About Us


Page 11234..10..»

Broadening Study of Mitochondrially Targeted Compounds

Posted: October 28, 2012 at 7:48 am

Mitochondria, the cell's herd of bacteria-like power plants, occupy an important position in processes of aging, metabolism, and many age-related conditions. Mitochondria produce damaging reactive oxidative molecules as a side-effect of their operation, and these can cause all sorts of havoc - such as by damaging mitochondrial DNA in ways that can propagate throughout the mitochondrial population of a cell, causing it to run awry and harm surrounding tissue. This happens ever more often as we age, and is one of the principle contributions to degenerative aging.

It is worth noting that a greater ability of mitochondria to resist this sort of self-inflicted oxidative damage is theorized to explain much of the longevity of many species that are unusually long-lived for their size - such as bats, naked mole-rats, and so forth.

Thus the researcher community is increasingly interested in finding ways to target therapies to mitochondria: to slow oxidative damage, fix that damage, repair other issues such as genetic disorders in mitochondrial DNA, or alter mitochondrial operation as a way of manipulating cellular behavior and metabolic processes. Building such a therapy usually means attaching a payload molecule to a delivery molecule or particle that will be (a) taken up by a cell, passing through the cell membrane, and then (b) swallowed by a mitochondrion within the cell, passing through that mitochondrion's membranes.

A range of different research groups are working on varied forms of delivery technology. Compare, for example, the repurposed protein machinery of rhTFAM with various plastinquione compounds or polymer nanoparticles. Or, more deviously, genetic engineering that makes a cell nucleus produce and export proteins to that cell's mitochondria. There are many others.

Diversity is a good thing - though of course not all of these strategies are equal in the sort of interventions that they can support. There is a world of difference between introducing more antioxidants into the mitochondria so as to blunt their creation of damaging, reactive byproducts and introducing new genes to repair damage to mitochondrial DNA. The former only gently slows the inevitable, while the latter reverses and repairs the harm done.

In any case, here is a paper representative of work taking place in the targeted antioxidant camp, much of which is taking place in Moscow research centers. Given a few years of promising studies, they are going on to explore the space of possible related compounds, in search of drug candidates that might do as well or better as those discovered to date.

Novel penetrating cations for targeting mitochondria

Novel penetrating cations were used for a design of mitochondria-targeted compounds and tested in model lipid membranes, in isolated mitochondria and in living human cells in culture. Rhodamine-19, berberine and palmatine were conjugated by aliphatic linkers with plastoquinone possessing antioxidant activity. These conjugates (SkQR1,SkQBerb, SkQPalm) and their analogs lacking plastoquinol moiety (C12R1,C10Berb and C10Palm) penetrated bilayer phospholipid membrane in their cationic forms and accumulated in isolated mitochondria or in mitochondria of living cells due to membrane potential negative inside.

Reduced forms of SkQR1, SkQBerb and SkQPalm inhibited lipid peroxidation in isolated mitochondria at nanomolar concentrations. In human fibroblasts SkQR1, SkQBerb and SkQPalm prevented fragmentation of mitochondria and apoptosis induced by hydrogen peroxide.

The novel cationic conjugates described here are promising candidates for drugs against various pathologies and aging as mitochondria-targeted antioxidants and selective mild uncouplers.

As a footnote I should remind folk that everyday antioxidant supplements do nothing for long-term health, and certainly don't end up in your mitochondria when you ingest them.


Gut Microbes in Aging

Posted: at 7:48 am

Microbes in the digestive system seem to have some influence on aging, insofar as they interact with the immune system, epigenetic regulation of nearby tissues, and so forth. In effect they act almost like an additional organ or biological system. Researchers are very much in the early stages of trying to understand how microbial life in the body fits in to the bigger picture of metabolism and aging - which is already very complex, and likely to become more so:

The ageing process affects the human gut microbiota phylogenetic composition and its interaction with the immune system. Age-related gut microbiota modifications are associated with immunosenescence and inflamm-ageing in a sort of self-sustaining loop, which allows the placement of gut microbiota unbalances among both the causes and the effects of the inflamm-ageing process.

Even if, up to now, the link between gut microbiota and the ageing process is only partially understood, the gut ecosystem shows the potential to become a promising target for strategies able to contribute to the health status of older people. In this context, the consumption of pro/prebiotics may be useful in both prevention and treatment of age-related pathophysiological conditions, such as recovery and promotion of immune functions ... Moreover, being involved in different mechanisms which concur in counteracting inflammation, such as down-regulation of inflammation-associated genes and improvement of colonic mucosa conditions, probiotics have the potentiality to be involved in the promotion of longevity.

