California

dentist

Local Dentist forms California Institute for Dental Implants

A local dentist develops new dental implant surgery and placement to give more people a chance at a healthy smile.

After years of using multiple systems to perform dental implant surgery and implant placement, Dr. Sean Mohtashami of All Bright Dental created his own and called it the 4M Dental Implant Solution. The 4M Dental Implant Solution gives patients with unhealthy or missing teeth an opportunity to get dental implants, even if they have been told they do not have enough bone.

“I developed my system after many years of using several other world-renowned dental implant systems,” says Dr. Sean. “I have always felt there must be a better way, and so I addressed every step of the procedure. My team and I developed a solution that is easier, faster, and more comfortable for the patient. We still use the All-On-4® procedure for full-mouth restorations, but we’ve also designed and developed some incredibly durable and natural-looking implants for single tooth and full-arch replacements.”

Dr. Sean, as his patients like to call him, wanted to expand, and he began traveling to Southern California to place implants for other dentists in their offices. He opened his first 4M Dental Implant Center in Newport Beach, California in 2017. Since then, he has opened two more offices, in Anaheim Hills and Long Beach, California.

To complete the circle of helping as many people as possible, Dr. Sean opened the 4M Institute, to teach dentists the advanced art and science of dental implants. “I am humbled by the excitement other dentists have shown to learn the 4M procedures and techniques,” says Dr. Sean. “It has been my hope to help as many people as possible with dental implants. I never dreamed that I would be able to help so many. I genuinely believe that 4M is the simplest and most comfortable solution to missing teeth, especially for those needing a full arch of teeth.”

Dentistry is ever changing, with stronger and more natural looking materials. Complex procedures are becoming mainstream, and faster and less painful techniques are giving patients better results quicker and more comfortably than ever before. Teaching dentists advanced skills and improving their practices enables Dr. Sean and his team at All Bright Dental and 4M Dental Implant Center to positively impact the lives of patients around the world.

See before and after photos and videos of actual patients, and learn more about our full arch All-on-4®, 4M dental implant system at www.AllBrightSmile.com.

Members of the editorial and news staff of the Las Vegas Review-Journal were not involved in the creation of this content.

Source Article

Read More
medicine

Rocket Pharmaceuticals Receives Funding from the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine for Phase 1 Clinical Trial of RP-L401 for Infantile Malignant Osteopetrosis

NEW YORK–(BUSINESS WIRE)–Rocket Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (NASDAQ: RCKT) (“Rocket”), a clinical-stage company advancing an integrated and sustainable pipeline of genetic therapies for rare childhood disorders, today announces that the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM) has awarded Rocket a $3.7 million CLIN2 grant award to support the clinical development of its lentiviral vector (LVV)-based gene therapy, RP-L401, for the treatment of Infantile Malignant Osteopetrosis (IMO), a rare, severe monogenic bone resorption disorder characterized by skeletal deformities, neurologic abnormalities and bone marrow failure. The CIRM was founded in 2004 following the passing of Proposition 71 or the California Stem Cell Research and Cures Initiative, which allowed $3 billion in state funding for stem cell research conducted in California. This will be Rocket’s second CIRM grant after receiving one in 2019 for the development of the company’s gene therapy for Leukocyte Adhesion Deficiency-I (LAD-I).

“We’re grateful the CIRM has recognized the promise of RP-L401 for IMO, a devastating pediatric rare disease for which the primary treatment option is allogeneic bone marrow transplant,” said Jonathan Schwartz, M.D. Chief Medical Officer and Senior Vice President of Rocket. “RP-L401 could be a potentially curative treatment for this devastating disorder that affects children at a young age, and we are thankful to have this meaningful support from the CIRM to move our program forward for these families.”

