Category Archives: Molecular Medicine

ReutersJun 11, 2020 11:34:10 IST

While some potential vaccines have emerged in the global race to find a way to stop the spread of COVID-19, many scientists and researchers believe antibody-based therapies hold great promise for treating people already infected with the disease.

These therapies use antibodies generated by infected humans or animals to fight off the disease in patients. They date back to the late 19th century when researchers used a serum derived from the blood of infected animals to treat diphtheria.

Researchers are studying the use of convalescent plasma and other treatments made with blood from recently recovered patients in order to help treat patients.

For COVID-19 treatment, researchers are studying the use of convalescent plasma and other treatments made with blood from recently recovered patients.

More recently, scientists have developed treatments called monoclonal antibodies antibodies that can be isolated and manufactured in large quantities to treat diseases like Ebola or cancer. Companies, like Eli Lilly and Co (LLY.N) and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals (REGN.O) in the United States, are trying to use this approach to develop their treatments.

Unlike convalescent plasma, manufacturers do not need a steady supply of antibody-rich blood to produce monoclonal antibodies, so this approach could be easier to scale up.

In general, the goal of a vaccine is to generate an immune response that can prevent someone from getting ill with a disease, whereas antibody-derived products are generally designed to treat disease.

And while some drugmakers have suggested antibody treatments can be used prophylactically - Regenerons Chief Scientific Officer George Yancopoulos has said their treatment could be a bridge to a vaccine - it could be expensive.

You might go into nursing homes or the military and use it because antibodies have a pretty long half-life, said Dr Betty Diamond, Director of Molecular Medicine at the Feinstein Institutes for Medical Research.

You might decide that you are going to use this as prevention in this very high-risk group, but you wouldnt do that for the whole country.

The amount of protein in antibody drugs makes the treatment more expensive than vaccines in general, Feng Hui, chief operating officer at Shanghai Junshi Biosciences (1877.HK), said.

Designing antibody drugs to treat or protect high-risk people, including those with weak immune systems, could require hundreds, or even over a thousand times more protein than found in a vaccine shot, according to Junshi.

Eli Lilly is collaborating with Junshi and Canadian biotech firm AbCellera Biologics to develop different antibody treatments, both of which have started early-stage testing in humans.

Regeneron plans to start clinical studies later this month to test its antibody cocktail treatment, which was derived from antibodies from genetically-modified mice. It aims to have hundreds of thousands of preventative doses available by the end of the summer or the fall.

The CoVIg-19 Plasma Alliance, which includes Japans Takeda Pharmaceuticals and CSL Behring, is working on hyperimmune globulin therapy derived from convalescent plasma, which could offer a standardized dose of antibodies and doesnt need to be limited to patients with matching blood types.

The Antibody Therapy Against Coronavirus (ATAC) project, funded by the European Commission and led by Swedens Karolinska research institute, is looking at a similar approach as well as monoclonal antibodies. Under the project, monoclonal antibodies extracted from convalescent plasma are now being tested on human volunteers in Germany and on animals in Switzerland.

Britains GlaxoSmithKline is working with Vir Biotechnology Inc (VIR.O) to develop potential antibody treatments which select the best antibodies out of the plasma.

AbbVie has also announced a collaboration to develop antibody therapies.

Singapores state research body A*Star is working with Japans Chugai Pharmabody Research on an antibody for clinical use.

Find latest and upcoming tech gadgets online on Tech2 Gadgets. Get technology news, gadgets reviews & ratings. Popular gadgets including laptop, tablet and mobile specifications, features, prices, comparison.

Read more here:
Coronavirus Outbreak: What is antibody therapy, how does it work, who is developing them? - Firstpost

Job number ACAD104563Division/School School of Cellular and Molecular MedicineContract type Open EndedWorking pattern Full timeSalary 33,797 - 38,017 per annumClosing date for applications 02-Jul-2020

We wish to recruit a Research Associate to be part of a multidisciplinary team investigating and evaluating new approaches to detect Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection in resource-limited settings.

The post is funded by the UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council and will be held jointly between the Schools of Physics and Cellular and Molecular Medicine (CMM) and is a collaboration with the Kenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI). The post is available for 18 months with potential funding from the 1st August 2020.

The key duties for the postholder will be to generate and characterise a series of modified superparamagnetic nanoparticles (SPIONs) based upon ferritins, and investigate their interactions, and those of a related series of derivatised fluorescent carbon dots (FCDs) with target Mycobacteria. The RA will produce, and subsequently derivatise, recombinant ferritins; characterise these materials using biophysical approaches including electron microscopy, light and X-ray scattering, and superconducting quantum interference device (SQUID) magnetometry; and investigate their interactions with target bacteria. The successful applicant will also be expected to prepare applications for time at the Diamond Light Source and other large scale facilities elsewhere in Europe.

Candidates should have a PhD in a Physical (Chemistry, Physics) or Life Sciences (Biochemistry, Microbiology) discipline awarded or soon to be awarded; or equivalent professional qualification/experience. They should have a strong background in recombinant protein production and characterisation and/or in biophysics/soft matter physics methods. Moreover the successful candidate will be passionate about interdisciplinary working, able to communicate clearly and effectively across a diverse team, be willing to contribute to the scientific direction of the project and disseminate its outputs and have excellent organisational skills.

For informal enquiries please contact Dr Annela Seddon (Annela.seddon@bristol.ac.uk); or Dr Jim Spencer (jim.spencer@bristol.ac.uk).

We welcome applications from all members of our community and are particularly encouraging those from diverse groups, such as members of the LGBT+ andBAME communities, to join us.