Link: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23079287


The Cost of Smoking

Posted: at 7:48 am

There are numerous ways in which lifestyle choices can damage long-term health and lower life expectancy, but smoking remains one of the more effective, on a par with becoming obese:

The Life Span Study (LSS) was initiated in 1950 to investigate the effects of radiation, tracking over 100,000 people. However, most received minimal radiation exposure, and can therefore provide useful information about other risk factors. Surveys carried out later obtained smoking information for 68,000 men and women, who have now been followed for an average of 23 years to relate smoking habits to survival.

The younger a person was when they started smoking the higher the risk in later life. Older generations did not usually start to smoke until well into adult life, and usually smoked only a few cigarettes per day. In contrast, Japanese born more recently (1920-45) usually started to smoke in early adult life, much as smokers in Britain and the USA.

These differences in smoking habits are reflected in the mortality patterns. Smokers born before 1920 lost just a few years. In contrast, men born later (1920-45) who started to smoke before age 20 lost nearly a decade of life expectancy, and had more than double the death rate of lifelong non-smokers, suggesting that more than half of these smokers will eventually die from their habit. Results on the few women who had smoked since before age 20 were similar.

In addition to studying the risk of smoking, the researchers were able to examine the benefits of stopping. As elsewhere, those who stopped smoking before age 35 avoided almost all the excess risk among continuing smokers, and even those who stopped around age 40 avoided most of it.

Link: http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2012-10/bmj-st1102412.php


Metformin Still Dubious as a Calorie Restriction Memetic

Posted: at 7:48 am

One of the many ways in which FDA regulation corrupts research and development in medicine is the creation of a strong financial incentive to reuse existing drugs. It's much less expensive to obtain regulatory approval for a new marginal use of a drug already approved for other uses than it is to obtain regulatory approval for a completely new drug or other medical technology that might be far better. This discourages real progress in favor of something that only looks a little like progress: many of the existing stable of drugs are decades old, yet resources that might otherwise go to breaking new ground are instead poured into shoving these old square pegs into as many round holes as possible.

Given this it should be no great surprise to see that as work on the biology of calorie restriction has progressed, an increasing amount of time and money has been devoted to attempts to reuse existing drugs as calorie restriction mimetics - i.e. to find approved drugs that produce at least some of the same changes in metabolism, and with as few side-effects as possible. One of these drugs is metformin, but as I noted in a post earlier this year, it really isn't much to write home about, given that results from a range of studies are all over the map. It may or may not be useful or beneficial, and certainly doesn't show the clear benefits to health and life expectancy produced by calorie restriction itself:

Studies of the potential antiaging effects of antidiabetic biguanides, such as metformin, are still experimental for obvious reasons and their results are currently ambiguous.

Today I thought I'd direct your attention to a recent paper that shows metformin failing to do much for fly life spans:

Activation of AMPK by the Putative Dietary Restriction Mimetic Metformin Is Insufficient to Extend Lifespan in Drosophila

The biguanide drug, metformin, commonly used to treat type-2 diabetes, has been shown to extend lifespan and reduce fecundity in C. elegans through a dietary restriction-like mechanism via the AMP-activated protein kinase (AMPK) and the AMPK-activating kinase, LKB1.

We have investigated whether the longevity-promoting effects of metformin are evolutionarily conserved using the fruit fly, Drosophila melanogaster. We show here that while feeding metformin to adult Drosophila resulted in a robust activation of AMPK and reduced lipid stores, it did not increase lifespan in either male or female flies. In fact, we found that when administered at high concentrations, metformin is toxic to flies. Furthermore, no decreases in female fecundity were observed except at the most toxic dose. Analysis of intestinal physiology after metformin treatment suggests that these deleterious effects may result from disruptions to intestinal fluid homeostasis.

Thus, metformin appears to have evolutionarily conserved effects on metabolism but not on fecundity or lifespan.

Nonetheless, money continues to flow for this and similar work.


Reporting on the 2012 Singularity Summit

Posted: at 7:47 am

Videos of the presentations given at this year's Singularity Summit have yet to emerge online, but while we're waiting here is a report on the event:

Kurzweil took the stage on Saturday afternoon to deliver the summit's keynote address. "The singularity is near," he began quietly, a grin slowly spreading across his face. "No, it isn't here yet, but it's getting nearer," he said to laughs and applause. He spoke extemporaneously for over an hour, his presentation a mix of statistics, time series graphs, personal anecdotes, and predictions.

