spotted by Leslie...
The modern sports ethos that we've constructed is based upon increasing advantages. Because certainly, in so many sports, we have pushed past natural human function to facilitate a more exciting game—better times, better performance. But where does an advantage become unfair? The crux of that question lays under the umbrella of ethics, which should indeed govern our rule structure within the competitive arena, but there's something in this story which specifically points toward a deep-seated fear, one we don't want to talk about in polite conversation, one which parallels historical instances of racial integration of sport and gender integration of sport. If we allow a person, one who we view as our inferior (in whatever way), to play with us, and then that person beats us, what does that say about us?
In the 1930s, Jesse Owens and Joe Louis blew the lid off common thinking of how "capable" an athlete of African descent was compared to an athlete of European descent, although the beginning of league integration took a decade more to achieve, and in some sports another three decades. It was as recent as 2003 when some members of the PGA balked at Annika Sorenstam's quest to compare her talent to the best men in the world, admitting their fear of how it might feel to have a woman beat them, an embarrassing display of archaic thinking.
In 2001, golfer Casey Martin, who played with a degenerative circulatory leg condition that made it nearly impossible to walk an 18-hole course, successfully won a Supreme Court decision allowing him to use a cart as an acceptable assistive medical device. The PGA Tour fought Martin for years, saying all pro golfers must walk because uniform rules are essential for the integrity of the sport. "Accommodating Martin with a golf cart will not fundamentally change the game," Justice John Paul Stevens wrote for a 7-2 majority.
What keeps percolating for me is this perceived discrepancy between advantage and "unfair" advantage. It's absurd to look at a star line-up of athletes and think that they all have an equal shot. We don't cry foul play when an athlete from the United States, with the best access to training facilities, coaching staffs, and nutritional science is up against someone from say…Uzkbekistan. It's tough luck that 5' 11" Tyson Gay has to line up against a 6'5" Usain Bolt.
It makes me twitch when we talk about "a level playing field." No two athletes are the same genetically and environmentally, and the mental and emotional factors they've endured in their life are relevant in their performance, too. The only reason athletes today are better than those of decades ago is because of science and technology: We know exactly what and when to feed our bodies for maximum energy, we have lighter shoes and better bikes and new rubberized track surfaces and (legal) supplements and altitude training. We are upping the ante each Olympic year with "smarter" design of an athlete's tools, both inside and outside the body.
A whopping 74 world records were broken last year between March and November with the Speedo Fastskin LZR Racer suit. 74! Do you wonder if Mark Spitz is annoyed that his times are compared to those of athletes using something he didn't have the opportunity to use or wear?
My interest was piqued in the latest version of the Fastskin LZR suit, an R&D collaboration with NASA. From the initial press releases to subsequent monthly articles, whatever I could find describing it was overwhelmingly celebratory: Writers cooed about the sharkskin-inspired biometric fiber panels for less drag in the water, and its corset-like torso construction, enabling a swimmer to compress their physique and keep better, more supported form during fatigue, making them markedly more efficient in the water.
Very, very few writers brought up any kind of ethical concern of such a tool like this suit until after the Beijing Olympics, choosing to focus on the race between swimwear companies to develop their own supersuit. Even then, the majority of articles on swimming were marveling at how Michael Phelps says he "literally felt like a rocket coming off the wall" using the device. Jason Rance, the lead designer on this Speedo suit, commented, "It's part of the evolution of the sport, and it's really exciting for swimmers. They say they feel like Superman."
After the ensuing arms-race to out-do the performance of the Speedo, the Americans and Australians led a protest to FINA, the governing body of swimming. In July of this year, FINA banned the full-length suit, having the suit stop at the knee instead, and mandated that all must be constructed of a "textile," which is in itself an incredibly ambiguous, vague rule. The ban will take effect in January 2010, and—most intriguing—FINA will allow all records set with the suits to stand.
Let's think about Tiger Woods having not one, but two LASIK surgeries to achieve 20/15 vision, when what we consider the best of natural vision to be is a mere 20/20. Before his first LASIK surgery, Woods had lost 16 straight tournaments. Immediately following the surgery, he won 7 of his next 10. Advantage through technology, or not?
On a company website he endorses, there's a quote from Tiger after his first LASIK surgery, and I found what he said remarkable on a few levels. He said:
For years I played golf with an invisible handicap, invisible to everyone but me. It was my contact lenses. My eyes would sting burn and water all the while I was trying to concentrate on championship golf. I had the Lasik procedure with a TLC laser eye center surgeon and the results were fabulous. I'm 20/20 with no contacts. My vision is so crisp I feel I can read all the subtleties of the green and look down the fairway hundreds of yards and focus perfectly on the fly. I'm very happy with the results, and grateful for my TLC center experience.
The first remarkable aspect of this is that for him, the "handicap" was the ineptitude of the contact lenses, and not the fact that he was visually impaired. (He suffered from -11 nearsightedness, considered the worst 1%, legally blind without corrective glasses or contacts.) The second is his own literal description of being able to now clearly see—without the impediment of burning, stinging eyes—hundreds of yards down the fairway thanks to his technological altering. He himself declares the advantage.
"Invisible to everyone but me." So is that why nobody's up in arms, the fact that you can't see his augmentation? Is that why nobody's challenging this medical method which assists him in achieving dominance in golf? Of course, in the same way that my running legs don't power themselves, Tiger's new eyes don't power and execute a beautiful swing. His athletic talent is further revealed and enabled than what it would have been under the limits of nature, thanks to technology.
Advantage is just something that is part of sports. No athletes are created equal. They simply aren't, due to a multitude of factors including geography, access to training, facilities, health care, injury prevention, and sure, technology.
I really don't know how we compare world records of today to those of 50 years ago. A modern climber's ascent to Everest has innumerable inherent differences than an ascent of a climber who didn't have access to lighter tanks, comfortable breathable fibers against the skin, medical support at base camp, etc. The competitive benchmarks in that sport have changed from simply being, "Can you climb the mountain?" to "Can you climb it with oxygen, or without?" A wooden tennis racket isn't the same thing as the graphite ones used now. We wholeheartedly accept titanium golf clubs, LASIK surgery, the invention of new pitches, better injury prevention and repair, titanium knee and hip replacements, Tommy John surgery (surprisingly even in Youth Leagues), and a notable shift in the size of the average NFL player.
Where do we draw this ethical line on performance enhancement? I'm not sure I can answer that right now. What I will say is that I don't think it's useful to have this discussion around the existing Cheetah Leg, confusing the current non-enhanced technology with future prosthetics that will indeed provide augmentation. As with all evolution in sport, let's decide the parameters of competition when the technology actually exists, when we have metrics that inform us as to what extent augmentation is a certainty. Conjecture has no place in this discussion.
Maybe our acceptance of Tiger's LASIK super vision is really answered in the question, "Can everyone have access to it?" In other words, perhaps because the average citizen out there on the street can get laser surgery, it's okay for Tiger to get it, too, whereas the nature of a bionic prosthetic is still viewed as exclusive, and having to wear one isn't exactly a position the average citizen covets.
What's going to happen in the future, especially with the rise of more capable prostheses? The human leg is actually a series of internal motors and springs, so the fact that external motors aren't allowed in track is kind of interesting. (Case in point: Dean Kamen placed 14 motors in his new design of the artificial arm to simulate human function.)
In the not-so-distant future, designers will be able to build a prosthetic leg with a chip in it that they can program to accurately simulate human performance thresholds. (Since we know that no two "able-bodied" athletes have the same bodies, and therefore what they can achieve with their bodies are different, will they average out individual "able-bodied" thresholds to get those metrics? Will they cap how fast they imagine the fastest man on earth to be at 9.58? That time was unimaginable even 18 months ago, when Bolt then set the new WR at 9.72.)
The chip used in a prosthetic that will dictate "acceptable human" metric-based output is what will be allowed in the Olympic standard; meanwhile, the Paralympics will be no holds barred. In an ironic, amazing cultural flip, you will see runners in the Paralympics going faster than those in the Olympics. Now won't that be an interesting comment on "dis"ability?
Aimee Mullins is an athlete, speaker, actress and model we met at TEDMED. She's also the guest editor for our theme week This Cyborg Life. Read her bio here.
This week, Gizmodo is exploring the enhanced human future in a segment we call This Cyborg Life. It's about what happens when we treat our body less as a sacred object and more as what it is: Nature's ultimate machine.
