medicine

medicine

Kamala Harris’ awkward laughs spark outrage. Why laughter is not her best medicine



Kamala Harris wearing a suit and tie


Kamala Harris

Senator Kamala Harris, the Democratic Party’s vice-presidential candidate, faced harsh criticism and ridicule from Republicans, including President Donald Trump, for bursting into laughter at a question about her alleged Leftist leanings.

Kamala Harris was mercilessly criticised, even reviled, in the battleground state of Twitter for laughing out loud when CBS reporter Norah O’Donnell asked her if she would push a progressive agenda since she was rated as “the most liberal senator” by the non-partisan, independent Congressional vote tracker, GovTrack.us.

Kamala Harris seemed unprepared for the question and laughed nervously when O’Donnell set the stage with a statement about her being a liberal. Kamala Harris said it was Vice President Mike Pence who had called her liberal during their debate.

The reporter persisted and cited GovTrack as the source of the information, and said Harris had supported the Green New Deal, Medicare-for-all and legalization of marijuana while Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden had not, the senator defended her record.

Kamala Harris again broke into laughter when O’Donnell asked, “Is that a socialist perspective?” Socialism is a bad word in American politics in a way conservatism is not. US politicians can espouse the most extreme right-wing positions and not face questions but anyone who dares to talk about workers and unions can be labeled a socialist and face an onslaught.

Kamala Harris got a bit emotional and explained, “It is the perspective of a woman who grew up a black child in America, who was also a prosecutor, who also has a mother who arrived here at the age of 19 from India, who also likes hip hop.” She finished by chuckling again.

Kamala Harris’ laughter has become a point of ridicule even though this time it probably came from a place of disbelief because she was being labeled as left of Bernie Sanders. But she does tend to break into awkward laughter at inopportune moments, something that leads to memes and counter memes.

Republican digital hawks are always at the ready to extract a clip from what might have been a longer conversation to portray Kamala Harris negatively. Some of the reactions on Twitter to the latest Kamala Harris outrage were downright vile.

Donald Trump made fun of Kamala Harris’ laughter at a rally on Monday hours after his “rapid response team” flooded Twitter about the incident. Two days ago, he went on a rant against her saying the US would never see a “socialist” president, “especially a female socialist we’re not going to put up with it.” The attacks would be deemed sexist by any definition.

Last month, Donald Trump said, “If a woman is going to become the first president of the United States, it can’t be her,” referring to Kamala Harris since Joe Biden has indicated he would be a one-term president. It is a scare tactic Republicans use with aplomb.

The fight for the White House in 2020 has gone down to a level that would have been unimaginable a decade ago. Misogyny, dog whistles,

Read More
medicine

Aesthetic Medicine and Cosmetics Market 2020 Global Analysis, Opportunities And Forecast to 2025

“Aesthetic Medicine and Cosmetics Market”

Wiseguyreports.Com Adds “Aesthetic Medicine and Cosmetics -Market Demand, Growth, Opportunities and Analysis Of Top Key Player Forecast To 2025” To Its Research Database

Aesthetic Medicine and Cosmetics Industry

Description

Wiseguyreports.Com Adds “Aesthetic Medicine and Cosmetics -Market Demand, Growth, Opportunities and Analysis Of Top Key Player Forecast To 2025” To Its Research Database

The report begins from overview of Industry Chain structure, and describes industry environment, then analyses market size and forecast of Aesthetic Medicine and Cosmetics by product, region and application, in addition, this report introduces market competition situation among the vendors and company profile, besides, market price analysis and value chain features are covered in this report.

This report contains opportunities, strengths, threats, and weaknesses (SWOT) analysis for this market. They have taken many aspects into account for analysis, including sales volume, revenue level of the last few years, product demands, customer retention, etc. A majority of information has been collected from primary sources, and analysts have taken effective samples. As the market size is large, analysts have taken large sample sizes from different regions of the globe. They also calculated the Aesthetic Medicine and Cosmetics Market’s customer churns level because it plays a vital role in sales volume. This research analysis report can help this Aesthetic Medicine and Cosmetics Market to become sustainable in the market from a global context.