Computing ability and technological innovation have been increasing exponentially over the past few decades, he argued, alongside similar increases in life expectancy and income. "All progress stems from the law of accelerating returns," he proclaimed. He discussed his latest project - an attempt to reverse-engineer the human brain. "Intelligence is at the root of our greatest innovations: genetics, nanotechnology, and robotics. Once we master artificial intelligence, unimaginable new frontiers will open up."

After his talk, a man stood up and looked Kurzweil in the eye. "I'm in my 60s like you," he said, his voice faltering. "Do you think we'll make it?" It took me a few seconds to realize they were talking about immortality and I felt chills in that moment. "Life expectancy tables are based on what happened in the past," responded Kurzweil without skipping a beat. "In 25 years, we'll be able to add one year of life for every year that passes. We have a very good chance of making it through."

I should note that I believe Kurzweil's timelines for rejuvenation biotechnology are only possible if $300 million or more in dedicated research funding turns up at the SENS Foundation's front door tomorrow, thereby ensuring a good shot at demonstrating rejuvenation in old laboratory mice by the mid-2020s. As things stand progress towards the necessary technologies is far slower - not because it cannot be done, but because there is comparatively little interest in doing it, and therefore little funding.

One of the deep puzzles of our age is how a multi-billion-dollar "anti-aging" industry, full of enthusiasm but providing nothing that significantly impacts aging, can exist alongside the near absence of interest in funding research that will produce therapies capable of reversing the progression of aging. There are strange tides at work in the psychology surrounding aging and longevity.

Link: http://www.policymic.com/articles/16546/human-immortality-singularity-summit-looks-forward-to-the-day-that-humans-can-live-forever


California Stem Cell Agency First: Big Pharma Hook Up

Posted: at 7:46 am

BURLINGAME, Ca. – For the first
time, a Big Pharma company has hooked into the $3 billion California
stem cell agency, a move that the agency described as a “watershed”
in its efforts to commercialize stem cell research.

The involvement of GlaxoSmithKline
comes via a partnership with ViaCyte, Inc., of San Diego, Ca., in a
clinical trial, partially financed with a $10.1 million grant today
from the stem cell agency. The trial involves a human embryonic stem
cell product that has “the potential to essentially cure patients
with type 1 diabetes and provide a powerful new treatment for those
with type 2 disease,” ViaCyte said. Scientific reviewers for the agency, formally known as the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine(CIRM),  “characterized the goal of the proposed therapy as as the 'holy grail' of diabetes treatments.”
CIRM Director Jeff Sheehy, who is co
vice chair of the agency's grant review group, said the ViaCyte product
could be manufactured on a large scale and basically involves “taking
(small) pouches and popping them into patients.”
The stem cell agency's award triggered
arrangements between ViaCyte and Glaxo that will bring in financial
and other support from Glaxo. The exact amount of cash was not
disclosed. CIRM said Glaxo will “co-fund and, assuming success,
conduct the pivotal trial and commercialize the product.” Under the terms of the grant, Glaxo and ViaCyte will have to meet CIRM milestones in order to secure continued funding. 
Following board approval, Jason
, head of the Glaxo stem cell unit, characterized the
arrangement as a partnership. He told the board that the company
intends to develop a “sustainable pipeline.”
Gardner credited CIRM President Alan
with being instrumental in helping to put the arrangement
together, beginning with their first meeting three years ago.
Trounson said the deal will resonate not only in California but
throughout the world.
Paul Laikind, president of ViaCyte,
also addressed the board, stressing the importance of CIRM's
financial support for his company over past years. It has received
$26.3 million (not including the latest grant) from California taxpayers at a time when stem cell
funding was nearly dried up. He noted that small companies such as ViaCyte do not have the resources to carry a product through the
final stages of clinical trials and subsequent production. Gardner also said,

“When the commercial funding avenues
have become much more risk averse, CIRM support (has ensured) that
promising, innovative cell therapy technologies are fully explored.”