View original post here:
Research Associate, School of Cellular and Molecular Medicine job with UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL | 209066 - Times Higher Education (THE)

Have you ever heard that taking vitamin D supplements or following a ketogenic (keto) diet will protect you from the new coronavirus? In this Special Feature, we explain why these and other persistent myths are not grounded in science.

Even before the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the new coronavirus outbreak a pandemic, their director general, Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, warned of the danger associated with spreading false information about the virus.

At a conference on February 15, 2020, he declared that were not just fighting an epidemic; were fighting an infodemic.

Fake news spreads faster and more easily than this virus and is just as dangerous, he emphasized.

However, it can be difficult to tell what is credible and what is not given the sheer quantity of information that people are sharing both on and offline.

Previously on Medical News Today, we compiled a list of 28 myths surrounding the new coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2). In this Special Feature, we will take an in-depth look at five more persistent myths and explain why people should not take them at face value.

Some articles claim that if a person takes vitamin D supplements, they will be less likely to contract SARS-CoV-2.

In part, people have based these claims on a controversial paper that appears in the journal Aging Clinical and Experimental Research.

The papers authors claim to have found a correlation between low mean levels of vitamin D in the populations of certain countries and higher rates of COVID-19 cases and related deaths in those same countries.

Based on this correlation, the authors hypothesize that supplementing the diet with vitamin D may help protect against COVID-19. However, there is no evidence to suggest that this would actually be the case.

In a rapid review of the evidence published on May 1, 2020, researchers from the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine at the University of Oxford in the United Kingdom unequivocally conclude: We found no clinical evidence on vitamin D in [the prevention or treatment of] COVID-19.

They also write that [t]here was no evidence related to vitamin D deficiency predisposing to COVID-19, nor were there studies of supplementation for preventing or treating COVID-19.

Other researchers who have conducted reviews of the existing data surrounding a potential relationship between vitamin D and COVID-19 agree.

One report by specialists from various institutions in the U.K., Ireland, Belgium, and the United States which appeared in BMJ Nutrition, Prevention & Health in May 2020 also points to a lack of supporting evidence in favor of taking vitamin D supplements to prevent infection with SARS-CoV-2.

The reports authors warn that:

[C]alls [for high dose vitamin D supplementation as a preventive strategy against COVID-19] are without support from pertinent studies in humans at this time, but rather based on speculations about presumed mechanisms.

They also note that although sufficient vitamin D can contribute to overall good health on a day-to-day basis, taking supplements without first seeking medical advice can be harmful.

For example, taking too much vitamin D in the form of a dietary supplement could actually jeopardize health, especially among people with certain underlying chronic conditions.

Another widespread rumor is that taking zinc supplements could help prevent infection with SARS-CoV-2 or treat COVID-19.

It is true that zinc is an essential mineral that helps support the functioning of the human immune system.

Starting from this notion, a team of researchers from Russia, Germany, and Greece hypothesized that zinc might be able to act as a preventive and adjuvant therapeutic for COVID-19. Their results appear in the International Journal of Molecular Medicine.

The researchers refer to in vitro experiments that apparently showed that zinc ions were able to inhibit the action of a certain enzyme that facilitates the viral activity of SARS-CoV-2.

However, they also point out the lack of actual clinical evidence that zinc might have an effect against SARS-CoV-2 in humans.

Other papers that cite the potential of zinc as an adjuvant in COVID-19 therapy including one that appears in Medical Hypotheses are more speculative and not based on any clinical data.

In a Practice patterns and guidelines paper from April 2020 which appears in BMJ Nutrition, Prevention & Health nutritionist Emma Derbyshire, Ph.D., and biochemist Joanne Delange, Ph.D., reviewed existing data about zinc (alongside other nutrients) in relation to viral respiratory infections.

They found that, according to available research in humans, zinc supplementation may help prevent pneumonia in young children, and that zinc insufficiency may impair immune responses in older adults.

However, they note that there is not enough evidence about the role of zinc supplementation in preventing viral infections in general.

Rigorous trials [] are yet to determine the efficacy of zinc supplementation, they write.

Vitamin C is another essential nutrient that has received a lot of attention. Many people believe that it can prevent or even cure the flu or common cold.

Although it is true that sufficient vitamin C can help support immune function, current evidence regarding its effectiveness in treating or preventing colds and influenza is limited and often contradictory.

Despite this, there have been claims that this vitamin might help fight infections with the new coronavirus.

It is possible that people are basing these claims on an existing ongoing clinical trial in China, which is looking at the effects of high dose intravenous (IV) vitamin C on hospitalized patients receiving care for severe COVID-19.

The researchers expect to complete the trial by the end of September 2020. No results are available in the interim.

Commenting on the trial, experts from the Linus Pauling Institute which focuses on health and nutrition at Oregon State University in Corvallis explain that although high dose IV vitamin C might help alleviate COVID-19 symptoms in severely ill patients, regular vitamin C supplements are very unlikely to help people fight off infections with SARS-CoV-2.

The experts warn that IV vitamin C is not the same as taking vitamin C supplements, as they would never raise blood levels of this vitamin as highly as an IV infusion would.

They also warn people who may be tempted to up their dosage of vitamin C of the fact they could end up taking too much and experiencing adverse side effects.

Keto diets, which are high in fats and low in carbohydrates, have also received some attention in the context of treating or preventing COVID-19.

This may be because there is some evidence to suggest that keto diets could help boost the immune system. However, much of that evidence is based on animal studies rather than human trials.

Also, an upcoming clinical trial from Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, MD, proposes to look at whether or not a ketogenic intervention might help intubated COVID-19 patients by reducing inflammation.

The intervention would necessitate the administration of a specially devised ketogenic formula through enteral feeding. It would be a last-resort procedure for those in a critical condition.

