Select Page ::

Islands on the Air (IOTA) Officially Launching New Website in September – ARRL

Posted on July 27, 2017 by Danzig

07/27/2017

The new Islands on the Air (IOTA) program website is targeted to launch officially in early September, when the current Radio Society of Great Britain (RSGB)-sponsored website will be taken offline. The new website is undergoing fine-tuning, according to IOTA IT Manager Johan Willemsen, PA3EXX.

When we are ready the old URL will be forwarded to the new URL, and IOTA users can login on the new website with their existing credentials, Willemsen told ARRL. A new entity the IOTA Foundation assumed management of the IOTA program from RSGB in 2015.

Paperless QSLing through QSO matching via Club Log has been available to the IOTA community on the existing system since July 2016. The process of adding operations valid for IOTA credit has been ongoing. Software developers should be aware that the change to a new website may affect any application using data from the current http://www.rsgbiota.org website.

Contact IOTA for more details.

New island off Carolina coast was expected to eventually disappear, but not like this – The State

Posted on July 27, 2017 by Danzig

New island off Carolina coast was expected to eventually disappear, but not like this
The State
The 50-yard channel that separated Shelly Island from Hatteras Island is filling in so quickly with sand that it's now only inches deep at low tied, and getting more shallow by the day, federal officials say. Just a few weeks ago, visitors had to swim ...

and more »

New island off Carolina coast was expected to eventually disappear, but not like this - The State

Croatia’s 8 Best Islands – Cond Nast Traveler

Posted on July 27, 2017 by Danzig

8 Photos

When it comes to European islands, most people immediately think of the Mediterranean's most famoushello, Santorini and Ibiza. But if you crunch the numbers, the Croatian archipelago is the largest in the Adriatic Sea and the second largest in the Mediterranean, after Greece. Put another way? Within the 718 islands and 389 islets, you've got a lot of places to explorehere's where to start.

Why we love it: Vis was closed off from foreign visitors until 1989, when it ceased being a military base for the Yugoslav army. As a result, this islandthe furthest from the Croatian mainlandis relatively underdeveloped compared to its island siblings, and that makes it a big draw. Once there, make time to beach hop (try Lucica and Srebrna ), climb Hum Mountain, eat fresh lobster in picturesque Komia, and take an offshore trip to the blue cave of Bievo.

Why we love it: The countrys most popular island for nightlife and yachters, Hvar is also Croatias sunniest spot, which makes its beaches (Lucisca; Dubovica; Grebisce) ever-packed. The island has a rich history, too: It was once an important trade base in the Adriatic, and its Stari Grad Plain, an agricultural landscape set up in the 4th century by Greek colonists, is a UNESCO World Heritage site.

Why we love it: Krk, the largest island in Croatia, connects to the mainland by a toll bridgeand as a result, is also one of Croatia's busiest islands. Due to its rich history, the island is considered a "cradle" of Croatian culture: It was part of the Republic of Venice during much of the Middle Ages, and at one point, inhabitants spoke five different languages on the 156-square-mile island.

Why we love it: With sandy shorelines, olive groves, vineyards, salted lakes (Veliko and Malo Jezero), and dense Mediterranean forest, Mljet holds a reputation as Croatia's greenest islandand one of its most beautiful. It's also the most forested island in the Adriatic, and the protected Mljet National Parkmuch comprises much of the island. Local specialties here include goat's cheese, eel, and red wine.

Why we love it: Twenty-two miles long, the Kornati archipelagoalso known as the Stomorski islandsis a nautical paradise. With more than 140 islands, the Kornati islands are the densest archipelago in the Mediterranean, but surprisingly lack any permanent settlements. Both land and sea are protected as part of the Kornati National Park, which means the waters (and beaches) here are some of the cleanest in the country.

Why we love it: Bra may be best known for its white-pebble stretch of beach, Zlatni Rat, but there's more to do on island than just sunbathe. Explore the picturesque towns of Bol and Supetar; trek to the Blaca Hermitage monastery, originally established in 1551; and hike Vidova Gora, the highest peak on the Adriatic islands.

Why we love it: When Greek settlers first came to Korula, they named the island Korkyra Melaina, Black Korula, for its dense forests. Today, Korula is famous for its white wine (poip grapes are primarily only grown here), and the island features a mix of tangled woods, winding coasts, small fishing villages, vineyards, and olive trees. Its biggest town, the eponymous Korula, is known as "Little Dubrovnik" for its fortified medieval walls and narrow streets. Local legend says explorer Marco Polo was born here, and the site of his alleged birth is open to visitors.

Why we love it: Tiny Krapanj, at just 0.14 square miles, is one of the smallest inhabited islands of the Adriatic Seaand no cars are allowed. Most famous for its spuvari, or sponge divers, the island also draws visitors for its scuba diving, free diving, and spearfishing.

An Error occurred while compiling your sass files. 🙁 Please find out what went wrong by consulting your friendly terminal. We are sorry for any inconvenience this may have caused you.

Link:

Croatia's 8 Best Islands - Cond Nast Traveler

Cayman Islands hospital offers new atrial fibrillation procedure – Amsterdam News

Posted on July 27, 2017 by Danzig

CAYMAN ISLANDS (July 27, 2017)A leading hospital in the Caribbean is offering another first that could save the lives of heart patients across the Caribbean and the world.

Health City Cayman Islands, the first hospital in the English-speaking Caribbean to use robotic navigation for joint replacements and the first to install two artificial hearts or left ventricle assist devices, is now offering cryoablation, a highly effective procedure for patients with atrial fibrillation, a common rhythm disorder of the heart in which people get irregular palpitations, which can lead to breathlessness and strokes.

Its also responsible for a lot of morbidity and lifestyle issues for the patient, and the health care cost of patients with atrial fibrillation on the community is pretty huge, said Dr. Ravi Kishore, chief interventional cardiologist and electrophysiologist of the Joint Commission International-accredited tertiary care facility founded by renowned heart surgeon and humanitarian Dr. Devi Shetty.

Peter Tuckey, originally from England, has lived in Jamaica since 1962, but when his heart developed atrial fibrillation, he tried hospitals in the United States and the Caribbean with little success. He was delighted and relieved to find his cure at Health City Cayman Islands.

Its just that its an excellent facility, and Im so happy that its close to Jamaica, said Tuckey after a Health City team led by Kishore treated his fibrillation with the innovative cryoablation procedure. Ill be back to exercising, back to golf and back to a drink or two, so everythings on the up.

Health City can help manage atrial fibrillation with medications and radiofrequency ablation, but there are imperfections with those methods. The new technology introduces a deflated cryoballoon into the heart. Through this balloon, we can introduce a liquid, which cools and dilates the balloon, and then freezes whichever structure it is put into, explained Kishore.

Doctors introduce the balloon catheter into the groin and thread it into the pulmonary veins, located in the back of the heart, where the impulses that trigger the atrial fibrillation come from, and then inflate the balloon and freeze the vein for two to three minutes, quickly and effectively destroying the source of the fibrillation.

Kishore reports that cryoablation is simpler, more effective and has fewer complications than radiofrequency ablation, which burns the affected area with radio waves. Even though they only introduced the cryoablation technique in the past few weeks, his teams have already performed the 60-minute to 90-minute procedure on five patients, all of whom were discharged within a day. We found it a very user-friendly technology and the outcomes were fantastic, Kishore said.

With Health City now offering this pioneering procedure, patients will be spared long and expensive trips. Health City is possibly the only location in the English-speaking Caribbean performing cryoblation for atrial fibrillation, for which people previously had to travel to the United States or the United Kingdom.

