only. Any action the reader takes upon the information found on our website is strictly at their own risk.

Read more:

Bitcoin: Why Environmentalists Need to Relax, It's Better Than You Think - BeInCrypto

Global Non-GMO Seeds Market To Be Driven By Increasing Health Consciousness Among Consumers In Forecast Period Of 2022-2027 Designer Women – Designer…

The new report by Expert Market Research titled, Global Non-GMO Seeds Market Report and Forecast 2022-2027, gives an in-depth analysis of the globalnon-GMO seeds market, assessing the market based on its segments like natures, forms, seed types, packaging types, and major regions. The report tracks the latest trends in the industry and studies their impact on the overall market. It also assesses the market dynamics, covering the key demand and price indicators, along with analyzing the market based on the SWOT and Porters Five Forces models.

Request a free sample copy in PDF or view the reportsummary@https://bityl.co/CUIX

The key highlights of the report include:

Market Overview (2017-2027)

Farmers are increasingly adopting non-GMO seeds since they can save money while boosting their yields, which is driving the market growth. With the increasing preference for clean and better-produced food goods with non-GMO Project Certified certifications over GMO food products by consumers due to their cost-effectiveness and more sustainable production, the market is growing. The rising popularity of vegetarian and vegan lifestyles, along with the increasing health-consciousness, is surging the demand for foods manufactured using organic and non-GMO seeds. Over the forecast period, the popularity of organic food products is expected to expand, which is anticipated to aid the growth of the non-GMO seeds industry.

Industry Definition and Major Segments

Non-GMO seeds, variously known as non-genetically modified seeds, refer to seeds whose DNA are not modified by genetic engineering. They are typically cultivated through natural processes like pollination. They also maintain soil and crop health without utilising fertilisers and pesticides. Moreover, non-GMO seeds are more cost-effective than their genetically modified counterparts, due to which they are extensively adopted in the agricultural industry.

Explore the full report with the table ofcontents@https://bityl.co/CUIW

By nature, the market is divided into:

Based on form, the market is categorised into:

The market, based on seed type, is segmented into:

On the basis of packaging type, the market is divided into:

The regional markets for the product include:

Market Trends

As non-GMO seeds are cost-effective than genetically modified seeds, they are increasingly preferred by farmers, which is bolstering the industry growth. The favourable agriculture economics of non-GMO seeds are surging the demand for their end-use products in the food processing industry, therefore propelling the market growth. With the growing focus on high-yielding crops and seeds to meet the rising food demand for the increasing global population, the demand for non-GMO seeds owing to their high yield is significantly surging. Furthermore, the increasing launches of non-GMO products in the food and beverage industry due to the emerging trend of health and wellness is predicted to propel the market growth in upcoming years.

Key Market Players

The key players in the market are Cargill Inc., BASF SE, Prairie Hybrids, Spectrum Premium Non-GMO, Albert Lea Seed, and Sentinel Seeds, LLC, among others. The report covers the market shares, capacities, plant turnarounds, expansions, investments and mergers and acquisitions, among other latest developments of these market players.

About Us:

Expert Market Research is a leading business intelligence firm, providing custom and syndicated market reports along with consultancy services for our clients. We serve a wide client base ranging from Fortune 1000 companies to small and medium enterprises. Our reports cover over 100 industries across established and emerging markets researched by our skilled analysts who track the latest economic, demographic, trade and market data globally.

At Expert Market Research, we tailor our approach according to our clients needs and preferences, providing them with valuable, actionable and up-to-date insights into the market, thus, helping them realize their optimum growth potential. We offer market intelligence across a range of industry verticals which include Pharmaceuticals, Food and Beverage, Technology, Retail, Chemical and Materials, Energy and Mining, Packaging and Agriculture.

Media Contact

Company Name: Claight CorporationContact Person: Louis Wane, Corporate Sales Specialist U.S.A.Email:sales@expertmarketresearch.comToll Free Number:+1-415-325-5166 | +44-702-402-5790Address: 30 North Gould Street, Sheridan, WY 82801, USAWebsite:https://www.expertmarketresearch.com

Read More:

All Terrain Robot Market: https://mbutimeline.com/technology/128032/global-all-terrain-robot-market-to-be-driven-by-rising-economies-and-growing-mechanisation-globally-in-the-forecast-period-of-2021-2026/

Air Bearings Market: https://mbutimeline.com/space/128121/global-air-bearings-market-to-be-driven-by-technological-developments-and-the-thriving-automotive-industry-in-the-forecast-period-of-2021-2026/

Aircraft Seat Upholstery Market: https://mbutimeline.com/news/128449/global-aircraft-seat-upholstery-market-to-be-driven-by-increasing-preference-for-premium-economy-seats-over-passenger-aircraft-and-the-growing-demand-for-personalized-first-class-and-business-class-se/

Steel Casting Market: https://mbutimeline.com/news/128709/global-steel-casting-market-to-be-driven-by-improved-productivity-in-the-manufacturing-sectors-and-automotive-industries-in-the-forecast-period-of-2021-2026/

Static Mixer Market: https://mbutimeline.com/technology/128906/global-static-mixer-market-to-be-driven-by-increasing-global-demand-for-industrial-and-consumer-products-in-the-forecast-period-of-2021-2026/

*We at Expert Market Research always thrive to give you the latest information. The numbers in the article are only indicative and may be different from the actual report.

More here:

Global Non-GMO Seeds Market To Be Driven By Increasing Health Consciousness Among Consumers In Forecast Period Of 2022-2027 Designer Women - Designer...

Helen Clark vs John Campbell: New Zealand’s most explosive TV interview, 20 years on – The Spinoff

It was the election interview that gripped the nation, taking the then white-hot issue of genetically modified food and turning it into incredible political TV drama. Duncan Greive reflects on Corngate an epochal moment in our media history.

The first thing that strikes you is the staging the studio is pitch dark, with bright spotlights on Helen Clark and John Campbell. He is rounding into the early era of his cult status as a probing, fearless interviewer; she is at the height of her power and influence as prime minister.

Clark looks fierce, Campbell locked in. Hes holding his clipboard and unleashing a volley of very heated statements. Did you mislead the Royal Commission? he asks, and later, Its about whether or not we can trust you, repeating it for emphasis. Feel free to shoot the messenger, he says toward the end.

Clark was not told about the specifics of the interview, and is clearly furious as a result, responding to Campbells questions with relentless real-time media criticism: You may think this is a really smart way to set up the prime minister, she says at one point. The more this interview goes on, the more offended I am, she says later. Its simply preposterous to carry on.

Every moment of it is extraordinary. The original tape seems to have essentially vanished, with Three not responding to requests for the archive and only a grainy six-minute clip available on NZ On Screen. Still, you can feel the heat even after all these years.

Given the challenges we confront today, its head-spinning to think all this arose over some delicious corn. The core of the issue was whether, during a time of a major debate about the safety of genetically modified crops, GM corn was accidentally released into New Zealands food supply. Campbell had been given an advance copy of Nicky Hagers book Seeds of Distrust, which alleged that a field of GM corn was mistakenly grown and distributed to consumers here, and furthermore, that cabinet had known and conspired with officials from the Ministry for Agriculture to cover it up.

The interview became known as Corngate and was one of the defining flashpoints of the decade, accurately described by a contemporary report as a bomb, dropped right into late stages of the 2002 election period. It derailed Labours campaign, pitted them bitterly against the Greens, caused a lasting rift between TV3 and Clark, and played a role in making genetic engineering a politically untouchable subject to this day.

The idea that a television interview could have such impact speaks to the era in which it aired. Twenty years ago TV news presenters were figures of huge socio-cultural power, and sometimes major newsmakers in their own right.

John Hawkesby received a $5.2m payout after his ill-fated three-week stint presenting the 6pm news on One. A few years later, Paul Holmes resigned from TVNZ in a fury over what he perceived as an insulting contract offer, and for a brief, glorious moment we had an impossible bounty of current affairs in primetime: Close Up on One, Campbell Live on TV3 and Paul Holmes (the show) on Prime all competing with the juggernaut that was mid-2000s Shortland Street.

This was the absolute apex of television as the agenda-setting centre of our lives, and TV3, playing David to TVNZs Goliath, had a pair of white-hot young stars reading the 6pm news in Carol Hirschfeld and John Campbell. The channel had become a beloved challenger to state-owned monolith TVNZ, innovating on style and form. Hirschfeld and Campbell had come to embody the network young, sharp and fearless. Campbell was a brilliant interviewer, smart yet with a rare ability to emotionally connect with the audience.

He had been inserting live political interviews into bulletins for some years, yet Corngate represented a massive escalation. It was a major break from the schedule TV3 was still years away from elevating Campbell to his own show in Campbell Live, and had settled on syndicated airings of broad American sitcoms like Home Improvement as its best weapon to confront TVNZs Holmes and Shortland Street at 7pm. The very fact of the interview breaking that 7pm routine gave it a huge sense of occasion.

It came towards the end of an oddly discombobulated election campaign. National was at its lowest ebb, careening toward its worst-ever election result under the leadership of a baby-faced Bill English, who barely warranted the withering stare of Clark. She was a prime minister of immense force of will and personality, probably our most imposing since Rob Muldoon. But with the capitulation of the right, the chaos of a divided left bloc became the focal point of the election.

Labour had governed its first term in coalition with the Alliance, which became a cautionary tale for minor parties thereafter, collapsing to a less than 2% share of the party vote in 2002. In their stead came a thicket of smaller players that collectively amassed an MMP record 37% of the vote, with NZ First, Act, United Future and the Greens all attracting over 6.5% of the electorates support.

It was the latter party that became Clark and Labours biggest headache, resulting in some memorable lines, including the prime minister referring to the Greens as goths and anarcho-feminists in the days before the Corngate interview. That this has not become the Greens official slogan is one of the enduring mysteries of our politics.

The focal point of much of this rancour was genetic modification (GM), a relatively new form of science that relied on gene editing to produce novel or altered organisms. It has applications across medicine and industry, but its use in agriculture drew the most attention. Proponents saw the potential for higher-yielding or more drought-resistant crops, or livestock that was less prone to particular forms of disease. The science has subsequently essentially settled in favour of GM, but it was highly contentious in our politics at the time, and had been subject to a Royal Commission in 2000.

The commission came back with a cautious endorsement of the technology, saying, New Zealand should keep its options open. It would be unwise to turn our back on the potential advantages on offer. It did little to resolve divisions over the issue, which saw the country split into two camps. Broadly speaking, business and the agricultural sector saw GM as a science crucial to growth, while much of the environmentally minded left saw it as dangerous, unproven practice that risked our clean, green reputation. Following the commissions report, a two-year moratorium preventing applications for the release of genetically modified organisms was put in place in 2001.

As the country rounded into the 2002 election, investigative journalist Nicky Hager was working on his third book. Seeds of Distrust examined the accidental release of GM corn, the potential for contamination of other crops and the decision not to notify the public of the incident. He scheduled it for publication on July 10 less than three weeks before the general election on July 27.

Campbell had worked with Hager twice before, fronting major stories accompanying both Secret Power, which covered the Waihpai spy base and its links to international espionage networks, and Secrets and Lies, which exposed the infiltration of West Coast environmental groups. The pair had become close, and Hager sent Campbell the manuscript for Seeds of Distrust, which emerged on a gigantic roll of fax paper. Campbell pored over it for weeks, recalls Hirschfeld, with the support of news editors Mark Jennings and Mike Brockie. (Jennings did not respond to a request for comment for this story.)

The team knew that this was a big story, but had to approach it carefully. TV3 went to Clarks office with an innocuous cover, suggesting a general conversation about genetic engineering rather than a laser focus on the decision not to publicise the potential release of the GM corn in November 2000. The fateful interview took place in-studio, but 20 years on, Hirschfeld says the infamous spotlit aesthetic was not an attempt to dial up the drama. It instead had a much more banal explanation. What was the thinking? We had no money, she laughs.