There is currently no evidence to suggest that following a keto diet could help a healthy person prevent or treat infection with SARS-CoV-2.

However, there is evidence to suggest that keto diets can expose people to certain health risks such as by raising cholesterol levels. Keto diets may also have side effects, such as flu-like symptoms, headaches, nausea, and changes in blood pressure.

There are also claims suggesting that various herbal medicines might be able to fight off the new coronavirus.

This may partly be based on a statement issued by a Chinese official in April 2020, suggesting that certain herbal drugs could help treat COVID-19, as a communication in The Lancet on May 15, 2020, reports.

Author Yichang Yang from the Department of Traditional Chinese Medicine at the Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine in Hangzhou, China warns that people should take encouragements to use herbal remedies in the treatment of COVID-19 with a pinch of salt.

Yang warns that herbal remedies including the drugs that the Chinese official names can have unexpected risks and may not be as effective as some people claim. Also, evidence from human trials is very limited.

For similar reasons, he also notes that the mechanisms through which herbal drugs work on the body are often unclear, which may mean that they are not always safe.

A mystery herbal cure for COVID-19 on sale in Madagascar a herbal tea made from artemisia plants has also spurred worry among specialists, who say that the remedy may do more harm than good.

Matshidiso Moeti, director of WHO Africa, has also commented on this:

We [the WHO] would caution and advise countries against adopting a product that has not been taken through tests to see its efficacy.

Although people may be tempted to try anything and everything in the face of such a threat to health as SARS-CoV-2, the most important preventive step is to follow official national and international guidelines for public health, as well as individual health advice from doctors and other healthcare professionals.

For more information on the new coronavirus and how to stay safe during the pandemic, take a look at the information from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the WHO.

For live updates on the latest developments regarding the novel coronavirus and COVID-19, click here.

Read this article:
5 false claims about coronavirus remedies and why they are wrong - Medical News Today

The Great Covid R&D Collaboration - Cooperation accelerating drug development

Pharma battles coronavirus with a mega-collaboration; its own health requires competitive balance.

Pharmas search for a vaccine or drug to prevent/treat Covid-19 has fostered collaboration among companies on an unprecedented scale.The new business model brings together the best minds in the industry to compress into months the search for a drug or vaccine and subsequent clinical testing that typically take decades.While there is no guaranty that any of the candidates chosen will achieve a timely cure, the scale of the effort has led even conservative experts like Dr. Anthony Fauci to predict that a vaccine could be available as soon as yearend, compared to the current world record of six years for the Ebola vaccine.

The worlds expectations pose a serious challenge for pharma.Industry observers, like Bernard Munos and Jack Scannell, have documented a decades long decline in productivity.One might reasonably ask, if collaboration is able achieve these results in a crisis, could it do the same against the major diseases, like cancer and Alzheimers disease, which together kill more each year than Covid-19?Could a cooperative industry be more productive than a competitive one?

The Power of Collaboration

In the last eight months the pandemic has emerged with stunning suddenness to infect more than 6.5 million people world-widekilling nearly 400,000.Cambridge University estimated that losses over the next five years would total nearly $27 trillion, more than 5% of global GDP.As the world hopes for salvation, how pharma responds will have a profound effect on its future.

Though related to predecessors like SARS and Ebola, the CoV2 virus has a unique structure and genetic signature that will likely require new medicines from an industry with an unimpressive track record at innovation.The era of modern molecular medicine began only 40 years ago and is still in relative infancy.Over the last five years, pharma have brought to market an average of 44 new drugs, costing over $2.5 billion each and many taking more than a decade.Pharma will need all their collective wisdom and resources to stop this viral firestorm before it runs is course.

In response, industry leaders have created a mega-collaboration within the commercial research community.Safi Bahcall, writing in the Wall Street Journal, explained that nearly all the major players in drug discovery and development have[established an] insider-only collaborationcalled Covid R&Dto accelerate creation of a vaccine or cure.In these unprecedented discussions, sworn competitors have shared proprietary data from promising drug candidates that they ordinarily would guard like prized jewels.Representatives of the Food and Drug Administration have even joinedto offer assistance.

With businessmen and attorneys out of the room, scientists across the industry can identify and advance projects at rates far faster than any single group. We dont need four companies with four versions of the same drug running redundant clinical trials at the nations hospitals, yet thats what we have today. In normal times, thats how business is done. But these arent normal times. Either industry leaders should empower their consortium to decide which companies should sacrifice their redundant programs, or the federal government should step in and do it for them.

Tahir Amin, Co-Executive Director of Initiative for Medicines, Access & Knowledge and Rohit Malpani, former policy director for Medecins Sans Frontieres, writing in STAT, claim that pharma could be better prepared for pandemics and more responsive to global health-care needs, if existing research [took] place in a more open and transparent manner, even if it is protected by intellectual property. The pharmaceutical industry sits on libraries of patented molecules and research, some of which originates [sic] from public funding, but which is [sic] not developed unless market opportunities arise.[In the case of remdesivir a] more transparent and open science platform could have motivated broader research participation earlier and potentially saved valuable time andimproved collective understandingof the drug.

The Problem With Collaboration

The Covid R&D collaboration focuses, not on drug discovery per sethere is no time for thatbut on selecting or modifying the best of candidates already on the market or in development and accelerating their path to the bedside.This is engineering on a grand scale.But can it help with invention, which is needed to sustain the industry in normal times? Are the competitive friction and apparent inefficiency of business-as-usual impediments to progress or essential elements in a productive commercial ecosystem?