However, there is more than technology behind Health Citys success. Tuckey had not been pleased with his hospital experiences in the United States, where an ablation surgery in Miami in 2014 failed, but he was impressed this time when he and his wife were met at the airport by Health City staffers who drove him to his appointments. He was relieved when staff shuttled his wife to her hotel and to his appointments, which saved him stressing about her getting a taxi or having to look after herself in a foreign country.

Backing up the accomplished surgeons, Tuckey recalled, was an efficient and caring staff at the East End, Grand Cayman facility. All the nurses and all the attending staff were very, very helpful and very accommodating, said Tuckey. Definitely we would recommend it. I must tell you in Jamaica, where we come from, Health Citys reputation is growing already. Its becoming quite well-known.

Kishore is pleased that Health City Cayman Islands has adopted the new cryoablation technique. This procedure gives a new option for patients suffering from atrial fibrillation by providing a safer and more effective option for long-term recovery, he said.

Originally posted here:

Cayman Islands hospital offers new atrial fibrillation procedure - Amsterdam News

Full ferry service to San Juan Islands to return Saturday – seattlepi.com

Posted on July 27, 2017 by Danzig

By Zosha Millman, SeattlePI

A Washington State ferry leaves Anacortes, Wash., in route to Orcas Island, Friday Harbor and Sidney, British Columbia, Wednesday morning. Mount Baker is seen in the background.

Full ferry service to San Juan Islands to return Saturday

Good news, ferry riders: The Anacortes/San Juan Islands ferry route will resume its regular schedule starting Saturday, July 29.

A massive equipment failure earlier in the month pushed Washington State Ferries to run ferries operating out of Anacortes on an emergency schedule, even cancelling some runs.

RELATED:Crippled ferry scrambles summer sailing schedule in San Juans

But a series of boat moves and a vessel repair will bring five boats back to the rotation on Saturday, restoring the route to full capacity. The boats will return to the standard summer 2017 schedule.

"We're happy to be able to return things back to normal for everyone who relies on us to get back and forth between Anacortes and the San Juan Islands," Elizabeth Kosa, chief of staff for Washington State Ferries, said in a statement.

"We know the adjusted schedule has been difficult for residents, businesses and tourists and want to thank them for their patience."

Passengers can begin making vehicle reservations for this weekend and beyond at 7 a.m. on Thursday. Customers with existing reservations will get priority on a first-come, first-served basis and are encouraged to arrive at least an hour before their desired sailing. Walk-on spots will be available, but expect to arrive at least two hours ahead of the desired sailing in order to ensure a spot.

If you could ‘design’ your own child, would you? – Washington Post

Posted on July 27, 2017 by Danzig

Scientists in Portland, Ore., just succeeded in creating the first genetically modified human embryo in the United States, according to Technology Review. Ateam led by Shoukhrat Mitalipov of Oregon Health & Science University is reported to have broken new ground both in the number of embryos experimented upon and by demonstrating that it is possible to safely and efficiently correct defective genes that cause inherited diseases.

The U.S. teamsresults follow two trials one last year and one in April by researchers in Chinawho injected genetically modified cells into cancer patients.Theresearch teamsused CRISPR, a new gene-editing system derived from bacteria thatenables scientists to editthe DNA of living organisms.

The era of human gene editing has begun.

In the short term, scientists are planning clinical trials to use CRISPR to edit human genes linked to cystic fibrosis and other fatal hereditary conditions. But supporters of synthetic biology talk up huge potential long-term benefits. We could, they claim, potentially edit genes and build new ones to eradicate all hereditary diseases. With genetic alterations, we might be able to withstand anthrax attacks or epidemics of pneumonic plague. We might revive extinct species such as the woolly mammoth. We might design plants that are far more nutritious, hardy and delicious than what we have now.

But developments in gene editing are alsohighlighting a desperate need for ethical and legal guidelines to regulate in vitro genetic editing and raising concerns about a future in which the well-off couldpay for CRISPR to perfect their offspring. We will soon be faced with very difficult decisions aboutwhen and how to use this breakthrough medical technology.For example, if your unborn child were going to have a debilitating disease that you could fix by taking a pill to edit theirgenome, would you take the pill? How about adding some bonusintelligence? Greater height or strength? Where would you draw the line?

CRISPRs potential for misuse by changinginherited human traits has prompted some genetic researchers to call fora global moratorium on usingthe techniqueto modify human embryos. Such use is a criminal offense in 29 countries, and the United States bans the use of federal funds to modify embryos.

Still, CRISPRs seductiveness is beginning to overtake the calls forcaution.

In February, an advisory body from the National Academy of Sciences announcedthe academys support for usingCRISPR to edit the genes of embryos to remove DNA sequences that doctors saycause serious heritable diseases. The recommendation came with significant caveats and suggested limiting the use of CRISPR to specific embryonic problems. That said, the recommendation is clearly an endorsement of CRISPR as a research tool that is likely to become a clinical treatment a step from which therewill be no turning back.

CRISPRs combination of usability, low cost and power is both tantalizing and frightening, with the potential tosomeday enableanyone to edit a living creature on the cheap in their basements. So, although scientists might use CRISPR to eradicate malaria by making the mosquitoes that carry it infertile, bioterrorists could use it to create horrific pathogens that could kill tens of millions of people.

With the source code of life now so easy to hack, and biologists and the medical world ready to embrace its possibilities, how do we ensure the responsible use of CRISPR?

Theres a line that A Prairie Home Companion host Garrison Keillor uses whendescribing the fictional town of Lake Wobegon, whereall the children are above average. Will we enter a time when those who can afford a better genome will live far longer, healthier lives than those who cannot? Should the U.S. government subsidize genetic improvements to ensure a level playing field when the rich have access to the best genetics that money can buy and the rest of society does not? And what if CRISPR introduces traits into the human germ line with unforeseen consequences perhaps higher rates of cardiac arrest or schizophrenia?

Barriers to mass use of CRISPR are already falling. Dog breeders looking to improve breedssuffering from debilitating maladies are actively pursuing gene hacking. A former NASA fellow in synthetic biology now sells functional bacterial engineering CRISPR kits for $150 from his online store. Its not hard to imagine a future in which the big drugstore chains carry CRISPR kits for home testing and genetic engineering.

The release ofgenetically modified organisms into the wildin the past few years has raised considerable ethical and scientific questions. The potential consequences of releasing genetically crippled mosquitoes in the southern United States to reduce transmission of tropical viruses, for instance, drew a firestorm of concern over the effects on humans and the environment.

So, while the prospect of altering the genes of people modern-day eugenics has caused a schism in the science community, research with precisely that aim is happening all over the world.

We have arrived at a Rubicon. Humans are on the verge of finally being able to modify their own evolution. The question is whether they can use this newfound superpower in a responsible way that will benefit theplanet and its people. And a decision so momentous cannot be left to the doctors, the experts orthe bureaucrats.

Failing to figure out how to ensure that everyonewill benefit from this breakthroughrisks the creation of a genetic underclasswho must struggle to compete with the genetically modified offspring of the rich. Andfailing to monitor and contain how we use itmay spell global catastrophe. Its up to us collectively to get this right.

Read the original here:

If you could 'design' your own child, would you? - Washington Post

A Cellular Immune Surveillance Mechanism that Detects Cancer Early – Technology Networks

Posted on July 27, 2017 by Danzig

Fresh insights into how cells detect damage to their DNA a hallmark of cancer could help explain how the body keeps disease in check.