They recorded enough footage for that electric half hour of television, cutting only around five minutes, which Campbell says was an attempt to give viewers the whole context. Afterwards, Clark left in a hurry, but not before telling Campbell exactly what she thought of him. She used the word treachery, Campbell recalls, while Hirschfeld remembers you traitor. Clark declined to be interviewed for this story, but has in the aftermath made her view of the interview abundantly clear.

TV3 cut it together into the half-hour special and aired it the following evening, July 9, 2002. It began with an opening segment in which Campbell interviewed Hager and travelled to the location of the alleged leak of the corn; the final two segments were dominated by that extraordinary interview with Clark. It was an immediate sensation, deeply uncomfortable yet incredibly compelling TV.

It was almost unbearable to watch, says Hager now. Writing for the NZ Herald, Jeremy Rees described it as a study of outrage and anger. In the days that followed, media reporting of the special tended to side with Clark, with Russell Brown typifying the criticism on his Hard News segment on bFM, saying that the way it did emerge dropped like a bomb on the election campaign was simply wrong.

Clark certainly thought so. She labelled Campbell a sanctimonious little creep, and interrupted her campaign to respond with a fusillade delivered from the lectern at a hastily arranged press conference. There she made it clear she blamed the Greens, and leader Jeanette Fitzsimons. I am going to sing from the rooftops that this is a very dirty campaign where the Greens and their supporters have descended to the gutter of the National Party.

Fitzsimons did not deter that impression when she issued a press release saying she was deeply distressed that the prime minister apparently decided to let this contaminated crop be grown, harvested, eaten and possibly exported in 2000/2001, and that the government participated in efforts to keep the truth from the public. Similarly, the fact Seeds of Distrust was published by Craig Potton, a former Greens candidate, made it easy for Clark and Labour to frame it as an orchestrated hit though Hager is adamant there was no collusion, and says the Green Party was privately furious with him for distracting from its policy agenda.

The interview became the defining moment of the campaign, and while it didnt impact the result, the bitter taste lingered, and reared up again a year later.

The Broadcasting Standards Authority received numerous complaints about the episode, including one from Mike Munro, the prime ministers chief press secretary, on behalf of himself and Clark. The regulator ultimately released a highly publicised ruling in July 2003. It ran to 92 pages and broadly vindicated the complainants, saying that standards were breached on multiple counts around balance and fairness. It faulted the tenor of the interview with Hager versus that with Clark as neither impartial nor objective, and the fact that Clark was not advised of the source of the allegations.

By BSA standards it was damning, but not unequivocal, and allowed for TV3 to issue a press release that quoted Jennings as saying we knew the story was right, we knew we had done our homework and the BSA ruling largely validates that view.

Russell Brown wrote a reflective response for Public Address afterwards in which he acknowledged that many parties got consumed by the heat of the moment and overdid their reactions, himself included, but faulted TV3 for only preserving the raw footage of the Clark interview, and not that of Hager. Brown says this left the unavoidable impression that it had treated Hagers allegations far more credulously than it did Clarks response.

Campbell disputes that characterisation today, saying he asked for and received the primary materials on which the book was based, and Hirschfeld says Campbell spent weeks on the story. There were endless sessions going over the details, she says. Ive never seen him so prepared.

Clark herself was clearly completely blindsided, and spent much of the interview underlining that fact through gritted teeth. It is simply not acceptable to set up the prime minister on something which happened a long time back in the term of government, that she was not the minister responsible for, she says at one point. Campbell was unconvinced of this then I think you do remember what happened, he says at one point and remains so today. She had a forensic rigour about her she was across the detail of all the portfolios, he says.

While it ultimately had little obvious effect on the election outcome, it had a huge impact on the journalists involved, coming up against a popular PM at the height of her influence. Hirschfeld recalls Campbell so spaced out after it aired that he was nearly run down on Ponsonby Road while getting out of a car. Hager remains frustrated by what happened, and the way the furore completely overwhelmed the book upon which it was based. I couldnt bear to look at it for years afterwards, he says, also believing that Clark has never forgiven him.

Campbell got it most personally, though, with one incident still seared into his memory. One night, not long after the special aired, he was out walking his one-year-old daughter through Three Lamps in Ponsonby, near his home. A woman he describes as having a patrician bearing approached him, and bent down to peer into the buggy. I pity you, having him for a father, Campbell recalls her saying. His relationship with the prime minister was also seriously damaged by the incident. It took years to recover.

Clarks fury dimmed but did not pass, and Hirschfeld remembers TV3 being pointedly left until dead last for an interview as late as the 2005 election campaign. But by that stage their lives had changed, and in some ways Corngate, for all its complexity as an incident, had helped them grow.

Hirschfeld went on to become the producer of Campbell Live, a full-time 7pm current affairs show that cemented Campbell as a star. The fearlessness of that 2002 interview was present in his live interviews as he supplanted Holmes to become the emblematic broadcaster of the era. Hager moved on, too. During the next election he picked up the threads of what was to become The Hollow Men, his book about Nationals 2005 campaign, and the one he considers his best.

As for Clark, she would go on to win a third term, and leave the rancour of Corngate to bulldoze through future controversies, from anti-smacking legislation to the pain of the Foreshore and Seabed Bill. Perhaps the most lasting scar of the era is a political circumspection around genetic modification issues that lingers to this day, with Greens food policy embodying a tension in stressing affordability while confining GM to the lab.

Despite the BSA ruling, Campbell remains proud of the work. To me, it wasnt a GM story, it was a political story. At a time of huge public interest in and fear about genetic modification, did bureaucrats and politicians combine to cover up the release of GM material into the environment? Hager and Campbell both remain convinced that they did. Campbells only regret is that his team were not more candid about the topic of the interview, but isnt sure whether the prime minister would have fronted had they been more direct. Was it the best of all the shitty options? I dont know, he says.

Twenty years on, our politics and media have changed immeasurably, and Hirschfeld expresses a sadness that such an interview has no place in primetime today. Watching it now its obvious why it had such an impact. It was enormous, says Hirschfeld, and it was immensely compelling television that still retains its power to this day.

Follow Duncan Greives NZ media podcast The Fold on Apple Podcasts, Spotify or your favourite podcast provider.

Follow this link:

Helen Clark vs John Campbell: New Zealand's most explosive TV interview, 20 years on - The Spinoff

How Cuba is eradicating child mortality and banishing the diseases of the poor – Peoples Dispatch

The authors at a clinic in Palpite in Cuba. Photo: Odalys Miranda/Twitter

Palpite, Cuba, is just a few miles away from Playa Girn, along the Bay of Pigs, where the United States attempted to overthrow the Cuban Revolution in 1961. Down a modest street in a small building with a Cuban flag and a large picture of Fidel Castro near the front door, Dr. Dayamis Gmez La Rosa sees patients from 8 am to 5 pm. In fact, that is an inaccurate sentence. Dr. Dayamis, like most primary care doctors in Cuba, lives above the clinic that she runs. I became a doctor, she told us as we sat in the clinics waiting room, because I wanted to make the world a better place. Her father was a bartender, and her mother was a housecleaner, but thanks to the Revolution, she says, she is a primary care doctor, and her brother is a dentist. Patients come when they need care, even in the middle of the night.

Apart from the waiting room, the clinic only has three other rooms, all of them small and clean. The 1,970 people in Palpite come to see Dr. Dayamis, who emphasizes that she has in her care several pregnant women and infants. She wants to talk about pregnancy and children because she wants to let me know that over the past three years, not one infant has died in her town or in the municipality. The last time an infant died, she said, was in 2008 when a child was born prematurely and had great difficulty breathing. When we asked her how she remembered that death with such clarity, she said that for her as a doctor any death is terrible, but the death of a child must be avoided at all costs. I wish I did not have to experience that, she said.

The region of the Zapata Swamp, where the Bay of Pigs is located, before the Revolution, had an infant mortality rate of 59 per 1,000 live births. The population of the area, mostly engaged in subsistence fishing and in the charcoal trade, lived in great poverty. Fidel spent the first Christmas Eve after the Revolution of 1959 with the newly formed cooperative of charcoal producers, listening to them talk about their problems and working with them to find a way to exit the condition of hunger, illiteracy, and ill-health. A large-scale project of transformation had been set into motion a few months before, which drew in hundreds of very poor people into a process to lift themselves up from the wretched conditions that afflicted them. This is the reason why these people rose in large numbers to defend the Revolution against the attack by the US and its mercenaries in 1961.

To move from 59 infant deaths out of every 1,000 live births to no infant deaths in the matter of a few decades is an extraordinary feat. It was done, Dr. Dayamis says, because the Cuban Revolution pays an enormous attention to the health of the population. Pregnant mothers are given regular care from primary care doctors and gynecologists and their infants are tended by pediatriciansall of it paid from the social wealth of the country. Small towns such as Palpite do not have specialists such as gynecologists and pediatricians, but within a short ride a few miles away, they can access these doctors in Playa Larga.

Walking through the Playa Giron museum earlier that day, the museums director Dulce Mara Limonta del Pozo tells us that the many of the captured mercenaries were returned to the US in exchange for food and medicines for children; it is telling that this is what the Cuban Revolution demanded. From early into the Revolution, literacy campaigns and vaccination campaigns developed to address the facts of poverty. Now, Dr. Dayamis reports, each child gets between 12 and 16 vaccinations for such ailments as smallpox and hepatitis.

In Havanas Center for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology (CIGB), Dr. Merardo Pujol Ferrer tells us that the country has almost eradicated hepatitis B using a vaccine developed by their Center. That vaccineHeberbiovac HBhas been administered to 70 million people around the world. We believe that this vaccine is safe and effective, he said. It could help to eradicate hepatitis around the world, particularly in poorer countries. All the children in her town are vaccinated against hepatitis, Dr. Dayamis says. The health care system ensures that not one person dies from diarrhea or malnutrition, and not one person dies from diseases of poverty.

What ails the people of Palpite, Dr. Dayamis says, are now the diseases that one sees in richer countries. It is one of the paradoxes of Cuba, which remains a country of limited meanslargely because of the US governments blockade of this island of 11 million peopleand yet has transcended the diseases of poverty. The new illnesses that she says are hypertension and cardiovascular diseases as well as prostate and breast cancer. These problems, she points out, must be dealt with by public education, which is why she has a radio show on Radio Victoria de Girn, the local community station, each Thursday, called Education for Health.

If we invest in sports, says Ral Forns Valenciano, the vice-president of the Institute of Physical Education and Recreation (INDER), then we will have less problems of health. Across the country, INDER focuses on getting the entire population active with a variety of sports and physical exercises. Over 70,000 sports health workers collaborate with the schools and the centers for the elderly to provide opportunities for leisure time to be spent in physical activity. This, along with the public education campaign that Dr. Dayamis told us about, are key mechanisms to prevent chronic diseases from harming the population.

If you take a boat out of the Bay of Pigs and land in other Caribbean countries, you will find yourself in a situation where healthcare is almost nonexistent. In the Dominican Republic, for example, infant mortality is at 34 per 1,000 live births. These countriesunlike Cubahave not been able to harness the commitment and ingenuity of people such as Dr. Dayamis and Dr. Merardo. In these other countries, children die in conditions where no doctor is present to mourn their loss decades later.

Read more here:

How Cuba is eradicating child mortality and banishing the diseases of the poor - Peoples Dispatch

Novavax Nuvaxovid COVID-19 Vaccine Conditionally Authorized in the European Union for Adolescents Aged 12 Through 17 – PR Newswire

GAITHERSBURG, Md., July 5, 2022 /PRNewswire/ -- Novavax,Inc. (Nasdaq: NVAX), a biotechnology company dedicated to developing and commercializing next-generation vaccines for serious infectious diseases, today announced that the European Commission (EC) has approved the expanded conditional marketing authorization (CMA) of Nuvaxovid (NVX-CoV2373) COVID-19 vaccine in the European Union (EU) for adolescents aged 12 through 17. The approval follows the positive recommendation made by the European Medicines Agency's Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use on June 23, 2022.