While required in a crisis, cooperation fails as a sustainable foundation for the pharmaceutical industry, because it dilutes incentive and does not support the quantity and diversity of research required for a strong, responsive industry.Innovation does best with many competing high-risk, high-reward projects, rather than a single coordinated effort.Competitive costs are more than covered by the value of the breadth and flexibility of the industry that a collaboration eliminates in the interests of speed.

Drug development is experimental innovation, based on trial-and-error.In a world where nine-candidates-out-of-ten fail in clinical trials and only one-in-five approved drugs is a commercial success, researchers do not know what will work against CoV2 or any pathogen.When outcomes cannot be predicted in advance, likelihood of success is proportional to the number of candidates tested and the degree to which they are differentiated from one another.

In the collaboration, senior team members set an agenda based on their expert judgment, narrowing the range of research to accelerate the development of a few of the most promising candidates.In the case of Covid-19, it means picking winners without clinical or market data, i.e. guessing.

With Covid the strategy has a good chance of yielding results, because the technology for targeting viruses is relatively advanced; the target is well characterized and, according to Michael Farzan at The Scripps Research Institute, more druggable than most targets; the timeframe is short; the scope is enormous, encompassing many candidates; and the cost of failure or delay is so high that it justifies massive spending, regardless of risk.

The problem for innovation is not in streamlining but making decisions based on expert opinion.A 2013 article in Nature Reviews Drug Discovery showed that the single factor that correlated most closely with success in drug development was managements willingness to kill candidates early, based on data.The Covid R&D alliance has no choice but to rely on judgment, given the timeframe.In contrast, normal drug development is true scientific research.Knowledge evolves through the Darwinian selection of candidates, based on experimental outcomes.Failures play at least as important a role as successes in guiding development.Second-tier performers may find uses in other indications.Knowing only what works gives developers no indication of where to go next when they encounter a block.An unexpected toxicity can eliminate an entire generation of drugs with a similar mechanism.

Expert opinion is not a substitute for the time and cost of competitive studies.Rather than choosing winners, researchers should aggressively cut weak performers early in development.By testing more drugs, more quickly with greater diversity, developers can improve productivity.

Though the scale of the collaboration can reduce the risk somewhat with more shots-on-goal, the lack of time diversification limits the technological base to the ideas and molecules available at the moment, excluding newer, untested and often unorthodox approaches.Should the current solutions prove inadequate, the collaboration would essentially have to start over.

If It Looks Like Collaboration

The threat of consensus thinking doesnt require the formal structure of a collaboration.The infatuation of the industry with the amyloid hypothesis of Alzheimers disease caused a similar narrowing of the industry focus to a single idea.Pharma has spent well over a decade and billions on the assumption that amyloid plaques and tangles caused the disease but have no approved products or even positive clinical results to show for the effort.Rather than assuming that the experts knew the answer, despite having no data proving causation, the industry would have been better served by testing as many different hypotheses as possible.With the presumed mechanism a bust, the industry have few promising alternatives and are essentially back where they were 10 or more years ago.

Contrary to Amin and Malpani, forcing access to proprietary molecules and data would not accelerate a treatment for Covid and would compound the collaboration problem longer term.Without the results of the phase II trials, it is unlikely that, out of hundreds of potential projects, investigators would have chosen in advance to work on remdesivir, a drug that had failed in HCV and Ebola and may offer only limited protection against Covid 19.Making available proprietary data that Gilead had spent tens of millions to acquire, along with the rights to the molecule, would destroy any incentive to invest in early stage research.

The commercial innovation machinery with all its redundancy and friction has provided a remarkably quick initial responselittle more than 8 weeks after the declaration of the pandemic, the FDA issued an emergency use authorization for remdesivirand set the stage for a more complete solution in the coming months.With ninety vaccines of eight different varieties in clinical trials as reported by Nature at the end of May and more on the way, competitive excess has enabled the industry to mount a robust response to Covid threat.One hopes it will be enough.

View original post here:
The Great Coronavirus Collaboration And The Future Of Drug Discovery - Forbes

AUSTIN, Texas The countrys first peer-reviewed study of a COVID-19 treatment that transfuses blood plasma from recovered patients into critically ill patients shows 19 out of 25 patients improving, including 11 discharged from the hospital.

On March 28, Houston Methodist Hospital became the first academic medical center in the U.S. to transfuse plasma from recovered COVID-19 patients into two critically ill patients. Collaborators at The University of Texas at Austin developed an antibody test and selected recovered patients with the highest levels of antibody response for donation.

With no adverse side effects caused by the plasma transfusion, the study concluded that convalescent plasma therapy is a safe treatment option for patients with severe COVID-19 disease. To date, this is the largest cohort worldwide assessed for outcomes pertaining to convalescent plasma transfusion for COVID-19.

The findings are described in a paper published May 26 in The American Journal of Pathology. This is the first peer-reviewed publication on convalescent plasma use in the U.S.

While physician scientists around the world scrambled to test new drugs and treatments against the COVID-19 virus, convalescent serum therapy emerged as potentially one of the most promising strategies, said James M. Musser, chair of the Department of Pathology and Genomic Medicine at Houston Methodist and corresponding author of the study. With no proven treatments or cures for COVID-19 patients, now was the time in our history to move ahead rapidly.

Eric Salazar, assistant professor of pathology and genomic medicine with the Houston Methodist Research Institute, is the principal investigator. Members of the UT Austin team are Gregory Ippolito, a research assistant professor in the Department of Molecular Biosciences and assistant professor of oncology at Dell Medical School; Jason Lavinder, research associate in the McKetta Department of Chemical Engineering in the Cockrell School of Engineering; Jimmy D. Gollihar, visiting researcher in molecular biosciences; and Andre C. Maranhao, postdoctoral fellow in molecular biosciences.