Scientists have discovered how damage to the cells genetic material can trigger inflammation, setting in motion processes to remove damaged cells and keep tissues healthy.

Cancer

The findings shed new light on how potentially cancerous cells are flagged, so that they can be removed as part of the bodys natural surveillance systems before tumours form.

A key molecule called cGAS is known to bind DNA, triggering inflammation. Until now, it was not clear how this happens as DNA is usually physically separated from the rest of the cell inside a compartment called the nucleus.

DNA damage

When damage occurs, fragments of DNA can get separated from the nucleus and form structures called micronuclei.

Researchers at the MRC Human Genetics Unit at the University of Edinburgh discovered that cGAS can penetrate these micronuclei and bind to DNA, initiating mechanisms that lead to inflammation.

Alarm system

As DNA damage is often one of the early steps in the development of cancer, the detection of micronuclei by cGAS could therefore be an important early alarm system allowing the human body to detect and remove potentially cancerous cells.

Inflammation

The team say their findings could also shed light on how inflammation occurs in certain types of autoinflammatory diseases, where the immune system attacks the bodys own tissues.

Our findings provide a possible new mechanism for how the body protects itself against cancer, but in some circumstances could instead trigger inflammatory disease.

Dr Karen Mackenzie, MRC Human Genetics Unit, University of Edinburgh

We hope that this research will inform future studies into the development of improved therapeutic approaches.

Dr Martin Reijns, Senior Research Fellow, MRC Human Genetics Unit

Reference

Mackenzie, K. J., Carroll, P., Martin, C. A., Murina, O., Fluteau, A., Simpson, D. J., ... & Osborn, R. T. (2017). cGAS surveillance of micronuclei links genome instability to innate immunity. Nature.

Go here to read the rest:

A Cellular Immune Surveillance Mechanism that Detects Cancer Early - Technology Networks

In US first, scientists edit genes of human embryos – CBS News

Posted on July 27, 2017 by Danzig

Last Updated Jul 27, 2017 1:50 PM EDT

For the first time in the United States, scientists have edited the genes of human embryos, a controversial step toward someday helping babies avoid inherited diseases. According to MIT Technology Review, which first reported the news on Wednesday, the experiment was just an exercise in science the embryos were not allowed to develop for more than a few days and were never intended to be implanted into a womb. Officials at Oregon Health & Science University confirmed that the work took place there and said results would be published in a journal soon. It is thought to be the first such work in the U.S.; previous experiments like this have been reported from China. The Oregon scientists reportedly used a technique called CRISPR, which allows specific sections of DNA to be altered or replaced. It's much more precise than some types of gene therapy that cannot ensure that desired changes will take place exactly where and as intended. With gene editing, the changes are permanent and would be passed down to any offspring.

Play Video

CRISPR could help rid of diseases like cystic fibrosis, muscular dystrophy and even HIV and cancer. But many scientists, including Jennifer Doudn...

The approach holds great potential to avoid many genetic diseases, but has raised fears of "designer babies" if done for less lofty reasons, such as producing desirable traits.

MIT Technology Review reports that the scientists created IVF embryos using donated sperm from men carrying inherited disease mutations.

"It is proof of principle that it can work. They significantly reduced mosaicism [errors in which desired DNA changes occurred in some but not all of the embryo's cells]. I don't think it's the start of clinical trials yet, but it does take it further than anyone has before," a scientist familiar with the project told the publication.

Last year, Britain said some of its scientistscould edit embryo genesto better understand human development. In animal studies, CRISPR has been used to successfully remove HIV infection from lab mice.

Earlier this year, the National Academy of Sciences and National Academy of Medicine said in a report that altering the genes of embryos might be OK if done under strict criteria and aimed at preventing serious disease.

"This is the kind of research that the report discussed," University of Wisconsin-Madison bioethicist R. Alta Charo said of the report of Oregon's work. She co-led the National Academies panel but was not commenting on its behalf Thursday.

"This was purely laboratory-based work that is incredibly valuable for helping us understand how one might make these germline changes in a way that is precise and safe. But it's only a first step," she said.

"We still have regulatory barriers in the United States to ever trying this to achieve a pregnancy. The public has plenty of time" to weigh in on whether that should occur, she said.

One prominent genetics expert, Dr. Eric Topol, director of the Scripps Translational Science Institute in La Jolla, California, said gene editing of embryos is "an unstoppable, inevitable science, and this is more proof it can be done."

Experiments are in the works now in the U.S. using gene-edited cells to try to treat people with various diseases, but "in order to really have a cure, you want to get this at the embryo stage," he said. "If it isn't done in this country, it will be done elsewhere."

Read the original post:

In US first, scientists edit genes of human embryos - CBS News

President Trump and health care: Live updates – CNN

Posted on July 27, 2017 by Danzig

CNN

President Trump and health care: Live updates
CNN
HEALTH CARE: Senators are still debating possible plans to repeal and replace Obamacare. Once debate time is up, the vote-a-rama starts. LEAKS: Last night, Trump's new communications director tweeted -- and then deleted -- about leaks, tagging chief of ...

and more »

Read the rest here:

President Trump and health care: Live updates - CNN

No Insurance, but for 3 Days, Health Care Is Within Reach – New York Times

Posted on July 27, 2017 by Danzig

The health fair reminded me of scenes Ive witnessed in refugee camps in South Sudan. But here in America?

The sight is a wrenching reminder of how many Americans slip through the cracks. No other advanced country permits this level of suffering and if the G.O.P. health care plan goes through, millions more will lose their health coverage.

Walking around, listening to people, it breaks your heart, said Gov. Terry McAuliffe, a Democrat, whom I encountered on the fairground. We need a healthy work force, and this is a disgrace.

Shame on us as a nation, McAuliffe added. This is an embarrassment to our country.

Thats what I feel, too: humiliation that Americans need to be rescued by a group originally intended to help people in the worlds poorest countries (mixed with pride at the altruistic spirit that attracted so many volunteers, paying their own expenses to come here). To me, the fundamental lesson is that even under Obamacare, too many people dont have coverage, and we urgently need a single-payer universal health care system along the lines of Medicare for all.

Remote Area Medical is the brainchild of Stan Brock, 81, a onetime British cowboy who in the 1950s managed one of the worlds biggest ranches, overseeing 50,000 cattle in Guyana in South America.

When he was badly injured by a wild horse, Brock was told it would be a 26-day hike to the nearest doctor. So he recovered on his own but began to think about supplying health care to deprived areas.

Brock ended up founding Remote Area Medical to work in places like the Amazon, Haiti and Uganda. But then one day he had a call from Sneedville, Tenn., where the hospital had just closed and the dentist moved out. Can you come here? the caller asked.

Brock loaded a dental chair on the back of a pickup truck and brought in a dentist as well and 150 people lined up, desperate for oral care. The result is that while it continues some international work, Remote Area Medical also treats people in the worlds superpower.

Brock is a character: He discovered a species of bat that is named for him, and today he has no home but unrolls a pad each evening and sleeps on the floor of Remote Area Medicals permanent offices in Tennessee. At 5 a.m. on the first day here, Brock opened the gate and began admitting people eager for care.

As they surged past, many stopped to thank him; one man had tears in his eyes as he did so.

I wish Mr. Trump would come, Brock told me. The health of these people is appalling.

Obamacare and the expansion of Medicaid have helped, but this health fair underscores glaring gaps in American coverage, especially for dental and vision care, in ways that affect us all.