"With this authorization, we are extremely pleased to be able to offer our Nuvaxovid COVID-19 vaccine to adolescents in the EU," said Stanley C. Erck, President and Chief Executive Officer, Novavax. "Our protein-based vaccine was developed using an innovative approach to traditional technology and has demonstrated efficacy and safety in both adolescents and adults."

The authorization was based on data from the ongoing pediatric expansionof PREVENT-19, a pivotal Phase 3 trial of 2,247 adolescents aged 12 through 17 years across 73 sites in the U.S., to evaluate the safety, effectiveness (immunogenicity), and efficacy of Nuvaxovid. In the trial, Nuvaxovid achieved its primary effectiveness endpoint and demonstrated 80% clinical efficacy overall at a time when the Delta variant was the predominant circulating SARS-CoV-2 strain in the U.S.

Preliminary safety data from the trial showed the vaccine to be generally well-tolerated. Serious and severe adverse events were low in number and balanced between vaccine and placebo groups, and not considered related to the vaccine. Local and systemic reactogenicity was generally lower than or similar to adults, after the first and second dose. The most common adverse reactions observed were injection site tenderness/pain, headache, myalgia, fatigue, and malaise. There was no increase in reactogenicity in younger (12 to <15 years old) adolescents compared to older (15 to <18 years old) adolescents. No new safety signal was observed through the placebo-controlled portion of the study.

The EC granted CMA for Nuvaxovid to prevent COVID-19 in individuals aged 18 and over in December 2021. In addition to the EC's expanded CMA, Indiahas granted emergency use authorization in the 12 through 17 year-old population.

Authorization in the U.S.

NVX-CoV2373 has not yet been authorized for use in the U.S. and the trade name Nuvaxovid has not yet been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

Important Safety Information

For additional information on Nuvaxovid, please visit the following websites:

About NVX-CoV2373NVX-CoV2373 is a protein-based vaccine engineered from the genetic sequence of the first strain of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19 disease. The vaccine was created using Novavax' recombinant nanoparticle technology to generate antigen derived from the coronavirus spike (S) protein and is formulated with Novavax' patented saponin-based Matrix-M adjuvant to enhance the immune response and stimulate high levels of neutralizing antibodies. NVX-CoV2373 contains purified protein antigen and can neither replicate, nor can it cause COVID-19.

The Novavax COVID-19 vaccine is packaged as a ready-to-use liquid formulation in a vial containing ten doses. The vaccination regimen calls for two 0.5 ml doses (5 mcg antigen and 50 mcg Matrix-M adjuvant) given intramuscularly 21 days apart. The vaccine is stored at 2- 8 Celsius, enabling the use of existing vaccine supply and cold chain channels. Use of the vaccine should be in accordance with official recommendations.

Novavax has established partnerships for the manufacture, commercialization and distribution of NVX-CoV2373 worldwide. Existing authorizations leverage Novavax' manufacturing partnership with Serum Institute of India, the world's largest vaccine manufacturer by volume. They will later be supplemented with data from additional manufacturing sites throughout Novavax' global supply chain.

About the NVX-CoV2373 Phase 3 TrialsNVX-CoV2373 continues being evaluated in two pivotal Phase 3 trials.

PREVENT-19 (thePRE-fusion protein subunitVaccineEfficacyNovavaxTrial | COVID-19) is a 2:1 randomized, placebo-controlled, observer-blinded trial to evaluate the efficacy, safety and immunogenicity of NVX-CoV2373 with Matrix-M adjuvant in 29,960 participants 18 years of age and over in 119 locations inthe U.S.andMexico. The primary endpoint for PREVENT-19 was the first occurrence of PCR-confirmed symptomatic (mild, moderate or severe) COVID-19 with onset at least seven days after the second dose in serologically negative (to SARS-CoV-2) adult participants at baseline. The statistical success criterion included a lower bound of 95% CI >30%. A secondary endpoint was the prevention of PCR-confirmed, symptomatic moderate or severe COVID-19. Both endpoints were assessed at least seven days after the second study vaccination in volunteers who had not been previously infected with SARS-CoV-2. In the trial, NVX-CoV2373 achieved 90.4% efficacy overall. It was generally well-tolerated and elicited a robust antibody response after the second dose in both studies. Full results of the trial were published in theNew England Journal of Medicine(NEJM).

The pediatric expansion of PREVENT-19 is a 2:1 randomized, placebo-controlled, observer-blinded trial to evaluate the safety, effectiveness, and efficacy of NVX-CoV2373 with Matrix-M adjuvant in 2,247 adolescent participants 12 to 17 years of age in 73 locations in the United States, compared with placebo. In the pediatric trial, NVX-CoV2373 achieved its primary effectiveness endpoint (non-inferiority of the neutralizing antibody response compared to young adult participants 18 through 25 years of age from PREVENT-19) and demonstrated 80% efficacy overall at a time when the Delta variant of concern was the predominant circulating strain in the U.S.Additionally, immune responses were about two-to-three-fold higher in adolescents than in adults against all variants studied.

PREVENT-19 is being conducted with support from the U.S. government, including the Department of Defense, the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), part of the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, part of the National Institutes of Health at HHS. BARDA is providing up to$1.75 billionunder a Department of Defense agreement (# MCDC2011-001).

Additionally, a trial conducted in the U.K. with 14,039 participants aged 18 years and over was designed as a randomized, placebo-controlled, observer-blinded study and achieved overall efficacy of 89.7%. The primary endpoint was based on the first occurrence of PCR-confirmed symptomatic (mild, moderate or severe) COVID-19 with onset at least seven days after the second study vaccination in serologically negative (to SARS-CoV-2) adult participants at baseline. Full results of the trial were published inNEJM.

About Matrix-M AdjuvantNovavax' patented saponin-based Matrix-M adjuvant has demonstrated a potent and well-tolerated effect by stimulating the entry of antigen-presenting cells into the injection site and enhancing antigen presentation in local lymph nodes, boosting immune response.

About NovavaxNovavax, Inc. (Nasdaq: NVAX) is a biotechnology company that promotes improved health globally through the discovery, development, and commercialization of innovative vaccines to prevent serious infectious diseases. The company's proprietary recombinant technology platform harnesses the power and speed of genetic engineering to efficiently produce highly immunogenic nanoparticles designed to address urgent global health needs. NVX-CoV2373, the company's COVID-19 vaccine, has received conditional authorization from multiple regulatory authorities globally, including the European Commission and the World Health Organization. The vaccine is currently under review by multiple regulatory agencies worldwide and will soon be under review in the U.S. for use in adults, adolescents and as a booster. In addition to its COVID-19 vaccine, Novavax is also currently evaluating a COVID-seasonal influenza combination vaccine candidate in a Phase 1/2 clinical trial, which combines NVX-CoV2373 and NanoFlu*, its quadrivalent influenza investigational vaccine candidate, and is also evaluating an Omicron strain-based vaccine (NVX-CoV2515) as well as a bivalent Omicron-based / original strain-based vaccine. These vaccine candidates incorporate Novavax' proprietary saponin-based Matrix-M adjuvant to enhance the immune response and stimulate high levels of neutralizing antibodies.

For more information, visitwww.novavax.comand connect with us on LinkedIn.

*NanoFlu identifies a recombinant hemagglutinin (HA) protein nanoparticle influenza vaccine candidate produced by Novavax. This investigational candidate was evaluated during a controlled phase 3 trial conducted during the 2019-2020 influenza season.

Forward-Looking StatementsStatements herein relating to the future of Novavax, its operating plans and prospects, its partnerships, the timing of clinical trial results, the ongoing development of NVX-CoV2373, a COVID-seasonal influenza investigational vaccine candidate, the scope, timing and outcome of future regulatory filings and actions, including Novavax' plans to supplement existing authorizations with data from the additional manufacturing sites in Novavax' global supply chain, additional worldwide authorizations of NVX-CoV2373 for adolescents, the potential impact and reach of Novavax and NVX-CoV2373 in addressing vaccine access, controlling the pandemic and protecting populations, and the efficacy, safety and intended utilization of NVX-CoV2373 are forward-looking statements. Novavax cautions that these forward-looking statements are subject to numerous risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied by such statements. These risks and uncertainties include, without limitation, challenges satisfying, alone or together with partners, various safety, efficacy, and product characterization requirements, including those related to process qualification and assay validation, necessary to satisfy applicable regulatory authorities; difficulty obtaining scarce raw materials and supplies; resource constraints, including human capital and manufacturing capacity, on the ability of Novavax to pursue planned regulatory pathways; challenges meeting contractual requirements under agreements with multiple commercial, governmental, and other entities; and those other risk factors identified in the "Risk Factors" and "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations" sections of Novavax' Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2021 and subsequent Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). We caution investors not to place considerable reliance on forward-looking statements contained in this press release. You are encouraged to read our filings with the SEC, available at http://www.sec.gov and http://www.novavax.com, for a discussion of these and other risks and uncertainties. The forward-looking statements in this press release speak only as of the date of this document, and we undertake no obligation to update or revise any of the statements. Our business is subject to substantial risks and uncertainties, including those referenced above. Investors, potential investors, and others should give careful consideration to these risks and uncertainties.

Contacts:InvestorsAlex Delacroix | 240-268-2022[emailprotected]

MediaAli Chartan | 240-720-7804[emailprotected]

SOURCE Novavax, Inc.

See the original post here:

Novavax Nuvaxovid COVID-19 Vaccine Conditionally Authorized in the European Union for Adolescents Aged 12 Through 17 - PR Newswire

How can the plastics industry harness carbon capture with polymers made from emissions? – Packaging Europe

Dr Hydra Rodrigues, technology analyst at IDTechEx, analyses the opportunities and challenges involved with using captured CO2 emissions as feedstock in the production of polymers, which the organisation suggests could facilitate a circular carbon economy.

One of the major environmental issues facing the planet today is the rising levels of plastic consumption and waste. According to a recent OECD study, we produced 460 million tonnes (Mt) of plastics in 2019, and consumption will continue to rise despite an expected increase in recycling technologies deployment.

As carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions also soar, the emerging carbon capture and utilization (CCU) industry proposes a solution for both issues: creating lower-carbon, degradable polymers using CO2emissions as the feedstock. The recent IDTechEx report Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Utilization 2022-2042: Technologies, Market Forecasts, and Players analyzes the opportunities and challenges of creating this proposed circular carbon economy.

How to make polymers from CO2?

There are at least three major pathways to convert CO2into polymers: electrochemistry, biological conversion, and thermocatalysis. The latter is the most mature CO2utilization technology, where CO2can either be utilized directly to yield CO2-based polymers, most notably biodegradable linear-chain polycarbonates (LPCs), or indirectly, through the production of chemical precursors (building blocks such as methanol, ethanol, acrylate derivatives, or mono-ethylene glycol [MEG]) for polymerization reactions.

LPCs made from CO2 include polypropylene carbonate (PPC), polyethylene carbonate (PEC), and polyurethanes (PUR). PUR is a major market for CO2-based polymers, with applications in electronics, mulch films, foams, and in the biomedical and healthcare sectors. CO2can comprise up to 50% (in weight) of a polyol, one of the main components in PUR. CO2-derived polyols (alcohols with two or more reactive hydroxyl groups per molecule) are made by combining CO2with cyclic ethers (oxygen-containing, ring-like molecules called epoxides). The polyol is then combined with an isocyanate component to make PUR.

Companies such as Econic, Covestro, and Aramco Performance Materials (with intellectual property acquired from Novomer) have developed novel catalysts to facilitate CO2-based polyol manufacturing. Fossil inputs are still necessary through this thermochemical pathway, but manufacturers can replace part of it with waste CO2, potentially saving on raw material costs.

In the realm of emerging technologies, chemical precursors for CO2-based polymers can be obtained through electrochemistry or microbial synthesis. Although electrochemical conversion of CO2into chemicals is at an earlier stage of development, biological pathways are more mature, having reached the early-commercialization stage. Recent advances in genetic engineering and process optimization have led to the use of chemoautotrophic microorganisms in synthetic biological routes to convert CO2into chemicals, fuels, and even proteins.

