Monthly Archives: March 2021

According to the report, the global synthetic biology market was valued atUS$ 4.96 Bnin 2020and is projected to expand at a CAGR of26.3%from2021to2027

Latest added Synthetic Biology Market research study by MarketDigits offers detailed product outlook and elaborates market review till 2026. The market Study is segmented by key regions that is accelerating the marketization. At present, the market is sharping its presence and some of the key players in the study areThermo Fischer Scientific, GenScript, Integrated DNA technologies, Eurofins Scientific, Origene technologies, Scientific genomics. The study is a perfect mix of qualitative and quantitative Market data collected and validated majorly through primary data and secondary sources.

Request for Free Sample Copy of This Report @https://marketdigits.com/synthetic-biology-market/sample

This report studies the Synthetic Biology Market size, industry status and forecast, competition landscape and growth opportunity. This research report categorizes the Synthetic Biology Market by companies, region, type and end-use industry.

Scroll down 100s of data Tables, charts and graphs spread through Pages and in-depth Table of Content on Synthetic Biology Market, By Products (Synthetic DNA, Synthetic Oligos, Synthetic Genes, Software Tools, Chassis Organisms, Synthetic Clones, Synthetic Cells), Technology (Nucleotide Synthesis And Sequencing, Bioinformatics, Microfluidics, Genetic Engineering), Application (Medical Applications, Industrial Applications, Environmental Applications) and Geography Global Forecast to 2026. Early buyers will get 10% customization on study.

To Avail deep insights of Synthetic Biology Market Size, competition landscape is provided i.e. Revenue Analysis (M $US) by Company (2018-2020), Segment Revenue Market Share (%) by Players (2018-2020) and further a qualitative analysis is made towards market concentration rate, product/service differences, new entrants and the technological trends in future.

Unlock new opportunities in Synthetic Biology Market; the latest release fromMarketDigitshighlights the key market trends significant to the growth prospects, Let us know if any specific players or list of players needs to consider to gain better insights.

Grab Complete Details with TOC For Free @https://marketdigits.com/synthetic-biology-market/toc

Synthetic Biology Market: Overview

Increase in Investments by Government and Private Organizations into Synthetic Biology Market

Rise in Prevalence of Various Diseases and Technology Advancements: A Key Driver

Biosafety, Biosecurity, and Ethical Risk Related to Synthetic Biology to Hamper Synthetic Biology Market

Global Synthetic Biology Market: Key Developments

Key players in the global synthetic biology market are engaged in regulatory approvals, advanced product development, launch of new products, increase in investments and funds, and acquisition & collaborative agreements with other companies. These strategies of key players are likely to fuel growth of the global synthetic biology market. A few expansion strategies adopted by players operating in the synthetic biology market are:

North America to Account for Major Share of Global Synthetic Biology Market

Global Synthetic Biology Market: Competitive Landscape

Analysis and discussion of important industry trends, market size, market share estimates are also covered in this global Synthetic Biology market report. The usefulness of SWOT analysis & Porter's Five Forces analysis in generating market research report makes it preferable by the businesses and hence also used while preparing this Synthetic Biology report. Synthetic Biology market report consists of market analysis by regions, especially North America, China, Europe, Southeast Asia, Japan, and India, focusing top manufacturers in global market, with production, price, revenue, and market share for each manufacturer. Being the most suitable example of the key market attributes, this Synthetic Biology report has been prepared by keeping in mind every market related aspect.

Which market aspects are illuminated in the report?

Executive Summary: It covers a summary of the most vital studies, the Global Synthetic Biology market increasing rate, modest circumstances, market trends, drivers and problems as well as macroscopic pointers.

Study Analysis: Covers major companies, vital market segments, the scope of the products offered in the Global Synthetic Biology market, the years measured and the study points.

Company Profile:Each Firm well-defined in this segment is screened based on a products, value, SWOT analysis, their ability and other significant features.

Manufacture by region:This Global Synthetic Biology report offers data on imports and exports, sales, production and key companies in all studied regional markets.

Table of Contents:

1 Scope of the Report

2 Executive Summary

3 Global Synthetic Biology by Players

4 Synthetic Biology by Regions

5 Americas

6 APAC

7 Europe

8 Middle East & Africa

9 Market Drivers, Challenges and Trends

10 Global Synthetic Biology Market Forecast

11 Key Players Analysis

12 Research Findings and Conclusion

13 List of Tables

14 List of Figures

Any Questions? Inquire Here Before Buying @https://marketdigits.com/synthetic-biology-market/analyst

About MarketDigits :

MarketDigitsis one of the leading business research and consulting companies that helps clients to tap new and emerging opportunities and revenue areas, thereby assisting them in operational and strategic decision-making. We atMarketDigitsbelieve that market is a small place and an interface between the supplier and the consumer, thus our focus remains mainly on business research that includes the entire value chain and not only the markets.

We offer services that are most relevant and beneficial to the users, which help businesses to sustain in this competitive market. Our detailed and in-depth analysis of the markets catering to strategic, tactical, and operational data analysis & reporting needs of various industries utilize advanced technology so that our clients get better insights into the markets and identify lucrative opportunities and areas of incremental revenues.

Contact Us :

MarketDigits

Phone : +91-9822485644

Email : sales@marketdigits.com

Read the original here:
Synthetic Biology Market 2021 Latest Research, Business Overview, Industry Analysis, Driver, Trends and Key Value | Integrated DNA technologies, Eurof...

MENLO PARK, Calif. and BOSTON, March 04, 2021 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Adicet Bio, Inc. (Nasdaq: ACET), a biotechnology company discovering and developing allogeneic gamma delta T cell therapies for cancer and other diseases, today announced the appointment of Andrew Sinclair, Ph.D., to its board of directors. Dr. Sinclair will replace Erez Chimovits, who will step down from the Board of Directors.

Abingworth was a significant investor in our recent successful $152 million financing and we are extremely pleased to welcome Andrew, a highly-respected healthcare investor, to our Board of Directors, said Chen Schor, President and Chief Executive Officer of Adicet Bio, Inc. Andrews significant life science experience amassed throughout his career, both from the financial and scientific perspective, will be tremendously valuable to Adicet as we continue to advance ADI-001 into the clinic and expand our pipeline of off-the-shelf gamma delta T cell product candidates. In addition, we would like to thank Erez for his five years of service and significant contributions to Adicet which have played an important role in advancing our strategic priorities.

I am excited to join Adicet Bios Board of Directors, said Andrew Sinclair. Adicets allogeneic gamma delta T cell approach has a number of potential advantages over other cell therapy platforms and I look forward to working with my fellow board members and company management to advance Adicets corporate goals in the years ahead.

Dr. Sinclair is currently a partner and portfolio manager at Abingworth LLP, a life sciences investment group. He has been at Abingworth since 2008 where he has served in various positions focusing on investments in public and private biotech and pharmaceutical companies. Dr. Sinclair currently serves on the boards of directors of Soleno Therapeutics, Inc., Sierra Oncology and Verona Pharma plc. Prior to joining Abingworth, he was senior equity analyst, director, at HSBC Global Markets, where he was responsible for investment research in the mid-cap pharmaceutical sector. Previously, Andrew held biotechnology analyst positions at Credit Suisse and SG Cowen. Dr. Sinclair received his B.Sc. in Microbiology from King's College London and his Ph.D. in Chemistry and Genetic Engineering at the BBSRC Institute of Plant Science, Norwich. Andrew qualified as a chartered accountant with KPMG.

About Adicet Bio, Inc.

Adicet Bio, Inc. is a biotechnology company discovering and developing allogeneic gamma delta T cell therapies for cancer and other diseases. Adicet is advancing a pipeline of off-the-shelf gamma delta T cells, engineered with chimeric antigen receptors and T cell receptor-like antibodies to enhance selective tumor targeting, facilitate innate and adaptive anti-tumor immune response, and improve persistence for durable activity in patients. For more information, please visit our website at http://www.adicetbio.com.

About Abingworth

Abingworth is a leading transatlantic life sciences investment firm. Abingworth helps transform cutting-edge science into novel medicines by providing capital and expertise to top calibre management teams building world-class companies. Since 1973, Abingworth has invested in 172 life science companies, leading to 44 M&As and 69 IPOs. Our therapeutic focused investments fall into three categories: seed and early-stage, development stage, and clinical co-development. Abingworth supports its portfolio companies with a team of experienced professionals at offices in London, Menlo Park (California), and Boston.

Forward-Looking Statements

This press release contains forward-looking statements of Adicet within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 relating to business and operations of Adicet including, but not limited to preclinical and clinical development of Adicets product candidates, including future plans or expectations for ADI-001 and potential therapeutic effects of ADI-001, the timing and outcome of discussions with FDA and other regulatory agencies, expectations regarding the design, implementation, timing, and success of its future clinical studies of ADI-001, and our growth as a company and the anticipated contribution of the members of our board of directors to our operations and progress. The words may, will, could, would, should, expect, plan, anticipate, intend, believe, estimate, predict, project, potential, continue, target and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements, although not all forward-looking statements contain these identifying words.