In the vision tent, a patient couldnt see even the biggest letter at the top of the eye chart. As he waited for glasses, a volunteer asked, And how did you get here?

Oh, I drove.

Jennifer Jolliffee, a volunteer, told of a 6-year-old boy who had behavioral problems, couldnt read and struggled at school. Then he had his first vision screening, and his parents learned that he could barely see. Soon he was looking around in wonderment through glasses.

In another area of the fairground, doctors saw patients in private rooms created by sheets dangled from strings with clothespins. In one such room, Dr. Ross Isaacs saw William Powers, a former bulldozer operator with severe kidney problems, and outlined how Powers could maximize his chances of a kidney transplant. Ive got hope again, Powers told me as he left.

As for Dr. Isaacs, he put it this way: The success of this event is an indictment of our health care system.

I invite you to sign up for my free, twice-weekly email newsletter. Please also join me on Facebook and Google+, watch my YouTube videos and follow me on Twitter (@NickKristof).

A version of this op-ed appears in print on July 27, 2017, on Page A26 of the New York edition with the headline: No Insurance, but for 3 Days, Health Care Is Within Reach.

Originally posted here:

No Insurance, but for 3 Days, Health Care Is Within Reach - New York Times

Murkowski says Zinke contacted her in wake of health care votes – CNN

Posted on July 27, 2017 by Danzig

Murkowski was responding to a reporter's question on Capitol Hill regarding a story in the Alaska Dispatch News that said Zinke called both her and the state's other Republican senator, Dan Sullivan, to warn them that Alaska's standing with the administration was at risk due to Murkowski's dissent.

The conversation with Zinke was about more than just health care and included a discussion about energy, Murkowski said in comments aired live by MSNBC.

But it's notable that Zinke, whose department has no direct role in efforts to reform health care, would bring up the issue with a sitting senator.

Murkowski said that during the call, ZInke told her, "the President is really disappointed in what he perceives to be as your lack of support for health care reform."

But Murkowski said she responded with a promise to "accomplish good things" for her state and the US.

"This is what we're going to do together," she said, according to E&E. "And right now, the President expressed his disappointment, and what I'm going to do is continue working in good faith with everybody on everything."

In a statement to CNN, Murkowski said that although she has "disagreed with the Senate process so far, the President and I agree that the status quo with health care in our country is not acceptable and that reforms must be made. I continue working to find the best path for what I believe will achieve that -- a committee process where we can work issues in the open and ensure Alaskans have the health care choices they want, the affordability they need, and the quality of care they deserve."

Murkowski chairs the Senate energy and natural resources committee and frequently references Alaska priorities in her position. She also oversees the confirmation process for the Interior Department.

Murkowski told CNN Thursday that the nominations vote was delayed just to work out a "little bump."

"We want to get it worked out before we take it up. We just postponed it so we can take it up," she said.

Murkowski responded no when asked if delay was part of a bigger motive to use leverage against the Trump administration.

"These are important people that need to get through," she said.

Nicole Daigle, communications director for Murkowski's energy committee staff, told CNN that the business meeting was "postponed due to uncertainty of the Senate schedule."

Messages left with Zinke and Sullivan's office were not returned Thursday.

Sullivan told the ADN that the call he received from Zinke wrought a "troubling message."

"I'm not going to go into the details, but I fear that the strong economic growth, pro-energy, pro-mining, pro-jobs and personnel from Alaska who are part of those policies are going to stop," Sullivan said.

"I tried to push back on behalf of all Alaskans. ... We're facing some difficult times and there's a lot of enthusiasm for the policies that Secretary Zinke and the President have been talking about with regard to our economy. But the message was pretty clear," Sullivan said.

Sullivan categorized the conversation he had with Zinke as "clear" and said it was in direct response to the vote Murkowski cast Tuesday against the motion to proceed with debate on the House-passed health care legislation. Sullivan has supported this week's votes on health care.

President Donald Trump slammed Murkowski over her votes Wednesday morning, tweeting, "Senator @lisamurkowski of the Great State of Alaska really let the Republicans, and our country, down yesterday. Too bad."

Murkowski responded to Trump Wednesday afternoon.

"My vote yesterday was from my heart for the people that I represent," Murkowski told CNN. "I'm going to continue working hard for Alaskans and focus on that."

The President has regularly rebuked GOP members of Congress in public for opposing the party in its efforts to repeal and replace Obamacare, going to far as to subtly warn Republicans that their political futures could be in jeopardy if they don't support his efforts.

"Any senator who votes against repeal and replace is telling America that they are fine with the Obamacare nightmare, and I predict they'll have a lot of problems," he said at a rally in Youngstown, Ohio, Tuesday night.

Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, who was the only other Republican senator aside from Murkowski to oppose Tuesday's motion to proceed vote, told reporters on Capitol Hill Thursday she had not received any threats from the White House.

CNN's Dan Merica, MJ Lee and Rene Marsh contributed to this report.

Follow this link:

Murkowski says Zinke contacted her in wake of health care votes - CNN

On health care the bipartisan DC approach is ‘tinker, tailor, pander and lie’ – USA TODAY

Posted on July 27, 2017 by Danzig

Charles Kolb, Opinion contributor Published 5:00 a.m. ET July 27, 2017 | Updated 2:39 p.m. ET July 27, 2017

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and fellow Republicans.(Photo: Michael Reynolds, epa)

Washington is abuzz with the collapse of yet another Republican-led effort to repeal and replacethe Affordable Care Act. Plenty of bipartisan blame abounds, and it is likely that future reform efforts regardless of who controls Congress will also be doomed.

The reason is straightforward: Rather than enact serious structural reforms that reward value over volume, bend the health care cost curve down, improve patient preventive and routine care, address chronic illnesses, and fund vital research, members of Congress take the easy way out. As with fiscal and budgetary issues, Congress keeps kicking the can down the road. Trite, perhaps, but true.

With apologies to spy novelist John Le Carr, rather than solve real problems, our elected officials prefer to tinker, tailor, panderand lie.

GOP health bill pits freedom of choice against freedom from fear

Former GOP senator: Resist the bullying. Don't vote for a mystery health care bill.

They tinker around the edges of health care. Economists across the ideological spectrum understand that serious structural reform requires repealing the favorable tax treatment of employer-sponsored insurancethat arose in World War II as a means for employers to end-run wage controls.

They tailor elaborate, complex rules that are difficult to understand, enforceand audit. These complexities virtually invite fraud, wasteand abuse into the system.

They pander to interest groups and lobbyists at every level. Reform bills now seem more like appropriations or tax bills in whichevery favored interest gets a goody that, once delivered, is difficult to repeal.

They lie. If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. Premiums will go down. No one told Americans that lower premiums if they in fact materialized might be accompanied by higher deductibles and co-payments. Today, we have people with insurance who cant afford to use it because of high upfront, out-of-pocket costs.

This is no way to address serious public policy issues that affect a sixth of the U.S. economy and touch the lives of tens of millions of Americans. We can do better. The fact that we arent is a bipartisan embarrassment.

For more than30 years, Ive been involved in health policy issues. In the early 1980s, at the Office of Management and Budget, I worked on Medicares service payment systems known as DRGs diagnosis-related groups.The idea was simple: Medicare reimburses a hospital in a given region of the country a fixed amount, lets say $900 for an appendectomy. If the hospital performed the procedure for $800, it could keep the extra $100. However, if the procedure cost $1,100, the hospital absorbed the $200 differential.