Patients were first treated under emergency use guidelines from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and then received approval April 3 from the FDA to open the trial to more patients as an investigational new drug. This rapid approval granted by the FDA opened access to convalescent plasma treatment for COVID-19 patients.

Additional findings during this trial revealed patient outcomes after plasma therapy were similar to recently published results of patients treated on a compassionate-use basis with the antiviral drug remdesivir. The research team also concluded that any observed complications were consistent with findings reported for COVID-19 disease progression and did not result from the plasma transfusions. The studys overall findings were consistent with several other small case studies of convalescent plasma use for severe COVID-19 that have been recently reported.

Ultimately, although the convalescent plasma therapy administered on the front lines at Houston Methodist was implemented for emergency treatment, the studys authors recognize the important need for controlled clinical trials to determine its therapeutic efficacy. A randomized controlled trial is currently being considered at Houston Methodist, where they would also look more closely at variables such as timing of the transfusion after the onset of symptoms, the number and volume of transfusions adjusted for patient biometrics, antibody levels in donor plasma and numerous other parameters needed to effectively evaluate how to optimize this therapy. This would help address some questions, including whether patients would have better outcomes if plasma transfusions were administered sooner after the onset of symptoms.

This study was supported by funding from the National Institutes of Health, the Fondren Foundation, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, the Army Research Office, Houston Methodist Hospital and Houston Methodist Research Institute.

Go here to see the original:
COVID-19 Convalescent Plasma Therapy is Safe, With 76% of Patients Improving - UT News | The University of Texas at Austin

People with blood type A may be more at risk of serious forms of the coronavirus, new research has shown.

The study, by researchers in Germany and Norway but not yet published in a journal, is the latest to show that people with this particular blood type may be more susceptible to the disease.

The researchers found two points in the human genome which were associated with an increased risk of respiratory failure in patients with Covid-19. One of these points is the gene that determines blood type.

Having type A blood was linked to a 50 per cent increase in the likelihood that a patient would need oxygen or go on a ventilator, the researchers found.

However, Andre Franke, professor of molecular medicine at the University of Kiel and lead author of the study, said it was not certain whether it was the blood group that determined whether someone would become more seriously ill, or the genetic marker.

We cannot disentangle yet whether actually the blood group is the risk or some genetic variants that are linked to the blood groups. Using the blood groups as proxies, we estimate a 50 per cent higher protection for [blood type] O and a 50 per cent higher risk for A, said Prof Franke.

Researchers took blood samples from 1,610 patients in hospitals in Italy and Spain who needed oxygen or had to go on a ventilator. They extracted DNA and scanned it using a technique called genotyping.

They then compared these findings with 2,205 blood donors who did not have Covid-19.

They then looked at the DNA of the Covid-19 patients to determine if they shared any of the same genetic code.

Separate studies from China and the United States have also shown that people with blood type A are more susceptible to the disease than those with type O, the more common blood type.

And during the 2002 to 2003 epidemic of Sars - the coronavirus most closely linked to Covid-19 - researchers also found that those with type A blood were more likely to contract the disease.

See original here:
People with blood type A more likely to suffer severe coronavirus symptoms, research finds - Telegraph.co.uk

The world was gaslit by misreporting about George Floyds initial autopsy report. As concerned physicians, we write to deconstruct the misinformation and condemn the ways this weaponization of medical language reinforced white supremacy at the torment of Black Americans.

Gaslighting is a method of psychological manipulation employed to make a victim question their own sanity, particularly in scenarios where they are mistreated. The term comes from a 1938 play and, later, a popular film, wherein a predatory husband abuses his wife in a plot to have her committed to a mental institution. He dims the gas lights in their home; then, when she comments on the darkness, knowingly rejects her observation and uses it as evidence that shes gone insane. Its a torturous tactic employed to destroy a persons trust in their own perception of reality. Its a devastating distraction from oppression. Its insidious. And it happened recently when millions of people who had seen nine agonizing minutes of murder were told by an autopsy report that they hadnt.

In America, widespread anti-Black violence is often paired with structural gaslighting. Racism, after all, thrives when blame for its outcomes are misattributed. When Black families are refused loans in criminally discriminatory housing schemes, their credit is blamed. When youth of color are disproportionately stopped and frisked, they are told the process is random, and for their safety.

And when Black people are killed by police, their character and even their anatomy is turned into justification for their killers exoneration. Its a well-honed tactic. One analysis of the national database of state-level death certificate data found that fewer than half of law enforcementrelated deaths were reported. In addition to this undercounting, police actions were further minimized by the use of diagnostic codes that incorrectly labeled the cause of death as accidental or undetermined rather than police-related. For centuries, our systems have relied on this psychological torturea host of mental gymnasticsto deny the truth of what Black people have always known. The cause of death is racism.

On May 29, the country was told that the autopsy of George Floyd revealed no physical findings that support a diagnosis of traumatic asphyxiation, and that potential intoxicants and preexisting cardiovascular disease likely contributed to his death. This requires clarification. Importantly, these commonly quoted phrases did not come from a physician, but were taken from a charging document that utilized politicized interpretations of medical information. As doctors, we wish to highlight for the public that this framing of the circumstances surrounding Floyds death was at best, a misinterpretation, and at worst, a deliberate obfuscation.

A timeline of events illustrates how a series of omissions and commissions regarding Mr. Floyds initial autopsy results deceptively fractured the truth. On May 28, a statement released by the Hennepin County Medical Examiners office reported ongoing investigations and acknowledgement from the forensic pathologist that an autopsy must be interpreted in the context of the pertinent investigative information. As per standardized medical examination, Floyds underlying health conditions and toxicology screen were documented. These are ordinary findings that do not suggest causation of death, yet headlines and the May 29 charging document falsely overstated the role of Floyds coronary artery disease and hypertension, which increase the risk of stroke and heart attack over years, not minutes. Asphyxiasuffocationdoes not always demonstrate physical signs, as other physician groups have noted.

