by Beyond Lab
Research is extremely expensive -- even more than drug development. NIH is throwing $8 million to epigenome and human disease studies, starting next year. Is this a big amount? No. absolutely not. it is just a few R01 grants. Epigenetic studies require a lot of new/expensive equipment and techniques, such as microarray, sequencing. in many cases, new methodologies have to be developed. Also, when focusing on human diseases, it needs more resource input.
More importantly, epigenetics is an expanding area with new markers appearing one by one. Which one of the epigenetic markers is more important? How could $8 million be balanced properly to all these markers?? WE NEED MORE!!!
Hopefully this is just the beginning.
Friday, July 18, 2008
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
summer vacation and protection
by Beyond Lab
There are a lot of reasons to avoid exposure to strong sunshine. This should be especially noticed during this summer travel time. -- Being tan might make you look good and feel good. But does your body feel good as well? -Most likely not.
There is clear scientific connection between heavy sunburn and melanoma (a kind of skin cancer) occurrence. People received multiple severe sunburns are at higher risk of developing melanoma. Children are at even higher risk.
Protect yourself and your family by doing necessary things, high SPF sunscreen (and reapply every 2 hours if in heavy sunshine), protective clothing and hats, and so on. What's the best solution? -- avoid the sun during peak hours -10am to 2pm.
Just my 2 cents.
There are a lot of reasons to avoid exposure to strong sunshine. This should be especially noticed during this summer travel time. -- Being tan might make you look good and feel good. But does your body feel good as well? -Most likely not.
There is clear scientific connection between heavy sunburn and melanoma (a kind of skin cancer) occurrence. People received multiple severe sunburns are at higher risk of developing melanoma. Children are at even higher risk.
Protect yourself and your family by doing necessary things, high SPF sunscreen (and reapply every 2 hours if in heavy sunshine), protective clothing and hats, and so on. What's the best solution? -- avoid the sun during peak hours -10am to 2pm.
Just my 2 cents.
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
A graduate student oath -- will it help?
by Beyond Lab
University of Toronto created a graduate student oath to let the students remember their social and moral responsibilities, in other words, to conduct research ethically. I think one of the reasons is to try to avoid so many scientific misconduct in the scientific research area. To name a few, the Korean tem cell scandal, the recent retract of an important paper by Linda Buck, a Nobel prize laureate. There are not only irreproducibility of their data, but also the way they put all responsibility to one of the co-first authors. All these are absolutely not normal and should not happen in the pursuit of science.
Will this oath help? I completely doubt it. -- The overall scientific environment is so competitive, mainly financially, that researchers have to publish before their competitors and have to publish in good journals to secure enough support for their continuing research, and their personal salary in many cases.
Is there any way out? Things have to be changed gradually. Higher NIH budget (in US) is definitely one of the first things to do.
University of Toronto created a graduate student oath to let the students remember their social and moral responsibilities, in other words, to conduct research ethically. I think one of the reasons is to try to avoid so many scientific misconduct in the scientific research area. To name a few, the Korean tem cell scandal, the recent retract of an important paper by Linda Buck, a Nobel prize laureate. There are not only irreproducibility of their data, but also the way they put all responsibility to one of the co-first authors. All these are absolutely not normal and should not happen in the pursuit of science.
Will this oath help? I completely doubt it. -- The overall scientific environment is so competitive, mainly financially, that researchers have to publish before their competitors and have to publish in good journals to secure enough support for their continuing research, and their personal salary in many cases.
Is there any way out? Things have to be changed gradually. Higher NIH budget (in US) is definitely one of the first things to do.
Monday, June 16, 2008
what's wrong with those consumer genomics companies?
by Beyond Lab
After the action of New York state about 2 months ago, California is taking a similar approach to try to regulate consumer genomics (personal genomics) companies from offering genome services without prescription from doctors. With many posts in my blog talking about the current situation of personal genomics, you might understand that one of the basic reasons is that it is not ready yet. (Most) Consumers feel what they got from the services didn't worth the money. As many experts suggested, the current consumer genomics services should be considered as "recreational genomics" -- therefore whichever company marketing these services should not relate them to health or medical implications. Otherwise, you have to get physician's prescription. So, at this point, it is reasonable for New York and California two states to initiate some regulations.
This is a good thing!
