151–160 of 267 posts
Back in 2011, there was an announcement from MIT about a new approach to a broad-spectrum antiviral that appeared to work.[1] This goes way beyond an AIDS-specific cure. But it was at MIT Lincoln Labs, which doesn't usually do bio. So the researcher moved to Draper Labs, but didn't get much funding. Then that funding ran out. Now the guy behind this is trying to get funding on Indiegogo.[3] The problem seems to be th…
Back in 2011, there was an announcement from MIT about a new approach to a broad-spectrum antiviral that appeared to work.[1] This goes way beyond an AIDS-specific cure. But it was at MIT Lincoln Labs, which doesn't usually do bio. So the researcher moved to Draper Labs, but didn't get much funding. Then that funding ran out. Now the guy behind this is trying to get funding on Indiegogo.[3] The problem seems to be th…
Given billionaires running their own space programs it makes me wonder why there aren't more billionaires running biologic research companies. Between life extension and immunity to (or protection from) really pathological conditions it seems like their interests would be aligned with folks like this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So, was he right?
Short answer: Yes. Longer answer: When I first read it, I didn't think that the limitation that he had proposed applied to the type of device that we were making. He was really criticizing a similar but-not-identical type of fusion concept, and I clung to the differences. However, as our work progressed, I saw that the basic concept applied, which is that the scattering which would occur in a plasma (or a beam) would…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Correct. You can also use CRISPR to edit a person's own cells in a lab for injection back into the person's body to combat a slew of diseases, including cancer. China is already experimenting on live humans: http://gizmodo.com/china-is-racing-ahead-of-the-us-in-the-qu...
AIDs, cancer, etc., is great, but what about male pattern baldness?
Back in 2011, there was an announcement from MIT about a new approach to a broad-spectrum antiviral that appeared to work.[1] This goes way beyond an AIDS-specific cure. But it was at MIT Lincoln Labs, which doesn't usually do bio. So the researcher moved to Draper Labs, but didn't get much funding. Then that funding ran out. Now the guy behind this is trying to get funding on Indiegogo.[3] The problem seems to be th…
Given billionaires running their own space programs it makes me wonder why there aren't more billionaires running biologic research companies. Between life extension and immunity to (or protection from) really pathological conditions it seems like their interests would be aligned with folks like this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I almost wonder if running your own space program is cheaper. As in the amount of regulatory BS you have to go through due to the monopolistic behavior of the large pharmaceutical companies...
That wouldn't slow down a self-respecting multi-billionaire, though, would it? Couldn't you just set up your lab in Malaysia / Brazil / Belarus? You don't even need a country without regulations against your research direction, just one that doesn't (consistently) enforce any such laws...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Given billionaires running their own space programs it makes me wonder why there aren't more billionaires running biologic research companies. Between life extension and immunity to (or protection from) really pathological conditions it seems like their interests would be aligned with folks like this.
Not just billionaires. One of my besties is directly funding early stage Lyme Disease research. Directly to the lab and researchers. Bypassing orgs, foundations, panels, etc. He has a vested interest in accelerating the process and has already benefitted from their findings. This direct funding model will become a significant strategy, as it becomes ever easier to find and connect interested parties.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't the only way to mutate to avoid CRISPR to change your genes enough that CRISPR can't identify you? If so, doesn't that mean we just find the new genetic signature and generate a variation that targets it? I see CRISPR as grepping through memory for running instruction code. Sure, the code can change, but if you see the behavior, then it's a matter of finding the new code signature manually and generating a new…
Well, as CRISPR was originally found as a kind of immune system, there do exist a number of anti-anti-Cas9 systems against that evolved alongside it. There are a number of small inhibitors of Cas9 [1] (which themselves could be used to tune Cas9 in therapeutics). However up-taking such a defense is admittedly an unlike route for a virus like HIV to take to evolve resistance to a CRISPR-based therapy. More practically…
Unless I'm grossly misunderstanding how CRISPR works, there's no conceptual reason why you couldn't target multiple sequences at the same time, with a cocktail method. That is, rather than trying a single overly broad match, you could go for (say) ten highly-specific targets at the same time. A particular HIV virion would then have to differ in all ten regions to avoid getting chopped up.
Just spitballing here:
Google tells me that HIV has a mutation rate of about 4E-3 per base.
Let's say you choose target sequences ten bases long (I don't know what the maximum practical length for the technology is, nor the minimum length you'd need to reliably tell HIV from human, and Google isn't any immediate help there).
The probability that there will be a mutation in that sequence is then about 0.04. However, if you target ten sequences simultaneously, the probability that all ten would be mutated is (0.04)^10 ~= 1e-14.
That's likely more than good enough to assure that there weren't any resistant mutants around (if by some chance there are...lather, rinse, repeat).
This is hand-waving, to be sure. If you have better numbers, plug them in.
Edit: fixed fat-fingering the calculator.
Great example is thalidiomide.
https://www.quora.com/What-are-examples-of-drugs-that-showed...
https://walkerma.wordpress.com/2007/04/27/animal-models/
I advise extreme caution and context on hyping this. Derek Lowe wrote a great post on this a few years ago that I still reference whenever I see HIV animal claims.
http://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2010/02/03/a_m...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are there other nations which have less demanding requirements, but still decent vetting? Why can't these kinds of ideas go there?
My scientist friends tell me China is paying well, making funding available, and has a lower go-to-market burden. Innovation appears to be literally moving to China as talent is being drained away from the US & Europe.