Monthly Archives: June 2021

The University of SydneysCharles Perkins Centrewas named the recipient of theinauguralNHMRC Research Quality Award. The biennial award recognises excellence and outstanding contribution to ensuring the highest quality in health and medical research.

Selected by the NHMRC CEO in consultation with the Chairs of NHMRCs Research Committee and Research Quality Steering Committee, the award acknowledges the significant contribution the Centre has made to actively pursuing a research culture conducive to the highest quality research involving the use of animals.

To support its commitment to conducting high-quality animal research, the Charles Perkins Centre commenced a research and development program to implement actions recommended by NHMRCs best practice methodology in the use of animals for scientific purposes. Led by Associate ProfessorKieron Rooney, and working with local and international collaborators, the team is investigating the barriers and facilitators to engagement with pre-clinical trial registration and developing educational tools.

The program is delivering a cultural shift in the conduct of animal research that will enhance transparency and reproducibility, reduce animal use and, ultimately, deliver improvements in human health.

Read this article:
Sydney researchers receive prestigious NHMRC awards - News - The University of Sydney

Capsida CEO,Dr. Robert (Bob)Cuddihy/ Photo Courtesy of Capsida Biotherapeutics

Capsida Biotherapeutics, which debuted in April already holding a research alliance with AbbVie, has wasted no time in putting its fully integrated adeno-associated virus (AAV) platform to work in the highest need therapeutic spaces.

This morning, Capsida announced a strategic collaboration with gene therapy leader, CRISPR Therapeutics to develop, manufacture and commercialize in vivo gene-edited therapies for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and Friedreichs ataxia (FA).

Per the agreement, CRISPR will lead the research and development of the Friedreichs ataxia program, while Capsida will shepherd the R&D for the ALS effort. Capsida, of course, will conduct the capsid engineering for both programs and will also assume responsibility for the process development and clinical manufacturing of both programs.

These are two neurodegenerative targets with significant unmet needs, and Capsida Chief Executive Officer, Dr. Robert M. Cuddihy, is excited about the progress this collaboration could bring.

I think it's going to take a different and a novel approach, and I think we're combining two innovative approaches that hopefully can really be disruptive to the field and start to bring some benefit to patients, he said.

Maybe the lesser-known of the two indications, Friedreichs ataxia is a genetic, progressive neurodegenerative movement disorder caused by an expansion of a GAA trinucleotide repeat in the FXN gene. This bears similarity to a familial form of ALS that the partners will be looking at.

What we can do in both of those diseases with genome editing is essentially excise the pathogenic repeat out of the genome to return the genome to more or less its non-aberrant state, said CRISPR Chief Operating Officer, Dr. Lawrence Klein.

CRISPR has done extensive work on the gene-editing side of bothdiseases. The next challenge, Klein shared, is to deliver the machinery necessary for editing, and Capsida stood out as having these particular capabilities.

We looked at a number of different companies that are working on engineering AAV to be more neurotropic, and the data that Capsida has been able to generate through their engineering platform really stood out. The neurotropic capacity of their engineered AAV vectors is truly remarkable, he said.

Capsidas high-throughput engineering and cargo development platform is designed to improve the safety, specificity, and reach of gene therapies for currently inaccessible targets.

By selecting the delivery vehicle, a novel engineered capsid, that has significantly enhanced tissue specificity versus AAV9, while de-targeting the tissues not relevant to the targeted disease, we expect potentially enhanced efficacy and safety profiles, Cuddihy explained.

In two diseases with no approved disease-modifying treatment options, time is of the essence, and Capsida, which has its own GMP manufacturing facility, could help to expedite time-to-market for a successful therapy down the line.

We pride ourselves on really being a fully integrated gene therapy company. Not only are we selecting novel capsids, we're assessing them upfront for manufacturability, ability to scale. We have our GMP facility opening up this year, so we're raring to go, Cuddihy said.

In this evenly-yoked partnership, both CRISPR and Capsida will have the option to co-develop and co-commercialize each program. Following such an option, the two would equally share all research, development, and commercialization costs and profits of an approved product.

I think there is a high degree of unmet need where small molecules and antibodies haven't had as much success, and where gene therapy and genome engineering can really bring about new approaches to treat these diseases, Klein said. Delivery technologies are getting better and better where I think we can really start to access the targets in a way that doesnt bring toxicity challenges.

Read the original:
CRISPR and Capsida Partner in Gene Edited Therapies for ALS, Friedreich's Ataxia - BioSpace

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.

The Center for Food Safety is the kind of organization that most progressive foodies can get behind: Its website features photos of graceful monarch butterflies and dairy cows with big, doleful eyes. Its recent campaign slogans implore supporters to tell EPA to stop this brain-damaging pesticide! and protect dolphins and birds from floating factory farms! It advocates for farmworker rights, humane treatment of animals, and protection of pollinators.