After the action of New York state about 2 months ago, California is taking a similar approach to try to regulate consumer genomics (personal genomics) companies from offering genome services without prescription from doctors. With many posts in my blog talking about the current situation of personal genomics, you might understand that one of the basic reasons is that it is not ready yet. (Most) Consumers feel what they got from the services didn't worth the money. As many experts suggested, the current consumer genomics services should be considered as "recreational genomics" -- therefore whichever company marketing these services should not relate them to health or medical implications. Otherwise, you have to get physician's prescription. So, at this point, it is reasonable for New York and California two states to initiate some regulations.
This is a good thing!
Saturday, June 14, 2008
to make use of genome
by Beyond Lab
Human genome is huge. Individual variations are also extremely common. Most of these variations don't have any effect on any function. But some, either by itself or in combination with others, do. What, how, when, and where these variations matter is something we have to know before personal genomics really mean anything.
As one of my earlier posts indicated, some companies, in collaboration with research institutes, have projects on their target diseases or conditions. But that's obviously not enough. We have to know everything - eventually.
So, there is a "genome-wide association studies" from NIH which involves "rapidly scanning markers across the complete sets of DNA, or genomes, of many people to find genetic variations associated with a particular disease". Many diseases are under study now. This sort of "national" or global initiative, like the previous human genome project, is really the drive to our understanding of our genome and therefore could make use of genome information.
More detail information could be found here: http://www.fnih.org/GAIN2/home_new.shtml
Human genome is huge. Individual variations are also extremely common. Most of these variations don't have any effect on any function. But some, either by itself or in combination with others, do. What, how, when, and where these variations matter is something we have to know before personal genomics really mean anything.
As one of my earlier posts indicated, some companies, in collaboration with research institutes, have projects on their target diseases or conditions. But that's obviously not enough. We have to know everything - eventually.
So, there is a "genome-wide association studies" from NIH which involves "rapidly scanning markers across the complete sets of DNA, or genomes, of many people to find genetic variations associated with a particular disease". Many diseases are under study now. This sort of "national" or global initiative, like the previous human genome project, is really the drive to our understanding of our genome and therefore could make use of genome information.
More detail information could be found here: http://www.fnih.org/GAIN2/home_new.shtml
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
One gene, one disease??
by Beyond Lab
Obviously not. Life is so complicated that it is impossible for one gene to be solely responsible for one function and therefore one disease. Almost all genes identified have multiple domains (function units) with different "potential" function. So, mess up one gene would certainly have more than one consequences. This has been confirmed in many species, from bakers yeast to human.
So, it is almost impossible to predict the occurrence of one disease just by analyzing the function/structure of one gene or its product. It has to be a combination of various information. With that being said, is it helpful to analyze one gene if it is know that this particular gene (or its mutant formats) always associates with certain disease. Absolutely!. But how accurate is it? No one knows when it comes to one individual -- yes or no. Probability means nothing for one individual.
Why am I saying this? Because one company Orion Genomics just licensed JHU technology to analyze IGF2 gene (insulin-like growth factor 2) with the hope to be able to predict the outcome (progression) of colorectal cancer. -- Beyond Lab personally thinks this is not very wise. I don't know how they will promote their future product to analyze one single gene. --Most current genetic or genomic detection products for breast cancer all involve many genes. One gene? Unlikely mean anything.
Obviously not. Life is so complicated that it is impossible for one gene to be solely responsible for one function and therefore one disease. Almost all genes identified have multiple domains (function units) with different "potential" function. So, mess up one gene would certainly have more than one consequences. This has been confirmed in many species, from bakers yeast to human.
So, it is almost impossible to predict the occurrence of one disease just by analyzing the function/structure of one gene or its product. It has to be a combination of various information. With that being said, is it helpful to analyze one gene if it is know that this particular gene (or its mutant formats) always associates with certain disease. Absolutely!. But how accurate is it? No one knows when it comes to one individual -- yes or no. Probability means nothing for one individual.
Why am I saying this? Because one company Orion Genomics just licensed JHU technology to analyze IGF2 gene (insulin-like growth factor 2) with the hope to be able to predict the outcome (progression) of colorectal cancer. -- Beyond Lab personally thinks this is not very wise. I don't know how they will promote their future product to analyze one single gene. --Most current genetic or genomic detection products for breast cancer all involve many genes. One gene? Unlikely mean anything.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