Request For Sample Report @ https://www.wiseguyreports.com/sample-request/5043846-global-aesthetic-medicine-and-cosmetics-market-analysis-2015

Company Coverage (Company Profile, Sales Revenue, Price, Gross Margin, Main Products etc.):

NuYu Medispa
Al Qamra Holding Group
Premium Naseem
Dr. Makki Plastic Surgicentre
Medica Group
Silkor
Al Emadi Hospital

Product Type Coverage (Market Size & Forecast, Major Company of Product Type etc.):
Surgical Procedures
Non-Surgical Procedures

Application Coverage (Market Size & Forecast, Different Demand Market by Region, Main Consumer Profile etc.):
Hospitals & Clinics
Beauty Centers & Medical Spas
Others

Region Coverage (Regional Production, Demand & Forecast by Countries etc.):
North America (U.S., Canada, Mexico)
Europe (Germany, U.K., France, Italy, Russia, Spain etc.)
Asia-Pacific (China, India, Japan, Southeast Asia etc.)
South America (Brazil, Argentina etc.)
Middle East & Africa (Saudi Arabia, South Africa etc.)

Leave a Query @ https://www.wiseguyreports.com/enquiry/5043846-global-aesthetic-medicine-and-cosmetics-market-analysis-2015

 

Table of Contents

1 Industry Overview
1.1 Aesthetic Medicine and Cosmetics Industry
Figure Aesthetic Medicine and Cosmetics Industry Chain Structure
1.1.1 Overview
1.1.2 Development of Aesthetic Medicine and Cosmetics
1.2 Market Segment
1.2.1 Upstream
Table Upstream Segment of Aesthetic Medicine and Cosmetics
1.2.2 Downstream
Table Application Segment of Aesthetic Medicine and Cosmetics
Table Global Aesthetic Medicine and Cosmetics Market 2015-2025, by Application, in USD Million
1.3 Cost Analysis

2 Industry Environment (PEST Analysis)
2.1 Policy
2.2 Economics
2.3 Sociology
2.4 Technology

….

4 Major Companies List
4.1 NuYu Medispa (Company Profile, Sales Data etc.)
4.1.1 NuYu Medispa Profile
Table NuYu Medispa Overview List
4.1.2 NuYu Medispa Products & Services
4.1.3 NuYu Medispa Business Operation Conditions
Table Business Operation of NuYu Medispa (Sales Revenue, Sales Volume, Price, Cost, Gross Margin)
4.2 Al Qamra Holding Group (Company Profile, Sales Data etc.)
4.2.1 Al Qamra Holding Group Profile
Table Al

Read More
medicine

Medicine not chainsaws: Indonesian clinic keeps villagers and forests healthy

(Thomson Reuters Foundation) – Offering affordable healthcare to villagers and indigenous communities living near forests could help reduce illegal logging and fight climate change, researchers said on Monday.

A new study led by Stanford University analysed a clinic providing such a service, set up by two nonprofits adjacent to Gunung Palung National Park in West Kalimantan on the Indonesian part of Borneo island, covering the period from 2009-2019.

Using satellite images of forest cover and more than 10 years of patient records, researchers linked the health programme to a 70% fall in deforestation compared with other Indonesian national parks, equivalent to protecting more than 27 sq km (10 sq miles) of forest.

Study co-author Susanne Sokolow, a scientist at the Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment, said the researchers had observed a strong reduction in the rate of forest loss.

“Importantly, we also found that the more engaged the villages were in terms of how many times they visited the clinic or participated in conservation programmes … the more impact we saw,” she told the Thomson Reuters Foundation.

The largest drop-offs in logging occurred next to villages that used the clinic the most, researchers said.

Globally, about 35% of protected natural areas are traditionally owned, managed, used or occupied by indigenous and local communities, yet they are rarely considered in the design of conservation and climate programmes, according to Stanford.

Seeking solutions, Indonesia-based environmental nonprofit Alam Sehat Lestari (ASRI) and U.S.-based Health In Harmony first questioned local communities and found that a key reason why they cut down trees was to pay for healthcare.

With this information, they established an affordable clinic in 2007, serving thousands of patients by accepting a range of alternative payments, such as tree seedlings, handicrafts, manure and labour – a system created with the communities.

Through agreements made with district leaders, the clinic also provided discounts to villages that could show evidence of reductions in illegal logging.

In addition, it offered training in sustainable, organic agriculture and a chainsaw buy-back scheme.

The study, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, said the 70% fall in deforestation was equivalent to an averted carbon loss estimated to be worth more than $65 million, using European carbon market prices.

The researchers also measured significant falls in infectious and other diseases, such as malaria and tuberculosis.