Any forward-looking statements in this press release are based on managements current expectations and beliefs of future events, and are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially and adversely from those set forth in or implied by such forward-looking statements, including without limitation, Adicets ability to execute on its strategy; that positive results from a clinical study may not necessarily be predictive of the results of future or ongoing clinical studies; the expected impact and contribution of our board of directors and executives to our business as well as those risks and uncertainties set forth in the companys most recent quarterly report on Form 10-Q and subsequent filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. For a discussion of these and other risks and uncertainties, and other important factors, any of which could cause Adicets actual results to differ from those contained in the forward-looking statements, see the section entitled Risk Factors in Adicets most recent annual report on Form 10-K and our periodic reports on Form 10-Q and Form 8-K filed with the SEC, as well as discussions of potential risks, uncertainties, and other important factors in Adicets other filings with the SEC. All information in this press release is as of the date of the release, and Adicet undertakes no duty to update this information unless required by law.

Adicet Bio, Inc.Investor and Media Contacts

Anne Bowdidgeabowdidge@adicetbio.com

Janhavi MohiteStern Investor Relations, Inc.212-362-1200janhavi.mohite@sternir.com

View post:
Adicet Bio Appoints Dr. Andrew Sinclair to its Board of Directors - GlobeNewswire

The United Nations Food Systems Summit, scheduled for September 2021, is facing the threat of a massive boycott, according to a report in the Guardian, with accusations that the summit is biased in favour of corporate, high-tech intensive agriculture.

Anger arose after the summits concept paper was revealed, reportedly highlighting the importance of precision agriculture, data collection and genetic engineering in addressing the food crisis, but making no reference to ecological farming or civil society involvement.

The UN special rapporteur on the right to food, Michael Fakhri, wrote that the summit appeared heavily skewed in favour of one type of approach to food systems, namely market-based solutions.

The business sector has been part of the problem of food systems, he stated, and has not been held accountable.

The summit was initially welcomed for recognising that farming had largely been ignored in climate talks. Its brief was to find ways to reduce hunger and improve global food systems, according to the Guardian, in the face of worsening climate and biodiversity crises.

However, it was the UN secretary generals appointment of Agnes Kalibata to head the event that sparked the first controversy.

The former Rwandan agriculture minister is president of the Gates-funded Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (Agra), which was set up in 2006 to open the continent up to genetically modified crops, high-yield commercial seed varieties and intensive farming, the Guardian reported.

In a statement to the newspaper, Kalibata defended her appointment, as well as the goals of the summit. I know those among the worlds most vulnerable and I am determined that this summit will not let them down, she said. We have designed the summit to ensure every voice is heard. We do not expect everyone to agree on everything from the outset.

The Civil Society and Indigenous Peoples Mechanism, a group of over 500 civil society groups with more than 300m members, revealed that it would boycott the event and set up an alternative meeting.

Timothy Wise, senior adviser at the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy in the US, lamented the missed opportunity to hear from successful farmer-led groups.

A growing number of farmers, scientists and development experts now advocate a shift from high-input chemical-intensive agriculture to low-input ecological farming, he noted. They are supported by an array of new research documenting both the risks of continuing to follow our current practices and the potential benefits of a transition to more sustainable farming.

Read more from the original source:
UN Summit faces boycott threat - Fruitnet

PHILADELPHIA, March 3, 2021 /PRNewswire/ --Century Therapeutics, a leading cell therapy company developing induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC)-derived cell therapies in immuno-oncology, today announced the closing of a $160 million Series C financing. The financing was led by Casdin Capital and brought together a syndicate of new investors including Fidelity Management & Research LLC, the Federated Hermes Kauffmann Funds, RA Capital, Logos Capital, OrbiMed, Marshall Wace, Qatar Investment Authority, Avidity Partners, and Octagon Capital.Founding investorsVersant Ventures and Leaps by Bayer also participated. Eli Casdin, Founder and Chief Investment Officer of Casdin Capital will be joining the Century Therapeutics Board of Directors.

"We are fortunate to be surrounded by such a top-tier group of investors, whose support will enable the acceleration of Century's technology platform into the clinic," said Lalo Flores, Chief Executive Officer, Century Therapeutics. "With this new investor partnership, we are well-positioned to capitalize on the tremendous potential of our integrated iPSC, cell engineering and manufacturing capabilities to develop safer, more effective and more affordable next generation allogeneic cancer therapies."

Funds raised will help advance Century's rich pre-clinical pipeline, which includes multiple iPSC-derived CAR-iT and CAR-iNK cell products. These products are designed to resist host rejection, enhance cell persistence, and allow repeat dosing to provide durable responses in all patients. The team anticipates beginning clinical testing of its first products in 2022, as well as generating multiple INDs annually in the coming years.

"It's a remarkable and transformative time in the field, with the ability to engineer cells for therapeutic impact now a commercial reality. At the same time, iPSC technology has matured and is now leading the transition from bespoke autologous products to off-the-shelf allogeneic ones." said Eli Casdin CIO of Casdin Capital. "We could not be more excited to partner with the expert team at Century Therapeutics and do our part to help them leverage and accelerate their deep technical expertise in cellular reprogramming, differentiation, genetic engineering and manufacturing to deliver on this next phase of cellular therapy."

About Century Therapeutics

Century Therapeutics is harnessing the power of adult stem cells to develop curative cell therapy products for cancer that overcome the limitations of first-generation cell therapies. Our genetically engineered, iPSC-derived iNK and iT cell products are designed to specifically target hematologic and solid tumor cancers. Our commitment to developing off-the-shelf cell therapies will expand patient access and provides an unparalleled opportunity to advance the course of cancer care. For more information, please visit http://www.centurytx.com.

SOURCE Century Therapeutics

Home

See the rest here:
Century Therapeutics Completes $160 Million Series C Financing to Accelerate Development of iPSC-derived Cell Therapy Pipeline - PRNewswire

Genetically engineering female grey squirrels to make them infertile could be a highly effective way to control their numbers and make way for declining red squirrel populations, a study has found.

Conservationists have long sought to reduce numbers of invasive grey squirrels, which were imported as curiosities from the US in the 1890s and started to wreak havoc on the UKs native red squirrels.

Grey squirrels carry a disease a parapoxvirus -which does not appear to affect their health but often kills red squirrels. Greys are more likely to eat green acorns, so will decimate the food source before they ripen and the reds can make use of them.

Green Shoots: i's Guide to Helping the Planet in your Everyday Life

Scientists are working on a new technique to alter their genetic makeup and, using computer modelling, they have demonstrated its potential to significantly reduce grey squirrel numbers.

The next step is to perfect the gene altering technique, which is well advanced in insects but still needs quite a lot of development before it could be used in rodents.

It would also require regulatory approval and probably public acceptance before it was used in the real world, although the Government is actively considering relaxing restrictions on gene editing.

The technique involves tweaking a key female fertility gene in a group of grey squirrels and releasing them into the wild.

Nicky Faber, who did the research at Edinburgh University and is now a PhD candidate at WageningenUniversity and Research in the Netherlands, said: The modelling shows that the technique is very effective at reducing the population size. It will spread through the population so after a certain number of generations, all grey squirrels will have the engineered gene and this will cause a lot of females to be infertile.

The programme would probably require an annual release of newly engineered grey squirrels, with numbers depending on factors such as the local population and the effectiveness of the technique in real life, she said.

The technique also has broader applications.

Ms Faber said: This technology is exciting because it could help solve some other big challenges: to control or immunize malaria-transmitting mosquitoes, to immunize vulnerable species threatened by a pathogen, or to control agricultural pests.

It is more humane than current pest control measures such as shooting, trapping, and poisoning. Also, it is more sustainable as it is species-specific, so it has no negative effects to other species.

A lot of research still needs to be done to make the technology practically applicable, but once it is, the technology could be a great tool in our conservation toolbox, she said.

Professor Luke Alphey, of the Pirbright Institute in London, who was not involved in the research said: Regulatory approval and public acceptance would obviously be essential before any actual use of such technology that is a long way off, but this paper indicates that gene drives could be a valuable tool in the conservation toolbox.

Originally posted here:
Genetically altering grey squirrel fertility could help the native red say scientists - iNews

DUBLIN, March 4, 2021 /PRNewswire/ -- The "Pharma 4.0" report has been added to ResearchAndMarkets.com's offering.

This report provides detailed exposure to the Pharma 4.0 market. This report also highlights the current and future market potential of Pharma 4.0 along with a detailed analysis of the competitive environment, regulatory scenario, technological advancement, and drivers, restraints, opportunities and trends in market growth.

This study's goals are to determine the current market scenario for Pharma 4.0 and to assess the market's growth potential during the forecast period. The research explores market dynamics such as drivers, restraints, opportunities, and trends that will have an impact on the growth of the market for Pharma 4.0. The study offers a comprehensive analysis of the current market for Pharma 4.0 and the future direction of the market.