Unlike thermochemical synthesis, these biological pathways generally use conditions approaching ambient temperature and pressure, with the potential to be less energy-intensive and costly at scale. Notably, the California-based start-up Newlight is bringing into market a direct biological route to polymers, where its microbe turns captured CO2, air, and methane into polyhydroxybutyrate (PHB), an enzymatically degradable polymer.

Currently, the scale of CO2-based polymer manufacturing is still minor compared to the incumbent petrochemical industry, but there are already successful commercial examples. One of the largest volumes available is aromatic polycarbonates (PC) made from CO2, being developed by Asahi Kasei in Taiwan since 2012.

More recently, the US-based company LanzaTech has successfully established partnerships with major brands such as Unilever, LOral, On, Danone, Zara, and Lulumelon to use microbes to convert captured carbon emissions from industrial processes into polymer precursors - ethanol and MEG - for manufacturing of packaging items, shoes, and textiles.

Questions remain

Although the idea of reusing waste greenhouse gases as raw material seems like a win-win proposition, many viability questions arise for each CO2utilization pathway. Will it truly lead to emission reductions? What are the financial and practical barriers to its commercialization? Can it scale to address climate change meaningfully?

These are some of the tough questions IDTechEx addressed in the latest report Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Utilization 2022-2042: Technologies, Market Forecasts, and Players, focusing not only on CO2use in the polymer and chemical markets, but also in enhanced oil recovery, building materials, fuels, and biological yield-boosting.

The bottom line

Not all CO2utilization pathways are equally beneficial to climate goals and not all will be economically scalable. Scarce resources that have alternative uses must be allocated where they are most likely to generate economic value and climate change mitigation.

As the worlds thirst for plastics does not seem to fade, a circular carbon economy may help maintain peoples lifestyles by fostering a petrochemical industry that sees waste CO2 as a viable feedstock.

Go here to see the original:

How can the plastics industry harness carbon capture with polymers made from emissions? - Packaging Europe

One shot treatment for HIV could be on its way – Intermountain Jewish News

Engineering a patients blood cells to secrete anti-HIV antibodies could form the basis of a groundbreaking vaccine or one-shot treatment for the HIV virus that causes AIDS, according to a new international research study.

Molecular biologist Adi Barzel.

The new research, as described in the journal Nature, was led by molecular biologist Adi Barzel and PhD student Alessio Nehmad from Tel Aviv Universitys school of neurobiology, biochemistry and biophysics in collaboration with Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center and additional researchers from Israel and the US.

The one-time injection was developed in Barzels laboratory using type B white blood cells that would be genetically engineered inside the patients body to secrete neutralizing antibodies against the HIV virus that causes the disease.

Formed in bone marrow, B cells are responsible for generating antibodies against viruses, bacteria and more. When they mature, B cells move into the blood and lymphatic system and throughout the body.

Barzel said that until now, only a few scientists, and we among them, had been able to engineer B cells outside of the body. In this study we were the first to do this in the body and to make these cells generate desired antibodies.

The genetic engineering is done with viral carriers derived from viruses that were engineered so as not to cause damage but only to bring the gene coded for the antibody into the B cells in the body.

All model animals that received the treatment responded well and had high quantities of the desired antibody in their blood, he reported.

When the engineered B cells encounter the virus, the virus stimulates and encourages them to divide, so we are utilizing the very cause of the disease to combat it, Barzel said.

If the virus changes, the B cells will also change accordingly in order to combat it, so we have created the first medication ever that can evolve in the body and defeat viruses in the arms race.

Barzel said that based on the study, researchers expect that over the coming years, they would be able to use the method to produce medication for AIDS and other infectious diseases, including certain types of cancer caused by a virus, such as cervical, neck and head cancer.

Related

The rest is here:

One shot treatment for HIV could be on its way - Intermountain Jewish News

Genetic Engineering – Courses, Subjects, Eligibility …

Genetic Engineering additionally called genetic modification or genetic manipulation is the immediate control of a living being's genes using biotechnology. It is an arrangement of innovations used to change the hereditary forms of cells, including the exchange of qualities inside and across species limits to create enhanced or novel living beings.

Genetic Engineering has been connected in various fields including research, medicine, industrial biotechnology and agriculture. In research, GMOs are utilized to contemplate quality capacity and articulation through loss of function, gain of function, tracking and expression experiments. By thumping out genes responsible for specific conditions it is possible to create animal model organisms of human diseases. And in addition to producing hormones, immunizations and different drug genetic engineering can possibly fix hereditary diseases through quality treatment. Similar strategies that are utilized to create medications can likewise have mechanical applications, for example, producing enzymes for detergents, cheeses and different products.

The ascent of commercialised genetically modified crops has given a financial advantage to agriculturists in a wide range of nations, however, has additionally been the wellspring of a large portion of the debate encompassing the innovation. This has been available since its initial implementation, the primary field trials were destroyed by anti-GM activists. In spite of the fact that there is a logical accord that at presently accessible sustenance got from GM crops represents no more serious hazard to human wellbeing than regular nourishment, GM sustenance security is the main concern with critics.

Genetic engineering is the study of genes and the science of heredity. Genetic engineers or geneticists study living organisms ranging from human being to crops and even bacteria.

These professionals also conduct researches which is a major part of their work profile. The experiments are conducted to determine the origin and governing laws of a particular inherited trait. These traits include medical condition, diseases etc. The study is further used to seek our determinants responsible for the inherited trait.

Genetic engineers or Geneticists keep on finding ways to enhance their work profile depending on the place and organization they are working with. In manufacturing, these professionals will develop new pharmaceutical or agricultural products while in a medical setting, they advise patients on the diagnosed medical conditions that are inherited and also treat patients on the same.

Skill sets for Genetic engineers or Geneticists

Strong understanding of scientific methods and rules

complex problem solving and critical thinking

ability to use computer-aided design (CAD)

graphics or photo imaging

PERL, Python

word processing software programs

excellent mathematical, deductive and inductive reasoning, reading, writing, and oral comprehension skills

ability to use lasers spectrometers, light scattering equipment, binocular light compound microscopes, bench top centrifuges, or similar laboratory equipment

Typical responsibilities of a Genetic Engineering or Geneticist includes:

When a genetic engineer gains a year of experience, one of the regions they can indulge into is hereditary advising, which includes offering data, support and counsel on hereditary conditions to your patients.

An individual aspiring to pursue a professional degree in Genetic Engineering can begin the BTech course after his/her 10+2 Science with Physics, Chemistry, Maths and Biology.

Admission to BTech in Genetic Engineering is made through entrance tests conducted in-house by various universities or through the scores of national engineering entrance examination like JEE for IITs/NITs & CFTIs across the country.

Genetic Engineering professionals require a bachelors or masters degree in Genetic Engineering or Genetic Sciences for entry-level careers. In any case, a doctoral qualification is required for those looking for free research professions. Important fields of study in Genetic Engineering incorporate natural chemistry, biophysics or related fields.

Genetic Engineers require a solid comprehension of logical techniques and guidelines, and in addition complex critical thinking and basic reasoning aptitudes. Phenomenal scientific, deductive and inductive thinking aptitudes, and in addition perusing, composing, and oral cognizance abilities are additionally expected to work in this field.

A semester- wise breakup of the course is tabulated below

SEMESTER I

SEMESTER II

Mathematics 1

Mathematics 2

English

Material Science

Physics

Principles of Environmental Science

Chemistry

Biochemistry

Basic Engineering 1

Basic Engineering 2

-

Cell Biology

-

Value Education

SEMESTER III

SEMESTER IV

Enzyme Technology

Basic Molecular Techniques

Genetics & Cytogenetics

Molecular Biology

Immunology

Stoichiometry and Engineering Thermodynamics

Microbiology

Bio-press Principles

Mechanical Operations & heat Transfer

Biostatistics

German Language Phase 1/French Language Phase 1/Japanese Language Phase 1

German Language Phase 2/Japanese Language Phase 2/French Language Phase 2

-

SEMESTER V

SEMESTER VI

Advanced Molecular Techniques

Recombinant DNA Technology

Functional Genomics and Microarray Technology

Bioinformatics

Momentum Transfer

Chemical Reaction Engineering

Bioprocess Engineering

Gene Therapy

Biophysics

Biosensors and Biochips

Plant Tissue Culture and Transgenic Technology

-

Personality Development

-

SEMESTER VII

SEMESTER VIII

Bio-separation Technology

Project Work

Animal Cell Culture and Transgenic Technology

Bio-Safety, Bio-ethics, IPR & Patients

Nano-biotechnology in Healthcare

-

Stem Cell Biology

-

Aspirants who wish to join the engineering industry as a genetic engineer can apply for the following jobs profiles available:

JOB PROFILE

JOB DESCRIPTION

Genetic Engineer

They apply their knowledge ofengineering, biology, and biomechanical principles into the design, development, and evaluation of biological and health systems and products, such as artificial organs, prostheses, instrumentation, medical information systems, and health care and management.

Lecturer/Professor

They teach at undergraduate and graduate level in areas allocated and reviewed from time to time by the Head of Department.

Research Scientist

They are responsible for designing, undertaking and analyzing information from controlled laboratory-based investigations, experiments and trials.

Scientific/Medical Writer

The research, prepare and coordinate scientific publications. The medical writer is responsible for researching, writing and editing clinical/statistical reports and study protocols, and summarizing data from clinical studies.

Most of the engineering educational institutes shortlist candidates for admission Into BTech in Genetic Engineering course on the basis of engineering entrance exams. These entrance exams are either conducted at the national level like JEE or held in-house by various engineering institutes in the country.

Some of the popular engineering entrance examinations aspirants should consider appearing for admissions to UG and PG level Automobile engineering courses are:

Q. Which college is best for genetic engineering?

A. SRM University Chennai Tamil Nadu, Bharath University Chennai Tamil Nadu, Aryabhatta Knowledge University Patna Bihar, Jawaharlal Nehru Centre for Advanced Scientific Research Bangalore are some of the institutes offering genetic engineering

Q. Is Jee required for genetic engineering?

A. NITs and IITs across India does not offer genetic engineering. But there are 23 collages which take admission on the basis of JEE main

Q. What is the qualification for genetic engineering?

A. For admission to BTech Genetic Engineering course, the candidate is needed to have passed the Higher Secondary School Certificate (10+2) examination from a recognized Board of education with Biology, Physics and Chemistry as main subjects with a minimum aggregate score of 60%.

Q. Does IIT offer genetic engineering?

A. No, IIT directly does not offer genetic engineering. Candidates have to take Life Sciences in graduation or Biotechnology from any engineering college in India.

Read the original post:

Genetic Engineering - Courses, Subjects, Eligibility ...

Research Snapshot: Producing green fuel, and more rapid determination of the biological consequences of gen… – Vanderbilt University

THE IDEA

A team of Vanderbilt researchers led byJamey Young, Cornelius Vanderbilt Professor of Engineering,John McLean, department chair and Stevenson Professor of Chemistry, and Carl Johnson, Cornelius Vanderbilt Professor of Biological Sciences, has described a novel method for rapidly characterizing the biological impact of genetic editing on bacteria. The new approach enables researchers to take the consequences of specific genetic edits into account as they engineer the production of specific chemicals from bacteria.

Ultimately the goal of this work is to discover the best way to genetically modify blue-green algae called cyanobacteria to produce fatty acid molecules that are used as a source of clean energy.Youngled this component of the work. The advanced analytical techniques developed in the McLean lab will enable our project team to rapidly engineer cyanobacteria and other microbes for high-yield production of medium-chain free fatty acids, which are readily converted into fuels, he said.

Rather than probing one gene edit, we are probing multiple bacterial strains with different gene edits to discern which are productive for what we want to accomplishand to understand all the consequences of gene editing on the bacterias overall biology, McLean said. We can characterize many gene editsor strainsin one experiment.

The research could lead to much shorter timeframes for green fuel production, drug discovery and the translation of research from the lab to the public in a variety of disciplines.