Rocket’s Investigational New Drug Application (IND) for RP-L401 was accepted by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in June of 2020, and the gene therapy received Fast Track designation from the FDA in August 2020. Proceeds from the grant will help fund clinical trial costs, as well as provide manufactured drug product for Phase 1 patients enrolled at the U.S. clinical trial site, University of California, Los Angeles, led by principal investigator Donald B. Kohn, M.D., Professor of Microbiology, Immunology and Molecular Genetics, Pediatrics (Hematology/Oncology), Molecular and Medical Pharmacology, and member of the Eli and Edythe Broad Center of Regenerative Medicine and Stem Cell Research at the University of California, Los Angeles. The non-randomized, open-label Phase 1 clinical trial will enroll two pediatric patients, one month of age or older. The trial is designed to assess safety and tolerability of RP-L401, as well as preliminary efficacy, including potential improvements in bone abnormalities/density, hematologic status and endocrine abnormalities. Further information about the clinical program is available here.

About Infantile Malignant Osteopetrosis

Infantile Malignant Osteopetrosis (IMO) is a rare, severe autosomal recessive disorder caused by mutations in the TCIRG1 gene, which is critical for the process of bone resorption. Mutations in TCIRG1 interfere with the function of osteoclasts, cells which are essential for normal bone remodeling and growth, leading to skeletal malformations, including fractures and cranial deformities which cause neurologic abnormalities including vision and hearing loss. Patients often have endocrine abnormalities and progressive, frequently fatal bone marrow failure. As a result, death is common within the first decade of life. IMO has an estimated incidence of 1 in 200,000. The only treatment option currently available for IMO is an

Read More
health

California Voters Exempt Uber, Lyft, DoorDash From Having to Reclassify Drivers

Uber Technologies Inc.,

Lyft Inc.

and DoorDash Inc. won a pivotal vote in California that exempts them from having to reclassify their drivers as employees, according to Associated Press race calls.

The companies, along with Postmates Inc. and Instacart Inc., collectively contributed around $200 million to support Proposition 22, a measure that allows them to bypass a state law intended to provide employee-like protections for their drivers. The campaign was the most expensive for any ballot measure in state history. With more than 60% of ballots counted, the vote was running 58% in favor of the measure and 42% against, prompting the Associated Press to project it would pass.

The outcome deals a blow to the state government, which has been embroiled in a high-stakes battle with the companies over the reclassification. A law passed last year sought to force ride-share and food-delivery companies to reclassify their drivers as employees, eligible for benefits such as minimum wage, paid sick leave and unemployment assistance.

The app companies’ business models are predicated on “gig workers”—independent contractors—to keep labor costs low.

None of the companies reclassified workers after the law went into effect on Jan. 1. Instead, they combined forces to support the ballot measure. The state sued in May to enforce the statute, litigation that will be superseded by the successful election outcome.

The stakes were high for the companies: A reclassification would have weighed on their already-red bottom lines and set a precedent for other U.S. states challenging their business model.

In recent months, the ride-share and delivery companies blasted ads and push notifications to drivers, saying only a fraction of them would be hired as employees. Fewer drivers would mean longer wait times, they said in messages to customers, and prices would rise because of higher costs associated with the reclassification. Uber Chief Executive Dara Khosrowshahiestimated that prices for rides could double if the ballot measure failed.

The California law at the heart of the dispute didn’t restrict flexible work; lawmakers say the companies were free to structure a model where benefits and flexibility went hand-in-hand.

Uber, Lyft, DoorDash and others sent ads and in-app messages that pressed voters to support their cause.



Photo:

Photo Illustration: Dave Cole/WSJ; Photos: WSJ Research (6), Gig Workers Rising (2)

The companies argued it was unrealistic to extend employee-like benefits to many drivers who worked for them just a few hours a week. They also said the reclassification would force drivers to work pre-scheduled shifts, robbing them of the freedom they currently enjoy. More than half a dozen drivers interviewed said they planned to vote in the companies’ favor because that messaging resonated with them.

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

Do you think that Uber, Lyft and other companies that employ app-based drivers should be exempt from treating drivers as employees? Why or why not? Join the conversation below.

To make their ballot measure more palatable, the companies said that if it passed they would guarantee some new protections, including health insurance for drivers who work

Read More
health

California voters reject new rules for dialysis clinics

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — California voters have rejected a ballot measure to require a doctor or highly trained nurse at each of California’s 600 dialysis clinics.