Without this important medical context, however, the public was left to reconcile manipulated medical language with the evidence they had personally witnessed. Ultimately,the initial report overstated and misrepresented the role of chronic medical conditions, inappropriately alluded to intoxicants, and failed to acknowledge the stark reality that but for the defendants knee on George Floyds neck, he would not be dead today.

By Monday, June 1, in the context of widespread political pressure,the public received two reports: the preliminary autopsy report commissioned by Floyds family by private doctors, andshortly thereaftera summary of the preliminary autopsy from the Hennepin County Medical Examiners Office. Both reports stated that the cause of Floyds death was homicide: death at the hands of another.

By inaccurately portraying the medical findings from the autopsy of George Floyd, the legal system and media emboldened white supremacy, all under the cloak of authoritative scientific rhetoric. They took standard components of a preliminary autopsy report to cast doubt, to sow uncertainty; to gaslight America into thinking we didnt see what we know we saw. In doing so, they perpetuated stereotypes about disease, risky behavior and intoxication in Black bodies to discredit a victim of murder. This state of affairs is not an outlierit is part of a patterned and tactical distortion of facts wherein autopsy reports are manipulated to bury police violence and uphold white supremacy. As Ida B. Wells said, Those who commit the murders write the reports. A similar conflict of interest between police departments and medical examiners offices continues today.

As physicians, we will not be complicit in the ongoing manipulation of medical expertise to erase government-sanctioned violence. Though we are relieved that two independent examinations invalidated the preliminary findings in the charging document and the headlines that deceitfully undermined Chauvins culpability in Floyds murder, our initial incense is not replaced by celebration.

For three days, Black Americans satand still sitwith the all-too-familiar pangs of being told that the truth is not true. Of fearing that the law would believe a physicians report over the reality they saw with their own eyes, and have lived with their own lives. It's a miscarriage of justice that deepens the cut; not only can Black people be killed with impunity; a physicians autopsy report can be twisted to replace the truth.

Medical science has long been used for the consolidation of power rather than for solidarity with the oppressed. We see how Black mothers are blamed for their own mortality in childbirth and how starkly high rates of COVID death in Black communities are preposterously misattributed to differences in hormone receptors or clotting factors; all the while letting racism off the hook.

We wish to remind fellow physicians that medical science has never been objective. It has never existed in a vacuum; there have and will always be social, political and legal ramifications of our work. Our assessments may be employed in criminal justice cases; our toxicology screens may have profound effects on the livelihood of patients; our diagnoses may perpetuate sexist and racist stereotypes. Our lack of ill intent cannot be our alibiwe must be accountable for not just our work but also how it is used, lest our medicine becomes the very weapon that harms. Medicine requires inclusion of the social context of disease in order to uphold its sacred oath of doing no harm. If we focus only on molecular pathways and neglect to articulate the role of structural inequitiesof racismin our country, our reports on the causes of death and injury in our patients will erase the roles of their oppressors.

We also write to remind our physician colleagues that the medical field is a place ripe for gaslighting. Bolstered by the perceived strength and legitimacy of a white coat and a stethoscope, our diagnoses and conclusionsabout physical or psychological abnormalities, about causes of illness and deathhave the power to eclipse reality, as weve seen in the case of George Floyd. Often, we stand by while other agents co-opt our frameworks, obscure our research and weaponize our language in the service of oppression.

The declarations, the truths, the realities of Black people in America are too often disregarded. Across the nation, Black people are suffocating under the weight of anti-Black hatred. They cannot breathe. And even as they gasp for air, structural gaslighting operates to deny the truths of the causes of their suffocation.

We write as physicians to denounce this psychological manipulation. We write to apologize for the discrimination our patients of color have received in the hospital under our watch, we write in gratitude for the tireless labor of Black activists, and we write to condemn how medicine has been weaponized in the service of white supremacy. We write to validate what Black people already knowhave always knownthat racism is a most pressing public health crisis. We pledge to fight this crisis as if our own breath depended on it.

Originally posted here:
George Floyd's Autopsy and the Structural Gaslighting of America - Scientific American

Lets take a closer look at how the molecular method can be used to discover the specific combinations of cannabis compounds beneficial in the treatment of certain medical indications such as inflammatory bowel disease, skin cancer, and colon cancer.

Over the last decade, cannabis as a medicine has become a more frequent topic of discussion. Many people initially thought it was all B.S., primarily because there were no legitimate, large-scale studies to on in the United States that one could refer to. However, in other parts of the world, namely Israel, cannabinoids have been an important research subject for the last 60 years.

And what have they discovered over in six decades, you may be asking? Well, as it turns out, cannabis is one of the most powerful medicinal plants on Earth one that can be used to treat everything from anxiety, to pain and nausea, to even certain types of cancer. What else are the scientists saying?

To give you a better idea of the depth at which cannabis is being studied, we included some experts from an interview with Professor Hinanit Koltai of Israels Volcani Research Institute, just outside of Tel Aviv. Volcani is a government funded institute focusing on agricultural research, innovation, and molecular plant science. This interview was conducted by Heli Dangur & Narkis Tessler from CannaCAST IL.

What combinations of cannabis compounds are the beneficial ones for the treatment of different medical indications (such as inflammation and cancer)? begins Prof. Kolati. For that, we combined deep chemical analysis in such a way that we could see each and every molecule present in cannabis extracts. We started to work on inflammatory bowel diseases, skin diseases, and even colon cancer and inflammation of colon polyps. We were able to identify and isolate the actual composition of molecules from cannabis which act, even synergistically, to treat those different medical indications.