The societal, environmental and economic benefits of this type of energy production are massive, McLean said.

Further, the researchers were able to rapidly examine the consequences of gene editing on the target and on the complete biology of the organism, instead of the traditional examination of one molecule at a time. As a result, researchers can look at multiple gene edits at once, cutting down the time for synthetic experiments.

Imagine growing algae at your home in a resealable zipper storage bag that is really making fuel for your energy needs, McLean said. That is a very long-term outcome of this research, but we are one step closer toward optimizing how bacterial strains produce this kind of fuel.

With expertise and access to myriad state-of-the-art microscopy instruments, McLean and his team are continuing to develop new approaches that enhance the technologys performance and outputs.

This work was supported by U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research Division under award number DE-SC00019404 and the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science, Office of Biological and Environmental Research, Genomic Science Program under award number DE-SC0022207. Financial support for aspects of this research was also provided by the National Institutes of Health grants NIH NIGMS R01GM092218, NIGMS R37GM067152, NCI R03CA222-452-01 and NCI 1F32GM128344-01, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency under Assistance Agreement 83573601, and the U.S. Army Research Office and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency under Cooperative Agreement W911 NF-14-2-0022.

With the McLean laboratorys status as aWaters Center of Innovation, the team had access to instrumental and early-stage technology that made this work possible.

The article, Accelerating Strain Phenotyping with Desorption Electrospray Ionization-Imaging Mass Spectrometry and Untargeted Analysis of Intact Microbial Colonies,waspublished inthejournalProceedings of the National Academy of SciencesonDec. 7.

The papers co-authorsincludeJody C. May, research assistant professor of chemistry, andBrian F. Pfleger, professor of chemical and biological engineering at University of WisconsinMadison. The papers first authors,Piyoosh BabeleandBerkley M. Ellis, are graduate students in the Young and McLean labs, respectively.

Read more:

Research Snapshot: Producing green fuel, and more rapid determination of the biological consequences of gen... - Vanderbilt University

Missing Genetic Switch at the Origin of Malformations During Embryonic Development – SciTechDaily

UNIGE Scientists have discovered how the absence of a genetic switch can lead to malformations during embryonic development.

Embryonic development follows delicate stages: for everything to go well, many genes must coordinate their activity according to a very meticulous scheme and tempo. This precision mechanism sometimes fails, leading to more or less disabling malformations. By studying the Pitx1 gene, one of the genes involved in the construction of the lower limbs, a team from the University of Geneva (UNIGE), in Switzerland, has discovered how a small disturbance in the activation process of this gene is at the origin of clubfoot, a common foot malformation. Indeed, even a fully functional gene cannot act properly without one of its genetic switches. These short DNA sequences provide the signal for the transcription of DNA into RNA, and are essential for this mechanism. And when just one of these switches is missing, the proportion of cells where the gene is active decreases, preventing the lower limbs from being built properly. These results, which can be read in the journal Nature Communications, highlight the hitherto largely underestimated role of genetic switches in developmental disorders.

During embryonic development, hundreds of genes must be precisely activated or repressed for organs to build properly. This control of activity is directed by short DNA sequences that, by binding certain proteins in the cell nucleus, act as true ON/OFF switches. When the switch is turned on, it initiates the transcription of a gene into RNA, which in turn is translated into a protein that can then perform a specific task, explains Guillaume Andrey, professor in the Department of Genetic and Developmental Medicine at the UNIGE Faculty of Medicine, who led this research. Without this, genes would be continuously switched on or off, and therefore unable to act selectively, in the right place and at the right time.

In general, each gene has several switches to ensure that the mechanism is robust. However, could the loss of one of these switches have consequences? This is what we wanted to test here by taking as a model the Pitx1 gene, whose role in the construction of the lower limbs is well known, says Raquel Rouco, a post-doctoral researcher in Guillaume Andreys laboratory and co-first author of this study.

To do this, the scientists modified mouse stem cells using the genetic engineering tool CRISPR-CAS 9, which makes it possible to add or remove specific elements of the genome. Here, we removed one of Pitx1s switches, called Pen, and added a fluorescence marker that allows us to visualize the gene activation, explains Olimpia Bompadre, a doctoral student in the research team and co-first author. These modified cells are then aggregated with mouse embryonic cells for us to study their early stages of development.

Usually, about 90% of cells in future legs activate the Pitx1 gene, while 10% of cells do not. However, when we removed the Pen switch, we found that the proportion of cells that did not activate Pitx1 rose from 10 to 20%, which was enough to modify the construction of the musculoskeletal system and to induce a clubfoot, explains Guillaume Andrey. Indeed, the proportion of inactive cells increased particularly in the immature cells of the lower limbs and in the irregular connective tissue, a tissue that is essential for building the musculoskeletal system.

Beyond the Pitx1 gene and clubfoot, the UNIGE scientists have discovered a general principle whose mechanism could be found in a large number of genes. Flawed genetic switches could thus be at the origin of numerous malformations or developmental diseases. Moreover, a gene does not control the development of a single organ in the body, but is usually involved in the construction of a wide range of organs. A non-lethal malformation, such as clubfoot for example, could be an indicator of disorders elsewhere in the body that, while not immediately visible, could be much more dangerous. If we can accurately interpret the action of each mutation, we could not only read the information in the genome to find the root cause of a malformation, but also predict effects in other organs, which would silently develop, in order to intervene as early as possible, the authors conclude.

Reference: Cell-specific alterations in Pitx1 regulatory landscape 1 activation caused 2 by the loss of a single enhancer 13 December 2021, Nature Communication.DOI: 10.1038/s41467-021-27492-1

Original post:

Missing Genetic Switch at the Origin of Malformations During Embryonic Development - SciTechDaily

Human genetic enhancement – Wikipedia

Human genetic enhancement or human genetic engineering refers to human enhancement by means of a genetic modification. This could be done in order to cure diseases (gene therapy), prevent the possibility of getting a particular disease[1] (similarly to vaccines), to improve athlete performance in sporting events (gene doping), or to change physical appearance, metabolism, and even improve physical capabilities and mental faculties such as memory and intelligence.These genetic enhancements may or may not be done in such a way that the change is heritable (which has raised concerns within the scientific community).[2]

Genetic modification in order to cure genetic diseases is referred to as gene therapy. Many such gene therapies are available, made it through all phases of clinical research and are approved by the FDA. Between 1989 and December 2018, over 2,900 clinical trials were conducted, with more than half of them in phase I.[3] As of 2017, Spark Therapeutics' Luxturna (RPE65 mutation-induced blindness) and Novartis' Kymriah (Chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy) are the FDA's first approved gene therapies to enter the market. Since that time, drugs such as Novartis' Zolgensma and Alnylam's Patisiran have also received FDA approval, in addition to other companies' gene therapy drugs. Most of these approaches utilize adeno-associated viruses (AAVs) and lentiviruses for performing gene insertions, in vivo and ex vivo, respectively. ASO / siRNA approaches such as those conducted by Alnylam and Ionis Pharmaceuticals require non-viral delivery systems, and utilize alternative mechanisms for trafficking to liver cells by way of GalNAc transporters.

Some people are immunocompromised and their bodies are hence much less capable of fending off and defeating diseases (i.e. influenza, ...). In some cases this is due to genetic flaws[clarification needed] or even genetic diseases such as SCID. Some gene therapies have already been developed or are being developed to correct these genetic flaws/diseases, hereby making these people less susceptible to catching additional diseases (i.e. influenza, ...).[4]

In November 2018, Lulu and Nana were created.[5] By using clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeat (CRISPR)-Cas9, a gene editing technique, they disabled a gene called CCR5 in the embryos, aiming to close the protein doorway that allows HIV to enter a cell and make the subjects immune to the HIV virus.

Athletes might adopt gene therapy technologies to improve their performance.[6] Gene doping is not known to occur, but multiple gene therapies may have such effects. Kayser et al. argue that gene doping could level the playing field if all athletes receive equal access. Critics claim that any therapeutic intervention for non-therapeutic/enhancement purposes compromises the ethical foundations of medicine and sports.[7]

Other hypothetical gene therapies could include changes to physical appearance, metabolism, mental faculties such as memory and intelligence.

Some congenital disorders (such as those affecting the muscoskeletal system) may affect physical appearance, and in some cases may also cause physical discomfort. Modifying the genes causing these congenital diseases (on those diagnosed to have mutations of the gene known to cause these diseases) may prevent this.

Also changes in the mystatin gene[8] may alter appearance.

Behavior may also be modified by genetic intervention.[9] Some people may be aggressive, selfish, ... and may not be able to function well in society.[clarification needed] There is currently research ongoing on genes that are or may be (in part) responsible for selfishness (i.e. ruthlessness gene, aggression (i.e. warrior gene), altruism (i.e. OXTR, CD38, COMT, DRD4, DRD5, IGF2, GABRB2[10])

There is some research going on on the hypothetical treatment of psychiatric disorders by means of gene therapy. It is assumed that, with gene-transfer techniques, it is possible (in experimental settings using animal models) to alter CNS gene expression and thereby the intrinsic generation of molecules involved in neural plasticity and neural regeneration, and thereby modifying ultimately behaviour.[11]

In recent years, it was possible to modify ethanol intake in animal models. Specifically, this was done by targeting the expression of the aldehyde dehydrogenase gene (ALDH2), lead to a significantly altered alcohol-drinking behaviour.[12] Reduction of p11, a serotonin receptor binding protein, in the nucleus accumbens led to depression-like behaviour in rodents, while restoration of the p11 gene expression in this anatomical area reversed this behaviour.[13]

Recently, it was also shown that the gene transfer of CBP (CREB (c-AMP response element binding protein) binding protein) improves cognitive deficits in an animal model of Alzheimers dementia via increasing the expression of BDNF (brain-derived neurotrophic factor).[14] The same authors were also able to show in this study that accumulation of amyloid- (A) interfered with CREB activity which is physiologically involved in memory formation.

In another study, it was shown that A deposition and plaque formation can be reduced by sustained expression of the neprilysin (an endopeptidase) gene which also led to improvements on the behavioural (i.e. cognitive) level.[15]

Similarly, the intracerebral gene transfer of ECE (endothelin-converting enzyme) via a virus vector stereotactically injected in the right anterior cortex and hippocampus, has also shown to reduce A deposits in a transgenic mouse model of Alzeimers dementia.[16]

There is also research going on on genoeconomics, a protoscience that is based on the idea that a person's financial behavior could be traced to their DNA and that genes are related to economic behavior. As of 2015, the results have been inconclusive. Some minor correlations have been identified.[17][18]

George Church has compiled a list of potential genetic modifications based on scientific studies for possibly advantageous traits such as less need for sleep, cognition-related changes that protect against Alzheimer's disease, disease resistances, higher lean muscle mass and enhanced learning abilities along with some of the associated studies and potential negative effects.[19][20]

Follow this link:

Human genetic enhancement - Wikipedia

Viewpoint: An argument for CRISPR crops ‘Very little about modern life is natural and it’s time we all got over it’ – Genetic Literacy Project

Life goes on as gene-edited foods begin to hit the market. Japanese consumers have recently started buying tomatoes that fight high blood pressure, and Americanshave been consuming soyengineered to produce high amounts of heart-healthy oils for a little over two years. Few people noticed these developments because, as scientists have said for a long time, the safety profile of a crop is not dictated by the breeding method that produced it. For all intents and purposes, it seems that food-safety regulators have done a reasonablejob of safeguarding public health against whatever hypothetical risks gene editing may pose.Credit: Karuchibe

But this has not stopped critics of genetic engineering from advocating for more federal oversight of CRISPR and othertechniquesused to make discrete changes to the genomes of plants, animals and other organisms we use for food or medicine. Over at The Conversation, a team of scientists recently made the case for tighter rules inCalling the latest gene technologies natural is a semantic distraction they must still be regulated.