Monica Nirmala, executive director of the clinic from 2014 to 2018 and a board member of Health In Harmony, said the data supported two important conclusions.

“Human health is integral to the conservation of nature and vice versa, and we need to listen to the guidance of rainforest communities who know best how to live in balance with their forests,” she said in a statement.

Stanford researchers are working with the two nonprofits as they look to replicate the approach with other rainforest communities in Indonesia, Madagascar and Brazil.

Reporting by Michael Taylor @MickSTaylor; editing by Megan Rowling. Please credit the Thomson Reuters Foundation, the charitable arm of Thomson Reuters,

Read More
medicine

Study in Nature Medicine Shows Superior Outcomes for Patients in The Leukemia & Lymphoma Society’s Paradigm-Shifting Beat AML Clinical Trial

RYE BROOK, N.Y., Oct. 26, 2020 /PRNewswire/ — Patients participating in The Leukemia & Lymphoma Society’s (LLS) groundbreaking precision medicine Beat AML Master Clinical Trial had superior outcomes compared to acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients who opted for standard chemotherapy treatment, according to findings published today in the prestigious Nature Medicine journal.


Leukemia & Lymphoma Society logo (PRNewsfoto/The Leukemia & Lymphoma Society)

The Beat AML trial achieved its primary endpoint by showing genomic analysis of the leukemia cells to identify AML subtypes can be completed within an unprecedented seven days, giving patients, caregivers and their doctors ample time to make a more personalized treatment decision without risking the patient’s chance for survival.

In other key findings, the study demonstrated a paradigm shift in how patients diagnosed with AML should be treated, proving that using genetic information to match patients to targeted therapies leads to better survival rates than the traditional one-size-fits all treatment approach.

AML is an extremely fast-moving cancer of the marrow and blood, affecting 21,000 people in the U.S. a year, and killing 10,000. For decades patients have been given the same treatments almost immediately upon diagnosis because waiting allows the cancer cells to grow out of control. This standard of care involves either infusion of a combination of two chemotherapies, cytarabine and daunorubicin, or treatment with a so-called hypomethylating agent, a drug that unleashes signals allowing the cancer cells to die.

“The study shows that delaying treatment up to seven days is feasible and safe, and that patients who opted for the precision medicine approach experienced a lower early death rate and superior overall survival compared to patients who opted for standard of care,” said John C. Byrd, MD, D. Warren Brown Chair of Leukemia Research of The Ohio State University, and one of the Beat AML leads and corresponding author of the study. “This patient-centric study shows that we can move away from chemotherapy treatment for patients who won’t respond or can’t withstand the harsh effects of the same chemotherapies we’ve been using for 40 years and match them with a treatment better suited for their individual case.”

Going on the Offensive Against AML

Recognizing the urgent need to do better for AML patients, LLS launched this clinical trial in fall 2016 to test multiple novel targeted therapies at major cancer centers across the U.S., in newly diagnosed AML patients aged 60 and older. In a historic first for cancer clinical trials, LLS is the first non-profit health organization to sponsor a trial and hold the IND (Investigational New Drug) application from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Beat AML partnered with Foundation Medicine Inc. to employ next generation genomic sequencing to rapidly analyze the patients’ cancer cells, and identify the patients’ AML subtype so they can be given a targeted therapy within a safe timeframe.

“The breadth of this collaboration, with every clinician, cancer center, pharmaceutical partner and all of the many operations and technical support companies, all unified in working toward the common goal of building a new model for tackling

Read More
medicine

Six Medicine Hat women receive PEO Sisterhood scholarships

Six Medicine Hat women have been awarded scholarships through the P.E.O Sisterhood.

The Medicine Hat winners are Samara Wilson-Muir, Kennedy Galloway, Litany Bloomfield, Rae-anne Ziegenhagel, Mackenzie Marsall and Adele Gemmell.

The six young women are the recipients of the Florence E. Taylor Scholarship, worth $1,000 for each student.

Gemmel also took home the Continuing Education Scholarship, which will grant her $3,000.

All of the women are attending the college or university of their choice, in various fields of study.

Scholarship committee chair Heather Bymoen says the financial support will go a long way for the young Hatters.

“The financial help is always important to offer to young people, especially now,” she said. “Especially in the day and age, people have a lot of expenses and education costs keep going up.