We are looking first at the molecules on the plant, and looking at each and every molecule, she continued. But we do not stop there. Rather, we ask, what is happening in the human cells and human tissues once they have been treated by this certain API formulation from cannabis? What genes and pathways are activated or repressed by this treatment? And by that we are looking not just at the plant, but also at the human body, and human cells and tissues and we allocate a mode of action of these cannabis compounds.

Researcher from Volcani collaborate with numerous healthcare professionals including doctors/physicians, hospitals, pharmacists, and specialty practitioners. Who they collaborate with at any given time depends on the specific medical indication thats being studied.

Tetrahydrocannabinol, more simply known as THC, is the most dominant cannabinoid in the cannabis plant, and its also the one with psychoactive effects. Because of this, cannabis flower and products containing more than trace amounts of THC are federally prohibited. THC is much more complex than just a substance that gets you high though, it has a myriad of health benefits including pain relief, brain regeneration, sleep aid, and PTSD treatment that are hard to find in most other natural compounds.

To understand why THC works for such a seemingly random combination of medical conditions, you will have to look deep within the human body at the Endocannabinoid System (ECS). The ECS is a network of receptors that can be found throughout the bodies of all mammals. Plant based cannabinoids, known as Phytocannabinoids, only work because our bodies already create natural cannabinoids, or Endocannabinoids, and the receptors that interact with them. The ESC is believe to have a prominent role in regulating many different processes in our bodies, as well as maintaining homeostasis.

So far, researchers have been able to identify two separate endocannabinoids: 2-arachidonoylglycerol (2-AG) and anandamide (AEA), as well as two main receptors: CB1 and CB2. 2-AG is a full agonist of both the CB1 and CB2 receptors but it has a more direct association with the CB2 receptor. Because of this, 2-AG is thought to have a substantial influence over the immune system.

THC is the only major cannabinoid that directly activates both the CB1 and CB2 receptors in the brain even CBD (cannabidiol), which has become mainstream for its well-publicized medical benefits does not. Other compounds can actually interfere with the way THC impacts the CB receptors, which is precisely why dosing and ratios (THC:CBD) are incredibly pertinent when it comes to successfully using cannabis-based therapies.

Cannabidiol (CBD), is well known for being a full-on, therapeutic powerhouse. And its true, CBD can certainly be used on a wide range of conditions including epilepsy, anxiety, and inflammation. However, unlike THC, CBD only communicates indirectly with the CB receptors in our brains. CBD works by targeting numerous other systems. For example, CBDs connection with the serotonin system helps reduce anxiety, which CBDs activation of the TRPV1 receptor is the reason why it works for pain.

More recently discovered is a target called the G-protein Coupled Receptor 55, or GPR55. This is another receptor that cannabis compounds, including CBD, bind to. GPR55 appears to be a major factor in much of the pharmacology related to cannabis, including CBDs actions in preventing seizures and fighting tumors.

To summarize, the most frequently cited uses for CBD are: anxiety, pain, inflammation, seizure control, and addiction management. Motivational disorders like addiction and anxiety are incredibly complicated and hard to understand as they impact quite a few receptor systems and neural pathways all at once. Over the coming years, we can expect that researchers will continue to further study these complexities to discover the full scope of CBDs therapeutic effects within the body.

Throughout the world, most peoples lives have been affected by cancer in some way, whether they had it or they know someone who does or did. In the United States alone, roughly 1.8 million people are diagnosed with cancer each year. The most common diagnosis is breast cancer, which affects close to 277,000 women each ear. Cancer is also the most common cause of death in Canada, accounting for nearly 30% of the overall death rate. Treatment options include radiation, chemotherapy, and surgery all of which carry some potentially dangerous and long-lasting side effects.

It seems like a stretch at first, but more research is coming to the surface describing cannabis compounds ability to fight cancerous tumors. Take the most recent study on this topic, published March 31, 2020 in the Oncotarget medical journal, where they found that numerous cannabinoids CBD and THC, as well as CBC (cannabichromene) and CBN (cannabinol) can cause cell death in certain tumors.

As per the study, Treatment with the synergistic combination of the active fractions led to apoptotic cell death in My-La and HuT-78 cell lines. Moreover, the synergistic treatment also led to apoptosis in SPBL, which was significantly selective to the malignant enriched cell population within the SPBL, further implicating possible therapeutic use. Indeed, a prevalent effect of cannabinoids on cancer cells is the induction of death by apoptosis and the inhibition of cancer cell proliferation [21]. For example, THC was previously demonstrated to induce the apoptotic death of cancerous glioma cells via CB1 and CB2 receptors.

Additionally, a cannabis-based treatment for cancer might actually be within reach, thanks to the ongoing work of medical cannabis pioneer, Professor Raphael Mechoulam. Mechoulam, who is currently head of the Cannabinoids Research Multidisciplinary Center at Hebrew University in Jerusalem, is leading a research team aimed at developing cannabis-based treatments for three aggressive forms of cancer: melanoma (skin cancer), neuroblastoma (cancer originating in the surrounding and mostly neural system in children), and glaublastoma (brain cancer).

As usual, Im once again amazed at the sheer magnitude of this plants healing abilities. Not only can it be used in the treatment of so many different medical indications, its also safe, non-addictive, and generally speaking, has very minimal side effects. Once the science here in the U.S. begins to catch up, we can anticipate the introduction of new and innovative cannabis-based therapies.