Many scientists have defended gene editing, in part, by arguing that it simply mimics nature. A mutation that boosts the nutrient content of rice, for example, is the same whether it was induced by a plant breeder or some natural phenomenon. Indeed, the DNA of plants and animals we eatcontains untold numbersof harmless, naturally occurringmutations. But The Conversation authors will havenone of this:

Unfortunately, the risks from technology dont disappear by calling it natural Proponents of deregulation of gene technology use the naturalness argument to make their case. But we argue this is not a good basis for deciding whether a technology should be regulated.

They have written a very longpeer-reviewed articleoutlining a regulatory framework based on scale of use.The ideais that the more widely a technology is implemented, the greater risk it may pose to human health and the environment, which necessitates regulatory control points to ensure its safe use. Its an interesting proposal, but its plagued by several serious flaws.

The most significant issue with a scale-based regulatory approachis that its a reaction to risks that have never materialized. This isnt to say that a potentially harmful genetically engineered organism will never be commercialized. But if were going to upend our biotechnology regulatory framework, we need to do so based on real-world evidence. Some experts have actually argued, based on decades of safety data, that the US over-regulates biotech products. As biologist and ACSHadvisorDr. Henry Miller and legal scholar John Cohrssen wroterecently in Nature:

After 35 years of real-world experience with genetically engineered plants and microorganisms, and countless risk-assessment experiments, it is past time to reevaluate the rationale for, and the costs and benefits of, the case-by-case reviews of genetically engineered products now required by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), US Department of Agriculture (USDA) and US Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

Real-world data aside for the moment, there are some theoretical problems with the scalabilitymodel as well. Theargument assumes thatrisks associated with gene editing proliferate as use of the technology expands, because each gene edit carries a certain level of risk. This is a false assumption, as plant geneticist Kevin Folta pointed out on a recentepisode of the podcastwe co-host (21 minute mark).

Scientists have a variety of tools with which to monitor and limit the effects of specific gene edits. For example,proteins known asanti-CRISPRs can be utilized to halt the gene-editing machinery so it makes only the changes we want it to. University of Toronto biochemist Karen Maxwell has explained how this couldwork in practice:

In genome editing applications, anti-CRISPRs may provide a valuable off switch for Cas9 activity for therapeutic uses and gene drives. One concern of CRISPR-Cas gene editing technology is the limited ability to control its activity after it has been delivered to the cell . which can lead to off-target mutations. Anti-CRISPRs can potentially be exploited to target Cas9 activity to particular tissues or organs, to particular points of the cell cycle, or to limit the amount of time it is active

Suffice it to say that these and other safeguards significantly alter the risk equation and weaken concerns about a gene-edits-gone-wild scenario. Parenthetically, scientists design these sorts of preventative measures as they developmoregenetic engineering applications for widespread use. This is why the wide variety of cars in production todayhave safety featuresthat would have been unheard of in years past.

To bolster their argument, The Conversation authors made the following analogy:

Imagine if other technologies with the capacity to harm were governed by resemblance to nature. Should we deregulate nuclear bombs because the natural decay chain of uranium-238 also produces heat, gamma radiation and alpha and beta particles? We inherently recognize the fallacy of this logic. The technology risk equation is more complicated than a supercilious its just like nature argument

If someone has to resort to this kind of rhetoric, the chances are excellent that their argument is weak. Fat Man and Little Boy,the bombs droppedon Japan in 1945, didnt destroy two cities because a nuclear physicist in New Mexico made a technical mistake. These weapons are designed to wreak havoc. Tomatoes bred to produce more of an amino acid, in contrast, are not.

The point of arguing that gene-editing techniques mimic natural processes isnt to assert that natural stuff is good; therefore, gene editing is also good. Instead, the point is to illustrate that inducing mutations in the genomes of plants and animals is not novel or uniquely risky. Even the overpriced products marketed as all-naturalhave been improvedby mutations resulting from many years of plant breeding.

Nonetheless, some scientistshave arguedthat reframing the gene-editing conversation in terms of risk vs benefit would be a smarter approach than making comparisons to nature. I agree with them, so lets start now. The benefits of employing gene editing to improve our food supply and treat disease far outweigh the potential risks, which we can mitigate. Very little about modern life is naturaland its time we all got over it.

Cameron J. English is the director of bio-sciences at theAmerican Council on Science and Health. Visithis websiteand follow ACSH on Twitter@ACSHorg

A version of this article was originally posted at theAmerican Council on Science and Healthand is reposted here with permission. The American Council on Science and Health can be found on Twitter@ACSHorg

Go here to see the original:

Viewpoint: An argument for CRISPR crops 'Very little about modern life is natural and it's time we all got over it' - Genetic Literacy Project

New gene-writing technology to obtain more effective and safe therapies developed – EurekAlert

image:From left to right: Marc Gell, Dimitrije Ivani, Avencia Snchez-Mejas and Maria Pallars. view more

Credit: UPF

An international, multidisciplinary team of researchers from theTranslational Synthetic Biology Laboratoryat Pompeu Fabra University (Barcelona, Spain), led by Dr.Marc Gell, has published an article in the scientific journalNature Communicationsshowing the potential of Find Cut-and-Transfer (FiCAT) technology as a state-of-the-art tool forgene writingto develop advanced therapies that are safer and more effective in their future clinical application in patients withgenetic and oncological diseasesthat have few treatment options.

The UPF Translational Synthetic Biology Laboratory has been working on gene editing and synthetic biology applied to gene therapies since 2017. FiCAT technology is an important scientific breakthrough to overcome the current limitations of the technology used today for genome editing and gene therapy.

Human genome engineering has significantly progressed in the last decade with the development of new editing tools, but there was still a technology gap that would allow therapeutic genes to be transferred efficiently with few size limitations, comments Dr. Marc Gell, supervisor of the study.

In this work, the researchers develop an efficient and precise programmable gene writing technology based on the combination of modified proteins CRISPR-cas and piggy Bac transposase (PB), succeeding in inserting small and large fragments. Dr.Maria Pallars, co-first author of the study explains that: CRISPR stands out for its precision when editing small fragments. However, transposases allow us to insert large fragments but in an uncontrolled manner. We have combined the best of each technology.

In this way, FiCAT technology allows us to precisely insert large fragments of DNA into the genome. This means we can develop therapeutic solutions to diseases that currently have no treatment, such as Duchenne muscular dystrophy, or some cases of hereditary blindness, in which the affected gene is large in size, asserts Dr.Avencia Snchez-Mejas, a senior researcher with the group and co-supervisor of the work.

They tested the technology in human and mouse cell lines achieving efficiencies of 522% with minimal off-target insertions and have demonstrated on-target gene transfer in vivo in mouse liver and germline cells in mouse models. Lastly, they performed a directed evolution of FiCAT and further improved efficiency by 25-30%. We have been progressively modifying enzymes so that they acquire the function we were looking for, selecting the ones that displayed a better function, detailsDimitrije Ivani, co-first author of the article. Our work is a clear example that enzyme engineering in the context of genome editing has great potential, he concludes.

UPF has transferred FiCAT technology via the spinoffIntegra Therapeutics, founded in 2020 by the researchers Marc Gell and Avencia Snchez-Mejas, seeking to get this scientific knowledge and technological capacity to reach the biopharmaceutical industry to develop safe and efficient advanced technologies that reach patients. Recently, Integra Tx has obtained 4.5 million euros in funding from Advent France Biotechnology (France), Invivo Capital (Spain) and Takeda Ventures (USA).

The work published in Nature Communications was carried out with funding from the Societal challenges AEI, AGAUR- PRODUCTE, UPGRADE-Horizon 2020 of the European Commission; la Caixa CaixaImpulse Validate and CaixaImpulse Consolidate programmes; the Ramn Areces Foundation; and the Ramn y Cajal programme of the Spanish Ministry of Economy, Industry and Competitiveness.

Reference article:

Pallars-Masmitj, M; Ivani, D; Mir-Pedrol, J; Jaraba-Wallace, J; Tagliani, T; Oliva, B; Snchez-Mejas, A; Gell, M. Find and cut-and-transfer (FiCAT) mammalian genome engineering. Nature Communications (2021). DOI: 10.1038/s41467-021-27183-x.

Nature Communications

Experimental study

Cells

Find and cut-and-transfer (FiCAT) mammalian genome engineering

3-Dec-2021

A.S.-M., D.I., M.G. and M.P.-M. have filed patent applications on FiCAT technology. Patent applicant: Pompeu Fabra University; application number: PCT/IB2020/055507; status of application: pending; specific aspect of manuscript covered in patent application: this patent application covered the general aspects of DNA binding proteins fused to integrases and transposases. Specifically, Fig. 1b, Supplementary Fig. 2a and preliminary data on activity characterization of some of the hyPB mutants included in Fig. 1c, d were disclosed in this patent application. A.S.-M. and M.G. are shareholders of Integra Therapeutics, company that licensed FiCAT technology. The remaining authors declare no competing interests.

Disclaimer: AAAS and EurekAlert! are not responsible for the accuracy of news releases posted to EurekAlert! by contributing institutions or for the use of any information through the EurekAlert system.

Read this article:

New gene-writing technology to obtain more effective and safe therapies developed - EurekAlert

Researchers Dig Up Genes and Cells Related to Skull Formation in Mice – Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology News

In a new mouse study, scientists at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai demonstrate how the activity of one gene, turned on in a newly discovered group of bone-bordering cells, may play an important role in shaping the skull.

The findings are published in the journalNature Communications in a paper titled, Single-cell analysis identifies a key role for Hhip in murine coronal suture development, and led by Greg Holmes, PhD, assistant professor of genetics and genomic sciences at Icahn Mount Sinai.

Craniofacial development depends on formation and maintenance of sutures between bones of the skull, the researchers wrote. In sutures, growth occurs at osteogenic fronts along the edge of each bone, and suture mesenchyme separates adjacent bones. Here, we perform single-cell RNA-seq analysis of the embryonic, wild type murine coronal suture to define its population structure.

Researchers focused on the cells of the coronal suture, a fibrous joint that connects the front and middle bone plates.

The Holmes lab worked with researchers in the labs of Bin Zhang, PhD, Harm van Bakel, PhD, and Ethylin Wang Jabs, MD, of Icahn Mount Sinai. Together they studied how the genetic activity in the cells of the coronal suture changes during early development.

Their findings suggested that a gene encoding a molecule called hedgehog interacting protein (HHIP) plays a unique role in coronal suture development. The researchers observed the gene was more active in a novel group of mesenchyme cells than it was in osteoblasts.

Using single-cell with bulk RNA-seq analysis we have better defined the distinctive composition of the coronal suture at the transcriptional and cell population levels, the researchers wrote.

Looking toward the future, the researchers hope that advanced single-cell genetic studies like this one will pave the way for a more thorough understanding of how a skull is shaped under healthy and disease conditions.

Our transcriptomic approach greatly expands opportunities for hypothesis-driven research in coronal and other suture development, concluded the researchers.

See more here:

Researchers Dig Up Genes and Cells Related to Skull Formation in Mice - Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology News

Poseida Therapeutics Provides Update on BCMA-Targeted CAR-T Clinical Trials at the 2021 American Society of Hematology (ASH) Annual Meeting – Yahoo…

P-BCMA-101 demonstrated strong anti-tumor activity and was well tolerated in nearly 100 patients with R/R multiple myeloma at the time of data cutoff

P-BCMA-101 in combination with rituximab achieved an improved overall response rate of 78% and 100% overall survival

Learnings from P-BCMA-101 informed development of the Company's first fully allogeneic CAR-T product candidate, P-BCMA-ALLO1

SAN DIEGO, Dec. 13, 2021 /PRNewswire/ -- Poseida Therapeutics, Inc. (Nasdaq: PSTX), a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company utilizing proprietary genetic engineering platform technologies to create cell and gene therapeutics with the capacity to cure, today reported interim results from its Phase 1/2 PRIME clinical trial of P-BCMA-101 for the treatment of relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (R/R MM) at the 2021 American Society of Hematology (ASH) Annual Meeting.