“Whatever help the students can get is so important for them, and it’s important for us to help.”

Bymoen added that Medicine Hat students made up a large number of the scholarships that were given out.

The P.E.O Sisterhood is a philanthropic educational organization that promotes educational opportunities for women through grants, loans, scholarships and stewardships of Cottey College.

The organization was founded in 1869 by seven students in Iowa. It has grown to have 250,000 members in Canada and the United States.

More than 100,000 women have been given financial aid for their education from the organization.

Loading…

Loading…Loading…Loading…Loading…Loading…

Source Article

Read More
medicine

Protect Good Medicine, Stop the Censorship of Good Counseling

An increasing number of children, both here in America and around the globe, are experiencing deep discomfort, confusion, and alienation from their sexed body, a condition known as gender dysphoria. Unsurprisingly, people disagree about how best to respond to this condition in order to help these kids. How we navigate that disagreement will prove critical.

Some people insist that the proper course of action involves experimental interventions directed at the boy or girl’s body itself—puberty-blocking drugs, cross-sex hormones, and surgery. Others suggest that therapy be directed to the child’s thoughts and feelings, not the body.

Physical interventions on minors to “affirm” a mistaken “gender identity” violate sound medical ethics and should be prohibited. And yet, in all fifty states, such interventions are entirely legal.

At the same time, a more radical movement is seeking to make it illegal to use a psychological approach to help these children rather than a hormonal and surgical one. An increasing number of jurisdictions—both in the US and in other countries—are banning therapy that aims to help minors with gender dysphoria feel comfortable about their own bodies without transforming their bodies. Federal legislation has been introduced that would create nationwide censorship of such therapy, and the UN has claimed that such therapy violates human rights.

This turns medical ethics—and the law—upside down. Good therapy should never be prohibited. Children deserve access to the therapeutic assistance they need to feel comfortable being what they are as a plain and ineradicable matter of biological fact: male or female. And parents have a natural right to seek this care for their children.

What’s Wrong with Therapy Bans

Some argue that any attempt to help children feel comfortable and thrive as the sex they are, without transforming their bodies, is not good medicine, and they accuse practitioners of using abusive, harmful techniques. But they never provide credible evidence, and the therapy bans they support don’t target harmful practices. Instead, they prohibit working toward goals and outcomes that sexual progressive activists oppose. That is, these therapy bans aren’t focused on techniques that cause harm, but on certain objectives being sought—namely, being comfortable with one’s body.

As a result, one-on-one counseling to help a teen struggling with body image due to anorexia would be permitted, but the very same counseling would be prohibited if the goal is to help a teen struggling with body image due to gender dysphoria.

Activists use emotionally charged language, labelling all such techniques “conversion therapy.” They do not apply this label only to certain discredited techniques (such as electro-shock therapies), but to any therapeutic service—including basic talk therapy—to help a gender dysphoric youth feel comfortable without “transitioning.” Their argument is that if the true “gender identity” of the child is not being “affirmed,” then the child is being harmed. They claim that if a boy who “identifies” as a girl is helped to be comfortable with his actual and unalterable bodily sex, then “conversion therapy” is taking place—regardless of the counseling techniques deployed.

What

Read More
medicine

New Landmark Study at UM School of Medicine Finds Aspirin Use Reduces Risk of Death in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients

BALTIMORE, Oct. 26, 2020 /PRNewswire/ — Hospitalized COVID-19 patients who were taking a daily low-dose aspirin to protect against cardiovascular disease had a significantly lower risk of complications and death compared to those who were not taking aspirin, according to a new study led by researchers at the University of Maryland School of Medicine (UMSOM). Aspirin takers were less likely to be placed in the intensive care unit (ICU) or hooked up to a mechanical ventilator, and they were more likely to survive the infection compared to hospitalized patients who were not taking aspirin, The study, published today in the journal Anesthesia and Analgesia, provides “cautious optimism,” the researchers say, for an inexpensive, accessible medication with a well-known safety profile that could help prevent severe complications.

“This is a critical finding that needs to be confirmed through a randomized clinical trial,” said study leader Jonathan Chow, MD, Assistant Professor of Anesthesiology at UMSOM. “If our finding is confirmed, it would make aspirin the first widely available, over-the-counter medication to reduce mortality in COVID-19 patients.”