Oh, yes, and theres one more thing: The 24-person nonprofit, whose revenue in 2019 was about $5.2 million, wants the US government to stop supporting certain kinds of high-level virology research. Last month, the group sued the National Institutes of Health in an attempt to force the agency to reveal information about its funding for what is known as gain-of-function researchthe term refers to a category of lab work that seeks to understand how viruses create pandemics. Sometimes, but not always, the research involves manipulating viruses to make them more virulent and contagious to study how they evolve.

Virologists say this kind of research is vital and has led to many important medical discoveries, including during the COVID-19 pandemic. But Center for Food Safety argues that gain-of-function research is too dangerous to pursue. A pathogen released from a lab could result in catastrophic consequences to the human environment, CFS staff attorney Victoria Yundt warned in a recent press release about the NIH law suit. Andrew Kimbrell, a public interest attorney who founded the Center for Food Safety in 1997, was also quoted in the release saying, The NIHs refusal to make public the research it is funding to enhance the transmissibility, infectiousness, and lethality of potential pandemic viruses is grossly irresponsible.

Why would this lefty food and farms groupand they arent alonerail against high-level virology research? The key to the answer has to do with the Center for Food Safetys long opposition to the practice of genetic engineering. In a recent phone call, I spoke to CFSs Kimbrell, who explained what he sees as the connection. You genetically engineer bacteria and plants, then you genetically engineer animals, then you genetically engineer embryosall that has happened, with some promise, but also a tremendous amount of danger and threat, he said. Now, viruses are not technically an organism, but they are living biological elements. So, they fit certainly within that narrative: Just because we can do something doesnt mean we should do something.

Kimbrell said he absolutely thinks the pandemic was the result of an accidental lab release. Scientists at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, he believes, used gain-of-function to enhance a coronavirus. The virus then escaped out of the lab, spread uncontrollably, and caused the COVID-19 pandemic. Hence, in effect, gain-of-function research caused the pandemic.

Kimbrell isnt the only genetic-engineering critic who has come out against gain-of-function research and in favor of the lab-leak theory. Over the past few months, many organizations that once busied themselves warning the public about pesticides in breakfast cereal and the evil deeds of Monsanto have pivoted to protesting gain-of-function work. Organic Consumers Association, a nonprofit that advocates against pesticides and genetic engineering of food, published a hall of shame series on virology researchers who use the technique. As we follow the evidenceand follow the moneywe come face to face with a cast of out-of-control Mad Scientists, militarists and biotech/bio-pharmaceutical entrepreneurs, one recent post reads.

US Right to Know, a nonprofit that advocates for transparency around genetically modified food, announced in May that it is expanding its investigative work into other urgent public health matters, including the origins of the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, which causes the disease COVID-19. Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.s anti-vaccination advocacy group Childrens Health Defense, which has also criticized genetic engineering, has taken up the campaign against gain-of-function and embraced the hypothesis that these experiments made COVID-19 more dangerousnot to mention that it then may have escaped from a lab. The website of the International Center for Technology Assessment, an anti-GMO group that Andrew Kimbrell founded alongside Center for Food Safety, now seems almost entirely devoted to criticizing gain-of-function and promoting the lab-leak hypothesis.

Over the last year, I have watched online anti-vaccine groups radicalize parents, starting with questions about shots and then moving them into pandemic-denying conspiracy theory adherents. Ive noticed that even in our politically polarized world, the political spectrum isnt always a straight line; sometimes its a circle where at a certain point in the back, the far left and the far right converge.

I am now watching the same dynamic play out in anti-GMO groups, as environmentalists who worry about pollinators get drawn into a dark narrative that vilifies vital research. With tens of thousands of followers on social media, anti-GMO groups have the potential to turn the tide of public opinion; hanging in the balance is science that could potentially help prevent the next pandemic.

Also at stake is the reputation of scientists themselves. When I asked Kimbrell why researchers would willingly undertake gain-of-function experiments if they really were both dangerous and unnecessary, he told me that he believes that the basic motivation could be found in the inflated egos of researchers. For some reason, theres always this altruistic halo around scientists, but you know, they created nuclear weapons, science has created all the chemicals that are polluting our air and our environment, he said. I think theres a huge amount of sort of just, Lets do it, because we can and its exciting. Like crossword puzzles.

Since the lab-leakhypothesis has dominated the news recently, let me back up. My suspicion is that no one will ever know for sure where the virus came from, though most scientists agree that the United States and China must conduct a thorough investigation into its origins. Scientists also agree about the paramount importance of lab safety; if youre interested in learning more about lab leaks, I urge you to read this piece by Rowan Jacobsen that Mother Jones published a year ago.