Is it right that disabled athletes are an "inspiration" when they are trailing behind, but the second a disabled athlete beats or competes on the same level as able bodied athletes they're called cheaters? As the author discusses, how is an amputee running with a prosthesis any different from Tiger Woods golfing after having LASIK surgery to correct his vision? Is it ethically appropriate to distinguish between athletes who have disadvantages such as poor eyesight or amputated limbs, and athletes who are "able bodied"? Where do we draw the line?
Sunday, November 29, 2009
End of Life: Man emerges from coma 23 years later
from NIkhil:
Trapped 'coma' man: How was he misdiagnosed?
By Mark Tutton, CNN
November 24, 2009 -- Updated 1651 GMT (0051 HKT)
Click to play
23 year coma patient communicates
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
* Man diagnosed as being in vegetative state for 23 years was fully conscious
* Study found that 41 percent of patients in minimally-conscious state were wrongly diagnosed
* Lack of careful assessment can contribute to misdiagnosis
London, England (CNN) -- A Belgian car crash victim who was misdiagnosed as being in a vegetative state for 23 years was conscious the whole time, it has emerged.
For years he listened to the conversations going on around him but he was unable to communicate with his doctors or family.
Rom Houben was 23 at the time of the near-fatal car crash in 1983 that left him paralyzed. Doctors presumed he was in a vegetative state following the accident and they believed he could feel and hear nothing.
Neurologist Dr.Steven Laureys of the University of Liege, in Belgium carried out a brain scan using state-of-the art scanning system and discovered that Houben's brain was fully functional.
In an interview with the UK's ITV news Monday, Rom communicated by typing on a special keyboard attached to his wheelchair, and aided by his carer.
He said: "At some moments it was terribly lonely but I knew my family was believing in me."
"I simply want to enjoy life," he added. "I notice a big difference now I'm back in contact with the world."
Video: Assessing comas
He was conscious for a long time, but it's difficult to know for how long.
--Caroline Schnakers, Coma Science Group
RELATED TOPICS
* Brain Injuries
* Health Care Issues
* Health and Fitness
The case has highlighted the difficulties doctors face when trying to diagnose the level of consciousness of a patient in a coma-like state.
Watch Laureys explain how comas are assessed
A study carried out last year on 103 patients by Laureys and his colleagues at Liege's Coma Science Group found that 41 percent of patients in a Minimally Conscious State (MCS) were misdiagnosed as being in the much more serious Vegetative State (VS).
Dr. Daniel Hanley, professor of neurology at Johns Hopkins Medicine, in Maryland, told CNN that VS is a coma-like state in which patients have a sleep and wake cycle, and can show reflex chewing, swallowing and blinking, but don't respond to language or stimulation.
Patients in MCS occasionally show they are aware of their environment, for example moving to face a doctor when asked, but only infrequently.
Laureys said of his research, "Differentiating the vegetative from the minimally conscious state is often one of the most challenging tasks facing clinicians involved in the care of patients with disorders of consciousness.
"Misdiagnosis can lead to grave consequences, especially in end-of-life decision-making."
Watch one iReporter's reaction to the situation
Caroline Schnakers, who carried out the research with Laureys, told CNN that one probable reason for the high rate of misdiagnosis is that doctors often base their diagnosis on observations of a patient's behavior, rather than assessing patients using standardized tests.
"Assessment is usually behavioral," Schnakers told CNN. "For example, if you come into a room and a patient's eyes follow you, or if they smile when you make a joke, they are conscious -- but it doesn't mean they will still be able to do that one hour later."
Schnakers said that using standardized tests could reduce incidents of misdiagnosis.
The Glasgow Coma Scale is a standardized test that classifies a patient's motor, verbal and eye response on a graded scale. It was widely used until about 2000 to classify a patient's level of consciousness, but Schnakers says it may contribute to misdiagnosis.
She told CNN, "In our study we used the JFK Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R), which is standardized for detecting signs of consciousness in someone recovering from a coma. It's very sensitive and avoided a lot more misdiagnosis than the Glasgow Coma Scale."
The CRS-R was developed at the JFK Johnson Rehabilitation Institute and grades patients' verbalization, communication, motor function, visual function and response to sound.
Diagnosis can be further complicated by another condition, called Locked-In Syndrome. Much less common than VS or MCS, patients in a locked-in state are totally aware of their environment but have minimal reflexive movements, typically only being able to blink their eyes. Hanley told CNN that Houben may have been in a locked-in state.
But Houben's diagnosis may have been made more difficult by the fact that he was partly paralyzed, meaning he was unable to show a motor response.
"He was conscious for a long time, but it's difficult to know for how long," said Schnakers. "Maybe he had a period of VS, but you wouldn't know how long it lasted, even if you ask a patient how long they were in VS or MCS."
Hanley explained that diagnosis is also more difficult if a patient is being treated with sedative drugs, which can cause severe neurological impairment that can mimic VS. But even given those considerations, Hanley says neurologists should easily be able to tell the difference between a patient in VS and MCS.
Dr. Nicholas Schiff, of the Weill Cornell Medical Center, in New York, told CNN that the risk of misdiagnosis is increased because a patient's condition can change over a long period and the transition from VS to MS often takes place outside the time window of careful assessment.
"The 'standard' is probably transfer to nursing home from acute care at an early stage, where an accurate diagnosis of VS gets replaced at the nursing home with an inaccurate prognosis of permanent VS, explicitly or implicitly," Schiff said.
"Because there are no standards for reassessment or any access to rehabilitation centers for many of these patients this is the status quo."
CNN's Caleb Hellerman contributed to this story.
Trapped 'coma' man: How was he misdiagnosed?
By Mark Tutton, CNN
November 24, 2009 -- Updated 1651 GMT (0051 HKT)
Click to play
23 year coma patient communicates
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
* Man diagnosed as being in vegetative state for 23 years was fully conscious
* Study found that 41 percent of patients in minimally-conscious state were wrongly diagnosed
* Lack of careful assessment can contribute to misdiagnosis
London, England (CNN) -- A Belgian car crash victim who was misdiagnosed as being in a vegetative state for 23 years was conscious the whole time, it has emerged.
For years he listened to the conversations going on around him but he was unable to communicate with his doctors or family.
Rom Houben was 23 at the time of the near-fatal car crash in 1983 that left him paralyzed. Doctors presumed he was in a vegetative state following the accident and they believed he could feel and hear nothing.
Neurologist Dr.Steven Laureys of the University of Liege, in Belgium carried out a brain scan using state-of-the art scanning system and discovered that Houben's brain was fully functional.
In an interview with the UK's ITV news Monday, Rom communicated by typing on a special keyboard attached to his wheelchair, and aided by his carer.
He said: "At some moments it was terribly lonely but I knew my family was believing in me."
"I simply want to enjoy life," he added. "I notice a big difference now I'm back in contact with the world."
Video: Assessing comas
He was conscious for a long time, but it's difficult to know for how long.
--Caroline Schnakers, Coma Science Group
RELATED TOPICS
* Brain Injuries
* Health Care Issues
* Health and Fitness
The case has highlighted the difficulties doctors face when trying to diagnose the level of consciousness of a patient in a coma-like state.
Watch Laureys explain how comas are assessed
A study carried out last year on 103 patients by Laureys and his colleagues at Liege's Coma Science Group found that 41 percent of patients in a Minimally Conscious State (MCS) were misdiagnosed as being in the much more serious Vegetative State (VS).
Dr. Daniel Hanley, professor of neurology at Johns Hopkins Medicine, in Maryland, told CNN that VS is a coma-like state in which patients have a sleep and wake cycle, and can show reflex chewing, swallowing and blinking, but don't respond to language or stimulation.
Patients in MCS occasionally show they are aware of their environment, for example moving to face a doctor when asked, but only infrequently.
Laureys said of his research, "Differentiating the vegetative from the minimally conscious state is often one of the most challenging tasks facing clinicians involved in the care of patients with disorders of consciousness.
"Misdiagnosis can lead to grave consequences, especially in end-of-life decision-making."
Watch one iReporter's reaction to the situation
Caroline Schnakers, who carried out the research with Laureys, told CNN that one probable reason for the high rate of misdiagnosis is that doctors often base their diagnosis on observations of a patient's behavior, rather than assessing patients using standardized tests.
"Assessment is usually behavioral," Schnakers told CNN. "For example, if you come into a room and a patient's eyes follow you, or if they smile when you make a joke, they are conscious -- but it doesn't mean they will still be able to do that one hour later."
Schnakers said that using standardized tests could reduce incidents of misdiagnosis.
The Glasgow Coma Scale is a standardized test that classifies a patient's motor, verbal and eye response on a graded scale. It was widely used until about 2000 to classify a patient's level of consciousness, but Schnakers says it may contribute to misdiagnosis.