One senior OMB official told me, Weve finally done it. Weve finally achieved cost containment in Medicare. I was skeptical and said so. Within 18 months, clever lawyers and others had figured out how to gamethe system by shifting more procedures to outpatient practices that werent subject to the DRG limits, practicing DRG creep by coding a practice to receive a higher reimbursementor, in some instances, through committing outright fraud.

There was no cost containment.

At the Committee for Economic Development, I was part of the Better Health Care Together Coalition in the early 2000s and had the privilege of working with Sens. Ron Wyden,D-Ore.,and Robert Bennett, R-Utah,on their reform bill, The Healthy Americans Act. The bipartisan Wyden-Bennett proposal offered serious structural reforms. The Obama administration never took it seriously.

A few weeks after BarackObama took office, I was in the White Houses East Room when the new president announced to a few hundred health policy experts that the first thing we needed to do was get insurancecosts under control and then expand access. Obama had the priorities right. Unfortunately, he outsourced the legislation to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and ended up signing legislation that did the precise opposite.

Veterans Affairs secretary: VA health care will not be privatized on our watch

POLICING THE USA: A look atrace, justice, media

Obamacare passed with all of its flaws without a single Republican vote. Republican efforts in 2017 proceeded without Democrats at the table and without public hearings. Whether there will be a truly bipartisan effort to fix Obamacare remains to be seen. Its unlikely.

When Sen.John McCain in his presidential campaign proposed eliminating the favorable tax treatment for employer-sponsored insurance, some Democrats accused him of supporting a tax increase. Thoughtful Democrats knew that these charges were disingenuous.

Likewise, some Republicans pilloried Democrats who raised questions about deciding what procedures and pharmaceuticals would be covered. These Democrats were accused of favoring death panels. Thoughtful Republicans knew that these charges were disingenuous.

This dynamic has to change. Sound public policy cannot be conducted in a vacuum, in the dark, or without bipartisan collaboration.

Its time for our country to attend to these pre-existing conditions(so to speak) and return to the drawing board. Whatever approach one pursues must be done in the context of a $20 trillion national debt and looming trillion dollar annual budget deficits. We cannot afford an open-ended health care entitlement. Whether you favor market forces or single-payer approaches, the country must decide in the very near future what health care procedures will be covered and who pays for them.

Members of Congress need to lead the nation in a very public discussion about the future of our health care system. Its time for our leaders to stop gaming the American public.

Charles Kolb served as deputy assistant to the president for domestic policy from 199092 in the George H. W. Bush White House. From 19972012, he was president of the Committee for Economic Development. He now serves as president & CEO of DisruptDC, a non-partisan business coalition devoted to structural governmental reform.

You can read diverse opinions from ourBoard of Contributorsand other writers on theOpinion front page, on Twitter@USATOpinionand in our daily Opinion newsletter. To respond to a column, submit a comment to letters@usatoday.com.

Read or Share this story: https://usat.ly/2w2qfuj

See the article here:

On health care the bipartisan DC approach is 'tinker, tailor, pander and lie' - USA TODAY

Former Obama Aides Lead Opposition to Health Care Repeal – New York Times

Posted on July 27, 2017 by Danzig

Andrew M. Slavitt, the former head of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, has been trolling Republicans over health care on Twitter, posting hundreds of tweets each week that attack their proposals as meanspirited and wrong.

Kathleen Sebelius, Mr. Obamas first secretary of health and human services, will soon embark on a monthlong bus tour designed to pressure members of Congress to oppose the health care laws repeal.

And a few blocks from the Capitol, a political war room run by Leslie Dach, one of Mr. Obamas top health care officials, is coordinating a nationwide anti-repeal campaign by liberal think tanks, local resistance groups, sympathetic governors, medical and insurance lobbyists, Democratic activists, polling experts and academics.

Conceived in the hours after Mr. Trump was elected in November, the group, called Protect Our Care, is at the heart of the effort to oppose a repeal. It hosts strategy calls at 8:30 and 9:45 every morning to develop talking points, plan TV ads and discuss the latest vote counts from the House and Senate.

The most important thing is that people understand what repeal means for them, Mr. Dach said. And what repeal means is millions losing their insurance, costs going up, not down, and anxiety coming back in their lives.

The Obama aides have helped direct about $6 million toward television ads by Save My Care, a separate group in Washington.

The aides insist they are just one part of a broader liberal network that has been organically animated by anger about the Republican efforts to repeal the health care law. But they bring years of experience to the political fight, and their efforts have not gone unnoticed.

In late February, Mr. Trump accused his predecessor of being the hidden hand behind town hall meetings where angry citizens accused lawmakers of trying to take away their health care. I think that President Obama is probably behind it, because his people are certainly behind it, Mr. Trump told Fox News at the time.

In fact, the former president has made only a few public comments on the repeal effort, once using Facebook to denounce the fundamental meanness at the core of this legislation. His current advisers say Mr. Obama has had little direct involvement in managing the day-to-day campaign, though he is regularly briefed on the subject.

His former aides have taken a more active role.

Anita Dunn, Mr. Obamas onetime communications director, is helping to spread the anti-repeal message, placing opinion articles in newspapers and distributing letters, including one from a group representing 7,000 Catholic nuns who oppose repealing the health law.

Meaghan R. Smith, who served as the communications director at the Department of Health and Human Services under Mr. Obama, and Lori Lodes, who was the spokeswoman at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, have become the de facto press secretaries for the effort, working to influence stories written by political and health care reporters.

And Kristie Canegallo, who was Mr. Obamas deputy chief of staff for policy implementation, is directing frequent strategy sessions with the opposition leadership. She has essentially reprised her White House role as the logistics person responsible for ensuring that a sprawling bureaucracy stayed on task as the health care law went into effect.

Ms. Canegallos conference calls have continued almost nonstop, even while she was on vacation in Australia, according to one participant.

Weve had a simple goal from the beginning, which is to stop the repeal of the Affordable Care Act, to protect Medicaid, Mr. Dach said in an interview this week.

Part of that strategy involved a public effort to broadly portray the Republican repeal effort as a threat to peoples existing health care choices.

Mr. Slavitts tweets are revered among Obama alumni for their sharp edges. Last week, when the Congressional Budget Office released its latest estimate of the effects of the Republican bill, Mr. Slavitt did not mince words.

A state-by-state look at who could lose insurance under the proposed Republican health care plans.

NEW CBO is out & a disaster, he tweeted. 22 million people lose coverage & insurance markets die.

Dan Pfeiffer, a former senior adviser to Mr. Obama; Tommy Vietor, one of his national security spokesmen; and Jon Favreau and Jon Lovett, his speechwriters; have used their popular podcast, Pod Save America, to regularly rail against the Republican repeal effort.

Among the episode titles: Kill Bill Vol. 2.

But the campaign against repeal is also more targeted, aimed directly at a handful of Republican senators who have expressed concern about the effects that scrapping the Affordable Care Act could have on their poorest constituents.

In an opinion article about the Republican repeal effort, former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. warned that it would lead to a massive cut in Medicaid and have a dramatic impact on budgets. Aimed at Senator Dean Heller, a Nevada Republican, the article appeared in The Reno Gazette-Journal.

After Mr. Heller and Senator Shelley Moore Capito, Republican of West Virginia, voted on Tuesday to open debate on repealing the health law, Save My Care released television ads on Wednesday chiding both of them.

Senator Capito just broke her promise by casting the deciding vote to repeal our health care, the narrator says. Because of Capito, over 100,000 West Virginians could lose their insurance.