To be fair to the opponents of gain-of-function research, most experts agree that some extreme versions of this work are truly reckless. As Jacobsen wrote, lab leaks have occurred with some frequency over the past few decades. An early controversy over gain-of-functionresearchcame to a head in 2011, when University of Wisconsin researcher Yoshihiro Kawaoka announced that his lab had successfully modified the highly lethal H5N1 bird flu to make it airborne among ferrets. After much media criticism of this experiment, in 2014, the Obama administration placed a moratorium on most gain-of-function experiments the US funded throughout the world. The Trump administration mostly lifted the restriction in 2017, though at the onset of the pandemic, the former president decried the practice and claimed that the US funding of such work in China was a relic of the Obama administration. (That wasnt exactly true; after all it was his administration who did away with the moratorium.)

Last month, after more stories about the Wuhan lab appeared, the US Senate approved an amendment put forth by Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) that would permanently halt US funding of gain-of-function research in China. While many still deny funding gain-of-function research in Wuhan, experts believe otherwise, Sen. Paul said in a press release. The passage of my amendment ensures that this never happens in the future.

Yet the virus researchers I spoke with emphasized that not all gain-of-function research is dangerousto the contrary, most of it is quite routine and has been crucial in advancing disease research and treatment. Gerald Keusch, an infectious disease specialist who is a co-director of Boston Universitys National Emerging Infectious Diseases Laboratories, points out that the term gain-of-function is frustratingly broad and describes a large swath of virus work. Most scientists will say that gain-of-function is too crude a terminology, he told me. It encompasses things that are necessary and safe, to things that are necessary but somewhat risky, to things that are maybe not necessary and highly risky. And they all get wrapped under the same term. He points out that some landmark medical breakthroughs happened because of gain-of-function: For example, the technique led to University of North Carolina scientists discovery that the drug remdesivir could treat COVID-19. Indeed, work under the broad category of gain-of-function also may have contributed to the vaccine research on other coronaviruses that hastened the development of the COVID-19 vaccines, Keusch added.

The outcry over gain-of-function research has cast a pall of suspicion over other, completely unrelated kinds of pandemic research. Peter Daszak, thepresident of nonprofit EcoHealth Alliance, has seen this play out firsthand. EcoHealth Alliance, which has an annual budget that ranges from $10 million to $17 million, a US-based staff of about 50, and some contractors abroad, came under scrutiny last April, when media reports revealed that the organization had earmarked about $600,000 of a $3.4 million NIH grant to fund preapproved research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. In the wake of these reports, the Trump administration canceled the entire NIH grant for EcoHealth Allianceeven the parts that had nothing to do with the Wuhan lab.

This move struck Daszak as bizarre. We dont even have a lab, he told me. We do things like produce a book on how to live safely with wildlife or educate community leaders. Despite the actual nature of his work, over the past year, he and EcoHealth Alliance somehow have become the symbols of gain-of-function research. The GMO-transparency group US Right to Know recently filed 74 requests under the Freedom of Information Act that tied up EcoHealths board members and funding agencies for months. They know that a small organization like ours cannot keep up with that level of work, Daszak said. He finds irony in anti-GMO groups crusade against his work. Youve got these anti-GMO groups trying to shut us down when here we are trying to achieve the same goal, he said, which is a more balanced relationship with nature.

The overlap that Daszak describes reflects a complicated political dynamic. The anti-GMO movement used to reside comfortably on the left: A 2001 ABC News survey found that Democrats were far more likely than Republicans to believe that genetically modified foods were unsafe, and Democratic politicians have fought hard for the mandatory labeling of these foods. Science writers have called the movement against GMOs the lefts anti-science problem. But that may be changing: A 2016 Pew survey found that equal numbers of Democrats and Republicans believe that GMOs are worse for peoples health. That same year, when the Senate was divided over a controversial GMO-labeling bill, many Democrats argued it didnt go far enough in requiring companies to disclose genetically engineered ingredients. But others defended the measure. It will provide fair and objective information without stigmatizing foods that are completely safe, Indianas Democrat Sen. Joe Donnelly said. Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) spoke of the scientific consensus that biotechnology is safe. (The bill passed 6330, and the law set to go into effect later this year.)

But now, this past year, anti-GMO groups gain-of-function criticism has drawn more attention from the right. Center for Food Safetys Kimbrell said that in the weeks since his group sued the NIH over gain-of-function transparency, he has been invited to speak on several right-wing talk shows. (He declined.) And until recently, the idea that COVID-19 could have come from a lab was considered mostly a right-wing theory, promoted with a few racist dog whistles by President Trump and his supporters. Anti-GMO groups dont typically endorse that kind of rhetoric, but with their embrace of the lab-escape theory, they couldnt help but attract it. I noted a xenophobic flavor to many of the comments on several of the groups social media posts referencing COVID. In response to a recent US Right to Know post, one commenter referred to COVID-19 as the China virus and President Biden as China Joe.