Reasons for Doing This Study

Technological advances over the last three centuries have helped make people's lives easier and richer. Technology has continually advanced to a higher level from one era to the next, starting with the Industrial Revolution. Now, we are seeing the start of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, also known as Industry 4.0.

The First Industrial Revolution followed the proto-industrialization period. This industrial revolution started in the eighteenth century with the advent of the steam engine when steam began powering everything from agriculture machinery to textile manufacturing. This industrial revolution is also called 'The Age of Mechanical Production.' Agrarian societies gave way to urbanization with steam power.

The Second Industrial Revolution began toward the end of the nineteenth century with massive technological advancements that led to the emergence of new sources of energy such as electricity, gas and oil. Other important advances in The Second Industrial Revolution included developments in steel production, chemicals and methods of communication such as the telegraph and the telephone. The Second Industrial Revolution is considered the most important one to this day because of the inventions of the automobile and the plane at the beginning of the twentieth century.

The Third Industrial Revolution was brought forth through the rise of electronics, telecommunications and of course computers. Through these new technologies, the third industrial revolution opened the doors to space exploration, Internet communications and biotechnology.

The Fourth Industrial Revolution can be described as the blurring of boundaries between the physical, digital and biological worlds. It is a fusion of advances in artificial intelligence (AI), robotics, the Internet of Things (IoT), 3D printing, genetic engineering, quantum computing, and other technologies. Industry 4.0 is emerging within subsets of various vertical industries, with one of the first being the pharmaceutical industry.

Report Includes:

Key Topics Covered:

Chapter 1 Introduction

Chapter 2 Pharma 4.0: Technology Background

Chapter 3 Medical Device Regulations

Chapter 4 Pharma 4.0: Market Dynamics

Chapter 5 Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic

Chapter 6 Key Technologies in Pharma 4.0

Chapter 7 Company Profiles

For more information about this report visit https://www.researchandmarkets.com/r/hbun9d

Media Contact:

Research and Markets Laura Wood, Senior Manager [emailprotected]

For E.S.T Office Hours Call +1-917-300-0470 For U.S./CAN Toll Free Call +1-800-526-8630 For GMT Office Hours Call +353-1-416-8900

U.S. Fax: 646-607-1904 Fax (outside U.S.): +353-1-481-1716

SOURCE Research and Markets

http://www.researchandmarkets.com

View original post here:
Overview of the Global Pharma 4.0 market with an Emphasis on Digital Manufacturing of Pharmaceutical Products, 2021 Report - PRNewswire

A centurys worth of change is about to be squeezed into a single decade. By 2030, entire industries are likely to be replaced with software code. Whole professions could wake up to find their livelihoods superfluous. Robots may be doing our chores, patrolling our streets, and fighting our wars.

Besides lives and jobs, entire nations could be upended: Digital currencies may destabilize global finance, robotics will likely accelerate the relocation of manufacturing, and the plunging cost of renewable energy will shift power away from petrostates. Nations will compete more fiercely than they have in generations. Whats more, all these changes will occur simultaneously and in ways that promise to be disorderly all around.

Its therefore more urgent than ever that the nations of the world get together to hammer out a shared consensus on a broad range of technologies and their future use. The earthquake will not stop at borders or respect national policieswhats urgently needed is a common understanding on the ethics of whats permitted, what isnt, and how to cooperate globally to make sure that countries, companies, research institutions, and individuals respect these bounds. Yes, we know all the arguments against governments intervening in scientific advances and free market innovation: that they will stifle them or use them only to their own ends. But not to act would be reckless. The giant bulldozer of challenges coming straight at us makes it unavoidable to make important collective decisions.

So far, governments have tried haphazardly to stay in control. Countries have, for example, effectively broken the global internet into a series of national or regional networks under their controlincluding social media, payments, shopping, news, and data storage. But as technology rapidly advances, this quilt of different approaches will no longer work. Each further advance will raise new and fundamental questions of ethics and equity that transcend borders and affect the interests of everyone involved.

Facing different pressures, nations will come to very different conclusions about appropriate uses of technology. Until recently, societies could adapt to new technologies in slow motionthey could study their effects and determine how to regulate them over a span of decades. But the growing speed and breadth of change, powered by the widening availability of powerful yet low-cost new technologies, make regulatory change at such a slow pace untenable.

The battles that Facebook fought with Australia over who should pay forlinkingto news articlespitting a corporation against a major country and its mediawill come to seem quaint as we argue over the deadly anddestabilizingeffects of battlefield killing machines controlled by artificial intelligence. Whether COVID-19 was the result of an accident of nature or a failed lab experiment will be irrelevant as biohackers and governments readily engineer viruses to create pandemics.

We urgently need a consensus between governments that limits the use of a broad range of technologies and institutes a mechanism for reparations by countries liable for their misuse. But before governments can do that, societies need to decide what is acceptable. Laws are codified ethics, after alland ethics are defined by social consensus. Every society approaches each advance with its own cultural, historical, and moral perspective.

These cultural differences were front and center in a series of Exponential Innovation workshops we ran with business executives in more than 30 countries. We put before them a hypothetical dilemma involving the use of CRISPR gene-editing technology, a fast and low-cost method of highly targeted genetic engineering. If their unborn child had a debilitating genetic disorder resulting in a lifetime of suffering, and a doctor had thetechnologyto manipulate the fetuss genes by giving the mother a single injection, what would they decide? As many as one-fifth of participants said they would refuse the novel treatmentbut their reasons differed widely across cultures. In Mexico, Catholic participants worried about Gods will; in Malaysia, the executives discussed the technologys consistency with the teachings of Islam; in Switzerland, many raised the social inequities the technology would create.

The questions and moral dilemmas raised by new technologies are frequently unexpected and difficult to grapple with. There are also no easy answers for how to integrate these technologies into our world safely and responsibly. To keep up with technology, we need our collective ethical governance to keep pace with technology creep. We can achieve that only by building layers of joint understanding and consequent agreement on acceptable limits. Once we find those limits locally, then we have to set them globally. Technology continually expands the boundaries of the possible, but policy and culture are what ultimately determine what we permit.

Finding common cause in such complex areas clearly wont be easy, but the world has risen to the occasion before. Chemical weapons, ozone-depleting chemicals, climate change, marine protection, human rights, and the protection of sites of cultural and natural valuethese are some of the issues on which nations have been able to find broad agreement. International treaties and agreements have set boundaries on whats permissible, created oversight bodies, established pools of capital, and laid down the consequences for failing to abide by the rules.

Unanimous agreement is not necessary for progress. Genetic engineering is a case in point: Although we have been able to clone cattle, sheep, cats, dogs, deer,horses, mules, rabbits, and ratsfor decades, nobody has cloned full human beingsat least as far as we know. Even though there is no formal treatybanningthe practice, instruments of global governance such as theUnited Nations Declaration on Human Cloning of 2005havecreatedpowerful norms and guidelines that have kept the technology in check. Even partial experimentation on humans has received the strongest discouragement across different social and political cultures. When a Chinese researcher, He Jiankui,announcedthat he had created the first gene-edited babies, the consequent global uproar led Chinese authorities to arrest him and later sentence him to three years in prison for unethical conduct, drawing a clear line between what is and what is not acceptableeven if the rebuke only came after the damage had occurred.

In the 1970s, a wave of environmentalism swept much of the globe and gave rise to two decades of global conferences with high ambitions. And it worked: An understanding of resource limits and the ecological fragility of the only planet available to us led to a slew of effective conventions, recommendations, and strategies. That should be our modelexcept we must move faster.

The time has come for us to reach a common understanding of the advancing technologies that stand to remake our world. International institutions and old-fashioned diplomacy may seem like a naive hope and an outdated approach. But in the face of the tremendous and truly unprecedented challenges before us, its the only chance we have. The alternative isnt just technological disruption on a scale the world has never seen but social, economic, and political mayhem.

See the original post here:
The World Must Regulate Tech Before It's Too Late - Foreign Policy

DUBLIN--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- ERS Genomics Limited (ERS), which was formed to provide broad access to the foundational CRISPR/Cas9 intellectual property co-owned by Dr. Emmanuelle Charpentier, today announced the appointment of Jon Kratochvil as Vice-President for Business Development & Licensing for North America.

With over 30 years of experience, Jon becomes a core member of ERS global team. Jon joins ERS from MilliporeSigma where he was Director of Business Development and Licensing, with responsibility for all global development opportunities for the companys gene editing and novel modalities technologies. In his role as Business Development Director for Washington University Jon was pivotal in generating over $70 million in revenue from a portfolio of over 1,000 life science technologies. Prior to this he was a licensing manager and the competitive intelligence analyst for Abbott Laboratories diagnostics division, working on novel detection platforms and pharmacogenetics. He is an inventor on over 40 patents and patent applications, has a BS in Biology from Rutgers University, and received graduate degrees from Northwestern University in Microbiology/Immunology and Loyola University in Chicago in Law.