She told CNN, "In our study we used the JFK Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R), which is standardized for detecting signs of consciousness in someone recovering from a coma. It's very sensitive and avoided a lot more misdiagnosis than the Glasgow Coma Scale."
The CRS-R was developed at the JFK Johnson Rehabilitation Institute and grades patients' verbalization, communication, motor function, visual function and response to sound.
Diagnosis can be further complicated by another condition, called Locked-In Syndrome. Much less common than VS or MCS, patients in a locked-in state are totally aware of their environment but have minimal reflexive movements, typically only being able to blink their eyes. Hanley told CNN that Houben may have been in a locked-in state.
But Houben's diagnosis may have been made more difficult by the fact that he was partly paralyzed, meaning he was unable to show a motor response.
"He was conscious for a long time, but it's difficult to know for how long," said Schnakers. "Maybe he had a period of VS, but you wouldn't know how long it lasted, even if you ask a patient how long they were in VS or MCS."
Hanley explained that diagnosis is also more difficult if a patient is being treated with sedative drugs, which can cause severe neurological impairment that can mimic VS. But even given those considerations, Hanley says neurologists should easily be able to tell the difference between a patient in VS and MCS.
Dr. Nicholas Schiff, of the Weill Cornell Medical Center, in New York, told CNN that the risk of misdiagnosis is increased because a patient's condition can change over a long period and the transition from VS to MS often takes place outside the time window of careful assessment.
"The 'standard' is probably transfer to nursing home from acute care at an early stage, where an accurate diagnosis of VS gets replaced at the nursing home with an inaccurate prognosis of permanent VS, explicitly or implicitly," Schiff said.
"Because there are no standards for reassessment or any access to rehabilitation centers for many of these patients this is the status quo."
CNN's Caleb Hellerman contributed to this story.
Monday, November 23, 2009
stem cell human research
Human trials of ES cell research could begin soon
23 November 2009
By Alison Cranage
Appeared in BioNews 535
Stem cell therapy came one step closer to being tested for the first time in people this week, as a US company applied to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for a licence to start a clinical trial. The embryonic stem (ES) cell therapy is being developed to treat Stargardt, a currently incurable disease that causes blindness in young people.
Advanced Cell Technology, a Massachusetts-based firm, has tested the treatment on rats and mice which model the human Stargardt disease, and found it prevented further vision loss without adverse side effects.
Stargardt's macular degeneration destroys a part of the retina, leading to loss of vision. The treatment involves a single injection of a type of retinal cell that supports the photoreceptors needed for vision. The researchers have generated the retinal cells from ES cells derived from day-old human embryos left over from IVF (in vitro fertilisation) treatment and donated for research purposes. ES cells have the potential to develop into any type of cell in the body and, as such, scientists envisage they could be used to mend any broken part of the body, from kidney and liver to brain. They hold promise as a treatment for a range of diseases from Parkinson's to heart disease. However, using ES cells in medical research is controversial as many view the embryo as sacrosanct and inviolable, and oppose the use of human embryos in research.
'After years of research and political debate, we're finally on the verge of showing the potential clinical value of embryonic stem cells,' said Dr Robert Lanza, the chief scientific officer at Advanced Cell Technology. He added: 'We've seen absolutely no adverse effects whatsoever in any of the preclinical experiments and our cells are more than 99.9 per cent pure.'
'Our research clearly shows that stem cell-derived retinal cells can rescue visual function in animals that otherwise would have gone blind. We are hopeful that the cells will be similarly efficacious in patients,' Dr Lanza continued.
The trials would involve 12 Stargardt patients, and could begin early next year if the FDA grants approval. The clinical trial could be the first in the world as US company Geron, the only company so far to have received a licence from the FDA, has delayed the start of its clinical trial until the end of next year due to safety problems.
A similar proposal to treat age-related macular degeneration with ES cells is being developed by scientists in the UK led by Professor Pete Coffey of University College London, but this clinical trial is unlikely to start until early 2011.
RELATED ARTICLES FROM THE BIONEWS ARCHIVE
Spinal stem cell treatment gets go ahead from the FDA
08 November 2009 - by Jay Stone
American company Geron Corporation (GC) has been given permission to resume its clinical trials testing the embryonic stem cell treatment GRNPOC1....[Read More]
FDA approves trial of neural stem cells to treat Lou Gehrig’s disease
28 September 2009 - by Marianne Neary
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted approval to NeuralStem Inc., a Maryland-based biotherapeutics company, to conduct the first human trial using neural stem cells for treatment of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). ALS is a type of motor neuron disease often referred to as 'Lou Gehrig's' and 'Maladie de Charcot'. The late-onset condition, of unknown cause, affects approximately two in 100,000 people, including the UK physicist Stephen Hawking and US rock gui...[Read More]
Geron issues statement on halted stem cell trial
06 September 2009 - by Nishat Hyder
Information has come to light regarding the US Food and Drug Adminstration (FDA)'s freeze on the clinical trails of GRNOPC1, a groundbreaking therapy for spinal cord injury derived from human embryonic stem (ES) cells being undertaken by biotech company Geron...[Read More]
US company's stem cell trial put on hold
23 August 2009 - by Alison Cranage
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has delayed the start of a clinical trial that plans to use human embryonic stem cell(ES) cells to treat spinal cord injury. The trial is being run by Californian based company Geron. The FDA originally gave the go-ahead for the trial in January, but now has halted the start in order to review new data submitted by Geron....[Read More]
SOURCES & REFERENCES
Company seeks FDA permission to conduct clinical trial using human embryonic stem cells
LA Times | 19 November 2009
Embryonic stem cells to cure eye disease
Nature blogs | 19 November 2009
First human trials for stem cell blindness therapy
The Daily Telegraph | 20 November 2009
Huge potential balanced against ethical fears
The Independent | 20 November 2009
People facing blindness may pioneer stem-cell therapy
The Times | 20 November 2009
Stem cells: the first human trial
The Independent | 20 November 2009
HAVE YOUR SAY
Be the first to leave a comment.
You need to Login or Register to view or add comments.
By posting a comment you agree to abide by the BioNews terms and conditions
23 November 2009
By Alison Cranage
Appeared in BioNews 535
Stem cell therapy came one step closer to being tested for the first time in people this week, as a US company applied to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for a licence to start a clinical trial. The embryonic stem (ES) cell therapy is being developed to treat Stargardt, a currently incurable disease that causes blindness in young people.
Advanced Cell Technology, a Massachusetts-based firm, has tested the treatment on rats and mice which model the human Stargardt disease, and found it prevented further vision loss without adverse side effects.
Stargardt's macular degeneration destroys a part of the retina, leading to loss of vision. The treatment involves a single injection of a type of retinal cell that supports the photoreceptors needed for vision. The researchers have generated the retinal cells from ES cells derived from day-old human embryos left over from IVF (in vitro fertilisation) treatment and donated for research purposes. ES cells have the potential to develop into any type of cell in the body and, as such, scientists envisage they could be used to mend any broken part of the body, from kidney and liver to brain. They hold promise as a treatment for a range of diseases from Parkinson's to heart disease. However, using ES cells in medical research is controversial as many view the embryo as sacrosanct and inviolable, and oppose the use of human embryos in research.
'After years of research and political debate, we're finally on the verge of showing the potential clinical value of embryonic stem cells,' said Dr Robert Lanza, the chief scientific officer at Advanced Cell Technology. He added: 'We've seen absolutely no adverse effects whatsoever in any of the preclinical experiments and our cells are more than 99.9 per cent pure.'
'Our research clearly shows that stem cell-derived retinal cells can rescue visual function in animals that otherwise would have gone blind. We are hopeful that the cells will be similarly efficacious in patients,' Dr Lanza continued.
The trials would involve 12 Stargardt patients, and could begin early next year if the FDA grants approval. The clinical trial could be the first in the world as US company Geron, the only company so far to have received a licence from the FDA, has delayed the start of its clinical trial until the end of next year due to safety problems.
A similar proposal to treat age-related macular degeneration with ES cells is being developed by scientists in the UK led by Professor Pete Coffey of University College London, but this clinical trial is unlikely to start until early 2011.