Peter Hotez, a vaccine scientist and misinformation expert with Baylor College of Medicine points out that the uproar over gain-of-function research plays right into the conservative narrative about greedy pharma companies and power-hungry scientists. Hotez notes that the right-leaning anti-vaccine groups that he tracks have begun to embrace anti-GMO rhetoric, insisting that mRNA vaccines genetically modify humans. (They dont.) In the past we said, this is far left and far right, but I am seeing more far-right dominance. Its becoming much more of a mainstream GOP dynamic.

Kimbrell doesnt see it this way. His group has always attracted a small contingent of libertarians, he said, accounting for perhaps 5 or 10 percent of the supporters. He noted that he has encouraged his staff to get vaccinated against COVID-19; he opted for the Johnson & Johnson shot because he was skeptical of the mRNA technique the Moderna and Pfizer used to develop their shots. Were bipartisan, were trying to have humans, as a species, live in a mutually enhancing world with the rest of nature, and thats generally viewed as progressive, he said. Im not quite sure why.

Progressives have a long history of advocating for diplomacy and cooperation over threats and hostile overtures. But these are strange times, with the far left and the far right bonding over vaccines, and conspiracy theories, and now, pandemic virology research. This dynamic can be dangerous not only to science, but also to the researchers who conduct this work.

In recent months, the paranoia about EcoHealth has spilled over into Daszaks personal life. He and his staff have received dozens of death threats. After someone sent an envelope of white powder to his home, he decided to hire security personnel to protect his family.

Baylors Hotez noted that threats to scientists have increased dramatically over the past year. He says that when prominent activists cast scientists as evil power brokers, it fosters an atmosphere of animosity toward researchers. Anti-science groups are trying to paint a picture of scientists as evildoers rather than the humanitarians that most of us are, he said. Most of us became scientists to help, to do something for humanity. Hotez himself has received many recent threats related to his vaccine advocacy, some of them anti-Semitic in nature.

Beyond his own personal safety, Daszak worries about the implications for infectious disease research: If the United States stops virology work in China its likelyscientists accessto a place where these viruses come fromwill be blocked. The tensions over the lab-leak theory may escalate to the point where scientific cooperation breaks down. And well certainly never get to conduct a thorough investigation into the origins of the pandemic, Boston Universitys Keuschsaid,noting, The best hope is that somehow in the back channels, we will figure out how to lower the heat, increase the light, convince the Chinese its in their interest to be transparent.

Will the diplomatic back channels prevail in time to prevent the next pandemic? Thats anybodys guess, because pathogens emerge, change, and spread all around us, all the time. Just last week, Chinese authorities reported the first human case of a rare bird flu. The idea that the United States wouldnt be able to monitor and study this pathogen alarms Daszak. If we dont do that work, its really damaging to future public health risk, he said. Well never know whats coming next.

Read the original post:
Inside the Anti-GMO Movement's Obsession With Virology Research and Lab Leaks Mother Jones - Mother Jones

DUBLIN--(BUSINESS WIRE)--The "Global Biohacking Market (2021-2026) by Product, Application, Type, End-User, Geography, Competitive Analysis and the Impact of Covid-19 with Ansoff Analysis" report has been added to ResearchAndMarkets.com's offering.

Key factors, such as the innovative trends of neuro-nutrition & growing biohacking in the health & wellness space, are likely to contribute to the growth of the market. Penetration of the Internet of Things in healthcare, fitness, and consumer electronics such as fitness bands also boosts the market growth. Rising demand for smart devices and effective drugs to meet the daily healthcare needs amongst the population and the prevalence of chronic disorders are factors driving the market growth. The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a surge in market growth for the pharma industries engaged in biohacking.

However, strict government regulations governing the genetic engineering experiments, lack of funds required for research, and lack of expertise are likely to hinder the market growth. Cybersecurity practices are expected to pose a challenge for the biohacking market.

Market Segmentation

The Global Biohacking Market is segmented further based on Product, Application, Type, End-User, and Geography.

Why buy this report?

Market Dynamics

Drivers

Restraints

Opportunities

Challenges

Companies Mentioned

For more information about this report visit https://www.researchandmarkets.com/r/ked5i

Read more here:
Global Biohacking Market (2021 to 2026) - Lab Experiments with The Use of Medical, Nutritional, and Electronic Technique Present Opportunities -...

Pixabay // Qimono

Admit it at some point in our childhoods, weve all wondered if we had a long-lost twin or a celebrity relative. Perhaps weve gone so far as to perform a genetic test through a company such as 23AndMe, and learned more about our ancestry and distant relatives. Though we often pursue genetic testing for personal purposes, finding out individuals that share DNA could have grand implications for our understanding of the health and structure of human populations at large.

This process of examining genetic connections has been streamlined by the introduction of iLASH (IBD by LocAlity-Sensitive Hashing), an algorithm that efficiently identifies relevant genetic connections among large sets of people, which then inform important advancements in population genetics and personalized medicine, among other fields.