With more than 9 million votes tallied Tuesday, Proposition 23 had just 37% of votes. It is the second measure seeking to regulate dialysis clinics placed on the ballot in recent years by unions that represent health care workers and drew more than $110 million in spending.

Opponents, financed by dialysis clinic companies, say that under that mandate, between two and three doctors would be required at every facility because most are open at least 16 hours a day, creating a financial burden that could lead some clinics to close.


Proposition 23 was the second attempt by the unions to increase regulation of dialysis clinics in California, where DaVita Inc. and Fresenius Medical Care — two of the country’s largest for-profit dialysis providers — operate about three-quarters of the state’s dialysis market.

THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. AP’s earlier story follows below.

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — California voters are deciding whether to require a doctor or highly trained nurse at each of the state’s 600 dialysis clinics whenever patients are being treated to improve patient care.

Proposition 23 was placed on the ballot by unions that represent health care workers and has attracted more than $110 million in political spending to persuade voters.

Opponents, financed by dialysis clinic companies, say that under that mandate, between two and three doctors would be required at every facility because most are open at least 16 hours a day, creating a financial burden that could lead some clinics to close.

Proposition 23 is the second attempt by the unions to increase regulation of dialysis clinics in California, where DaVita Inc. and Fresenius Medical Care — two of the country’s largest for-profit dialysis providers — operate about three-quarters of the state’s dialysis market.

In 2018, a separate initiative sought to cap dialysis clinics’ profits and force them to invest more of their profits in patient care. Voters rejected the measure, which became the most expensive initiative on the 2018 ballot and one of the most expensive in history, generating more than $130 million in campaign spending: $111 million from dialysis companies and $19 million from unions.

This time around, unions have raised nearly $9 million, while the coalition against Proposition 23 — led by DaVita and Fresenius, along with the California Medical Association and American Nurses Association-California — has raised more than $105 million.

The nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office estimates dialysis companies make roughly $3 billion a year from their California operations.

Dialysis providers say most California clinics offer high-quality care and are regulated by federal and state authorities. They also point out that all patients already have a nephrologist — a kidney specialist who oversees their care — and that nephrologists direct each California clinic. Both initiatives have been part of a tactic to pressure dialysis companies to unionize workers.

Dialysis patients typically undergo four-hour treatments at

Read More
health

California Voters to Decide on Dialysis Clinics Care | California News

By OLGA R. RODRIGUEZ, Associated Press

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — California voters are deciding whether to require a doctor or highly trained nurse at each of the state’s 600 dialysis clinics whenever patients are being treated to improve patient care.

Proposition 23 was placed on the ballot by unions that represent health care workers and has attracted more than $110 million in political spending to persuade voters.

Opponents, financed by dialysis clinic companies, say that under that mandate, between two and three doctors would be required at every facility because most are open at least 16 hours a day, creating a financial burden that could lead some clinics to close.

Proposition 23 is the second attempt by the unions to increase regulation of dialysis clinics in California, where DaVita Inc. and Fresenius Medical Care — two of the country’s largest for-profit dialysis providers — operate about three-quarters of the state’s dialysis market.

In 2018, a separate initiative sought to cap dialysis clinics’ profits and force them to invest more of their profits in patient care. Voters rejected the measure, which became the most expensive initiative on the 2018 ballot and one of the most expensive in history, generating more than $130 million in campaign spending: $111 million from dialysis companies and $19 million from unions.

This time around, unions have raised nearly $9 million, while the coalition against Proposition 23 — led by DaVita and Fresenius, along with the California Medical Association and American Nurses Association-California — has raised more than $105 million.

The nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office estimates dialysis companies make roughly $3 billion a year from their California operations.

Dialysis providers say most California clinics offer high-quality care and are regulated by federal and state authorities. They also point out that all patients already have a nephrologist — a kidney specialist who oversees their care — and that nephrologists direct each California clinic. Both initiatives have been part of a tactic to pressure dialysis companies to unionize workers.

Dialysis patients typically undergo four-hour treatments at least three times a week, during which machines remove the blood in the patient’s body, filter toxins out, then put the blood back in, temporarily performing the functions of the kidneys.