Thank you for choosing CBD Testers for your cannabis-related information. Make sure to subscribe to the CBD Testers Weekly Newsletter for more articles like this one.

Like Loading...

Related

See the rest here:
Creating API Cannabinoid Therapies Using Molecular Methods - CBD Testers

As the world prepares for future waves of COVID-19, the ability to predict mutations in the novel coronavirus even before they emerge will be essential to stopping future outbreaks.

Dr. Natalie Strynadka

UBC faculty of medicines Dr. Robert Brunham and Dr. Natalie Strynadka, together with the faculty of sciences Steven Plotkinalong with a team of commercial and academic collaboratorsare one step closer to achieving this thanks to a $1.8 million grant from the Digital Technology Supercluster COVID-19 Program, which aims to find solutions to urgent health care needs across Canada arising from COVID-19.

The project, Predicting the Evolution of COVID-19, brings together experts in artificial intelligence, computer modelling and structural biology to predict changes to SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. The findings will inform the early design of effective tests, therapies and vaccines, allowing public health systems globally to prepare and ideally prevent future pandemics caused by evolving strains of the virus.

For the first six-month phase of the project, Dr. Strynadkas lab is working to generate atomic resolution experimental datausing a cutting edge biophysical toolbox including x-ray crystallography and single particle cryo-electron microscopythat will in turn help train the computational algorithms to optimally predict future mutations of the virus

We are incredibly excited about this project, and grateful to the Digital Technology Supercluster for supporting our work, says Dr. Strynadka, a professor in the faculty of medicines department of biochemistry and molecular biology. Our goal is to harness powerful computational methods to predict mutations in the SARS-CoV-2 virus. We are working to create algorithms that will hopefully keep us a step ahead of the virus and give us the ability to know where future mutations might arise.

Our goal is to harness powerful computational methods to predict mutations in the SARS-CoV-2 virus. We are working to create algorithms that will hopefully keep us a step ahead of the virus and give us the ability to know where future mutations might arise. Dr. Natalie Strynadka

Dr. Brunham, a professor in the faculty of medicines division of infectious diseases and head of the Vaccine Research Laboratory at the BC Centre for Disease Control who was involved in responding to the SARS outbreak in 2003, is lending his expertise in vaccine development.

Dr. Robert Brunham

We believe the coronavirus spike protein may very well be the basis for a vaccine for this virus, says Brunham. This work will be tremendously important in anticipating whether the virus will mutate to escape immunity generated by the vaccine.

As part of the project, Plotkins lab is designing a universal antibody therapy that the virus cant easily evade through mutation.

Given past outbreaks such as SARS and MERS, which were also caused by coronaviruses, there is no reason to assume that another pandemic wouldnt happen again, says Plotkin, a professor in the department of physics and astronomy and has held a Canada Research Chair in Theoretical Molecular Biophysics. This is a problem that is not going to go away on its own, so we have to be forward-thinking in finding solutions for it.

The Predicting the Evolution of COVID-19 project is led by Terramera, a Vancouver-based company that fuses science, nature and artificial intelligence to transform how food is grown and the economics of agriculture. Collaborating partners include D-Wave, Menten AI, Microsoft, and ProMIS Neurosciences.

View post:
Predicting the evolution of COVID-19 to help manage future outbreaks - UBC Faculty of Medicine

Treadmill tests have long been considered the gold standard for measuring a person's fitness level.

But a simple blood test may provide a more nuanced assessment, according to Stanford Medicine researchers who have been studying the body's molecular response to exercise.

Such a test eventually could be used as a complement to the treadmill assessment, which measures a person's aerobic fitness levels. That belief stems from a study the researchers conducted, collecting hundreds of thousands of molecular measurements from 36 people between ages 40-75 before and after exercise.

"Everybody knows exercise is good for you, but we really don't know what drives that at a molecular level," Michael Snyder, chair of genetics at Stanford said in a statement. "Our goal at the outset was to conduct a highly comprehensive analysis of what's happening in the body just after exercising."

Study participants had their blood drawn before completing a treadmill test, which requires people to run while wearing an oxygen-measuring masks until reaching peak oxygen consumption. They then had blood taken 2 minutes, 15 minutes, 30 minutes and 60 minutes after the exercise.

The researchers tracked molecular markers for various biological processes, including metabolism, immunity, oxidative stress and cardiovascular function. Those markers, found in blood and other bodily fluids and tissues, can be used to evaluate a person's health.

The study participants who were the most physically fit had similar molecular signatures in their blood samples taken before they exercised, researchers found. That led them to believe a blood test could be developed to measure fitness.

"Aerobic fitness is one of the best measures of longevity, so a simple blood test that can provide that information would be valuable to personal health monitoring," saidKvin Contrepois, the genetics department's director of metabolomics and lipidomics.

Most participants' molecular markers of inflammation, tissue healing and oxidative stress spiked as their bodies started to recover from the exercise, Snyder said. Two minutes after exercise, their blood samples showed that their bodies were metabolizing certain amino acids for energy, but they switched to metabolizing glucose by the 15-minute mark.

The researchers also found that participants who had a form of diabetes or pre-diabetes and were insulin-resistant had a dampened immune response after exercise.

While there appears to be a strong correlation between certain molecular markers of immunity, metabolism and muscle activity and a person's aerobic fitness, Snyder said more research is needed to fully understand the connection.

His team also is working to narrow the number of biomarkers needing to be measured to best predict a person's fitness level. The researchers have a created a proof-of-principle test based on their preliminary data and filed a patent application.

The blood test is not available to the public, but they hope to eventually offer an inexpensive and faster way to measure aerobic fitness. The study was published inCell.

Read more:
A simple blood test may be able to measure your fitness level - PhillyVoice.com