What is iLASH?

iLASH came to be when Ruhollah Shemirani, Ph.D. student at USC, teamed up with Jose-Luis Ambite, Research Team Leader at USCs Information Sciences Institute (ISI) and Associate Research Professor of Computer Science at USC Viterbi, to study how genetic connections among individuals can shed light on genetic causes of diseases and the genetic structure of populations. In addition, iLASH can also be used for other purposes such as finding distant relatives through services like 23AndMe. This project was made possible by collaborating with experts from the University of Colorado, the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

Establishing genetic connections can make the world feel smaller than you think. Ambites experience, among those of many others who have used similar services, serve as interesting examples.

According to 23andMe, I share 0.07% of my genome with Greg Ver Steeg, another researcher at ISI, mentioned Ambite. Greg is American (from Dutch descent, many generations ago). Im from Spain. Nonetheless, we share a bit of DNA from a common ancestor.

Essentially, iLASH is a method for IBD, or Identity-By-Descent, estimation. IBD estimation is the process of finding out where, and how much, each pair of individuals in a genetic dataset share their DNA due to shared ancestry, explained Shemirani.

IBD estimation is the first step of IBD Mapping, a novel process to identify the genetic basis of disease. This process is broken down into three steps, each to be published independently in a paper. The first step, published as a featured article in the Editors Highlights in Nature Communications on June 10th, involves estimating genetic segments that are shared between pairs of individuals using iLASH. Next, this genetic pairing information is used to create groups of distant families using network clustering methods. The last paper will focus on statistical methods to show whether these distant families reveal elevated rates of diseases or other traits.

A Pioneer in IBD Estimation

So what sets iLASH apart from other genetic algorithms? Scalability and accuracy.With the ability to perform IBD estimation on a large-scale, biobanks, or storages of biological samples for research, that were previously unfeasible can now be analyzed for genetic connections at an unprecedented speed.

Before iLASH, finding genetic connections in a dataset of 50,000 individuals would take more than a week (~6 days per chromosome), said Shemirani. The same dataset is analyzed by iLASH in an hour!

To achieve this, iLASH employs Locality Sensitive Hashing (LSH), which eliminates unrelated pairs of genetic samples, leaving remaining pairs that have a high probability of shared DNA. This complex algorithm has been facilitated by parallel computing, which allows multiple processes to be carried out simultaneously, creating an efficient approach to IBD estimation.

As a crucial step, Shemirani and Ambite collaborated with geneticists and researchers from various institutions to ensure iLASH is compatible with common formats used by bioinformaticians, who apply information generated from the algorithm to biological and medical research.

Without such feedback from real geneticists at the University of Colorado Medical Campus and Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, we could not have achieved this, Shemirani said.

Revolutionizing Population Genetics

iLASH has significant real-world applications in both population genetics and personalized medicine.

In the population genetics field, iLASHs efficiency and accuracy as an IBD estimation method has been unprecedented by other types of analyses and has already been implemented by experts across the country.

We can use iLASH in very large datasets to extract patterns of migration and recent fine-scale ancestry structures for the first time, said Shemirani.

In fact, Dr. Gillian Belbin, an iLASH co-author and researcher at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, used iLASH to analyze the UK Biobank, a genetic dataset of 500,000 people in the UK. Among other findings, the study showed patterns of common ancestry with Nordic populations who inhabited areas that are historically contact points for Viking populations.

Incorporating Diversity into the Conversation

In the field of medicine, iLASH is not only an effective tool for studying the genetic origins of rare diseases, but also a promising way to better our understanding of diversity in genetics.

Helping with the discovery of these rare genetic origins for various diseases is just one of the utilities of such studies, Ambite noted. For example, they can also help geneticists with calibrating genetic disease risk calculations for diverse non-European populations.

By building upon previous analyses that were limited to white European populations, iLASH enables researchers to expand existing results to cover a broader range of population groups.

Including iLASH in genetic study pipelines, such as polygenic risk scores or disease mapping studies, will help to account for population structure and hidden relatedness in the datasets, explained Shemirani. This will help partially address the problems that arise from the imbalance, or lack of diversity, of the datasets and studies in terms of population demographics.

Another upside of iLASH is that its more cost-friendly when compared to many other alternatives in medicine, therefore making it a much more accessible option.

Going Forward

Though iLASH has proven to be highly promising in various applications, there is still work to be done. Shemirani named three particular improvements that they are currently working on.

The primary challenge is to create a distributed version of iLASH to meet increasing scalability demands. As datasets grow larger by the day, iLASH needs the resources required to cover a sizable amount of data accurately and efficiently.

In addition, Shemirani and Ambite are also looking to create a cloud service for iLASH, though ethical and security issues surrounding sensitive genetic data pose a problem for this goal.

Finally, adding an incremental analysis would allow iLASH to be adopted in commercial settings where new customers are constantly being added and need to be incorporated into the existing dataset.

Though not all of us are going to find a lost-long twin or celebrity relative, iLASH can help researchers extract crucial genetic information that will inform relevant research in the fields of population genetics and medicine, benefiting us all in the long term.