Rick Barnett, who runs the largest nonprofit dialysis provider in California, Satellite Healthcare, with 60 clinics, said a kidney specialist oversees the care of every dialysis patient, highly trained nurses and technicians staff the clinics and both federal and state officials conduct scheduled and random inspections.

“This is not about quality of care so, my question is, what problem are they trying to solve?” Barnett asked.

Find AP’s full election coverage at APNews.com/Election2020.

Copyright 2020 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Source Article

Read More
health

California Prop 14 may change lives of sick kids, keep taxpayer funding of stem cell therapy research

Three-year-old Ava was constantly sick. Her gums were inflamed, and every time she got a scraped knee, it turned into a dangerous infection.

Her parents, Alicia and Jon Langenhop, were months pregnant with their third child when they learned that Ava’s constellation of symptoms added up to an extremely rare, inherited disorder of the white blood cells, called leukocyte adhesion deficiency-1. Although antibiotics and antivirals could prolong her life, the disease was considered fatal, usually before kindergarten.

Ava’s primary hope, doctors told the Langenhops, was a bone marrow transplant from someone who was a good match, probably a brother or a sister.

Two-year-old Olivia had inherited the same disease as her big sister. She had been hospitalized with infections, too.

The baby in Alicia’s belly would be the girls’ best hope. Since both parents were carriers of the rare genetic mutation, the new baby, a boy, had a 25% chance of inheriting it, too.

Alicia was still in the hospital last October when they found out baby Landon had the mutation. Around the same time, the couple learned of a research trial in California.

Children Ava, Olivia and Landon Langenhop were diagnosed with an extremely rare, inherited disorder of the white blood cells, called leukocyte adhesion deficiency-1. California Proposition 14, a citizen-initiated ballot measure, authorizes bonds continuing stem cell research.
Children Ava, Olivia and Landon Langenhop were diagnosed with an extremely rare, inherited disorder of the white blood cells, called leukocyte adhesion deficiency-1. California Proposition 14, a citizen-initiated ballot measure, authorizes bonds continuing stem cell research.

Doctors would take each child’s blood cells, fix the mutation and return them. It should be a permanent fix, with less risk than a bone marrow transplant because the healthy cells would be their own, so their bodies wouldn’t reject them as foreign.  

The approach had been tried in only one child, though.

This is the type of research reaching patients nearly two decades after President George W. Bush banned federal funding of stem cell research and 16 years after California residents approved a tax increase on themselves to support research.

Proposition 14 on Tuesday’s ballot asks whether Californians want to continue this work, providing $5.5 billion for stem cell research over the next three decades.

In the early 2000s, stem cell research was controversial because it often required the destruction of human embryos. Though embryonic stem cells remain essential for some therapies, in cases such as the Langenhops’, treatment focuses on manipulating a person’s own cells.

Stem cell science has made tremendous progress, but as in most new fields, the pace remains painstakingly slow. Every treatment has to be the subject of years of trial-and-error research, and many scientific hurdles linger. 

Stem cells have been used to treat rare diseases, such as severe combined immunodeficiency, also known as “bubble boy disease,” and they are being tested in more common conditions such as Parkinson’s disease, macular degeneration, Type 1 diabetes and even heart disease.

“Even if a subset of stuff in the pipeline goes all the way, it will change the world for patients who currently don’t have other good options,” said Sean Morrison, a stem cell biologist in Dallas.

“It’s a pivotal time in the field,” said

Read More
health

L.A. County reports 1,590 coronavirus cases, 4 deaths amid rise in Southern California infections

Los Angeles County public health officials on Sunday reported 1,590 new cases of the coronavirus and four related deaths.



a person sitting on a bed: A masked voter works on his ballot at Azusa Women's Club. (Irfan Khan / Los Angeles Times)


© Provided by The LA Times
A masked voter works on his ballot at Azusa Women’s Club. (Irfan Khan / Los Angeles Times)

The numbers brought the county’s total to 309,197 cases and 7,074 deaths.

Loading...

Load Error

There were 799 confirmed coronavirus patients in county hospitals on Friday, with 28% in intensive care, officials said. Though hospitalizations have increased slightly, they remain far below the 2,220-plus patients seen during the peak of the outbreak in July.