RELATED ARTICLES FROM THE BIONEWS ARCHIVE
Spinal stem cell treatment gets go ahead from the FDA
08 November 2009 - by Jay Stone
American company Geron Corporation (GC) has been given permission to resume its clinical trials testing the embryonic stem cell treatment GRNPOC1....[Read More]
FDA approves trial of neural stem cells to treat Lou Gehrig’s disease
28 September 2009 - by Marianne Neary
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted approval to NeuralStem Inc., a Maryland-based biotherapeutics company, to conduct the first human trial using neural stem cells for treatment of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). ALS is a type of motor neuron disease often referred to as 'Lou Gehrig's' and 'Maladie de Charcot'. The late-onset condition, of unknown cause, affects approximately two in 100,000 people, including the UK physicist Stephen Hawking and US rock gui...[Read More]
Geron issues statement on halted stem cell trial
06 September 2009 - by Nishat Hyder
Information has come to light regarding the US Food and Drug Adminstration (FDA)'s freeze on the clinical trails of GRNOPC1, a groundbreaking therapy for spinal cord injury derived from human embryonic stem (ES) cells being undertaken by biotech company Geron...[Read More]
US company's stem cell trial put on hold
23 August 2009 - by Alison Cranage
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has delayed the start of a clinical trial that plans to use human embryonic stem cell(ES) cells to treat spinal cord injury. The trial is being run by Californian based company Geron. The FDA originally gave the go-ahead for the trial in January, but now has halted the start in order to review new data submitted by Geron....[Read More]
SOURCES & REFERENCES
Company seeks FDA permission to conduct clinical trial using human embryonic stem cells
LA Times | 19 November 2009
Embryonic stem cells to cure eye disease
Nature blogs | 19 November 2009
First human trials for stem cell blindness therapy
The Daily Telegraph | 20 November 2009
Huge potential balanced against ethical fears
The Independent | 20 November 2009
People facing blindness may pioneer stem-cell therapy
The Times | 20 November 2009
Stem cells: the first human trial
The Independent | 20 November 2009
HAVE YOUR SAY
Be the first to leave a comment.
You need to Login or Register to view or add comments.
By posting a comment you agree to abide by the BioNews terms and conditions
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
fyi
What About Ethics?
November 18, 2009
A group of doctors, medical ethicists, and others sent NIH director Francis Collins a letter yesterday urging the NIH "to fund studies on medical ethics, conflicts of interest in medicine and research, and prescribing behavior." The 96 authors add that moving research funded by NIH "into clinical practice is strongly affected by the complex web of relationships that exists among industry, academicians, medical educators and clinicians." The letter was organized by PharmedOut, an independent project run by Georgetown University's Adriane Fugh-Berman and she told ScienceInsider that many ethics research projects aren't funded by NIH. "I think that NIH has thought that it doesn't comes under their domain, and the trouble is that it doesn't come under anybody's domain," she says.
The Hastings Center's Thomas Murray, who did not sign the letter, says that Collins may consider the request. "The letter is actually quite gentle and modest in what it requests," he says to the Chronicle of Higher Education.
November 18, 2009
A group of doctors, medical ethicists, and others sent NIH director Francis Collins a letter yesterday urging the NIH "to fund studies on medical ethics, conflicts of interest in medicine and research, and prescribing behavior." The 96 authors add that moving research funded by NIH "into clinical practice is strongly affected by the complex web of relationships that exists among industry, academicians, medical educators and clinicians." The letter was organized by PharmedOut, an independent project run by Georgetown University's Adriane Fugh-Berman and she told ScienceInsider that many ethics research projects aren't funded by NIH. "I think that NIH has thought that it doesn't comes under their domain, and the trouble is that it doesn't come under anybody's domain," she says.
The Hastings Center's Thomas Murray, who did not sign the letter, says that Collins may consider the request. "The letter is actually quite gentle and modest in what it requests," he says to the Chronicle of Higher Education.
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
BIO NEWS- Many new articles
http://www.bionews.org.uk/
TOP NEWS STORIES
Trial to re-grow breasts after cancer surgery planned for next year
16 November 2009 - by Charlotte Maden
Scientists in Australia have developed a way for women diagnosed with breast cancer to regrow their breasts after a mastectomy. The group at the Bernard O'Brien Institute of Microsurgery in Melbourne plan to start clinical trials with the technique next year. It is believed that this will be only the second time in the world that tissue engineering has been carried out in a human....[Read More]
Stem cell treatment in irradiated rats offers hope for radiotherapy patients
16 November 2009 - by Marianne Neary
Following radiation to the head, rats transplanted with stem cells had greater improvements in learning and memory, showed a research team at the University of California....[Read More]
Public consulted on research involving animals with human genes
16 November 2009 - by Ben Jones
The UK's Academy of Medical Sciences has launches a broad study into the scientific, social, ethical and legal implications of research on animals containing human genetic material. Such animals, mostly mice, are found in labs across the UK and mostly consist of animals into whose DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) single sequences of human genetic code have been inserted. However, with developing stem cell and other technologies, there is a perceived ethical crisis point ahead which t...[Read More]
TOP NEWS STORIES
Trial to re-grow breasts after cancer surgery planned for next year
16 November 2009 - by Charlotte Maden
Scientists in Australia have developed a way for women diagnosed with breast cancer to regrow their breasts after a mastectomy. The group at the Bernard O'Brien Institute of Microsurgery in Melbourne plan to start clinical trials with the technique next year. It is believed that this will be only the second time in the world that tissue engineering has been carried out in a human....[Read More]
Stem cell treatment in irradiated rats offers hope for radiotherapy patients
16 November 2009 - by Marianne Neary
Following radiation to the head, rats transplanted with stem cells had greater improvements in learning and memory, showed a research team at the University of California....[Read More]
Public consulted on research involving animals with human genes
16 November 2009 - by Ben Jones
The UK's Academy of Medical Sciences has launches a broad study into the scientific, social, ethical and legal implications of research on animals containing human genetic material. Such animals, mostly mice, are found in labs across the UK and mostly consist of animals into whose DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) single sequences of human genetic code have been inserted. However, with developing stem cell and other technologies, there is a perceived ethical crisis point ahead which t...[Read More]
Monday, November 16, 2009
genetic testing the deceased
Families Could Benefit From Gene Tests in Sudden Cardiac Death Victims Identifying mutation in deceased cuts costs for evaluating risk in relatives, study shows
Posted November 15, 2009
SUNDAY, Nov. 15 (HealthDay News) -- Genetic testing of people who've suffered sudden unexplained death is an effective and cost-efficient way of identifying genetic mutations that may put surviving relatives at increased risk for potentially deadly heart rhythm disturbances, a new study suggests.
Genetic defects that can cause sudden cardiac death occur in 25 percent to 30 percent of victims of sudden unexplained death. The current recommended approach is for first-degree relatives of sudden unexplained death victims to undergo comprehensive cardiac testing.
In this study, U.S. researchers compared the results and costs of postmortem genetic/molecular autopsy testing in 146 sudden unexplained death cases and found that 40 of the victims (26.7 percent) had either a catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia mutation (18 people) or a long QT syndrome mutation (22 people). Both are known to cause sudden death.
The researchers then estimated the costs of testing the 584 relatives of the sudden unexplained death victims. The total cost of postmortem genetic testing, genetic confirmation testing of the 160 relatives of victims who tested positive for mutations, and cardiac tests for both relatives of mutation-positive and mutation-negative sudden unexplained death victims was $6.78 million.
In comparison, comprehensive cardiac testing for all 584 relatives of the sudden unexplained death victims, followed by directed genetic testing, would have been more than $7.7 million.
"With less than 150 sudden unexplained death cases, use of a cardiac channel molecular autopsy would be estimated to save almost $1 million indicating a much less expensive way of evaluating those left behind," study co-author David Tester, a senior research technologist at Windland Smith Rice Sudden Death Genomics Laboratory, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn., said in a news release.
"If you identify a mutation in a sudden unexplained death victim, you can do a simple genetic test in first-degree relatives to assess their risk and perform a disorder-directed clinical evaluation rather than a full clinical evaluation. If a relative is negative for the causative mutation, they may not need to undergo further clinical evaluation at all, and that saves money," Tester explained.
The study was to be presented Sunday at the American Heart Association's annual meeting in Orlando, Fla.
Posted November 15, 2009
SUNDAY, Nov. 15 (HealthDay News) -- Genetic testing of people who've suffered sudden unexplained death is an effective and cost-efficient way of identifying genetic mutations that may put surviving relatives at increased risk for potentially deadly heart rhythm disturbances, a new study suggests.
Genetic defects that can cause sudden cardiac death occur in 25 percent to 30 percent of victims of sudden unexplained death. The current recommended approach is for first-degree relatives of sudden unexplained death victims to undergo comprehensive cardiac testing.
In this study, U.S. researchers compared the results and costs of postmortem genetic/molecular autopsy testing in 146 sudden unexplained death cases and found that 40 of the victims (26.7 percent) had either a catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia mutation (18 people) or a long QT syndrome mutation (22 people). Both are known to cause sudden death.