Here is the original post:
Find Your Genetic Relatives Quickly and Accurately with USC ISI's iLASH Algorithm - USC Viterbi | School of Engineering - USC Viterbi School of...

With the rising acreage of hybrid tolerant Bt cotton (HT Bt cotton) threatening to cut into the revenues of seed firms and yields for farmers, seed industry associations have appealed to the Union government to take measures to curb HT Bt cultivation.

The National Seed Association of India (NSAI) and the Federation of Seed Industry of India (FSII), have alleged that the sale of HT Bt cotton seeds has suddenly shot up this year, posing a serious threat to the environment, farmers, legitimate seed companies and government revenue. It cautioned that consequences of allowing the illegal technology could be disastrous.

Also read: Highest HTBT cotton sowing in coming kharif: Shetkari Sanghatana

The two associations have written a letter to the Union Ministry of Agriculture, the government of India and the GEAC (Genetic Engineering Approval Committee) to initiate steps to curb the sale of the illegal seeds and take action against the offenders.

Besides causing harm to the environment and losses to the industry, the HT Bt seeds could contaminate the production of legitimate seeds.

The sale of HT Bt cotton is illegal in the country as the GEAC has not given permission to the technology yet.

The HT Bt cotton, the third generation biotechnology in cotton, gives the plant an ability to survive specific herbicides. It works on the premise that when a specific herbicide is sprayed on the crop variety/hybrid modified to resist that herbicide survives and all others are killed. The genetically modified plant has strength to withstand the effect of weedicide.

Though the farmers in some States have been growing HT Bt cotton for the last few years, the extent was limited to some pockets.

The industry associations alleged that there is a sudden surge in the acreage. Quoting a Department of Biotechnology (DBT) survey, they said about 15 per cent of the cotton acreage in Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh, Telangana and Gujarat was under HT Bt cotton.

The area under cultivation of illegal HT cotton has been increasing over the years. However, this year there is a big jump in such illegal cultivation especially in the major cotton States, M Ramasami, Chairman of FSII, said.

From an estimated 35 lakh packets last year, the area is likely to go up to about 70 lakh packets this year, Ramasami, who is also the Chairman of the Rasi Seeds, said.

The fact that the total size of the cottonseed packets is five crore packets (of 450 gm each) shows how alarming the situation is.

He said that the illegal seed packets indicate the presence of several technologies in the seeds. This could pose a very serious challenges to the environment.

If it is not controlled immediately by the government, it will spell disaster for the industry and farmers, he said.

NSAI President Prabhakar Rao cautioned that the proliferation of illegal seeds could decimate small cotton seed companies, while posing a major threat to the entire legal cotton seed market in the country.

To make matters worse, the illegal seeds are sold using the brand name of prominent companies. While the illegal seeds are polluting the environment, the industry is losing legitimate seed sale. There is a dent in tax collections too, Prabhakara Rao, who is also the Managing Director of Nuziveedu Seeds Limited, said.

He lamented that the regulators were focusing only on licensed dealers and seed companies, while unscrupulous players continued to sell the HT seeds without any hindrance.

The focus must be shifted to catching them and taking exemplary and strong punitive action, he said.

Read the original:
Seed industry raises a flag on surge in HT Bt cotton acreage - BusinessLine

DUBLIN, June 14, 2021 /PRNewswire/ -- The "Global Biohacking Market (2021-2026) by Product, Application, Type, End-User, Geography, Competitive Analysis and the Impact of Covid-19 with Ansoff Analysis" report has been added to ResearchAndMarkets.com's offering.

Key factors, such as the innovative trends of neuro-nutrition & growing biohacking in the health & wellness space, are likely to contribute to the growth of the market. Penetration of the Internet of Things in healthcare, fitness, and consumer electronics such as fitness bands also boosts the market growth. Rising demand for smart devices and effective drugs to meet the daily healthcare needs amongst the population and the prevalence of chronic disorders are factors driving the market growth. The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a surge in market growth for the pharma industries engaged in biohacking.

However, strict government regulations governing the genetic engineering experiments, lack of funds required for research, and lack of expertise are likely to hinder the market growth. Cybersecurity practices are expected to pose a challenge for the biohacking market.

Market Segmentation

The Global Biohacking Market is segmented further based on Product, Application, Type, End-User, and Geography.

Recent Developments1. Fitbit Collaborates with Scripps Research and Stanford Medicine to Study the Role of Wearables to Detect, Track and Contain Infectious Diseases like COVID-19. - 4th April 20202. InteraXon announced a new product launch - Muse S, a Meditation Sleep Headband. - 9th January 2020

Company Profiles

Some of the companies covered in this report are Apple, THE ODIN, Thync Global, Fitbit, Synbiota, Moodmetric, HVMN, InteraXon Inc, etc.