That vote marked a setback in the battle to save Mr. Obamas legacy. But in the hours since, the opposition campaign has celebrated a bit. Votes on several variations of repeal legislation failed to pass the Republican-controlled Senate on Tuesday and Wednesday.

Still, the former aides to Mr. Obama said they did not intend to drop their guard. When a repeal bill failed to pass in the House in March, they relaxed their efforts, only to see the legislation roar back to life a few weeks later.

The lesson here is eternal vigilance, Ms. Dunn said. We all prematurely celebrated after the first House vote. Until we can control one body, we cant afford to walk away.

See the original post here:

Former Obama Aides Lead Opposition to Health Care Repeal - New York Times

The 16 genetic markers that can cut a life story short – Medical Xpress

Posted on July 27, 2017 by Danzig

July 27, 2017 Credit: CC0 Public Domain

The answer to how long each of us will live is partly encoded in our genome. Researchers have identified 16 genetic markers associated with a decreased lifespan, including 14 new to science. This is the largest set of markers of lifespan uncovered to date. About 10 percent of the population carries some configurations of these markers that shorten their life by over a year compared with the population average. Spearheaded by scientists from the SIB Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics, the Lausanne University Hospital (CHUV), the University of Lausanne and the EPFL, the study provides a powerful computational framework to uncover the genetics of our time of death, and ultimately of any disease. The study is published today in Nature Communications.

Why do some of us live longer than others? While the environment in which we live including our socio-economic status or the food we eat plays the biggest part, about 20 to 30 percent of the variation in human lifespan comes down to our genome. Changes in particular locations in our DNA sequence, such as single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), could therefore hold some of the keys to our longevity.

"Until now, the most comprehensive studies had found only two hits in the genome," points out Prof. Zoltn Kutalik, Group Leader at SIB and assistant professor at the Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine (CHUV).

In a new study, a team of scientists, led by Kutalik, has used an innovative computational approach to analyse a dataset of 116,279 individuals and probe 2.3 million human SNPs.

An unparalleled number of SNPs associated with lifespan (16) were uncovered, including 14 new to science. "In our approach, we prioritized changes in the DNA known to be linked to age-related diseases in order to scan the genome more efficiently," says Kutalik. "This is the largest set of lifespan-associated genetic markers ever uncovered."

About 1 in 10 people carry some configurations of these markers that shorten their life by over a year compared with the population average. In addition, a person inheriting a lifespan-shortening version of one of these SNPs may die up to seven months earlier.

The approach also enabled the researchers to explore how the DNA changes affected lifespan in a holistic way. They found that most SNPs had an effect on lifespan by impacting more than a single disease or risk factor, for example through being more addicted to smoking as well as through being predisposed to schizophrenia.

The discovered SNPs, combined with gene expression data, allowed the researchers to identify that lower brain expression of three genes neighbouring the SNPs (RBM6, SULT1A1 and CHRNA5, involved in nicotine dependence) was causally linked to increased lifespan.

These three genes could therefore act as biomarkers of longevity, i.e. survival beyond 85-100 years. "To support this hypothesis, we have shown that mice with a lower brain expression level of RBM6 lived substantially longer," comments Prof. Johan Auwerx, professor at the EPFL.

"Interestingly, the gene expression impact of some of these SNPs in humans is analogous to the consequence of a low-calorie diet in mice, which is known to have positive effects on lifespan," adds Prof. Marc Robinson-Rechavi, SIB Group Leader and professor at the University of Lausanne.

"Our findings reveal shared molecular mechanisms between human and model organisms, which will be explored in more depth in the future," concludes Prof. Bart Deplancke, SIB Group Leader and professor at the EPFL.

This study, which is a part of the AgingX Project supported by SystemsX.ch (the Swiss Initiative in Systems Biology), therefore brings us a step closer to grasping the mechanisms of human aging and longevity. It also proposes an innovative computational framework to improve the power of genomewide investigations of diseases more generally. As such, the framework could have promising applications in the field of personalized medicine.

Explore further: Study shows smoking doesn't always mean a shortened life span or cancer

More information: Aaron F. McDaid et al. Bayesian association scan reveals loci associated with human lifespan and linked biomarkers, Nature Communications (2017). DOI: 10.1038/NCOMMS15842

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

Follow this link:

The 16 genetic markers that can cut a life story short - Medical Xpress

First Editing of Human Embryos Performed in United States – NBCNews.com

Posted on July 27, 2017 by Danzig

Human embryos on a petri dish are viewed through a microscope. Sandy Huffaker / Bloomberg via Getty Images file

Some countries have signed a convention prohibiting the practice on concerns it could be used to create so-called designer babies.

Results of the peer-reviewed study are expected to be published soon in a scientific journal, according to OHSU spokesman Eric Robinson.

The research, led by Shoukhrat Mitalipov, head of OHSU's Center for Embryonic Cell and Gene Therapy, involves a technology known as CRISPR that has opened up new frontiers in genetic medicine because of its ability to modify genes quickly and efficiently.

CRISPR works as a type of molecular scissors that can selectively trim away unwanted parts of the genome, and replace it with new stretches of DNA.

Scientists in China have published similar studies with mixed results.

In December 2015, scientists and ethicists at an international meeting held at the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) in Washington said it would be "irresponsible" to use gene editing technology in human embryos for therapeutic purposes, such as to correct genetic diseases, until safety and efficacy issues are resolved.

But earlier this year, NAS and the National Academy of Medicine said scientific advances make gene editing in human reproductive cells "a realistic possibility that deserves serious consideration.

Link:

First Editing of Human Embryos Performed in United States - NBCNews.com

Human Genetic Engineering Begins! | National Review – National Review

Posted on July 27, 2017 by Danzig

Some of the most powerful technologies ever invented whichcan literally change human life at the DNAlevel aremoving forward with very little societal discussion or sufficient regulatory oversight. Technology Review is now reporting an attempt in the US to use CRISPR to genetically modify a human embryo. From the story:

The first known attempt at creating genetically modified human embryos in the United States has been carried out by a team of researchers in Portland, Oregon,Technology Reviewhas learned.

The effort, led by Shoukhrat Mitalipov of Oregon Health and Science University, involved changing the DNA of a large number of one-cell embryos with the gene-editing technique CRISPR, according to people familiar with the scientific results

Now Mitalipov is believed to have broken new ground both in the number of embryos experimented upon and by demonstrating that it is possible to safely and efficiently correct defective genes that cause inherited diseases.

Although none of the embryos were allowed to develop for more than a few daysand there was never any intention of implanting them into a wombthe experiments are a milestone on what may prove to be an inevitable journey toward the birth of the first genetically modified humans.

It may begin with curing disease. But it wont stay there. Many are drooling to engage in eugenic genetic enhancements.

So, are we going to just watch, slack-jawed, the double-time marchto Brave New World unfoldbefore our eyes?

Or are we going to engage democratic deliberation to determine if this should be done, and if so, what the parameters are?

Considering recent history, I fear I know the answer.

And NO: I dont trust the scientists to regulate themselves.

Mr. President: We need a presidential bioethics/biotechnology commission now!

Originally posted here:

Human Genetic Engineering Begins! | National Review - National Review

True Blue Chrysanthemum Flowers Produced with Genetic Engineering – Scientific American

Posted on July 27, 2017 by Danzig

Roses are red, but science could someday turn them blue. Thats one of the possible future applications of a technique researchers have used to genetically engineer blue chrysanthemums for the first time.

Chyrsanthemums come in an array of colours, including pink, yellow and red. But all it took to engineer the truly blue hueand not a violet or bluish colourwas tinkering with two genes, scientists report in a study published on July 26 inScience Advances. The team says that the approach could be applied to other commercially important flowers, including carnations and lilies.