To conduct the study, Dr. Chow and his colleagues culled through the medical records of 412 COVID-19 patients, age of 55 on average, who were hospitalized over the past few months due to complications of their infection. They were treated at the University of Maryland Medical Center in Baltimore and three other hospitals along the East Coast. About a quarter of the patients were taking a daily low-dose aspirin (usually 81 milligrams) before they were admitted or right after admission to manage their cardiovascular disease.

The researchers found aspirin use was associated with a 44 percent reduction in the risk of being put on a mechanical ventilator, a 43 percent decrease in the risk of ICU admission and – most importantly – a 47 percent decrease in the risk of dying in the hospital compared to those who were not taking aspirin. The patients in the aspirin group did not experience a significant increase in adverse events such as major bleeding while hospitalized.

The researchers controlled for several factors that may have played a role in a patient’s prognosis including age, gender, body mass index, race, hypertension and diabetes. They also accounted for heart disease, kidney disease, liver disease and the use of beta blockers to control blood pressure.

COVID-19 infections increase the risk of dangerous blood clots that can form in the heart, lungs, blood vessels and other organs. Complications from blood clots can, in rare cases, cause heart attacks, strokes and multiple organ failure as well as death.

Doctors often recommend a daily low-dose aspirin for patients who have previously had a heart attack or stroke caused by a blood clot to prevent future blood clots. Daily use, however, can increase the risk of major bleeding or peptic ulcer disease.

“We believe that the blood thinning effects of aspirin provides benefits for COVID-19 patients by preventing microclot formation,” said study co-author Michael A. Mazzeffi, MD, Associate Professor of Anesthesiology at

Read More
medicine

Socialized medicine or health care freedom

As an emergency room physician and cancer survivor, I understand that each minute counts in a medical emergency. And as our nation chooses a direction on health care this November, we need to remember the realities that follow from government-run socialized medicine – increased taxes, longer wait times, delayed care and fewer incentives to maintain a healthy lifestyle.



Americans have a choice: Socialized medicine or health care freedom


© iStock
Americans have a choice: Socialized medicine or health care freedom

Socialized medicine will have profoundly negative effects on our country. The Medicare for All plans proposed by Democrats in the House and Senate are authoritarian measures that will control the lives of Americans in the most intimate way possible. Under Medicare for All, the federal government will possess the medical records of every American and have the power to dictate when and what type of care you receive. This will ultimately lead to rationed care and unaccountable bureaucrats making the most difficult, ethical decisions about your life.

Loading...

Load Error

The Tennesseans I represent have no interest in allowing the federal government to take such an intrusive role in our health care decisions. If the government pays for our health care, are they going to tell us how many kids we can have, whether we can drink sugary sodas, or whether we can smoke? Ultimately, socialized medicine endangers our freedom to make life choices. That’s why the best direction for America’s health care system is to get the heavy hand of government out of the way and let patients, doctors, and states make their own medical decisions.

Socialized medicine will not only entail a massive government expansion into the private life of every American: It will also place a tremendous burden on the backs of the American taxpayers. Neither Medicare for All bill even attempts to put a price on its plan. That is always a bad sign. Organizations across the political spectrum have estimated the costs, and the numbers are staggering. According to the Mercatus Center, Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (I-Vt.) Medicare for All plan could cost taxpayers an additional $32.6 trillion over ten years.

Sanders’ plan does not specify where the money will come from, but we know the only way to pay for it will be to dramatically raise taxes across the board. The Heritage Foundation estimates that two-thirds of American households will see a dramatic increase in taxes. In other words, American families will be paying more for supposedly “free health care.”

Public option health care plans like those favored by Presidential nominee Joe Biden are just as radical, despite rhetoric that suggests otherwise. Dr. Lanhee J. Chen of the Hoover Institute explains that a “public option could add more than $700 billion to the 10-year federal deficit.” The long-term cost may be even greater, exceeding military spending by 2042 and matching combined spending on Medicaid and Affordable Care Act subsidies by 2049.

A public option is more insidious because it masquerades under the guise of choice. In the end, however, it will leave Americans with only one

Read More
medicine

What patients want the FDA to consider about the role of AI in medicine

Unlock this article by subscribing to STAT Plus and enjoy your first 30 days free!

GET STARTED

What is it?

STAT Plus is STAT’s premium subscription service for in-depth biotech, pharma, policy, and life science coverage and analysis.
Our award-winning team covers news on Wall Street, policy developments in Washington, early science breakthroughs and clinical trial results, and health care disruption in Silicon Valley and beyond.