Jon has a fantastic track record in the industry; we are delighted to welcome him to the team. He will be an asset in our global expansion efforts and pivotal in expanding the use and adoption of CRISPR/Cas9 in North America, said Eric Rhodes, CEO, ERS Genomics.

The team at ERS is making huge progress in its mission to increase global access to the Nobel Prize winning CRISPR/Cas9 system, commented Jon Kratochvil, Vice-President for Business Development & Licensing for North America, ERS Genomics. This powerful technology has led to a revolution in genetic engineering and I look forward to being part of the next phase.

For additional information, please visit http://www.ersgenomics.com

For high resolution images please contact Zyme Communications

View source version on businesswire.com: https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20210301005374/en/

Go here to see the original:
ERS Genomics Expands Team With Appointment of Jon Kratochvil as VP Business Development - BioSpace

Introduction

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is one of the most prevalent metabolic disorders globally. It is a highly inflammatory disorder with increased blood concentrations of numerous inflammatory biomarkers.1,2 It is closely related to sedentary life and inappropriate food intake.3 Patients with DM should know about the uses of correct nutritional habits, which is the key in the regulation of blood glucose.4 Dietary strategies are vital to the treatment of DM and risk factors for cardiovascular disease (CVD) development.5

Eating patterns like the Mediterranean style, Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension and monitored carbohydrate diet are effective for lowering CVD risk factors and controlling glycemia.6 Mediterranean-style diet is the most comprehensive diet, characterized by olive oil as the chief source of fat and high consumption of vegetables, monounsaturated fatty acids and a low consumption of red or processed meat.7 The American Diabetes Association (ADA) approves a mediterranean-style diet and long-chain omega-3 fatty acids without supplements. Oily fish intake, without supplementation, is recommended in the United Kingdom for DM patients.8 In addition, the national lipid association recommends adults 2 servings of fish/seafood per week.9

CVD is the principal cause of mortality in patients with DM.10 According to some studies omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acid (O-3 PUFA) therapy helps in the prevention of CVD among DM patients. O-3 PUFAs helps in the improvement of coagulation, lipid profile and inflammatory parameters.11 Moreover, O-3PUFA long-term supplementation helps in the reduction in pulse pressure and blood pressure.12,13

Animal studies revealed the plasma level of O-3 fatty acid is decreased among diabetes.14 The blood levels of O-3fatty acids can differ based on diet habits and geography. For instance, Japanese living in Japan have higher blood o-3fatty acid levels than whites in living in Pennsylvania and Japanese Americans living in Honolulu.15 A low level of O-3 fatty acid promotes inflammation, on the contrary, higher intake of O-3 fatty acid and their high concentration in the erythrocyte membrane is related to a lower risk of inflammation.16

Evidences regarding those issues were relatively deficient with few summarized studies. Hence, in this review, I will provide comprehensive summarized evidence regarding the benefit, types, dietary sources and mechanism of action of O-3PUFA for DM patients using available evidence.

There are three types of Omega3 fatty acids: Those include; Alphalinoleic acid (ALA), Eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and Docosahexaenoic acid (DHA). EPA and DHA are derived predominantly from fish and seafood and ALA is derived from plant sources, such as seeds, particularly flaxseed and leafy greens.17 DHA and EPA are found in predominantly in fish and other seafood, and thus they may be together referred to as marine O3 fatty acids.18

In human diets, ALA is frequently derived from botanical sources such as green leaves, flaxseed, pecans and kiwifruit with chia seed and flax seed being the richest sources. Linseeds and their oil typically contain 4555% of fatty acids as ALA, while rapeseed oil, soybean oil, and walnuts all typically contain ~10% of fatty acids as ALA. There is small ALA from sunflower oil and corn oil.19 The principal food sources of omega-3 fatty acids are oily fish (Table 1). But, it should be noted that the omega-3 content of fish differs by the fishs diet and species. The best sources of omega-3 fatty acids are herring, salmon, anchovies, rainbow trout and sardines.20

Table 1 Summary on the Sources of Omega-3 Polyunsaturated Fatty Acid and Their Concentration

Marine fishes have more O3 PUFAs than farmed ones since most marine fishes feed on phytoplankton and zooplankton that are rich in O3 PUFAs. Similarly, cold-water fishes accumulate much proportions of long-chain O3 PUFAs that aid them to adapt to cold environment than warm water fishes. Omega-3 fatty acid products are available as prescription formulations (icosapent ethyl, omega-3-acid ethyl esters A, omega-3-acid ethyl esters, Omega-3-carboxylic acids) and dietary supplements (predominantly fish oils). Fish, fish oil supplements, and other seafoods primarily account for the DHA and EPA in human diets.21

Once eaten, the body converts ALA to EPA and then to DPA and lastly to DHA, but this conversion is inadequate, with less than 15%. As this conversion is not efficient enough to fulfill health requirements, DHA and EPA are considered essential fatty acid as well and,22 thus consuming them is the only practical way to get them in the body.23 The consumption of O3 PUFAs is usually inadequate because of their limited sources.24 EPA and DHA are also available in O-3 fortified foods, including pastas, breads, cereals, eggs, dairy products, meats, juices, salad dressings, spreads, and oils. Consumption of O-3 fortified foods is a potential option to increase EPA and DHA intake in vegetarians or individuals who dislike fish/seafood.25

T2DM is closely linked with obesity, and adipose tissue produces numerous hormone-like compounds that can raise insulin resistance (IR).26 Adipose tissue is involved in hormone secretion, such as leptin, adiponectin and visfatin, and could stimulate insulin signals. Adiponectin has a role in the modulation of lipid and glucose metabolism together with insulin-sensitive tissues.27

In humans, levels of adiponectin are lower in IR states, as well as in T2DM. Experimental studies revealed supplementation with O-3 PUFA improved insulin sensitization, thru increased levels of adiponectin and reduced inflammation.2830 It raises adiponectin synthesis by inhibiting transient receptor potential canonical calcium ion channels, which can control adiponectin production.31 Besides, in animal model adiponectin prevents T2DM and atherosclerosis.32 Agonism of G-protein coupled receptor 120 (GPR120) which is a receptor for O3 fatty acids, has potent antiinflammatory effects by blocking the signaling of many proinflammatory mediators.33

EPA is metabolized to the thromboxanes, prostaglandins and leukotrienes, which had anti-coagulant and anti-inflammatory effects.28 Besides, the metabolic products of O3 fatty acids, namely protectins, resolvins and maresins are also antiinflammatory in nature and thus counteract inflammatory responses during CVD.34

Generally, proposed mechanisms of O-3PUFAs protection against several diseases including DM, were: (i) They increase the production of anti-inflammatory eicosanoids that can help in phagocytosis and resolution of inflammation; (ii) they can inhibit the production of adhesion molecules (iii) they can limit the activity and production of inflammatory mediators (iv) they can inhibit sterol regulatory element-binding protein 1c nuclear factor which mediates lipid degradation and decreases lipid biosynthesis; and (v) they can improve hypothalamic regulation and glucose uptake.35

Furthermore, O-3 PUFAs can potentially reduce inflammation via many mechanisms, including inhibition of nuclear factor kappa B activation, inhibition of the arachidonic acid pathway, and initiation of anti-inflammatory signaling through GPR120 and decrease C-reactive protein (C-RP) concentration (Figure 1).3638

Figure 1 Summary figure on mechanism of action of O-3PUFA. Arrows going up represent an increase in a specific parameter whereas arrows going down represent a decrease in a specific parameter.

Abbreviations: PG3, prostaglandin E3; TXs, thromboxanes; LTs5, 5-series leukotrienes; TFN-, tumor necrosis factor-; IL-6, interleukin 6; IL-1, interleukin 1; CRP, C-reactive protein; CVD, Cardiovascular disease.

O-3PUFA supplementation was postulated to improve glycaemic control which is the cornerstone of DM management. Possible mechanisms for this include improved hepatic insulin sensitivity through reducing lipogenesis and hepatic fatty acid oxidation39 and modulation of incretin hormones, which are participated in glucose-stimulated insulin secretion.40 Furthermore, in animal studies, supplementation with O-3PUFA improved insulin sensitization, potentially via increased levels of adiponectin, an emerging protective risk factor, and reduced inflammation.33,41

According to some studies O-3 PUFA supplementation had beneficial effect on glucose level, Hb1Ac, reduces pro-inflammatory cytokine levels and improves glycaemia.42,43 A review exploring the impact of PUFA intake on glycaemic control in T2DM populations concluded that PUFA supplementation of 0.425.2 g/day for at least 2months may benefit glycaemic control, particularly in Asian populations.44 DPA supplementation was shown to be effective in reducing blood glucose levels and improving homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance in a rodent model.45

However, a meta-analysis of 20 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with T2DM patients reported that there were no significant differences in markers of glycaemic control, including fasting blood glucose, postprandial plasma glucose, fasting insulin and HbA1c with O-3 PUFA supplementation (0.52 to 3.89 g/day EPA and up to 3.69 g/day of DHA, 65 duration ranged 248 weeks) in comparison to control groups.46 Human trials showed that O-3 PUFA supplementation appears to have a negligible effect on insulin sensitivity and markers of glycaemic control including HbA1c and fasting glucose.47,48 Furthermore, one RCT has suggested no benefits of low-dose O-3 PUFAs in dysglycemia.49 Generally, so far there are inadequate studies that recommend the usage of O-3 PUFA for glycaemic control.