The researchers then estimated the costs of testing the 584 relatives of the sudden unexplained death victims. The total cost of postmortem genetic testing, genetic confirmation testing of the 160 relatives of victims who tested positive for mutations, and cardiac tests for both relatives of mutation-positive and mutation-negative sudden unexplained death victims was $6.78 million.
In comparison, comprehensive cardiac testing for all 584 relatives of the sudden unexplained death victims, followed by directed genetic testing, would have been more than $7.7 million.
"With less than 150 sudden unexplained death cases, use of a cardiac channel molecular autopsy would be estimated to save almost $1 million indicating a much less expensive way of evaluating those left behind," study co-author David Tester, a senior research technologist at Windland Smith Rice Sudden Death Genomics Laboratory, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn., said in a news release.
"If you identify a mutation in a sudden unexplained death victim, you can do a simple genetic test in first-degree relatives to assess their risk and perform a disorder-directed clinical evaluation rather than a full clinical evaluation. If a relative is negative for the causative mutation, they may not need to undergo further clinical evaluation at all, and that saves money," Tester explained.
The study was to be presented Sunday at the American Heart Association's annual meeting in Orlando, Fla.
Monday, November 9, 2009
sample ethical issue
An Ethical Question: Does a Nazi Deserve a Place Among Philosophers?
Published: November 8, 2009
By PATRICIA COHEN
For decades the German philosopher Martin Heidegger has been the subject of passionate debate. His critique of Western thought and technology has penetrated deeply into architecture, psychology and literary theory and inspired some of the most influential intellectual movements of the 20th century. Yet he was also a fervent Nazi.
Now a soon-to-be published book in English has revived the long-running debate about whether the man can be separated from his philosophy. Drawing on new evidence, the author, Emmanuel Faye, argues fascist and racist ideas are so woven into the fabric of Heidegger’s theories that they no longer deserve to be called philosophy. As a result Mr. Faye declares, Heidegger’s works and the many fields built on them need to be re-examined lest they spread sinister ideas as dangerous to modern thought as “the Nazi movement was to the physical existence of the exterminated peoples.”
First published in France in 2005, the book, “Heidegger: The Introduction of Nazism Into Philosophy,” calls on philosophy professors to treat Heidegger’s writings like hate speech. Libraries, too, should stop classifying Heidegger’s collected works (which have been sanitized and abridged by his family) as philosophy and instead include them under the history of Nazism. These measures would function as a warning label, like a skull-and-crossbones on a bottle of poison, to prevent the careless spread of his most odious ideas, which Mr. Faye lists as the exaltation of the state over the individual, the impossibility of morality, anti-humanism and racial purity.
The book is the most radical attack yet on Heidegger (1889-1976) and would upend the philosophical field’s treatment of his work in the United States, and even more so in France, where Heidegger has frequently been required reading for an advanced degree. Mr. Faye, an associate professor at the University of Paris, Nanterre, not only wants to drum Heidegger from the ranks of philosophers, he wants to challenge his colleagues to rethink the very purpose of philosophy and its relationship to ethics.
At the same time scholars in disciplines as far flung as poetry and psychoanalysis would be obliged to reconsider their use of Heidegger’s ideas. Although Mr. Faye talks about the close connection between Heidegger and current right-wing extremist politics, left-wing intellectuals have more frequently been inspired by his ideas. Existentialism and postmodernism as well as attendant attacks on colonialism, atomic weapons, ecological ruin and universal notions of morality are all based on his critique of the Western cultural tradition and reason.
Richard Wolin, the author of several books on Heidegger and a close reader of the Faye book, said he is not convinced Heidegger’s thought is as thoroughly tainted by Nazism as Mr. Faye argues. Nonetheless he recognizes how far Heidegger’s ideas have spilled into the larger culture.
“I’m not by any means dismissing any of these fields because of Heidegger’s influence,” he wrote in an e-mail message referring to postmodernism’s influence across the academy. “I’m merely saying that we should know more about the ideological residues and connotations of a thinker like Heidegger before we accept his discourse ready-made or naïvely.”
Although the English text published by Yale University Press won’t be out in the United States for a few weeks, it is already making waves, as signaled by an essay in The Chronicle Review, the opinion and ideas journal of The Chronicle of Higher Education. In an essay titled “Heil Heidegger!” Carlin Romano, a critic for The Review, called Heidegger a “Black Forest babbler” and fraud who was “overrated in his prime” and “bizarrely venerated by acolytes even now.”
Few people have read the book, but the article has generated more than 150 online comments from vehement advocates and detractors, more than any other piece The Review has printed this year, said Liz McMillen, the editor. Others joined the fray.
Ron Rosenbaum, the author of “Explaining Hitler,” even extended the argument to the German Jewish philosopher Hannah Arendt, a former student and lover of Heidegger’s. Citing a recent essay by the historian Bernard Wasserstein, Mr. Rosenbaum wrote in Slate.com that Arendt’s thinking about the Holocaust and her famous formulation, “the banality of evil,” were contaminated by Heidegger and other anti-Semitic writings.
Commentators heatedly rejected the notion that significant ideas could not be distilled from vile ones. Writing for The New Republic’s Web site, tnr.com, Damon Linker declared it was “absurd” to “implicate Heidegger’s entire philosophical corpus.
He and others echoed the views of the influential American philosopher Richard Rorty, who once wrote in The New York Times, “You cannot read most of the important philosophers of recent times without taking Heidegger’s thought into account.” Mr. Rorty added, however, that “the smell of smoke from the crematories” will “linger on their pages.”
In Mr. Faye’s eyes Heidegger’s philosophy cannot be separated from his politics in the way, say, T.S. Eliot’s poetic skills or D. W. Griffith’s cinematic technique might be appraised independently of his own beliefs. While he doesn’t dispute Heidegger’s place in the intellectual pantheon, Mr. Faye reviews his unpublished lectures and concludes his philosophy was based on the same ideas as National Socialism.
Without understanding the soil in which Heidegger’s philosophy is rooted, Mr. Faye argues, people may not realize that his ideas can grow in troubling directions. Heidegger’s dictum to be authentic and free oneself from conventional restraints, for example, can lead to a rejection of morality. The denunciation of reason and soulless modernism can devolve into crude anti-intellectualism and the glorification of “blood and soil.”
Passions about Heidegger have simmered for years. He joined the Nazi party in 1933 when he became rector of Freiburg University and oversaw the dismissal of all Jewish professors. After the war Heidegger was banned by a de-Nazification tribunal from teaching. In the 1950s Arendt re-established ties with him and labored to revive his reputation.
Heidegger was a critic of modern technological society and of the Western philosophical tradition that gave rise to it. He argued that we must overcome this tradition and rethink the very nature of human existence or being.
His prose is so dense that some scholars have said it could be interpreted to mean anything, while others have dismissed it altogether as gibberish. He is nonetheless widely considered to be one of the century’s greatest and most influential thinkers.
Theologians have used his critique of reason to explain the leap of faith; architects have been inspired by his rejection of conventional rules to introduce a buffet of new styles, materials and shapes to building design. His criticism of mechanistic technology has attracted environmentalists and planners.
A verbal brawl over Heidegger’s theories should not be surprising, though. After all, the classic American position on how liberal societies should treat dangerous ideas is with more discussion.
That is precisely what Mr. Faye says he wants. In his view teaching Heidegger’s ideas without disclosing his deep Nazi sympathies is like showing a child a brilliant fireworks display without warning that an ignited rocket can also blow up in someone’s face.
Published: November 8, 2009
By PATRICIA COHEN
For decades the German philosopher Martin Heidegger has been the subject of passionate debate. His critique of Western thought and technology has penetrated deeply into architecture, psychology and literary theory and inspired some of the most influential intellectual movements of the 20th century. Yet he was also a fervent Nazi.
Now a soon-to-be published book in English has revived the long-running debate about whether the man can be separated from his philosophy. Drawing on new evidence, the author, Emmanuel Faye, argues fascist and racist ideas are so woven into the fabric of Heidegger’s theories that they no longer deserve to be called philosophy. As a result Mr. Faye declares, Heidegger’s works and the many fields built on them need to be re-examined lest they spread sinister ideas as dangerous to modern thought as “the Nazi movement was to the physical existence of the exterminated peoples.”
First published in France in 2005, the book, “Heidegger: The Introduction of Nazism Into Philosophy,” calls on philosophy professors to treat Heidegger’s writings like hate speech. Libraries, too, should stop classifying Heidegger’s collected works (which have been sanitized and abridged by his family) as philosophy and instead include them under the history of Nazism. These measures would function as a warning label, like a skull-and-crossbones on a bottle of poison, to prevent the careless spread of his most odious ideas, which Mr. Faye lists as the exaltation of the state over the individual, the impossibility of morality, anti-humanism and racial purity.