What’s included?

  • Daily reporting and analysis
  • The most comprehensive industry coverage from a powerhouse team of reporters
  • Subscriber-only newsletters
  • Daily newsletters to brief you on the most important industry news of the day
  • STAT+ Conversations
  • Weekly opportunities to engage with our reporters and leading industry experts in live video conversations
  • Exclusive industry events
  • Premium access to subscriber-only networking events around the country
  • The best reporters in the industry
  • The most trusted and well-connected newsroom in the health care industry
  • And much more
  • Exclusive interviews with industry leaders, profiles, and premium tools, like our CRISPR Trackr.

!function(f,b,e,v,n,t,s){if(f.fbq)return;n=f.fbq=function(){n.callMethod? n.callMethod.apply(n,arguments):n.queue.push(arguments)};if(!f._fbq)f._fbq=n; n.push=n;n.loaded=!0;n.version='2.0';n.queue=[];t=b.createElement(e);t.async=!0; t.src=v;s=b.getElementsByTagName(e)[0];s.parentNode.insertBefore(t,s)}(window, document,'script','https://connect.facebook.net/en_US/fbevents.js');

fbq( 'init', '436331036555416' ); fbq( 'track', 'PageView' );

if ( 'object' === typeof mc4wp && mc4wp.forms ) { mc4wp.forms.on( 'subscribed', function() { // Successful MC4WP newsletter signup AJAX form submission. fbq( 'track', 'Lead' ); } ); } fbq( 'track', 'ViewContent' ); } );

Source Article

Read More
medicine

As STAT turns 5, a look back at science and medicine’s biggest headlines

The past five years have been packed with medical and scientific advances, a series of public health crises that have gripped the world, and uproar over rising prescription drug costs.

They’ve also been a heck of a time to launch a publication about health and medicine.

As STAT celebrates its five-year anniversary, our reporters took a look back at six areas we’ve covered closely — CRISPR, infectious disease, the opioid crisis, drug pricing, AI in medicine, and cell and gene therapy — to recap the biggest headlines and controversies and cast an eye to what may lie ahead.

advertisement

Breaker for 5 year

CRISPR: A Nobel, He Jiankui’s bombshell, and an ugly patent fight

Even before STAT published its first stories, we knew CRISPR would be big: Breakthrough scientific papers in 2012 and early 2013 showed that this technique for changing the DNA of plants and animals was so easy to use that labs across the world would seize on it to understand basic biological processes as well as develop cures for genetic diseases. That’s why my first story for STAT profiled one of CRISPR’s inventors, biologist Feng Zhang of the Broad Institute. Check out his “Twinkle, twinkle, little star” analogy.

Sure enough, just five years later, CRISPR became Nobel big: Earlier this month, biochemist Jennifer Doudna of the University of California, Berkeley, and microbiologist Emmanuelle Charpentier of the Max Planck Institute for Infection Biology won the Nobel Prize in chemistry for their discovery of the CRISPR-Cas9 genetic scissors. The award was the first science Nobel won by two women.

advertisement

What I never suspected was how fast a CRISPR nightmare might come true, how agonizingly long drug development takes, and what an ugly fight over patents CRISPR would spawn.

CRISPR’s inventors knew from the get-go that it would be theoretically possible to use the technique to alter the genes of human embryos, creating “designer babies.” That seemed like something a rogue researcher might try in, oh, 10 years. Yet there I was in Hong Kong in November 2018, at the second international conference on human genome editing, when China’s He Jiankui dropped his bombshell: He’d CRISPR’d human embryos, resulting in the birth of twin, genetically altered girls. That ignited a firestorm of condemnation and hand-wringing that the global scientific community hadn’t tried hard enough to stop him.

Also in the hand-wringing category: The fight over CRISPR patents between the Broad Institute and the University of California has been an eye-opener with its legal costs (well into eight figures; think of the science that would buy), ugly accusations, and sheer persistence.

Two happier CRISPR surprises: significant improvements on the original technique and the growing list of human diseases it might treat or cure, if success in lab mice is any indication.

With several companies as well as academic scientists already using CRISPR in clinical trials, one message from 2015 has stuck: CRISPR might actually live up to its hype, becoming the powerhouse genetic cure scientists dreamed of.

— Sharon Begley

Breaker for 5 year

Infectious disease: From

Read More