Still, many Southern California communities are reporting increases in the number of cases recorded each day, a concerning trend that has some officials worried that transmission of the virus could be on the rise.

In order to determine when a county can move to the next phase of reopening under California’s four-tier plan, the state monitors how many cases have been reported per 100,000 residents over a recent seven-day period. In larger counties, the rate is adjusted to account for how much testing is being done.

L.A. County’s adjusted case rate increased last week to eight per 100,000 residents, from 7.6 the week before.

In Orange County, which reported 233 new coronavirus cases and one death Sunday, the case rate ticked up to 5.1 from 4.6 the week before. Riverside County reported its most recent adjusted case rate at 10.1, up from 9.1 the week before. And San Bernardino County reported an adjusted case rate of 11.9, up from 10.9.

L.A., Riverside and San Bernardino counties all remain in the purple tier, the most restrictive, meaning risk of transmission remains widespread, and most nonessential businesses are closed for indoor operations. To move into the next tier, red, a county must have an adjusted rate of no more than seven cases per 100,000 residents.

Orange County is classified within the red tier. In order to move into the less-restrictive orange tier, which means that the risk of transmission is considered moderate and some indoor business operations can resume with modifications, the county must reduce its adjusted case rate to four cases per 100,000 residents.

It’s not clear what is driving the increase in cases in Southern California. Some officials have blamed parties as likely contributors, particularly gatherings celebrating the recent Lakers and Dodgers wins.

The trend is also playing out elsewhere across the United States, which on Thursday broke the single-day record for the highest number of coronavirus cases, then did so again Friday.

This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.

Continue Reading

Source Article

Read More
health

Trump Claims California Wants You To Eat ‘Through’ A Face Mask, Here Is What They Said

Well, isn’t that special.

During a campaign rally in Arizona, U.S. President Donald Trump said that “In California, you have a special mask. You cannot, under any circumstances, take it off. You have to eat through the mask.”

A special face mask? Really? What exactly did Trump mean by special, which incidentally is also the name of a song by the musical group Garbage.

Well, take a look at what Trump said in this AP News video of his campaign speech:

As you can see, Trump didn’t clarify what he meant by “special.” But he did add that eating spaghetti and meat sauce with a face mask on can make you look like you got into a fight with Dana White, President of the Ultimate Fighting Championship.

Of course, eating while wearing a face mask over your nose and mouth is not a good idea. Not only could it make you look like an axe murderer, which is not a great look on a date, getting your mask soiled with sauce and other food items could end up degrading the mask, thus reducing its protective effect. After all, as experience has probably taught you, ladling gravy into your swimsuit can make it more see-through, whether it’s your bikini or your Borat slingshot thong. That’s why all ladling of gravy on your body should be done in the privacy of your own home, regardless of whether mashed potatoes are involved.

In fact, in most cases, eating through your mask would not even be feasible, assuming that you don’t want to eat your face mask as well. That’s because you tend to eat through your mouth and not though another part of your body like your ear or belly button. And a barrier is a barrier. If a mask is supposed to block respiratory droplets, certainly a hot dog can’t make its way through either, unless you have somehow managed to get your hands on an inter-dimensional hot dog.

So who exactly has said that you should eat through your face mask? What public health experts actually recommended doing so? Why did Trump even claim that California doesn’t want you to ever take off your face mask?

Perhaps Trump was referring to the following October 3 tweet from the Office of the Governor of California:

Hmm. “Keep your mask on in between bites” is not the same as “eat through the mask.” That would like saying that “you can urinate when you can get breaks during a date” would be the same as “you can urinate throughout the date.” Doing the latter may not get you a second date and could get you thrown out of the restaurant.

That doesn’t mean that the tweet was perfect. Saying “keep your

Read More
dentist

Man gets 26-years-to-life for killing California dentist over apparent affair with his wife

An Orange County man was sentenced Friday to 26-years-to-life in prison for stabbing to death his wife’s apparent ex-lover, an Irvine dentist, after trying to run the man down with a Mercedes-Benz SUV.