The book is the most radical attack yet on Heidegger (1889-1976) and would upend the philosophical field’s treatment of his work in the United States, and even more so in France, where Heidegger has frequently been required reading for an advanced degree. Mr. Faye, an associate professor at the University of Paris, Nanterre, not only wants to drum Heidegger from the ranks of philosophers, he wants to challenge his colleagues to rethink the very purpose of philosophy and its relationship to ethics.
At the same time scholars in disciplines as far flung as poetry and psychoanalysis would be obliged to reconsider their use of Heidegger’s ideas. Although Mr. Faye talks about the close connection between Heidegger and current right-wing extremist politics, left-wing intellectuals have more frequently been inspired by his ideas. Existentialism and postmodernism as well as attendant attacks on colonialism, atomic weapons, ecological ruin and universal notions of morality are all based on his critique of the Western cultural tradition and reason.
Richard Wolin, the author of several books on Heidegger and a close reader of the Faye book, said he is not convinced Heidegger’s thought is as thoroughly tainted by Nazism as Mr. Faye argues. Nonetheless he recognizes how far Heidegger’s ideas have spilled into the larger culture.
“I’m not by any means dismissing any of these fields because of Heidegger’s influence,” he wrote in an e-mail message referring to postmodernism’s influence across the academy. “I’m merely saying that we should know more about the ideological residues and connotations of a thinker like Heidegger before we accept his discourse ready-made or naïvely.”
Although the English text published by Yale University Press won’t be out in the United States for a few weeks, it is already making waves, as signaled by an essay in The Chronicle Review, the opinion and ideas journal of The Chronicle of Higher Education. In an essay titled “Heil Heidegger!” Carlin Romano, a critic for The Review, called Heidegger a “Black Forest babbler” and fraud who was “overrated in his prime” and “bizarrely venerated by acolytes even now.”
Few people have read the book, but the article has generated more than 150 online comments from vehement advocates and detractors, more than any other piece The Review has printed this year, said Liz McMillen, the editor. Others joined the fray.
Ron Rosenbaum, the author of “Explaining Hitler,” even extended the argument to the German Jewish philosopher Hannah Arendt, a former student and lover of Heidegger’s. Citing a recent essay by the historian Bernard Wasserstein, Mr. Rosenbaum wrote in Slate.com that Arendt’s thinking about the Holocaust and her famous formulation, “the banality of evil,” were contaminated by Heidegger and other anti-Semitic writings.
Commentators heatedly rejected the notion that significant ideas could not be distilled from vile ones. Writing for The New Republic’s Web site, tnr.com, Damon Linker declared it was “absurd” to “implicate Heidegger’s entire philosophical corpus.
He and others echoed the views of the influential American philosopher Richard Rorty, who once wrote in The New York Times, “You cannot read most of the important philosophers of recent times without taking Heidegger’s thought into account.” Mr. Rorty added, however, that “the smell of smoke from the crematories” will “linger on their pages.”
In Mr. Faye’s eyes Heidegger’s philosophy cannot be separated from his politics in the way, say, T.S. Eliot’s poetic skills or D. W. Griffith’s cinematic technique might be appraised independently of his own beliefs. While he doesn’t dispute Heidegger’s place in the intellectual pantheon, Mr. Faye reviews his unpublished lectures and concludes his philosophy was based on the same ideas as National Socialism.
Without understanding the soil in which Heidegger’s philosophy is rooted, Mr. Faye argues, people may not realize that his ideas can grow in troubling directions. Heidegger’s dictum to be authentic and free oneself from conventional restraints, for example, can lead to a rejection of morality. The denunciation of reason and soulless modernism can devolve into crude anti-intellectualism and the glorification of “blood and soil.”
Passions about Heidegger have simmered for years. He joined the Nazi party in 1933 when he became rector of Freiburg University and oversaw the dismissal of all Jewish professors. After the war Heidegger was banned by a de-Nazification tribunal from teaching. In the 1950s Arendt re-established ties with him and labored to revive his reputation.
Heidegger was a critic of modern technological society and of the Western philosophical tradition that gave rise to it. He argued that we must overcome this tradition and rethink the very nature of human existence or being.
His prose is so dense that some scholars have said it could be interpreted to mean anything, while others have dismissed it altogether as gibberish. He is nonetheless widely considered to be one of the century’s greatest and most influential thinkers.
Theologians have used his critique of reason to explain the leap of faith; architects have been inspired by his rejection of conventional rules to introduce a buffet of new styles, materials and shapes to building design. His criticism of mechanistic technology has attracted environmentalists and planners.
A verbal brawl over Heidegger’s theories should not be surprising, though. After all, the classic American position on how liberal societies should treat dangerous ideas is with more discussion.
That is precisely what Mr. Faye says he wants. In his view teaching Heidegger’s ideas without disclosing his deep Nazi sympathies is like showing a child a brilliant fireworks display without warning that an ignited rocket can also blow up in someone’s face.
Saturday, November 7, 2009
several bioethics stories
British mother asks court to turn off her infant's machine
Nov 07, 2009
"Amicably separated" parents in Britain are at loggerheads over whether to let their disabled 13-month-old son die. RB, as the boy is called to protect the family's privacy, has congenital myasthenia syndrome, a rare neuromuscular condition that prevents him from breathing on his own and severely restricts his power to move his limbs. The British health service has applied to the High Court in London to allow life-saving care to be withdrawn.
His doctor, who cannot be named, has described the child as at the "most severe end" of physical disability. He lacks the ability to cough or swallow and must be moved every two hours to prevent pressure sores. The mother believes that her child will be better off dead. But the father contends that he should have a tracheotomy so that he can be cared for at home. Unlike many children with severe developmental disorders, RB may have normal intelligence. The father contends that he can see, hear, feel, and recognise his parents and deserves to live.
Although most of the media presented a very dark picture of RB's future, the Daily Mail published an open letter from the mother of a 10-year-old with a similar condition who went on to have a tracheotomy. He goes to school in a wheelchair and is a popular and well-loved child. "Today I look at my gorgeous, funny, cheeky little boy and I am endlessly grateful we gave him a chance to live," writes Niki Shisler. She says that doctors are normally cautious and pessimistic and speculates that they may be too concerned about the cost of care. -- BMJ, Nov 4
Aborted foetus cells used to make beauty cream
Nov 07, 2009
A San Francisco cosmetics company, Neocutis, has admitted that it used cells from an aborted male foetus as an ingredient in a beauty cream. The Swiss product is manufactured from patented processed skin proteins (PSP), and is used for conditions such as psoriasis and eczema, and, unsurprisingly, ageing. It is controversial because the proteins were obtained from a postage stamp-sized rectangle of skin taken from a terminated 14-week old male foetus in Switzerland.
Anti-abortion groups were particularly scandalised by the company's brazenness in defending the use of aborted tissue in beauty creams. Neocutis contends that harvesting the skin cells was responsible and ethical. "The small skin donation" taken to develop this cosmetic treatment "originated from a single terminated pregnancy that could not survive to term and that was deemed medically necessary by the attending physicians." The company compared this use of foetal tissue to the 1954 Nobel Prize, which was awarded to "researchers who utilized fetal kidney cells to develop the polio vaccine."
The PSP is used in Neocutis bio-restorative skin cream, Journée bio-restorative day cream, Lumière bio-restorative eye cream and Bio-gel bio-restorative hydrogel. The Neocutis website says that "Through years of research, physicians [have] discovered fetal skin has a unique ability to heal wounds without scarring."
The moral status of foetal material is widely disputed. For some, as an entry in the American Journal of Bioethics Blog suggests, "foetal proteins in a face cream aren't any different from animal or plant protein because for them the moral status of the aborted foetus doesn't have the moral status to give one concern if consent to both abortion and research took place."
On the other hand, the Vatican discussed the use of "biological material of illicit origin" in its recent statement on bioethics, Dignitas Personae. This insisted that "The corpses of human embryos and fetuses, whether they have been deliberately aborted or not, must be respected just as the remains of other human beings." ~ Washington Times, Nov 3,
My genes made me do it, says Italian murderer
Nov 07, 2009
An Italian of Algerian descent who stabbed a man to death in 2007 has had his sentence reduced because he has a gene which predisposes him to violence. Abdelmalek Bayout originally received a relatively mild sentence of 9 years and 2 months because he had a psychiatric illness. But his lawyer succeeded in knocking another year off by pointing out that he had gene variants linked to aggression, notably the gene encoding the neurotransmitter-metabolizing enzyme monoamine oxidase A (MAOA). A molecular neuroscientist and a cognitive neuroscientist testified that this would make him more prone to violence when provoked.