Competitive Quadrant

The report includes a Competitive Quadrant, a proprietary tool to analyze and evaluate the position of companies based on their Industry Position score and Market Performance score. The tool uses various factors for categorizing the players into four categories. Some of these factors considered for analysis are financial performance over the last 3 years, growth strategies, innovation score, new product launches, investments, growth in market share, etc.

Why buy this report?

Report Highlights:

Key Topics Covered:

1 Report Description

2 Research Methodology

3 Executive Summary

4 Market Overview4.1 Introduction 4.2 Market Dynamics4.2.1 Drivers4.2.1.1 Innovative Trends of Neuro-Nutrition and Biohacking in The Wellness Space 4.2.1.2 Increase in The Use of Radiofrequency Identification (RFID) Technology in Medical Devices 4.2.1.3 Rising Demand for Smart Devices and Drugs 4.2.1.4 Penetration of Internet of Things (IoT) In Healthcare, Fitness, and Consumer Electronics 4.2.2 Restraints4.2.2.1 Stringent Government Regulations Governing the Genetic Engineering Experiments4.2.2.2 Lack of Funds Required for Research 4.2.2.3 Lack of Expertise 4.2.3 Opportunities4.2.3.1 Lab Experiments with The Use of Medical, Nutritional, and Electronic Technique 4.2.3.2 Advancement in Technologies4.2.3.3 The Sharp Rise in Chronic Diseases Coupled with The Growing Geriatric Population4.2.4 Challenges4.2.4.1 Cyber Security Concerns4.3 Trends

5 Market Analysis5.1 Porter's Five Forces Analysis5.2 Impact of COVID-195.3 Ansoff Matrix Analysis

6 Global Biohacking Market, By Product6.1 Introduction6.2 Smart Drugs6.3 Sensors6.4 Strains6.5 Others

7 Global Biohacking Market, By Application7.1 Introduction 7.2 Synthetic Biology7.3 Genetic Engineering7.4 Forensic Science7.5 Diagnosis & Treatment7.6 Drug Testing

8 Global Biohacking Market, By Type8.1 Introduction8.2 Inside8.3 Outside

9 Global Biohacking Market, By End User9.1 Introduction9.2 Pharmaceutical & Biotechnology Companies9.3 Forensic Laboratories9.4 Others

10 Global Biohacking Market, By Geography10.1 Introduction10.2 North America10.2.1 US10.2.2 Canada10.2.3 Mexico10.3 South America10.3.1 Brazil10.3.2 Argentina10.4 Europe10.4.1 UK10.4.2 France10.4.3 Germany10.4.4 Italy10.4.5 Spain10.4.6 Rest of Europe10.5 Asia-Pacific10.5.1 China10.5.2 Japan10.5.3 India10.5.4 Indonesia10.5.5 Malaysia10.5.6 South Korea10.5.7 Australia10.5.8 Russia10.5.9 Rest of APAC10.6 Rest of the World10.6.1 Qatar10.6.2 Saudi Arabia10.6.3 South Africa10.6.4 United Arab Emirates10.6.5 Latin America

11 Competitive Landscape11.1 Competitive Quadrant11.2 Market Share Analysis11.3 Competitive Scenario11.3.1 Mergers & Acquisitions11.3.2 Agreement, Collaborations, & Partnerships11.3.3 New Product Launches & Enhancements11.3.4 Investments & funding

12 Company Profiles12.1 Apple12.2 THE ODIN 12.3 Thync Global 12.4 Fitbit 12.5 Synbiota 12.6 Moodmetric 12.7 HVMN 12.8 InteraXon 12.9 Modern AlkaMe12.10 Behavioral Tech

13 Appendix

For more information about this report visit https://www.researchandmarkets.com/r/25qr1p

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

Continue reading here:
Worldwide Biohacking Industry to 2026 - Competitive Analysis and the Impact of COVID-19 - PRNewswire

In-vivo data in disease model further supports development of Eligo's CRISPR-Cas antimicrobial strategies and itsEligobiotics platform

Phase 1 trial for EB003 lead candidate expected to commence in Q2'22; Orphan Drug Designation granted by the EMA

PARIS, June 15, 2021 /PRNewswire/ -- Eligo Bioscience SA, a Paris, France-based microbiome engineering company, today announced that the Company presented preclinical data on its lead drug candidate, EB003, for the treatment of severe diarrhea induced by shiga-toxin (Stx) producing E. coli (STEC, leading to Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome), at the 14thAnnual CRISPR 2021 meeting held June 1-10, 2021. The data presented further supports development of CRISPR-Cas antimicrobial strategies against STEC and other microbiome bacterial targets utilizing Eligo's proprietary Eligobiotics platform. Eligo's proprietary technology is protected by over 20 patent families, including the 2013 foundational IP on CRISPR antimicrobials.EB003 has been granted Orphan Drug Designation by the EMA.