Hongli Sun, 43, was convicted earlier this month of first-degree murder for killing Dr. Xuan Liu, as well as felony assault for injuring a woman who tried to intervene during the attack outside a medical building off Barranca Parkway in Irvine on July 18, 2015.

According to court testimony, Sun divorced his wife, Cynthia Chen, after she had an affair with Liu, her longtime employer. Chen spent several months in China, leaving the couple’s young child with Sun. After her return, the two reversed their divorce, as they tried to reconcile.

But Sun still suspected his wife was having an affair with Liu. On the day of the attack, he drove to Liu’s office to see if she was there.

Sun found a letter on the office door that appeared to be written in his wife’s handwriting, saying they had gone to lunch. Sun waited in his car until his wife, Liu and two officer workers returned.

Sun drove toward Liu, striking him with enough force to knock him away from the SUV before the vehicle collided with a wall. Sun exited the SUV and chased after Liu, stabbing him 17 times and injuring an office worker who was trying to stop him.

That Sun killed Liu wasn’t disputed at the trial. Instead, jurors were left to decide whether Sun planned to kill Liu when he drove to the office that day, or whether he acted in the heat of passion.

During the trial, Senior Deputy District Attorney Mark Birney described Sun as being driven by “anger, jealousy and ultimately the desire for revenge.” The prosecutor told jurors that Sun felt shamed by his wife cheating on him, as well as the knowledge that others at Liu’s office knew of the affair.

Sun’s attorney, John Barnett, told jurors that Sun believed Liu had “drugged,” “debased,” and “seduced” his wife, had photographed her having sex and had given her a sexually transmitted disease. The repeated betrayals had caused Sun to “snap” and kill Liu, the defense attorney said.

Source Article

Read More
health

In the hospital? You can still vote in California and most other parts of the country

Johnathon Talamantes in a hospital bed.
Johnathon Talamantes broke his hip in a car accident and needed surgery that will keep him hospitalized beyond the Nov. 3 election. The hospital helped him apply for an emergency ballot so he can vote without leaving his bed. (Los Angeles County-USC Medical Center)

Johnathon Talamantes broke his hip in a car accident last week and had surgery five days later at Los Angeles County-USC Medical Center.

His post-op recovery will keep him in the hospital beyond election day, and that was on his mind as he prepared himself for the surgery.

“One of the first things I asked my nurse this morning was, ‘Oh, how am I going to vote?’” Talamantes, 30, said from his hospital bed the day before the operation.

He initially thought of asking his mom to rummage through a pile of papers at the home they share and bring him the mail-in ballot that he, like all registered California voters, received for this election.

But then staffers at County-USC told him about another option: They could help him get an emergency ballot so he could cast his vote without having to get out of bed. So Talamantes told his mom to not bother.

I don’t want her coming down here, because of the COVID restrictions,” he said.

California law protects the rights of voters who are in the hospital or other care facilities, or confined at home. It allows them to get help from anyone they choose — other than an employer or a union representative — so they can cast an emergency ballot.

At least 37 other states allow emergency voting for medical reasons, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. But practices vary.

In some states, only family members can assist hospitalized patients with voting from the hospital.

In California, New York and several other states, hospital employees and volunteers can help a patient complete an emergency ballot application. They can pick up the ballot for the patient and deliver the completed ballot back to the election office or deposit it in an official drop box.

In North Carolina, by contrast, it is a felony for a healthcare worker to assist a patient with voting.

In 18 states, the law allows local election boards to send representatives directly to patients’ bedsides, though six of those states have canceled that service this fall because of the COVID-19 pandemic, said Dr. Kelly Wong, founder of Patient Voting, a nonpartisan organization dedicated to increasing turnout among registered voters who find themselves unexpectedly hospitalized around election time.

The group’s website features an interactive map of the United States with state-by-state information on voting while in the hospital. It also allows patients to check whether they are registered to vote.

Wong, an emergency room resident at Rhode Island Hospital in Providence, recalled that when she was a medical student working in an ER, patients who were about to be admitted to the hospital would tell her, “‘I can’t be admitted; I have let

Read More