This is not the first time that MAOA has been invoked as a defence in criminal law. In the last 5 years, it has come up more than 200 times in US trials, according to Nita Farahany, of Vanderbilt University. She specialises in the ethical and legal perspectives on neuroscience and is sceptical of the "my genes made me do it" defence. "The point is that behavioural genetics is not there yet, we cannot explain individual behaviour, only large population statistics," she told Nature News.
Genetic determinism is far from being a dogma amongst geneticists. "90% of all murders are committed by people with a Y chromosome -- males. Should we always give males a shorter sentence?" says Steve Jones, of University College London. "I have low MAOA activity but I don't go around attacking people." -- Nature News, Oct 30
Genetic tests used to prove nationality in UK
Nov 07, 2009
British immigration officials want to use genetic tests to determine the nationality of asylum seekers, a move which scientists have criticised as "fundamentally flawed science". "Genes are not aware of national borders," said Sir Alec Jeffreys, a geneticist at the University of Leicester. "Nationality is a legal concept, and it's got nothing to do with genetics at all."
And bioethicist John Harris, of Manchester University, commented: "Genetic testing may be able to tell you where somebody's ancestors started out, but it doesn't tell you where they're from. It won't give them anything worth knowing, and it's very likely that what it will give them is misleading."
The United Kingdom Border Agency launched a pilot project in September because it feels that many African asylum seekers are claiming that they have come from a dangerous and war-torn country like Somalia or Sudan rather than a relatively peaceful place like Kenya. The refugees are asked to give a voluntary cheek swab or hair or nail sample which the Agency says yields valuable, if not conclusive, evidence about their country of origin. So far the tests are only being used on people who claim to come from Somalia, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Kenya, Uganda and Sudan.
According to AP, the agency originally planned to use the tests as definitive proof of nationality, but retreated after scientists protested. Now the agency declares that they will only be used in combination with other ways of determining a refugee's nationality, such as language analysis and interviews. ~ AP, Nov 6
British IVF clinic makes worst mistake possible, says industry watchdog
Nov 07, 2009
A serious error in a British fertility clinic's screening processes has led to concerns about the safety of IVF procedures. The London Women's Clinic (LWC) was found this week to have produced a large quantity of embryos using unscreened sperm. The sperm had a serious chromosomal abnormality which could be passed on to any of the unborn children, the Independent newspaper found. The mistake led to a miscarriage for at least one of the couples to whom these embryos were donated. Twenty-two other embryos resulting from the sperm were destroyed.
The incident could spark more investigation into the practices of British IVF clinics and the industry's current regulatory system. The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA), the UK's fertility industry watchdog, has stated that it will name and shame similar errors in future. The LWC's mistake has been described as the worst possible for a fertility clinic.
Current HFEA figures reveal that there have been 182 "incidents" in British fertility clinics in 2008, eight of them "serious". But lawyers are sceptical of these figures and say that the actual numbers could be far higher. A number of affected couples are initiating legal proceedings.
The LWC was pulled up earlier this year in an HFEA inspection, after the required number of "witnessing stages" crucial to correct screening procedures, was not carried out. However, the clinic was found still producing embryos using unscreened sperm in June, according to some prospective parents.
The couple later demanded compensation from the LWC. "It made us so aware that IVF is a business and it all comes down to money," the couple told the Independent. They were eventually remunerated; the LWC sent them abroad for fertility treatment; and they are now expecting a child. ~Independent (UK), Nov 1
Oklahoma abortion reporting law "misrepresented"
Nov 07, 2009
A new law affecting patient privacy has become the centre of political controversy in Oklahoma. As reported last week in BioEdge, abortion advocates complained that women could easily be identified using the information gained from a new questionnaire. But the state chairman of Oklahomans For Life, Tony Lauinger, says that this misrepresents the new abortion-reporting law.
He says that new law actually repeals the existing law's requirement for identifiable residential information. The legislation reads: "Nothing in the Individual Abortion Form shall contain the name, address, or information specifically identifying any patient." However, the form is highly comprehensive. Doctors are required to tick about 37 boxes, many of which are comprised of several (in one instance around 40) sub-questions about the patient's reasons for abortion, number and nature of past abortions, method of payment, as well as the mother's race, age, marital status and other details. The new legislation also requires information about abortion complications.
Lauinger points out that the abortion industry, particularly the Guttmacher Institute (formerly the research arm of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America) already collects and publishes demographic information through annual surveys.
Medical privacy is a major concern in the age of the internet. As the amount of publicly available information grows, medical information can be increasingly matched to demographic data. Latanya Sweeney, of Harvard's Center for Research on Computation and Society, says that "policies on data sharing are not very good, and the result is that data tend to flow around and get linked to other data." ~ BioEdge, Oct 30 , National Right to Life Committee Oct 21, Harvard Magazine Sept-Oct 2009
New suicide drug available next year, says Nitschke
Nov 07, 2009
A "peaceful pill" for people who want to commit suicide will be made available by mail order in 2010. The pill is a stable solid form of the barbiturate Nembutal. Developed by the euthanasia group Exit International, it is designed to withstand transport and can be stored for up to 50 years. Customers will only have to mix it with water. An activation kit with the chemicals for reconstitution and a test kit to check the strength of the resulting product are nearly finished so that the pill can be distributed.
Dr Philip Nitschke, a leading right-to-die advocate and director of Exit International, said "Exit believes that all seniors of sound mind should have the option of a peaceful death at the time of their choosing should this be their wish - this Exit Pill will go some way to ensuring this." Nitschke is set to hold instructional suicide talks in San Francisco this Sunday. ~ Assisted-Suicide Blog Oct 30, CBC News Nov 4
Next year, says Geron, embryonic stem cell trials will begin. We hope
Nov 07, 2009
One of the most convincing advocates of human embryonic stem cell research, quadriplegic actor Christopher Reeves, died without seeing any substantial progress towards a cure for spinal cord injury. However, he was buoyed up by the hope that hESC research at Geron Corporation might help him walk again. Geron has announced many times that it would soon start human hESC trials -- but so far no trials have begun. The latest announcement came last week when it announced that the trials would begin next year. Its share price rose 4.2% at the news.
Dr David Prentice, of the Family Research Council, a critic of embryo research, has been logging Geron's announcements since 2002 and found that trials were going to begin "next year" every year since 2004. He argues that "the obsession with embryonic stem cells has obscured the real hope for patients-adult stem cells. Peer-reviewed evidence of adult stem cell success for spinal cord injury patients has already been published by groups in Portugal, in Australia, in Ecuador,and in Brazil". The trials with embryonic cells have usually been delayed over safety concerns, as they could cause tumours. --Forbes, Oct 30
Nov 07, 2009
"Amicably separated" parents in Britain are at loggerheads over whether to let their disabled 13-month-old son die. RB, as the boy is called to protect the family's privacy, has congenital myasthenia syndrome, a rare neuromuscular condition that prevents him from breathing on his own and severely restricts his power to move his limbs. The British health service has applied to the High Court in London to allow life-saving care to be withdrawn.
His doctor, who cannot be named, has described the child as at the "most severe end" of physical disability. He lacks the ability to cough or swallow and must be moved every two hours to prevent pressure sores. The mother believes that her child will be better off dead. But the father contends that he should have a tracheotomy so that he can be cared for at home. Unlike many children with severe developmental disorders, RB may have normal intelligence. The father contends that he can see, hear, feel, and recognise his parents and deserves to live.
Although most of the media presented a very dark picture of RB's future, the Daily Mail published an open letter from the mother of a 10-year-old with a similar condition who went on to have a tracheotomy. He goes to school in a wheelchair and is a popular and well-loved child. "Today I look at my gorgeous, funny, cheeky little boy and I am endlessly grateful we gave him a chance to live," writes Niki Shisler. She says that doctors are normally cautious and pessimistic and speculates that they may be too concerned about the cost of care. -- BMJ, Nov 4
Aborted foetus cells used to make beauty cream
Nov 07, 2009
A San Francisco cosmetics company, Neocutis, has admitted that it used cells from an aborted male foetus as an ingredient in a beauty cream. The Swiss product is manufactured from patented processed skin proteins (PSP), and is used for conditions such as psoriasis and eczema, and, unsurprisingly, ageing. It is controversial because the proteins were obtained from a postage stamp-sized rectangle of skin taken from a terminated 14-week old male foetus in Switzerland.