"The data presented virtually this year at the CRISPR meeting continues to support the potential of our lead candidate EB003 and the use of the Eligobioticsplatform to modulate bacterial populations of the microbiome with unprecedented precision," said Xavier Duportet, Ph.D., Chief Executive Officer of Eligo Bioscience. "EB003 demonstrated efficacy across multiple in vitro and in vivo models. Moreover, we observed significantly reduced STEC colonization and alleviated symptoms in 100% of treated animals in a disease model representative of the intended patient population.We are very excited about these findings, how they support progression of EB003, and the clear demonstration of effective application of our proprietary platform."

Dr. Duportet continued, "This is indeed the first time that symptom alleviation has been achieved via the delivery of exogenous nuclease in a gut infection model, building on the foundational invention of this technology. Even more exciting is the fact that bacterial killing is solely achieved by the nuclease activity as opposed to the lytic cycle of the phage, therefore enabling a true modulation at the strain level based on the sole presence of a deleterious gene in bacteria.We are looking forward to advancing EB003 into the clinic next year."

The virtual presentation describes efficacy data in in vitro collections of epidemiologically relevant STEC strains, and in two animal models. Efficiency was first demonstrated in vitro on a collection of epidemiology relevant STEC strains where EB003 was able to efficiently kill E. coli strains harboring Stx genes. The EB003 CRISPR-based killing mechanism also abolished Shiga-toxin production, compared to antibiotic treatment, which can on the contrary lead to Shiga-toxin overproduction. Additionally, EB003 was able to reduce STEC colonization by multiple orders of magnitude in both a mouse gut colonization model and an infant rabbit disease model. In the latter model that recapitulates STEC infection associated symptoms, treatment with EB003 demonstrated statistically significant symptom alleviation.

The results provide strong support for further development of the company's CRISPR-Cas antimicrobial strategy and Eligobioticsplatform. Eligo is planning to initiate its first clinical trial for EB003 for the treatment of STEC in the second quarter of 2022.

About EB003

EB003, Eligo's lead drug candidate, was developed using the Company's proprietary Sequence-Specific Anti-Microbials (SSAM) platform. SSAM relies on the delivery of a non-replicative DNA payload encoding an exogenous Cas nuclease,guided towards specific genomic sequences. This modality leads to targeted lethal DNA double strand-breaks only if such sequences are present in the bacterial genome. This strategy enables precise engineering of the microbiome by killing only the strains harboring genomic sequences targeted by the nuclease.EB003 is being developed for the treatment of severe diarrhea induced by shiga-toxin (Stx) producing E. coli (STEC, leading to Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome) and is expected to enter Phase 1 in the second quarter of 2022. EB003 has been granted Orphan Drug Designation by the EMA.

About Eligobiotics

Eligobioticsis a first in class microbiome gene therapy that can change the microbiome composition and function with unprecedented precision.Eligobioticscan be designed, built, and optimized to target the microbiome species of choice with the automated proprietary platform that leverages Eligo's unique expertise in synthetic biology, phage biology, genetic engineering, and bioinformatics. Eligobioticscan be used to precisely and selectively remove unwanted bacterial strains carrying deleterious genes while leaving beneficial bacterial strains intact through the targeted delivery of a payload encoding an RNA-guided CRISPR-Cas nuclease. Alternatively, Eligobioticscan deliver to target bacteria the necessary genetic instructions to produce, display or secrete therapeutic proteins of interest in close proximity to the host's cells.Eligo is utilizing its Eligobioticsplatform to build a pipeline of drug candidates in inflammation, autoimmunity, and oncology.

About EligoBioscience

Eligo Bioscience is the world leader in microbiome gene therapy to address microbiome-associated diseases. Eligo was founded by scientists from The Rockefeller University, where CRISPR-based antimicrobials were invented, and by scientists from MIT. Eligo was named a Technology Pioneer by the World Economic Forum in 2017. With venture capital funding from Khosla Ventures and Seventure Partners, and non-dilutive funding from the GlaxoSmithKline, European Commission, CARB-X, and Bpifrance, Eligo has built an extensive pipeline of drug candidates using its Eligobioticsplatform.

Through its novel technology platform and robust intellectual property positions, Eligo is poised to be a catalyst for the growth anticipated across the microbiome-associated diseases industry.

For more information about Eligo visithttps://www.eligo.bio/.

Follow us athttps://www.twitter.com/EligoBioandhttps://www.linkedin.com/company/eligo-bio.

Logo - https://mma.prnewswire.com/media/1533529/Eligo_Bioscience_SA_Logo.jpg

Eligo Contact:

Argot PartnersKevin Murphy / Troy Neubeckereligo@argotpartners.com+1-212-600-1902

SOURCE Eligo Bioscience SA

Read the original here:
Eligo Presents Preclinical Data Demonstrating for the First Time that Gut Microbiome Modulation via Delivery of CRISPR Nuclease Impacts Disease...