Consumers love novelty, says Nick Albert, a plant biologist at the New Zealand Institute for Plant & Food Research in Palmerston North, New Zealand. And people actively seek out plants with blue flowers to fill their gardens.

Plenty of flowers are bluish, but its rare to find true blue in nature, says Naonobu Noda, a plant researcher at the National Agriculture and Food Research Organization near Tsukuba, Japan, and lead study author. Scientists, including Noda, have tried to artificially produce blue blooms for years:efforts that have often produced violet or bluish huesin flowers such as roses and carnations. Part of the problem is that naturally blue blossoming plants arent closely related enough to commercially important flowers for traditional methodsincluding selective breedingto work.

Most truly blue blossoms overexpress genes that trigger the production of pigments called delphinidin-based anthocyanins. The trick to getting blue flowers in species that arent naturally that colour is inserting the right combination of genes into their genomes. Noda came close in a 2013 studywhen he and his colleagues found that adding a gene from a naturally blue Canterbury bells flower (Campanula medium) into the DNA of chrysanthemums (Chrysanthemum morifolium) produced a violet-hued bloom.

Noda says he and his team expected that they would need to manipulate many more genes to get the blue chrysanthemum they produced in their latest study. But to their surprise, adding only one more borrowed gene from the naturally blue butterfly pea plant (Clitoria ternatea) was enough.

Anthocyanins can turn petals red, violet or blue, depending on the pigments structure. Noda and his colleagues found that genes from the Canterbury bells and butterfly pea altered the molecular structure of the anthocyanin in the chrysanthemum. When the modified pigments interacted with compounds called flavone glucosides, the resulting chrysanthemum flowers were blue. The team tested the wavelengths given off by their blossoms in several ways to ensure that the flowers were truly blue.

The quest for blue blooms wouldn't only be applicable to the commercial flower market. Studying how these pigments work could also lead to the sustainable manufacture of artificial pigments, says Silvia Vignolini, a physicist at the University of Cambridge, UK, who has studied themolecular structure of the intensely blue marble berry.

Regardless, producing truly blue flowers is a great achievement and demonstrates that the underlying chemistry required to achieve 'blue' is complex and remains to be fully understood, says Albert.

This article is reproduced with permission and wasfirst publishedon July 26, 2017.

Pancreas in a Dish Tells Story of How Metastatic Cells Turn Back Time – Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology News (press release)

Posted on July 27, 2017 by Danzig

Pancreatic cancer is a killer; 85% of patients die within nine months of diagnosis. A new study sheds light on how the cancer spreads throughout the body.

The study, published in the journal Cell by researchers at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, reports that the cancers spread is controlled by epigeneticschanges that arent hardwired into DNA, but affect how genes are expressed. To make this discovery, scientists grew and tested balls of cells that mimic the shape and behavior of the pancreas, known as pancreatic organoids. These organoids may one day lead to personalized cancer treatments.

In a few years, pancreatic cancer will become the second-leading cause of cancer death in the United Stateseclipsing colon and breast canceraccording to Howard Crawford, director of the pancreas research program at University of Michigan. But pancreatic cancer garners far less public attention than other malignancies.

Thats because we dont have any survivors, Crawford tells GEN. We dont have people that can bring a lot of press. We all have to rely on the patients families and loved ones to raise awareness. And thats a challenge.

The cancer is so deadly because pancreatic tumors regularly break off and spread to far-flung regions of the bodya process known as metastasis. Scientists have tried to identify genes that control the cancer, but genetics dont tell the whole story.

We have a pretty good understanding of how pancreatic cells become pancreatic tumor cells, said Chang-Il Hwang, postdocoral fellow and co-first author of the study. We dont know how they metastasize to distant organs.

To understand the cancers spread, Hwang and colleagues collected pancreatic tumors and their metastases from mice and grew the cells in a dish. The cells formed tiny 3D structures known as organoids, which looked and acted like pancreatic cells.

When the researchers compared organoids from the initial tumor to organoids from the metastases, they didnt find major genetic differences. But they did see that metastatic organoids had more active enhancersshort regions of DNA that boost gene expression by binding to proteins.

The roughly 800 enhancers active in metastatic organoids were linked to embryonic pancreas formation. In effect, metastatic cells were turning back the clock and reverting to an earlier state in order to leave the pancreas.

The researchers analyzed the DNA sequences of the enhancers to find the protein that binds to them, and found FOXA1. When they expressed high levels of FOXA1 in organoids and injected them into the tails of mice, the organoids spread to the lunga sign of metastasis. But when the researchers injected mice with organoids lacking FOXA1, they didnt metastasize.

The scientists also checked human pancreatic tissue samples and found that FOXA1 increased with disease severityconsistent with its role in metastasis. Hwang is now working to better understand how FOXA1 works in order to develop future therapies.

The future goal will be to try to utilize this information to benefit metastatic pancreatic cancer patients, said Hwang.

Because organoids are grown from a patients cells, Hwang and others may be able to use them to personalize cancer treatments. A researcher could grow organoids from a tumor, treat those organoids with a variety of drugs, and see which drugs work best before administering the drug to a patient. But this takes timesomething that pancreatic cancer patients have in short supply.

It takes almost a month or more to establish a good organoid culture from a pancreatic patient, said Crawford. If a patient has six to nine months to live, thats not a lot of time.

Crawford believes the key is earlier diagnosis. Ten percent of patients have a family history of the disease and genetic markers that put them at risk. He thinks these people should be screened early and often. But screening the rest of the population will be a challenge.

We have to have a fairly perfect way to screen [the] population, he said. Even with a 98% or 99% success rate theres a large number of people there that would falsely be diagnosed and a few that would be missed.

Here is the original post:

Pancreas in a Dish Tells Story of How Metastatic Cells Turn Back Time - Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology News (press release)

Two Gene Therapy Approaches Pending Approval from FDA Bring Hope to Mesothelioma Community – MesotheliomaHelp.org (blog)

Posted on July 27, 2017 by Danzig

Nearly five years ago, MesotheliomaHelp reported about a breakthrough treatment called gene therapy. At the time, it was touted as the next frontier in medicine, and cancer patients from around the world watched closely in the hopes that the treatment could bring a cure to even the rarest of cancers, such as mesothelioma. Now, all eyes are on the U.S. Food and Drug Administration as it is poised to approve two types of gene therapy.

The Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee (ODAC) sent its recommendation to the FDA on July 12 for CTL019 (tisagenlecleucel) for the treatment of a form of leukemia. Then, on July 17, the FDA accepted a Biologics Licensing Application from Spark Therapeutics for gene therapy for a rare inherited eye disease that causes blindness, approved the name Luxturna for the treatment, and assigned priority status to the treatment for accelerated review.

To better understand these two pending landmark approvals and the future of gene therapy, MesotheliomaHelp turned to Ricki Lewis, a New York-based geneticist and author.

Its not right for every disease, said Lewis. But it is an approach that can be considered some day along with drugs, surgery and everything else.

Tisagenlecleucel is an investigational chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy from Novartis, developed by researchers at the University of Pennsylvania. The pharmaceutical company wants to use the therapy to treat a rare form of leukemia, B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia affecting children and young adults under the age of 25, according to NPR.

Lewis explains that CAR-T therapy is not conventional gene therapy, which has been in clinical trials to treat single-gene diseases since 1990. However, she notes that CAR T cell technology has had astonishing success in treating a form of leukemia and its being tested for multiple myeloma, brain cancer, breast cancer, and soft tissue cancers.