CVD is the most common cause of morbidity and mortality in T2DM patients and its risk factors are common in patients with T2DM.50 It has been revealed that O-3 fatty acids can decrease cholesterol and prevent IR.51 They switch off the genes participated in lipid synthesis, diminish the hormones associated with obesity and inhibit omega-6 fatty acids production.52 Furthermore, O-3 PUFA has been widely used for the management of hypertriglyceridemia53,54 and according to recent systematic review of RCTs O-3PUFAs can be recommended for ameliorating CVD risk factors.55

Suggested mechanisms for the protective role of O3 fats against CVDs include: modulating arterial lipoprotein lipase levels; altering the lipid profile, lowering the blood pressure, reducing thrombotic tendency; producing antiinflammatory effects and improving vascular endothelial function.56 Furthermore, it helps against CVD by disrupting the c-Jun N-terminal kinase (JNK) signaling by reducing the expression of tumour necrosis factoralpha.57

A meta-analysis of 5 trials in T2DM revealed that O-3 PUFA supplementation considerably reduced diastolic blood pressure.58 In a similar way, a clinical trial with O-3PUFA supplementation in women with T2DM revealed a major mean reduction in blood pressure.59 Consistent O-3PUFA supplementation may decrease the risks of sudden cardiac death and myocardial infarction (MI). In addition, some evidence proposed that it may improve blood circulation and increase the breakdown of fibrin.60

EPA at a pharmacologic dose can lower fasting triglyceride and interfere with atherosclerosis which causes reduced CVD.61 It has also been reported that O-3PUFA supplementation inhibits platelet aggregation and decreases oxidative stress.62 A meta-analysis demonstrated that O-3 PUFA supplementation improves endothelial dysfunction and arterial stiffness in T2DM patients.63 Furthermore, according to meta-analysis by Wang et al supplementation with long-chain PUFAs significantly improves the endothelial function.64

However, over three months of high-dose O-3 PUFA treatment in very high-risk patients with atherosclerotic CVD and T2DM did not improve the endothelial function indices.65 A recent meta-analysis among type one DM patients indicated that daily high dose bolus of O-3PUFA supplementation for six-months does not improve glucose homeostasis, vascular health or metabolic parameters.66 Furthermore, other study demonstrated that in patients with long-standing, well-controlled T2DM and atherosclerotic disease treatment with a high dose of O-3 PUFAs for three months does not improve coagulation and inflammation.67

According to the result from the ORIGIN (Outcome Reduction with Initial Glargine Intervention) trial, which evaluated the effects of 0.9g/day of O-3 fatty acids ethyl esters on cardiovascular outcomes in patients with DM, found no reductions in deaths from CVD causes.49 Besides, according to ASCEND (A Study of Cardiovascular Events in Diabetes) revealed that among patients with DM but without evidence of CVD at baseline, there was no significant difference in the incidence of serious vascular events between those who received O3 fatty acids and those who received placebo.68

However, Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio della Sopravvivenza nellInfarto Miocardico (GISSI)- -Prevenzion study, showed that the early administration of low-dose (1 g/day) O-3 PUFA reduces total mortality and sudden death by CVD.69 According to JELIS (Japan Eicosapentaenoic Acid Lipid Intervention Study) among patients with hypercholesterolemia received statins alone or in combination with highly purified EPA (1.8 g/day) after 5 years patients receiving the combined treatment experienced a 19% relative reduction in major coronary events.70 Furthermore, based on results from REDUCE-IT (Reduction of Cardiovascular Events with EPA Intervention Trial), the addition of 4 g/d of EPA plus statin resulted in a significantly lower occurrence of CVD events.71 This finding provides a strong rationale for prescribing icosapent ethyl for patients with hypertriglyceridemia who are on a statin.

In general, despite the substantial body of evidence that has investigated O-3PUFA supplementation on CVD risk factors within T2DM populations; the effect of O-3PUFAs on clinical CVD endpoints is not conclusive. Thus, O-3 PUFA supplementation is therefore not recommended by the AHA for the prevention of CVD in patients with T2DM.72

Omega3 fatty acids have a great role to avoid the progression of diabetic retinopathy, because of their antiangiogenic, antiinflammatory and antioxidant properties.73 They reduce the formation of free radicals and inducing the expressions of endogenous antioxidant enzymes. Also, they prevent the initiation of retinal angiogenesis remarkably by down-regulating the expressions of various angiogenic agents such as Matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs), Cyclooxygenase-2 (COX2) and Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF).74,75 Furthermore, since they form an vital constituent of cell membranes they control cell membrane fluidity.76

Animal studies revealed that O-3PUFAs inhibit hyperoxia-induced premature retinopathy.77 A prospective observational study among older patients with T2DM who consumed Mediterranean diet and had a dietary O-3 PUFA intake equivalent to at least two weekly servings of oily fish had a significantly lower risk of diabetic retinopathy.78 However, a beneficial effect of omega-3 PUFAs in human retinopathies is unclear, possibly due to the paucity of human studies in the area.

Recent meta-analysis revealed that O-3PUFA supplementation could help improve proteinuria and maintain renal function among T2DM.79,80 The effects of O-3 PUFA supplementation in subjects in DM patients are dependent on the dose of O-3Fatty acid supplementation.81 Other study showed that higher dietary O-3PUFA consumption was related with a lower risk of proteinuria among DM patients.82 For people with T2DM, the European Prospective Investigation of Cancer study showed that consuming at least two servings of fish per week lowered their risk of macro-albuminuria.83 In the CKD population specifically, a 12-week intervention study showed omega-3 PUFA supplementation (3.6 g daily) to reduce triglyceride levels, retard CKD progression, and having the capacity to reduce inflammation and oxidative stress.84

Early rodent models suggest a higher O-3 PUFAs intake, particularly omega-3 PUFAs (from fish oil), to reduce albuminuria in diabetic nephropathy.85 In human trials, however, the effects are far from conclusive, likely owing to the short durations and small sample sizes of current studies.86 Currently, O-3PUFA supplementation should not be advocated for avoiding kidney complications in diabetic nephropathy and existing literature were unable to draw conclusions.

The mechanisms via which O-3 fatty acids diminish proteinuria are not clear up to now. One of the suggested hypotheses is that O-3 fatty acids may decrease urine protein excretion via anti-inflammatory and oxidative stress. As hyperglycemia amongst diabetic sufferers induces podocyte injury as well as endothelial cell and tubulointerstitial harm through the activation of protein kinase C, formation of advanced glycation endproducts, and generation of reactive oxygen species, which performs a pivotal function in initiation and progression of proteinuria and diabetic nephropathy.87

Omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids are an increasing number of being used to prevent CVD, along with DM. However, long-term effects of PUFA on development and management of DM remain inconclusive. Some studies suggest that O3fatty acids supplementation was either positively, negatively or insignificantly associated with DM development.88,89 Recent systematic review and meta-analysis suggests that increasing O-3 fatty acids has little or no effect on prevention and management of T2DM.90 A recent meta-analysis of RCTs established that O-3PUFA supplementation has little effect on the prevention of T2DM in humans and evidence for preventing T1DM remains preliminary and limited to animal studies.91

However, a metaanalysis revealed that the appropriate dosage and compositions of omega3, optimized cooking method, and early omega3 supplementation might be beneficial for T2DM prevention.92 Epidemiological studies suggest that inadequate O-3PUFA intake is related with an increased risk of developing both T2DM93 and type 1 DM.16

DHA helps in maintaining membrane fluidity of the brain which is vital for proper neurological and cognitive functions.94 O-3PUFAs are involved in the development and maintenance of healthy nerves. Experimental study revealed in peripheral nerve injury, increased endogenous levels of O-3 PUFAs have been shown to improve sciatic nerve blood flow and speed up the recovery.95 Furthermore, O-3 PUFAs helps in the prevention of heart disease4 and prevent oxidative stress among DM patients.96

Moreover, it has been proposed that O-3 Fatty acid treatment partially blocks the development of experimental diabetic cardiomyopathy by affecting sarcoplasmic reticulum calcium transport activity.97 Supplementation of O-3 FUFAs is also a promising novel nutritional approach to decrease obesity and associated metabolic disorders. They are effective in protecting against obesity by activating brown adipose tissue which aids energy expenditure thru its specialized thermogenic function.98 In general, there is limited clinical evidence which support O-3 PUFA supplement use in DM management and prevention (Table 2).