Poseida Therapeutics (PRNewsfoto/Poseida Therapeutics, Inc.)

The results show that P-BCMA-101, a non-viral transposon-based autologous CAR-T, was well tolerated and demonstrated strong anti-tumor activity in advanced, late line R/R MM patients. The learnings from P-BCMA-101 informed the development of the Company's first allogeneic program, P-BCMA-ALLO1 which is also being evaluated in R/R MM patients. The Company previously announced that it is winding down the P-BCMA-101 autologous program in favor of the allogeneic program, P-BCMA-ALLO1.

"We are encouraged by the outcomes seen from our clinical trial of P-BCMA-101, results that continue to validate our approach and that have informed P-BCMA-ALLO1, our first fully allogeneic CAR-T program for patients with multiple myeloma, as well as our other programs. Our focus is on creating differentiated product candidates with a high percentage of T stem cell memory (Tscm) cells," said Eric Ostertag, M.D., Ph.D., chief executive officer of Poseida Therapeutics. "Looking ahead, we continue to advance P-BCMA-ALLO1 and P-MUC1C-ALLO1 and look forward to presenting data in 2022 for both of these allogeneic programs."

Story continues

The PRIME trial is a Phase 1/2, open label 3+3 single dose escalation of P-BCMA-101 CAR-T cells. The primary objective of the study is to determine the safety and maximum tolerated dose of P-BCMA-101 based on dose limiting toxicities (DLT), and the key secondary objective is to assess the anti-myeloma effect of the product. The median patient age was 62, with a median time since diagnosis of approximately 5.8 years. Patients were heavily pre-treated, with a median of 7 prior lines of therapy (2-18). As of the data cut-off date of October 15, 2021, a total of 98 patients have been dosed with P-BCMA-101.

The best observed treatment regimen was a combination with rituximab (n=14), with an overall response rate (ORR) of 78%, a VGPR/sCR rate of 43% and 100% overall survival at the time of the data cutoff. Progression free survival was also improved with rituximab, with median overall survival rates not yet reached in several cohorts including the rituximab combination cohorts. Response rates for other cohorts are consistent with results previously reported.

Across the study, no dose-limiting toxicities were observed. 28% of patients developed cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and 7% of patients developed neurotoxicity. None of the patients developed Grade 3 or higher CRS, and 2% of patients developed Grade 3 neurotoxicity. There were no treatment-related deaths among the patient population and no patients needed ICU admission as a result of CAR-T related toxicities. 28 patients were treated on a fully outpatient basis.

"P-BCMA-101 demonstrated strong anti-tumor activity in advanced multiple myeloma patients, and cohorts to date have shown minimal CRS and neurotoxicity, which allows for safe administration in an outpatient environment and combinations with other therapies," said Caitlin Costello, M.D., Associate Clinical Professor of Medicine and member of the Division of Blood and Marrow Transplantation at the University of California, San Diego. "These data indicate that the piggyBac transposon-based platform is an attractive option for allogeneic CAR-T cells, which has led to a first-in-human Phase 1 study."

The Company's first fully allogeneic CAR-T cell product, P-BCMA-ALLO1 utilizes Poseida's proprietary piggyBac DNA delivery system and Cas-CLOVER site-specific gene editing system to create an allogeneic product that prevents both graft-vs-host and host-vs-graft diseases and also incorporates a next-generation BCMA binder. P-BCMA-ALLO1 manufacturing involves a proprietary "booster" molecule that allows for numerous doses to be produced from a single manufacturing run, while maintaining desirable Tscm cells, which can reach percentages in the 60-80% range.

The Investigational New Drug (IND) application for P-BCMA-ALLO1 was given a safe to proceed designation by the FDA in August 2021. The Phase 1 study is an open label, dose escalation study following a 3+3 design of dose escalation in subjects with R/R MM. The study will assess the safety and maximum tolerated dose of P-BCMA-ALLO1 based on dose limiting toxicities. Key secondary objectives of the study include the anti-myeloma effect and safety of P-BCMA-ALLO1.

About Poseida Therapeutics, Inc.Poseida Therapeutics is a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company dedicated to utilizing our proprietary genetic engineering platform technologies to create next generation cell and gene therapeutics with the capacity to cure. We have discovered and are developing a broad portfolio of product candidates in a variety of indications based on our core proprietary platforms, including our non-viral piggyBac DNA Delivery System, Cas-CLOVER Site-specific Gene Editing System and nanoparticle- and AAV-based gene delivery technologies. Our core platform technologies have utility, either alone or in combination, across many cell and gene therapeutic modalities and enable us to engineer our portfolio of product candidates that are designed to overcome the primary limitations of current generation cell and gene therapeutics. To learn more, visit http://www.poseida.com and connect with us on Twitter and LinkedIn.

Forward-Looking StatementStatements contained in this press release regarding matters that are not historical facts are "forward-looking statements" within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Such forward-looking statements include statements regarding, among other things, the potential benefits of Poseida's technology platforms and product candidates, Poseida's plans and strategy with respect to developing its technologies and product candidates, and anticipated timelines and milestones with respect to Poseida's development programs and manufacturing activities. Because such statements are subject to risks and uncertainties, actual results may differ materially from those expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements are based upon Poseida's current expectations and involve assumptions that may never materialize or may prove to be incorrect. Actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in such forward-looking statements as a result of various risks and uncertainties, which include, without limitation, risks and uncertainties associated with development and regulatory approval of novel product candidates in the biopharmaceutical industry and the other risks described in Poseida's filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. All forward-looking statement contained in this press release speak only as of the date on which they were made. Poseida undertakes no obligation to update such statements to reflect events that occur or circumstances that exist after the date on which they were made, except as required by law.

Cision

View original content to download multimedia:https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/poseida-therapeutics-provides-update-on-bcma-targeted-car-t-clinical-trials-at-the-2021-american-society-of-hematology-ash-annual-meeting-301442793.html

SOURCE Poseida Therapeutics, Inc.

Original post:

Poseida Therapeutics Provides Update on BCMA-Targeted CAR-T Clinical Trials at the 2021 American Society of Hematology (ASH) Annual Meeting - Yahoo...

Nature Communications paper published by two collaborating teams at Clarkson University (NY, USA) and Queensland University of Technology (Australia)…

Figure 1. Leading researchers in the collaborative project. The full list of the co-authors in the Nature Communication paper: Zhong Guo, Oleh Smutok, Wayne A. Johnston, Patricia Walden, Jacobus P. J. Ungerer, Thomas S. Peat, Janet Newman, Jake Parker, Tom Nebl, Caryn Hepburn, Artem Melman, Richard J. Suderman, Evgeny Katz, Kirill Alexandrov.

The best and most efficient way to perform multi-disciplinary research is by doing it in collaboration. One of such research programs, including synthetic biology, materials science, bioelectrochemistry, bioelectronics, and biosensors, has been performed in a close collaboration between scientists at the Department of Chemistry and Biomolecule Science, Clarkson University, Dr. Oleh Smutok, Dr. Artem Melman (deceased on November 25, 2021), and Dr. Evgeny Katz, with a team of Australian scientists led by Dr. Kirill Alexandrov, Queensland University of Technology (Figure 1). This collaboration being active for several years has been supported with grants from Human Frontiers Science Program (HFSP) and US Department of Defense with the total funding over 1 million dollars. The results from the collaborative efforts have been published in numerous scientific papers and covered by several patents. The most recent and impressive publication was a paper in Nature Communications one of the top scientific journals (Impact Factor 14.92). The paper entitled Design of a methotrexate-controlled chemical dimerization system and its use in bio-electronic devices (Nature Commun. 2021, 12 article No. 7137) reports on a novel artificial enzyme produced by genetic engineering that can be activated with a drug (methotrexate) molecules. The artificial enzyme was immobilized at an electrode surface and used for the drug biosensing with extremely high sensitivity and specificity (Figure 2).

In addition to the fundamental novelty of using the artificial signal-activated enzyme, the study is highly relevant for practical biomedical application. Methotrexate is a toxic drug used in anti-cancer chemotherapy and its overdose has serious, life-threatening side effects. Thus, the methotrexate analysis in biological fluids is important for keeping the drug at the optimal concentration. The study opens the future options for biomedical applications of the developed biosensor and possibilities for other biosensing systems based on the same concept. It should be noted that the success of this project was based on the collaboration of scientists with expertise in different areas, synthetic biology, synthetic organic chemistry, and bioelectrochemistry. This is an exemplary collaboration that serves as a model of performing multi-disciplinary research. While the artificial enzyme preparation was carried out by the Australian team led by Dr. Alexandrov, the bioelectrochemical study of the developed biosensor was performed by Dr. Smutok at Clarkson University. Both US and Australian teams are continuing their successful work combining synthetic biology and bioelectronics and are expecting many more interesting and practically important results. The scientific efforts are combined with the education of graduate and undergraduate students participating in the project.

Originally posted here:

Nature Communications paper published by two collaborating teams at Clarkson University (NY, USA) and Queensland University of Technology (Australia)...

Genome Editing Market to hit US$ 10691.0 Million, Globally, by 2025 at 17.0% CAGR: The Insight Partners – Digital Journal

The global genome editing market is expected to reach US$ 10,691.0 million by 2025 from US$ 3,210.1 million in 2017; it is estimated to grow at a CAGR of 17.0% from 2018 to 2027.

According The Insight Partners study on Genome Editing Market Forecast to 2027 COVID-19 Impact and Global Analysis by Technology, Application, End User, The report highlights trends existing in the market, and drivers and hindrances pertaining to the market growth. Factors such as Increase in funding for the genome editing, rising prevalence of the genetic disorders, rise in the advancements for genome editing technology and rise in the production of genetically modified crops are the driving factors for the growth of the market.

Genome editing is a technique that is utilized for the changes that are to be done in the DNA of a cell or an organism. The technique involves cutting DNA sequences for the addition or removing the DNA in the genome. The changes in the genome are done for the required characteristics of the cell. Genome editing is done for the research purpose, the treatment of the diseases, and the biotechnological purpose.

Get Sample PDF Copy of Genome Editing Market at: https://www.theinsightpartners.com/sample/TIPHE100000853/

Market Insights

Increase in Funding for the Genome Editing

The market for genome editing is expected to grow in the coming near future due to the growth factor that is driving the market is the increase in the funding. The different government in the different regions are increasing their funds and grants to develop genome editing research. Owing to genome editings advantages, the various government is supporting their public and private research and academic institutes for increasing the research activities for the genome editing and genetic engineering.

Across the world, funding is being provided by every nation. However, the more funds, for instance, in January 2018 US government announced donating US$ 190 million for research for the next six years. Also, the government is hoping to develop therapies to treat cancer and other diseases using gene editing. In addition, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has kept approximately US$ 45.5 million aside for the next four fiscal years for the Somatic Cell Genome Editing program. Moreover, in the Asia Pacific region, the countries are also investing more in the development of genome editing technology for two-three years back. For instance, in April 2016, Japan invested approximately US$76million for the five years for the creation of Japanese owned genome editing technologies.

Furthermore, the investments are made for private companies operating for genome editing. For instance, in August 2015, Editas Medicine is a company at the forefront of developing the gene-editing technology CRISPR has received US$ 120 million to create a new treatment for the conditions which include cancer, retinal diseases, and sickle cell anemia. Therefore, the rise in the funding for genome editing is likely to drive the market for genome editing in the forecast period. The rise in the funding will enhance the research and development of the gene-editing technologies and products for the researchers for efficient and effective genome editing. The funding will also enable the biopharmaceutical and pharmaceutical companies to develop technologies for the therapies using gene editing to treat and diagnose chronic diseases.

It also includes the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the market across all the regions. The Genome Editing Market , by region, is segmented into North America, Europe, Asia Pacific (APAC), Middle East and Africa (MEA), and South and Central America (SAM).

COVID-19 first began in Wuhan (China) during December 2019 and since then it has spread at a fast pace across the globe. The US, India, Brazil, Russia, France, the UK, Turkey, Italy, and Spain are some of the worst affected countries in terms confirmed cases and reported deaths. The COVID-19 has been affecting economies and industries in various countries due to lockdowns, travel bans, and business shutdowns.