Anti-abortion groups were particularly scandalised by the company's brazenness in defending the use of aborted tissue in beauty creams. Neocutis contends that harvesting the skin cells was responsible and ethical. "The small skin donation" taken to develop this cosmetic treatment "originated from a single terminated pregnancy that could not survive to term and that was deemed medically necessary by the attending physicians." The company compared this use of foetal tissue to the 1954 Nobel Prize, which was awarded to "researchers who utilized fetal kidney cells to develop the polio vaccine."
The PSP is used in Neocutis bio-restorative skin cream, Journée bio-restorative day cream, Lumière bio-restorative eye cream and Bio-gel bio-restorative hydrogel. The Neocutis website says that "Through years of research, physicians [have] discovered fetal skin has a unique ability to heal wounds without scarring."
The moral status of foetal material is widely disputed. For some, as an entry in the American Journal of Bioethics Blog suggests, "foetal proteins in a face cream aren't any different from animal or plant protein because for them the moral status of the aborted foetus doesn't have the moral status to give one concern if consent to both abortion and research took place."
On the other hand, the Vatican discussed the use of "biological material of illicit origin" in its recent statement on bioethics, Dignitas Personae. This insisted that "The corpses of human embryos and fetuses, whether they have been deliberately aborted or not, must be respected just as the remains of other human beings." ~ Washington Times, Nov 3,
My genes made me do it, says Italian murderer
Nov 07, 2009
An Italian of Algerian descent who stabbed a man to death in 2007 has had his sentence reduced because he has a gene which predisposes him to violence. Abdelmalek Bayout originally received a relatively mild sentence of 9 years and 2 months because he had a psychiatric illness. But his lawyer succeeded in knocking another year off by pointing out that he had gene variants linked to aggression, notably the gene encoding the neurotransmitter-metabolizing enzyme monoamine oxidase A (MAOA). A molecular neuroscientist and a cognitive neuroscientist testified that this would make him more prone to violence when provoked.
This is not the first time that MAOA has been invoked as a defence in criminal law. In the last 5 years, it has come up more than 200 times in US trials, according to Nita Farahany, of Vanderbilt University. She specialises in the ethical and legal perspectives on neuroscience and is sceptical of the "my genes made me do it" defence. "The point is that behavioural genetics is not there yet, we cannot explain individual behaviour, only large population statistics," she told Nature News.
Genetic determinism is far from being a dogma amongst geneticists. "90% of all murders are committed by people with a Y chromosome -- males. Should we always give males a shorter sentence?" says Steve Jones, of University College London. "I have low MAOA activity but I don't go around attacking people." -- Nature News, Oct 30
Genetic tests used to prove nationality in UK
Nov 07, 2009
British immigration officials want to use genetic tests to determine the nationality of asylum seekers, a move which scientists have criticised as "fundamentally flawed science". "Genes are not aware of national borders," said Sir Alec Jeffreys, a geneticist at the University of Leicester. "Nationality is a legal concept, and it's got nothing to do with genetics at all."
And bioethicist John Harris, of Manchester University, commented: "Genetic testing may be able to tell you where somebody's ancestors started out, but it doesn't tell you where they're from. It won't give them anything worth knowing, and it's very likely that what it will give them is misleading."
The United Kingdom Border Agency launched a pilot project in September because it feels that many African asylum seekers are claiming that they have come from a dangerous and war-torn country like Somalia or Sudan rather than a relatively peaceful place like Kenya. The refugees are asked to give a voluntary cheek swab or hair or nail sample which the Agency says yields valuable, if not conclusive, evidence about their country of origin. So far the tests are only being used on people who claim to come from Somalia, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Kenya, Uganda and Sudan.
According to AP, the agency originally planned to use the tests as definitive proof of nationality, but retreated after scientists protested. Now the agency declares that they will only be used in combination with other ways of determining a refugee's nationality, such as language analysis and interviews. ~ AP, Nov 6
British IVF clinic makes worst mistake possible, says industry watchdog
Nov 07, 2009
A serious error in a British fertility clinic's screening processes has led to concerns about the safety of IVF procedures. The London Women's Clinic (LWC) was found this week to have produced a large quantity of embryos using unscreened sperm. The sperm had a serious chromosomal abnormality which could be passed on to any of the unborn children, the Independent newspaper found. The mistake led to a miscarriage for at least one of the couples to whom these embryos were donated. Twenty-two other embryos resulting from the sperm were destroyed.
The incident could spark more investigation into the practices of British IVF clinics and the industry's current regulatory system. The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA), the UK's fertility industry watchdog, has stated that it will name and shame similar errors in future. The LWC's mistake has been described as the worst possible for a fertility clinic.
Current HFEA figures reveal that there have been 182 "incidents" in British fertility clinics in 2008, eight of them "serious". But lawyers are sceptical of these figures and say that the actual numbers could be far higher. A number of affected couples are initiating legal proceedings.
The LWC was pulled up earlier this year in an HFEA inspection, after the required number of "witnessing stages" crucial to correct screening procedures, was not carried out. However, the clinic was found still producing embryos using unscreened sperm in June, according to some prospective parents.
The couple later demanded compensation from the LWC. "It made us so aware that IVF is a business and it all comes down to money," the couple told the Independent. They were eventually remunerated; the LWC sent them abroad for fertility treatment; and they are now expecting a child. ~Independent (UK), Nov 1
Oklahoma abortion reporting law "misrepresented"
Nov 07, 2009
A new law affecting patient privacy has become the centre of political controversy in Oklahoma. As reported last week in BioEdge, abortion advocates complained that women could easily be identified using the information gained from a new questionnaire. But the state chairman of Oklahomans For Life, Tony Lauinger, says that this misrepresents the new abortion-reporting law.
He says that new law actually repeals the existing law's requirement for identifiable residential information. The legislation reads: "Nothing in the Individual Abortion Form shall contain the name, address, or information specifically identifying any patient." However, the form is highly comprehensive. Doctors are required to tick about 37 boxes, many of which are comprised of several (in one instance around 40) sub-questions about the patient's reasons for abortion, number and nature of past abortions, method of payment, as well as the mother's race, age, marital status and other details. The new legislation also requires information about abortion complications.
Lauinger points out that the abortion industry, particularly the Guttmacher Institute (formerly the research arm of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America) already collects and publishes demographic information through annual surveys.
Medical privacy is a major concern in the age of the internet. As the amount of publicly available information grows, medical information can be increasingly matched to demographic data. Latanya Sweeney, of Harvard's Center for Research on Computation and Society, says that "policies on data sharing are not very good, and the result is that data tend to flow around and get linked to other data." ~ BioEdge, Oct 30 , National Right to Life Committee Oct 21, Harvard Magazine Sept-Oct 2009
New suicide drug available next year, says Nitschke
Nov 07, 2009
A "peaceful pill" for people who want to commit suicide will be made available by mail order in 2010. The pill is a stable solid form of the barbiturate Nembutal. Developed by the euthanasia group Exit International, it is designed to withstand transport and can be stored for up to 50 years. Customers will only have to mix it with water. An activation kit with the chemicals for reconstitution and a test kit to check the strength of the resulting product are nearly finished so that the pill can be distributed.
Dr Philip Nitschke, a leading right-to-die advocate and director of Exit International, said "Exit believes that all seniors of sound mind should have the option of a peaceful death at the time of their choosing should this be their wish - this Exit Pill will go some way to ensuring this." Nitschke is set to hold instructional suicide talks in San Francisco this Sunday. ~ Assisted-Suicide Blog Oct 30, CBC News Nov 4
Next year, says Geron, embryonic stem cell trials will begin. We hope
Nov 07, 2009
One of the most convincing advocates of human embryonic stem cell research, quadriplegic actor Christopher Reeves, died without seeing any substantial progress towards a cure for spinal cord injury. However, he was buoyed up by the hope that hESC research at Geron Corporation might help him walk again. Geron has announced many times that it would soon start human hESC trials -- but so far no trials have begun. The latest announcement came last week when it announced that the trials would begin next year. Its share price rose 4.2% at the news.
Dr David Prentice, of the Family Research Council, a critic of embryo research, has been logging Geron's announcements since 2002 and found that trials were going to begin "next year" every year since 2004. He argues that "the obsession with embryonic stem cells has obscured the real hope for patients-adult stem cells. Peer-reviewed evidence of adult stem cell success for spinal cord injury patients has already been published by groups in Portugal, in Australia, in Ecuador,and in Brazil". The trials with embryonic cells have usually been delayed over safety concerns, as they could cause tumours. --Forbes, Oct 30
Friday, November 6, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)