Table 2 Current State of Evidence for the Effects of Omega-3 PUFA Intake Regarding Diabetes Complications

Dietary intervention is a key factor in the management of DM and the goals of nutrition therapy to adults with diabetes is to promote and support healthful eating patterns, focusing a variety of nutrient dense diet in appropriate portion sizes, to improve overall health (Table 3). Medical Nutrition Therapy for diabetes aims to achieve the following objectives:

Table 3 American Diabetes Association 2016 Recommendations for Diabetes Patients

Evidence does not support recommending O-3PUFA supplements for people with DM for the prevention or treatment of CVD. As recommended for the general public, an increase in foods containing long-chain O-3 fatty acids is recommended for patients with DM due to their beneficial effects on the prevention of heart disease, lipoproteins and associations with positive health outcomes.100 If the triglyceride concentration is not controlled with statins or fibrates O-3 fatty acids (4g/day) EPA can be used in patients with T2DM and in general CVD population.71

So far, there is no similar scientific guideline on the ideal O-3 PUFA intake. Things need to be considered include the issues related to supplement dose, purity, cost of obtaining O-3 PUFAs thru supplementation versus food and possibility of adverse effects. Adverse effects are likely dose-dependent. Due to their structure, O-3 PUFAs are susceptible to oxidation if exposed to excess heat. Improper storage of O-3PUFA supplements may cause their damage and affect their beneficial health effects.

O-3 PUFA supplements are a cost-effective way of attaining therapeutic doses. The common therapeutic dosages range from 14g/day.101 But, due to the beneficial effect of dietary sources in improving diet quality and improve intake of other beneficial nutrients, the food sources have to be prioritized.102

There are limited studies to draw exact suggestions regarding dosage; duration and the interaction of dosage O-3 PUFA intake and the available information are inconsistent. Probably, the consistent their cardiovascular effects might be likely only with doses above 2000 mg daily.103 Currently, dietary recommendations for individuals with and without DM supports increased consumption of foods rich in O-3PUFA but do not recommend supplementation.104 The Global Burden of Disease Study suggests that optimal intake of long-chain O-3 fatty acid is 0.25 g/d.105

The International Diabetes Federation Global Guideline for T2DM recommends that in patients with T2DM who are unable to achieve lipid-lowering targets with or are intolerant of conventional medications should be considered as candidates for other medications for dyslipidemia, including high-dose O-3PUFAs.106 The 2012 Endocrine Society clinical practice guideline on evaluation and treatment of hypertriglyceridemia, though not specific to patients with T2DM, recommends that drug therapies like fibrates, or O-3PUFAs (alone or in combination with statins) be considered for treatment of moderate to severe triglyceride levels.107

According to a systematic review by Brown et al supplemental long-chain O-3 fatty acids would not be encouraged for the prevention or treatment of DM. In case, supplementary long-chain omega-3 fatty acid is used to reduce triglyceride concentrations, or people with or at risk of T2DM choose to take supplementary long-chain O-3, doses below 4.4g/d should be encouraged.90 On the other hand, according to some studies, there is an increased risk of T2DM with the intake of long-chain O-3 fatty acids, particularly with higher intakes (0.20g O-3/d).108 The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recommends that the intake for consumers not exceeds 3g/day of EPA plus DHA with no more than 2 g/day from dietary supplementation.109

According to recent clinical trial for the general population and those with DM, about 1 g/d of omega-3 fatty acids reduced the risk of from CVD. A higher dose of omega-3 fatty acids (approximately 4 g/d of EPA and likely 4 g/d of EPA+DHA, as well) is also an effective adjunct for cardiovascular treatment in those with high triglycerides who take statins.110 According to one experimental study O-3 fatty acids can be given in conjunction with metformin to decrease triglyceride levels in diabetic dyslipidaemia. Two grams of O-3 fatty acids were more effective than 1 gram of omega-3 fatty acids in decreasing triglyceride levels.111

Based on results from REDUCE-IT, the addition of 4 g/d of EPA should be considered for statin-treated patients who have cardiovascular disease or diabetes and elevated triglycerides. But, the STRENGTH (Statin Residual Risk Reduction with Epanova in High Risk Patients with Hypertriglyceridemia) trial showed no benefit on cardiovascular event rates of a high-dose combination of EPA and DHA and do not support use of this omega-3 fatty acid formulation to reduce major adverse cardiovascular events in high risk patients.112

O-3 PUFA supplementation is not suggested by the American Heart Association (AHA) for the avoidance of CVD in T2DM patients. However, for the secondary prevention of CVD in the general population, the AHA considers O-3 PUFA supplementation reasonable.72 AHA does not recommend supplementation with O-3 PUFAs for individuals with T2DM to prevent coronary artery disease.113,114 Furthermore, the ADA does not recommend O-3PUFA supplements to treat or prevent CVD in patients with DM, even though the consumption of foods containing O-3PUFAs is recommended.115 The AHA recommends supplementation for adults not eating enough oily fish.116

In general, there are limited data on the use of O-3 PUFA supplementation among DM patients. However, for clinical practice, evidence from the most current clinical trials supports the recommendation to consume at least one to two servings of fish/seafood per week, with additional primary prevention benefits conferred by consuming ~1 g/d of DHA and EPA.

Several strategies have been suggested to rise the intake of O3 fatty acids in the body; including; (i) Increased consumption of fatty fish and other O3 PUFAs-rich foods, (ii) Fortification of food products with fish oil or ALA, (iii) Enhancement of O3 PUFAs in animal products by feeding O3 PUFAs-rich diets, and (iv) Fortification of O3 PUFAs in oilseed crops by genetic engineering.117

It has been demonstrated that feeding animals with ALA-rich diet can increase the content of O3PUFA in animal-derived products. However, the magnitude of increase in O3PUFA content appears to be dependent on the type of diet supplementation.24 For instance, two- to five-fold higher DHA and EPA has been recorded in breast and thigh meat of broilers fed with high ALA-rich flaxseed oil for 6 weeks.118 Moreover, O3 PUFAs enriched eggs produced by feeding laying hens with a fish meal or canola/linseed oil are commercially viable as a good source of O3 PUFA.118

FUFAs Metabolically engineered oilseed crops are also beneficial to improve the content of O3 FAs in seed oil. They have certain advantages over conventional sources of PUFAs. For example, pollution of marine ecosystems has resulted in high accumulation of toxic dioxins, polychlorinated biphenyls, heavy metals, and organochlorine pesticides in fish.119 Additionally, low content of n3 PUFAs in farmed fishes and wild fish stock are insufficient in order to satisfy recommended EPA and DHA intake levels. Thus, genetically modified crops can serve as future sources of O3 PUFAs.120

Enhancement of O3 FAs in animal products by feeding O3 FAs rich diets or by genetic engineering fatty acid biosynthetic pathways has revealed potential to improve the content of O3 PUFAs in the diet. However, these strategies need to be fine-tuned. In addition, the releasing and approval of genetically modified crops are challenging due to social concerns.35

Fish oil dietary supplements are widely available and commonly used by consumers; however, there are critical distinctions between these dietary supplements and the FDA-approved O-3PUFA drugs that can be obtained only by prescription. Prescription O-3PUFA products are highly purified, subject to quality control regulations, and required to demonstrate both safety and efficacy in clinical studies to achieve approval by the FDA.

In order to provide adequate PUFAs, the level of their fortification into foods needs extensive consideration. At least 0.5 g/d of O-3 PUFAs EPA and DHA are recommended for daily consumption.121 Dietary consumption of O-3 PUFAs via incorporation into foods is ultimately the most effective mechanism of providing them to the average consumer.122

There is considerable evidence indicated that the consumption of O-3 PUFA is associated with substantial health benefits among DM patients. However, despite the promising experimental investigations, currently, the clinical evidence for the usage of omega-3 supplementation for the management of DM and its complications is both conflicting and inconsistent. Hence, further study is required to ascertain the effects of O-3 PUFA supplementation in the management of diabetes.

Diabetes mellitus especially type 2 is a significant health challenge with multiple associated comorbidities. Diet and lifestyle factors are central to its prevention and control. There are three types of Omega3 fatty acids; those include ALA which is derived from plant oils and EPA and DHA which are derived primarily from fish oil.

There is limited clinical evidence that supports O-3 PUFA supplement use in DM management and so far, there is no similar scientific guideline on the ideal O-3 PUFA intake. There are limited studies to draw exact suggestions regarding dosage; duration and the interaction of dosage O-3 PUFA intake and the available information are inconsistent. Several strategies have been suggested to raise the intake of O3 fatty acids and dietary approach to increase omega-3 fatty acid intake is preferable.

The author reports no conflicts of interest for this work.

1. Gmez JM, Vila R, Catalina P, Soler J, Badimn L, Sahn M. The markers of inflammation and endothelial dysfunction in correlation with glycated haemoglobin are present in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients but not in their relatives. Glycoconj J. 2008;25(6):573579. doi:10.1007/s10719-008-9118-8

2. Yaturu S, Rains J, Jain SK. Relationship of elevated osteoprotegerin with insulin resistance, CRP, and TNF- levels in men with type 2 diabetes. Cytokine. 2008;44(1):168171. doi:10.1016/j.cyto.2008.07.471

3. Bagchi D, Nair S, editors. Nutritional and Therapeutic Interventions for Diabetes and Metabolic Syndrome. Academic Press; 2018 May, 25.