Although both approaches deliver DNA in viruses, classical gene therapy adds a working copy of a single mutant gene, restoring a specific proteins function, says Lewis. Revving up a not-naturally-occurring immune response isnt the same thing as replacing an enzyme, which is what Luxturna does.

According to the National Cancer Institute, in CAR-T treatment, T cells are removed from the patients blood and genetically altered in a lab to have chimeric antigen receptors on their surface. The T cells are then multiplied, into the billions, in the lab and infused back into the patients blood, where they seek out the cancer cells and launch a precise immune attack against them.

Lewis offers the following explanation of CAR-T:

CAR operates like a drone, targeting and obliterating cancer cells. It introduces a gene manufactured to contain instructions for making two immune system components in one, something that doesnt exist in nature: an antibody and a T cell receptor. When delivered in a virus, the CAR enters the persons T cells, which then manufacture the hybrid (chimeric) protein.

The engineered receptor portion guides the T cells to a specific target such as cancerous B cells where the antibody part binds. The action alerts the immune system to respond and kill the cancer cells.

Ultimately, CAR-T, also described as a process that genetically alters a patients own cells to fight cancer, could be used for many more diseases and cancers, and bring an effective treatment to mesothelioma patients.

In a 2013 article for MesotheliomaHelp, Lewis wrote about CAR-T treatment saying, An ingenious technique that has vanquished leukemia in a handful of patients is also being applied to mesothelioma.

Lewis highlighted the CAR-T process being used in a mesothelioma clinical trial from the University of Pennsylvania that uses the doctored T cells, known as chimeric immune receptor (CIR) instead of CAR, against mesothelin, a protein that is found to be in excess in mesothelioma and other cancers. The idea is that T cells led to the mesothelioma cells will attract an immune response, said Lewis.

Find out more about the mesothelioma clinical trial from the University of Pennsylvania here.

In her book The Forever Fix, Lewis followed the journey of the use of gene therapy to restore the vision of a young boy who was nearly blind from a hereditary disorder. The doctors added a working copy of a single defective gene in the New York boys eyes that prevented his eyes from using vitamin A to send visual signals to his brain. The treatment was a success: the boys vision was restored and no further treatments or surgery were required.

Last weeks FDA advisory committees greenlight for CAR technology overshadowed a milestone for what is likely to be the first approval of classic gene therapy for a form of inherited blindness, Lewis told MesotheliomaHelp. Thats the Leber congenital amaurosis type 2 renamed RPE65-mediated inherited retinal dystrophy that I wrote my book about.

In an interview with Lewis last week, Dr. Katherine High, MD, President, Chief Scientific Officer, and a founder of Spark Therapeutics, said of the future of gene therapy:

I hope we will see continued accumulation of successful clinical results in a range of target tissues and continued progress in bringing gene therapy products to licensing. When gene therapy products are licensed, there will be increased interest in the medical community, and that will help to expand opportunities.

Mesothelioma patients typically show disease symptoms years or even decades after exposure to asbestos, a known carcinogen. The cancer is eventually fatal, but aggressive therapy may prolong the lives of patients who are diagnosed early. Approximately 3,000 Americans are diagnosed with the cancer each year.

Getting at the basis of why one person develops mesothelioma and another person doesnt, that is going to hold a clue to really fighting it, Lewis said, referring to a clinical trial conducted at Wake Forest University in 2013 to determine whether some mesothelioma patients are genetically predisposed to developing mesothelioma. Then we will know what to do the gene therapy on.

The pending FDA approvals could bring groundbreaking treatment to cancer patients and to patients with genetic diseases. Perhaps someday, mesothelioma patients will enjoy long, productive lives through gene therapy.

The FDA is not bound to follow the ODACs recommendations, however, the Agency nearly always follows the recommendation. Approval for CTL019 is expected in November. The FDA will decide on Luxturna in January, 2018.

About Ricki Lewis,PhD Ricki Lewis is a science writer with a PhD in genetics. The author of several textbooks and thousands of articles in scientific, medical, and consumer publications, Rickis first narrative nonfiction book, The Forever Fix: Gene Therapy and the Boy Who Saved It, was published by St. Martins Press in March 2012. In addition to writing, Ricki provides genetic counseling for parents-to-be at CareNet Medical Group in Schenectady, NY and teaches Genethics an online course for masters degree students at the Alden March Bioethics Institute of Albany Medical Center.

Read more about gene therapy on Ricki Lewiss DNA Science blog.

Find out more about Ricki Lewis at her website.

See the original post:

Two Gene Therapy Approaches Pending Approval from FDA Bring Hope to Mesothelioma Community - MesotheliomaHelp.org (blog)

Mark Zuckerberg Is A Bad Futurist – HuffPost

Posted on July 27, 2017 by Danzig

Elon Musks doomsday AI predictions arent irresponsible, but Mark Zuckerbergs techno-optimism is.

Mark Zuckerberg criticized Elon Musk on Sunday for warning a group of governors that artificial intelligence poses a fundamental risk to the existence of human civilization. During a Facebook Live broadcast from his backyard, Zuckerberg said Musks cautioning was pretty irresponsible, and really negative.

But at a time when some of the brightest minds on the planet are saying that AI could pose a significant existential threat, isnt it more irresponsible to dismiss Musks warnings, in favor of keeping people blindly optimistic about technology? Zuckerbergs relentless techno-optimism is misguided at best, and dangerous at worst. Heres why:

1. A good futurist is capable of imagining and exploring all future scenarios, not just the positive ones.

Yes, AI may help save lives, but that doesnt mean it cant take lives, too. At this stage, we know so little about how AI will develop that both scenarios are equally plausible, and every possible scenario deserves careful consideration.

Zuckerberg argues that AI, like every new technology, can be used for good or for bad. But as Musk pointed out in his speech, the AI revolution is expected to be qualitatively different than other technological advancements. Once a superintelligent AI emerges, the option of steering AI to be good or bad (whatever that may mean) may no longer be in our control. And to assume that humans will stay in control, despite having a drastically inferior intelligence, is just arrogant.

2. Technology needs more nay-sayers like Musk.

We already live in a world that worships technology and believes almost anything could be improved if you slap an algorithm on it. Wouldnt society be better off if we had more thinkers like Musk that were willing to ponder the disaster storylines, instead of having blind faith in black-box technology?

Zuckerbergs optimism may be uplifting and on-brand and great for Facebook PR, but it doesnt help motivate people to prepare for and prevent the potential negative consequences of technology. Tackling tech challenges with a build-it-and-see-what-happens approach (a la Zuckerbergs former move fast and break things development mantra) just isnt suitable for AI. As Musk put it, By the time we are reactive in regulation, its too late. Weve already seen some of the negative effects of AI emerge, and this is likely only the beginning.

3. No ones saying we should halt progress on AI altogether; rather, experts like Musk believe we need to be thoughtful and think critically about how we move forward with it.

Elon Musk doesnt just have it out for AIthis is the same man who expects us to let AIs drive us around, after allhe just wants policymakers to start considering regulations for AI. Asking governors to entertain possible consequences of AI isnt irresponsible, in fact, its the only responsible thing to do.

He wants the industry to hit pause and think before building out the most significant technology of our species existence. Whats unreasonable about that?

The Morning Email

Wake up to the day's most important news.

Go here to see the original:

Mark Zuckerberg Is A Bad Futurist - HuffPost

Select Page ::