Download the Latest COVID-19 Analysis on Genome Editing Market Growth Research Report at: https://www.theinsightpartners.com/covid-analysis-sample/TIPHE100000853

Based on technology, the genome editing market is segmented into transcription activator-like effector nucleases (TALENS), clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR), zinc finger nucleases (ZFNs), antisense RNA and others. In 2017, the CRISPR segment held the largest share of the market, by technology owing to the applications and its benefits offered. The TALENs segment is expected to grow at the fastest rate during the coming years.

Based on application, the genome editing market is segmented into genetic engineering, cell line engineering and others. In 2017, cell line segment held the largest share of the market, by application. Moreover, the genetic engineering segment is expected to grow at the fastest rate during the coming years owing to its sub segments such as animal genetic engineering and plant genetic engineering that are being carried out extensively.

Based on end user, the genome editing market is segmented into biotechnology & pharmaceutical companies, contract research organizations, academic & government research organization and other end users. The market is dominated by the biotechnology & pharmaceutical companies and is expected to surge significantly during the forecast period from 2017 to 2025. The biotechnology & pharmaceutical companies segment is expected gain its market share during the forecast period. Also, biotech & pharmaceutical companies is expected to show a prime CAGR owing to the increasing government funding and partnerships between the various organizations in all the regions.

Genome Editing Market : Competitive Landscape and Key Developments

Transposagen Biopharmaceuticals, Inc.,Integrated DNA Technologies, Inc.,Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc.,GenScript,Lonza,Horizon Discovery Group plc,Sangamo Therapeutics, Inc.,New England Biolabs,Editas Medicine,Merck KGaA.

Order a Copy of Genome Editing Market Shares, Strategies and Forecasts 2021-2025 Research Report at https://www.theinsightpartners.com/buy/TIPHE100000853/

About Us:

The Insight Partners is a one stop industry research provider of actionable intelligence. We help our clients in getting solutions to their research requirements through our syndicated and consulting research services. We specialize in industries such as Semiconductor and Electronics, Aerospace and Defense, Automotive and Transportation, Biotechnology, Healthcare IT, Manufacturing and Construction, Medical Device, Technology, Media and Telecommunications, Chemicals and Materials.

Contact Us:

If you have any queries about this report or if you would like further information, please contact us:

Contact Person:Sameer Joshi

E-mail: sales@theinsightpartners.com

Phone:+1-646-491-9876

Press Release: https://www.theinsightpartners.com/pr/genome-editing-market/

Original post:

Genome Editing Market to hit US$ 10691.0 Million, Globally, by 2025 at 17.0% CAGR: The Insight Partners - Digital Journal

The tomatoes at the forefront of a food revolution – BBC News

One 2021 study looked at the genome of Solanum sitiens a wild tomato species which grows in the extremely harsh environment of the Atacama Desert in Chile, and can be found at altitudes as high as 3,300m (10,826ft). The study identified several genes related to drought-resistance in Solanum sitiens, including one aptly named YUCCA7 (yucca are draught-resistant shrubs and trees popular as houseplants).

They are far from the only genes that could be used to give the humble tomato a boost. In 2020 Chinese and American scientists performed a genome-wide association study of 369tomato cultivars, breeding lines and landraces, and pinpointed a gene called SlHAK20 as crucial for salt tolerance.

Once the climate-smart genes such as these are identified, they can be targeted using Crispr to delete certain unwanted genes, to tune others or insert new ones. This has recently been done with salt tolerance, resistance to various tomato pathogens, and even to create dwarf plants which could withstand strong winds (another side effect of climate change). However, scientists such as Cermak go even further and start at the roots they are using Crispr to domesticate wild plant species from scratch, "de novo" in science speak. Not only can they achieve in a single generation what previously took thousands of years, but also with a much greater precision.

De novo domestication of Solanum pimpinellifolium was how Cermak and his colleagues at the University of Minnesota arrived at their 2018 plant. They targeted five genes in the wild species to obtain a tomato that would be still resistant to various stresses, yet more adapted to modern commercial farming more compact for easier mechanical harvesting, for example. The new plant also had larger fruits than the wild original.

"The size and weight was about double," Cermak says. Yet this still wasn't the ideal tomato he strives to obtain for that more work needs to be done. "By adding additional genes, we could make the fruit even bigger and more abundant, increase the amount of sugar to improve taste, and the concentration of antioxidants, vitamin C and other nutrients," he says. And, of course, resistance to various forms of stress, from heat and pests to draught and salinity.

See the original post here:

The tomatoes at the forefront of a food revolution - BBC News

Novavax Files for Emergency Use of COVID-19 Vaccine in the United Arab Emirates – KPVI News 6

GAITHERSBURG, Md., Dec. 13, 2021 /PRNewswire/ -- Novavax, Inc. (Nasdaq: NVAX), a biotechnology company dedicated to developing and commercializing next-generation vaccines for serious infectious diseases, today announced that it has submitted a regulatory filing to the Ministry of Health and Prevention (MoHaP) for emergency use of its COVID-19 vaccine in the United Arab Emirates (UAE).

"The rapid emergence and continuedspread of variants is a stark reminder that no one is safe until everyone is safe in the fight against COVID-19," said Stanley C. Erck, President and Chief Executive Officer, Novavax. "We remain committed to delivering our vaccine, which is based on a proven, well understood platform, to countries around the world as we anticipate that ongoing vaccination will be necessary over the long term to end the pandemic."

Novavax made the submission for the regulatory evaluation by MoHaP of NVX-CoV2373, the company's recombinant nanoparticle protein-based COVID-19 vaccine with Matrix-M adjuvant. The filing includes clinical data from two pivotal Phase 3 clinical trials: PREVENT-19, which included 30,000 participants in the U.S. and Mexico and demonstrated 100% protection against moderate and severe disease, 93.2% efficacy against the predominantly circulatingvariants of concern and variants of interest, and 90.4% efficacy overall; and a trial of 15,000 participants in the U.K. that demonstrated efficacy of 96.4% against the original virus strain, 86.3% against the Alpha (B.1.1.7) variant and 89.7% efficacy overall. In both trials, NVX-CoV2373 demonstrated a reassuring safety and tolerability profile.

Novavax and Serum Institute of India Pvt. Ltd. (SII) recently received Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for the vaccine inIndonesiaand thePhilippines, and the companies have filed for EUA inIndiaand for Emergency Use Listing (EUL) with theWorld Health Organization(WHO). Novavax also announced regulatory filings for its vaccine in theUnited Kingdom,Australia,New Zealand,Canada, theEuropean Union, Singapore and with theWHO.Additionally, Novavax and SK bioscience announced a Biologics License Application (BLA)submission to MFDSinSouth Korea. Novavax expects to submit the complete package to the U.S. FDA by the end of the year.

The chemistry, manufacturing and controls (CMC) data package submitted to MoHaP and other global regulatory agencies leverages Novavax' manufacturing partnership with SII, the world's largest vaccine manufacturer by volume. It will later be supplemented with data from additional manufacturing sites in Novavax' global supply chain.

About the NVX-CoV2373 Phase 3 trials

NVX-CoV2373 is being evaluated in two pivotal Phase 3 trials: a trial in the U.K. that demonstrated efficacy of 96.4% against the original virus strain, 86.3% against the Alpha (B.1.1.7) variant and 89.7% efficacy overall; and the PREVENT-19 trial in the U.S. and Mexico that demonstrated 100% protection against moderate and severe disease, 93.2% efficacy against the predominantly circulatingvariants of concern and variants of interest, and 90.4% efficacy overall. It was generally well-tolerated and elicited a robust antibody response.

About NVX-CoV2373

NVX-CoV2373 is a protein-based vaccine candidate engineered from the genetic sequence of the first strain of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19 disease. NVX-CoV2373 was created using Novavax' recombinant nanoparticle technology to generate antigen derived from the coronavirus spike (S) protein and is formulated with Novavax' patented saponin-based Matrix-M adjuvant to enhance the immune response and stimulate high levels of neutralizing antibodies. NVX-CoV2373 contains purified protein antigen and can neither replicate, nor can it cause COVID-19.

Novavax' COVID-19 vaccine is packaged as a ready-to-use liquid formulation in a vial containing ten doses. The vaccination regimen calls for two 0.5 ml doses (5 mcg antigen and 50 mcg Matrix-M adjuvant) given intramuscularly 21 days apart. The vaccine is stored at 2- 8 Celsius, enabling the use of existing vaccine supply and cold chain channels.

About Matrix-M Adjuvant

Novavax' patented saponin-based Matrix-M adjuvant has demonstrated a potent and well-tolerated effect by stimulating the entry of antigen-presenting cells into the injection site and enhancing antigen presentation in local lymph nodes, boosting immune response.

About Novavax

Novavax, Inc. (Nasdaq: NVAX) is a biotechnology company that promotes improved health globally through the discovery, development and commercialization of innovative vaccines to prevent serious infectious diseases. The company's proprietary recombinant technology platform harnesses the power and speed of genetic engineering to efficiently produce highly immunogenic nanoparticles designed to address urgent global health needs. NVX-CoV2373, the company's COVID-19 vaccine, received Emergency Use Authorization in Indonesia and the Philippines and has been submitted for regulatory authorization in multiple markets globally. NanoFlu, the company's quadrivalent influenza nanoparticle vaccine, met all primary objectives in its pivotal Phase 3 clinical trial in older adults. Novavax is currently evaluating a COVID-NanoFlu combination vaccine in a Phase 1/2 clinical trial, which combines the company's NVX-CoV2373 and NanoFlu vaccine candidates. These vaccine candidates incorporate Novavax' proprietary saponin-based Matrix-M adjuvant to enhance the immune response and stimulate high levels of neutralizing antibodies.

For more information, visitwww.novavax.comand connect with us on Twitter,LinkedIn, Instagram and Facebook.

Forward-Looking Statements

Statements herein relating to the future of Novavax, its operating plans and prospects, its partnerships, the ongoing development of NVX-CoV2373, the scope, timing and outcome of future regulatory filings and actions, Novavax' plans to submit a complete package to the U.S. FDA by the end of the year, and Novavax' plan to supplement the CMC data submitted to the MoHaP with data from the additional manufacturing sites in Novavax' global supply chain are forward-looking statements. Novavax cautions that these forward-looking statements are subject to numerous risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied by such statements. These risks and uncertainties include challenges satisfying, alone or together with partners, various safety, efficacy, and product characterization requirements, including those related to process qualification and assay validation, necessary to satisfy applicable regulatory authorities; difficulty obtaining scarce raw materials and supplies; resource constraints, including human capital and manufacturing capacity, on the ability of Novavax to pursue planned regulatory pathways; challenges meeting contractual requirements under agreements with multiple commercial, governmental, and other entities; and those other risk factors identified in the "Risk Factors" and "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations" sections of Novavax' Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2020 and subsequent Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). We caution investors not to place considerable reliance on forward-looking statements contained in this press release. You are encouraged to read our filings with the SEC, available at http://www.sec.gov and http://www.novavax.com, for a discussion of these and other risks and uncertainties. The forward-looking statements in this press release speak only as of the date of this document, and we undertake no obligation to update or revise any of the statements. Our business is subject to substantial risks and uncertainties, including those referenced above. Investors, potential investors, and others should give careful consideration to these risks and uncertainties.

Contacts:

Investors

Novavax, Inc.

Erika Schultz| 240-268-2022

ir@novavax.com

Solebury Trout

Alexandra Roy| 617-221-9197

aroy@soleburytrout.com

Media

Alison Chartan| 240-720-7804

Laura KeenanLindsey | 202-709-7521

media@novavax.com

Logo - https://mma.prnewswire.com/media/1506866/Novavax_High_Res_Logo.jpg

Go here to see the original:

Novavax Files for Emergency Use of COVID-19 Vaccine in the United Arab Emirates - KPVI News 6