4. Steyn NP, Mann J, Bennett PH, et al. Diet, nutrition and the prevention of type 2 diabetes. Public Health Nutr. 2004;7(1a):147165. doi:10.1079/PHN2003586

5. Hall RM, Strong AP, Krebs JD. Importance of low carbohydrate diets in diabetes management. Nutr Diet Suppl. 2016;8:919.

6. American Diabetes Association. Nutrition recommendations and interventions for diabetes: a position statement of the American Diabetes Association. Diabetes Care. 2007;30(suppl 1):S4865. doi:10.2337/dc07-S048

7. Schrder H. Protective mechanisms of the Mediterranean diet in obesity and type 2 diabetes. J Nutr Biochem. 2007;18(3):149160. doi:10.1016/j.jnutbio.2006.05.006

8. American Diabetes Association. 5. Lifestyle management: standards of medical care in diabetes2019. Diabetes Care. 2019;42(Supplement 1):S46S60. doi:10.2337/dc19-S005

9. Jacobson TA, Maki KC, Orringer CE, et al. National lipid association recommendations for patient-centered management of dyslipidemia: part 2. J Clin Lipidol. 2015;9(6):S122.

10. American Diabetes Association. 9. Cardiovascular disease and risk management. Diabetes Care. 2017;40(Supplement 1):S7587. doi:10.2337/dc17-S012

11. Derosa G, Maffioli P, DAngelo A, et al. Effects of long chain -3 fatty acids on metalloproteinases and their inhibitors in combined dyslipidemia patients. Expert Opin Pharmacother. 2009;10(8):12391247. doi:10.1517/14656560902865601

12. Cicero AF, Derosa G, Gregori VD, Bove M, Gaddi AV, Borghi C. Omega 3 polyunsaturated fatty acids supplementation and blood pressure levels in hypertriglyceridemic patients with untreated normal-high blood pressure and with or without metabolic syndrome: a retrospective study. Clin Exp Hypertens. 2010;32(2):137144. doi:10.3109/10641960903254448

13. Hajianfar H, Paknahad Z, Bahonar A. The effect of omega-3 supplements on antioxidant capacity in patients with type 2 diabetes. Int J Prev Med. 2013;(Suppl 2):S234.

14. McLennan PL, Raederstorff D. Diabetes puts myocardial n-3 fatty acid status at risk in the absence of supplementation in the rat. Lipids. 1999;34(1):S912. doi:10.1007/BF02562242

15. Sekikawa A, Curb JD, Ueshima H, et al. Marine-derived n-3 fatty acids and atherosclerosis in Japanese, Japanese-American, and white men: a cross-sectional study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008;52(6):417424. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2008.03.047

16. Norris JM, Yin X, Lamb MM, et al. Omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acid intake and islet autoimmunity in children at increased risk for type 1 diabetes. JAMA. 2007;298(12):14201428. doi:10.1001/jama.298.12.1420

17. Gebauer SK, Psota TL, Harris WS, Kris-Etherton PM. n 3 fatty acid dietary recommendations and food sources to achieve essentiality and cardiovascular benefits. Am J Clin Nutr. 2006;83(6):1526S35S. doi:10.1093/ajcn/83.6.1526S

18. Kaur G, Cameron-Smith D, Garg M, Sinclair AJ. Docosapentaenoic acid (22: 5n-3): a review of its biological effects. Prog Lipid Res. 2011;50(1):2834. doi:10.1016/j.plipres.2010.07.004

19. Burdge GC, Calder PC. Dietary -linolenic acid and health-related outcomes: a metabolic perspective. Nutr Res Rev. 2006;19(1):2652. doi:10.1079/NRR2005113

20. Richter CK, Skulas-Ray AC, Kris-Etherton PM. Recommended intake of fish and fish oils worldwide. In: Fish and Fish Oil in Health and Disease Prevention. Academic Press; January 1, 2016:2748.

21. Lee JH, Okeefe JH, Lavie CJ, Harris WS. Omega-3 fatty acids: cardiovascular benefits, sources and sustainability. Nat Rev Cardiol. 2009;6(12):753758. doi:10.1038/nrcardio.2009.188

22. Office of Dietary Supplements - Omega-3 Fatty Acids [Internet]; [cited December 8, 2020]. Available from: https://ods.od.nih.gov/factsheets/Omega3FattyAcids-HealthProfessional/. Accessed February 25, 2021.

23. Encyclopedia of Dietary Supplements [Internet]. Routledge & CRC Press; [cited December 11, 2020]. Available from: https://www.routledge.com/Encyclopedia-of-Dietary-Supplements/Coates-Betz-Blackman-Cragg-Levine-Moss-White/p/book/9781439819289. Accessed February 25, 2021.

24. Moghadasian MH. Advances in dietary enrichment with n-3 fatty acids. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2008;48(5):402410. doi:10.1080/10408390701424303

25. Whelan J, Rust C. Innovative dietary sources of n-3 fatty acids. Annu Rev Nutr. 2006;26(1):75103. doi:10.1146/annurev.nutr.25.050304.092605

26. Jackson MB, Ahima RS. Neuroendocrine and metabolic effects of adipocyte-derived hormones. Clin Sci. 2006;110(2):143152. doi:10.1042/CS20050243

27. Ramel A, Martinez A, Kiely M, Morais G, Bandarra NM, Thorsdottir I. Beneficial effects of long-chain n-3 fatty acids included in an energy-restricted diet on insulin resistance in overweight and obese European young adults. Diabetologia. 2008;51(7):1261. doi:10.1007/s00125-008-1035-7

28. De Caterina R, Madonna R, Bertolotto A, Schmidt EB. n-3 fatty acids in the treatment of diabetic patients: biological rationale and clinical data. Diabetes Care. 2007;30(4):10121026. doi:10.2337/dc06-1332

29. Kalupahana NS, Claycombe K, Newman SJ, et al. Eicosapentaenoic acid prevents and reverses insulin resistance in high-fat diet-induced obese mice via modulation of adipose tissue inflammation. J Nutr. 2010;140(11):19151922. doi:10.3945/jn.110.125732

30. Okamoto Y, Kihara S, Funahashi T, Matsuzawa Y, Libby P. Adiponectin: a key adipocytokine in metabolic syndrome. Clin Sci. 2006;110(3):267278. doi:10.1042/CS20050182

31. Sukumar P, Sedo A, Li J, et al. Constitutively active TRPC channels of adipocytes confer a mechanism for sensing dietary fatty acids and regulating adiponectin. Circ Res. 2012;111(2):191200. doi:10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.112.270751

32. Park M, Sweeney G. Direct effects of adipokines on the heart: focus on adiponectin. Heart Fail Rev. 2013;18(5):631644. doi:10.1007/s10741-012-9337-8

33. Talukdar S, Bae EJ, Imamura T, et al. GPR120 is an omega-3 fatty acid receptor mediating potent anti-inflammatory and insulin-sensitizing effects. Cell. 2010;142(5):687698. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2010.07.041

34. Serhan CN, Dalli J, Colas RA, Winkler JW, Chiang N. Protectins and maresins: new pro-resolving families of mediators in acute inflammation and resolution bioactive metabolome. Biochim Biophys Acta Mol Cell Biol Lipids. 2015;1851(4):397413.

35. Saini RK, Keum YS. Omega-3 and omega-6 polyunsaturated fatty acids: dietary sources, metabolism, and significanceA review. Life Sci. 2018;203:255267. doi:10.1016/j.lfs.2018.04.049

36. Lin N, Shi JJ, Li YM, et al. What is the impact of n-3 PUFAs on inflammation markers in type 2 diabetic mellitus populations?: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Lipids Health Dis. 2016;15(1):133. doi:10.1186/s12944-016-0303-7

37. Fedor D, Kelley DS. Prevention of insulin resistance by n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care. 2009;12(2):138146. doi:10.1097/MCO.0b013e3283218299

38. Horia E, Watkins BA. Complementary actions of docosahexaenoic acid and genistein on COX-2, PGE2 and invasiveness in MDA-MB-231 breast cancer cells. Carcinogenesis. 2007;28(4):809815. doi:10.1093/carcin/bgl183

39. Wu JH, Micha R, Imamura F, et al. Omega-3 fatty acids and incident type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Nutr. 2012;107(S2):S21427. doi:10.1017/S0007114512001602

Read more from the original source:
[Full text] Purposeful Review to Identify the Benefits, Mechanism of Action and Pr | NDS - Dove Medical Press

Photograph Source: Lisa @ Sierra Tierra CC BY 2.0

In the winter of 1996, Monsanto and a few other companies first began to sell genetically engineered seeds to commercial growers, and also mounted a massive public relations effort to convince people of their supposed benefits. They hyped their new GMOs as the answer to world hunger, a way to help troubled farmers stay on the land, and as a technology that would bring higher quality, more nutritious food to all. Skeptics in many countries responded swiftly: Greenpeace blockaded shipments and planted symbols in farmers fields, while decentralized networks of activists organized Global Days of Action. Saboteurs in some countries attacked GMO test plots in the dark of night, but in the UK they started doing it out in the open, leading to dramatic acquittals by local courts. Some farmers in India held large, public ceremonies to burn GMO crops. Within a year, the European Union began to require labeling of food products containing GMO ingredients.

Twenty-five years later, genetically engineered crop varieties are grown on roughly 190 million hectares worldwide a relatively constant figure since the early to mid-2010s and the profile of what is being grown and where does not differ very much from the late 1990s. Half the global GMO acreage is in soybeans, with soybeans, corn, cotton and canola representing 99 percent of all genetically engineered crops. Forty percent of all GMO acreage is in the US and 95 percent of the acreage is in just seven countries. Eighty-five percent of GMO crops are engineered to withstand high doses of chemical weed-killers most often Monsanto/Bayers Roundup family of herbicides and more than 40 percent produce a bacterial pesticide aimed to attack various pest species, but with long-documented harms for a host of beneficial insects. (The total exceeds 100 percent due to varieties that contain multiple, or stacked, engineered traits.)

As many readers know, this technology has failed to demonstrate any consistent advantages for crop yields or food quality, but has helped drive an unprecedented consolidation of corporate power in the global seed and agrochemical sectors. Following a mid-2010s cycle of mergers which greatly compounded the impact of the original late-nineties wave of GMO-driven mergers and acquisitions three global agribusiness empires came to control 70 percent of agrochemical production and more than 60 percent of the commercial seed market. The recently merged entities are Bayer-Monsanto, ChemChina-Syngenta and Corteva, a company formed from the merger of Dow and DuPonts agribusiness divisions. Four giant grain-trading and processing companies (ADM, Bunge, Cargill and Louis Dreyfuss) now control 90 percent of crop export markets worldwide.

While much of the world continues to reject GMO crop production, these varieties still dominate global food processing and markets for livestock feed. Farmers in many countries have had an increasingly difficult time obtaining seeds with desired agronomic traits nearly always the result of traditional crop breeding that arent also genetically engineered to resist herbicides and/or produce insecticidal toxins. And while GMO skeptics are occasionally written off as anti-science, researchers around the world continue to document the unintended consequences of GMO products, often in defiance of corporate-driven assaults on their reputations and livelihoods.

While active resistance to GMOs continues in many countries, many people have become complacent about our bifurcated food supply: those who are able to pay more increasingly favor organically grown and GMO-free products, while others are faced with an increasingly synthetic and often toxic food supply. The latest wave of advocacy for state-level GMO labeling in the US was curtailed by an Obama administration-supported bill that purportedly mandated a uniform national labeling rule, but one that is fundamentally misleading, filled with loopholes, and designed to be widely ignored. Still, people in much of the world continue to reject genetically engineered foods and agriculture.

One notable exception to this is Argentina, the third largest GMO producer after the US and Brazil. GMO soybean production has come to increasingly dominate Argentinas agriculture, with only occasional sparks of resistance. Over a decade ago, I met the Argentine sociologist, Amalia Leguizamn, who was then a graduate student in New York City struggling to understand just how that had come to pass. She began to explore the conditions on the ground in the centers of GMO soy production in Argentina, and found that the rare voices of resistance were typically overwhelmed by what appeared to be an unbreakable national consensus. Now a professor at Tulane University in New Orleans, she has produced a meticulously researched and superbly readable volume that tells the story of her investigations and reaches to the core of Argentinas apparent infatuation with GMO soybeans.

Leguizamns book, Seeds of Power: Environmental Injustice and Genetically Modified Soybeans in Argentina (Duke), transports readers into some of the most soy-dependent places in Argentina, spanning the famous pampas grasslands and the forested Chaco region, together encompassing the northeastern third of the country. Fields of herbicide-dependent GMO soybeans have spread as far as the eye can see in many areas, running right into peoples backyards and dominating the roadsides. Many large soy plantations are managed remotely by corporate-tied entrepreneurs and technicians who utilize the latest high-tech tools, and often live in urban and suburban areas many hours away from the farms they operate. They have expanded upon a tradition of large export-oriented farms that goes back to the late-nineteenth century wave of European immigrants, who were recruited by the millions to help turn Argentinas rangelands into el granero del mundo the granary of the world.

But it was only after the arrival of GMOs that the region shifted dramatically from producing wheat, corn, beef, dairy and a variety of other products toward increasingly mechanized monocultures of soybeans. Soybeans now represent half of Argentinas agricultural production, with 80 percent of all farmland in plots larger than 1000 hectares (nearly 2500 acres). Rural dwellers now less than ten percent of the countrys population typically work as contract laborers and their lives are dominated by the decisions of corporate managers and remote farm owners. Yet people in cities and towns still commonly proclaim that we all live off the countryside, as they rely on the relative economic stability the export soy industry can offer. The military dictatorship of the 1970s and eighties largely pacified the rural areas politically, and the neoliberal policies of the 1990s further entrenched patterns of corporate dominance, boosted by hefty seed discounts and relaxed patent rules that made GMO soybeans appear even more desirable for Argentine growers than for their counterparts in the US. The neo-populist administrations of Nestor and Cristina Kirchner supported the expansion of the soy economy and large growers successfully defeated a government attempt to raise export taxes during the global food crisis of the late 2000s, further entrenching their political influence.

Leguizamn did, however, happen upon some pockets of concern and skepticism. In one soy-dependent town, she learned of high rates of cancer, miscarriages and birth defects, but most people insisted they had no idea why this was occurring and voiced a persistent sense of resignation and fatalism, even amidst the ever-present fumigation trucks. While a few more trenchant concerns occasionally slipped through most notably when she found herself in temporarily women-only spaces people typically shut themselves down before their conversations got very far. However in one city, deep in the interior of the country, tacit concerns blossomed into an organized resistance that led to a local ban on crop dusting, a nationally famous lawsuit against a major violator, and eventually the cancellation of plans to build a massive new Monsanto corn seed plant that would have been one of the largest in the world. That community, on the outskirts of the city of Crdoba, became the site of a blockade and encampment that lasted a couple of years and hosted as many as 200 people, including international supporters. Indigenous communities in the northern part of the country, facing widespread deforestation and dislocations, have also made some waves, but have had fewer tangible successes.

Seeds of Power contains insightful reflections throughout on a compelling problem that is rarely closely examined by activist-researchers: how power operates to create acquiescence. What is often characterized as public support for corporate-friendly policies is often just a mere acceptance by those who feel they have little power or agency to raise difficult questions. Constraints of culture, history, enforced traditional gender roles and other such factors play a powerful silencing role. Where people feel disempowered, we know they are often far more susceptible to forms of political and religious demagoguery that may feed their acceptance of the health hazards and economic stresses they experience on a daily basis. Groups of mothers, like those near Crdoba, will sometimes see most clearly through the fog, and are often in the forefront of struggles for environmental justice. Leguizamns insights on the politics of acquiescence also shed light on the realities faced by famers in the US Midwest, where the constant pressure to keep expanding operations just to keep their families on the land often compels acceptance of labor-saving technologies such as herbicide-tolerant GMO crops.

This past year, the coronavirus pandemic and the worldwide race to develop and distribute COVID-19 vaccines has boosted the reputations of companies engaged in medical biotechnology research, and their agribusiness counterparts have mounted a public relations offensive to try to share in the benefits. They systematically obscure the fundamental distinction between the use of advanced genetic methods as research tools and the release of living genetically manipulated organisms into the open environment. While genetically engineered yeasts or bacteria in confined laboratory settings are typically involved in the initial phase of production of new pharmaceuticals such as mRNA vaccines, the purified end products carry far less risk of unintended consequences than whole engineered organisms. The scientific literature on GMO technologies disruption of genetic regulation at the cellular and molecular levels is quite extensive and compelling, despite industry disinformation to the contrary. While biotech approaches to monitoring and analysis have also helped enhance the speed and reliability of plant breeding research, there is a similarly clear distinction between diagnostic methods in a laboratory setting and uncontrolled releases of engineered seeds, plants and even insects. We are told that newer methods of gene editing by methods such as the Nobel-honored CRISPR-Cas9 technology are inherently more precise than conventional genetic engineering methods, but there is also a growing cautionary literature on unintended consequences of those more advanced genetic manipulations.

The book, Seeds of Power, offers important insights on the complex dynamics of power and compliance and how they can play out in a broad national context. It helps us understand how individuals position themselves amidst those dynamics and appreciate the often unconscious personal decisions that can serve to reinforce patterns of social control. It offers an exceptional mix of scholarship and storytelling, and deserves to be widely read by everyone who wants to better understand how the global GMO debate has evolved over these past 25 years.

The rest is here:
25 Years of GMOs, and Some New Insights from Argentina - CounterPunch.org - CounterPunch