In comments to the California Stem Cell
Elona Baum, CIRM's general counsel and vice president for
business development, described the award as a “watershed” for
the eight-year-old agency, linking the agency with Big Phama for the
first time. Much of CIRM's current efforts are aimed at stimulating
financial commitments from large companies, which are necessary to
commercialize stem cell research.
Arrangements between Big Pharma and
small companies are not unusual and can vanish quickly. However, the
CIRM-ViaCyte-Glaxo deal sends a message to other Big Pharma companies
and smaller ones, perhaps clearing away concerns that have hindered
other deals that could involve the stem cell agency.
The stem cell agency is pushing hard to
fulfill the promises of the 2004 ballot campaign that created CIRM.
Voters were led to believe that stem cell cures were virtually around
the corner. None have been developed to date.


Trounson Going Halftime in January and February

Posted: at 7:46 am

BURLINGAME, Ca. -- The president of the $3 billion California stem cell agency, Alan Trounson, will be working half-time while living in Australia during January and February of next year.

Trounson told the governing board of the agency of his plans at the beginning of its meeting here morning. He said he needs to spend more time with his family, which lives in Melbourne.

Trounson has an 11-year-old son with whom Trounson said he hasn't spend much time in the last 18 months.  Trounson said he intends to teach his son to surf. Trounson's daughter also will be getting married in February.

Meanwhile, directors are currently discussing approval of grants in its $20 million-plus strategic partnership round.


Texas Science Flap Cited as California Stem Cell Agency Eyes its Own Processes

Posted: at 7:46 am

OAKLAND, Ca. – Meeting against a
backdrop from Texas that involves conflicts of interest and mass
resignations of grant reviewers, a task force of the $3 billion
California stem cell agency today began a partial examination of its
own grant approval process, specifically focusing on appeals by
rejected applicants.

The president of the California
organization, Alan Trounson, told the task force that it was dealing
with a “very serious matter” that in some ways is similar to what
happened in Texas. He said the science community is “very much
The situation in Texas involves the
five-year-old Cancer Prevention and Research Institute, which like
the California stem cell agency, formally known as the California
Institute of Regenerative Medicine (CIRM)
, has $3 billion of borrowed
money to use to finance research.
The chief scientific officer of the
Texas organization, Nobel laureate Alfred Gilman, resigned Oct. 12
during a flap about its attempts “to simultaneously support basic
research and nurture companies.”
Gilman's departure was triggered by a
$20 million award made without scientific review. Reviewer
resignations followed with letters that accused the Texas group of
“hucksterism” and dishonoring the peer review process. (Writer Monya Baker has a good overview today in Nature.)
The situation in Texas came to a head
AFTER the governing board of the California research group created
its task force. The problems in Texas are bigger and not identical to
those in California, which mainly involve the free-wheeling nature of the appeal process, not an entire lack of scientific review.
Nonetheless, this past summer, directors of the California agency for
the first time approved an award that was rejected twice by
reviewers. The award went to StemCells, Inc., of Newark, Ca., which
now has won $40 million, ranking the company No. 1 in
awards to business from CIRM.
Earlier this month, Los Angeles Times
business columnist Michael Hiltzik characterized the StemCells, Inc.,
award as “redolent of cronyism.”
Today's session of the CIRM task force
focused primarily on an aspect of the agency's appeals process that
CIRM labels as “extraordinary petitions.” They are letters which
rejected applicants use to challenge decisions by grant reviewers.
The researchers follow up with public appearances before the
governing board, often trailing squads of patients making emotional
Both researchers and patients have a
right under state law to appear before the CIRM board to discuss any
matter. CIRM, however, is trying to come up with changes in the
appeal process that will make it clear to researchers on what the
grounds the board might overturn reviewers' decisions. The agency is
also defining those grounds narrowly and aiming at eliminating
appeals based on differences in scientific opinion.
At today's meeting, CIRM Director Jeff
, a patient advocate and co-vice chair of the grants review
group, said peer review is an “extraordinary way of analyzing
science, but it is not always perfect.” However, he also said that
“as a board we are not respecting input” from scientists and thus
allow the perception that we can be “persuaded against the judgment
of scientists.”
CIRM Director Oswald Steward, director
of the Reeve-Irvine Research Center at UC Irvine, agreed with a
suggestion by Sheehy that board must act with “discipline” when
faced with appeals by rejected applicants. Steward said, 

process has gotten a little out of hand.”

It was a sentiment that drew no dissent
at today's 90-minute meeting.
Missing from today's meeting, which had
teleconference locations in San Francisco, Irvine, La Jolla and Palo
Alto, were any of the hundreds of California scientists whose
livelihoods are likely to be affected by changes in the grant
approval process. Also absent were California biotech businesses,
along with the only representative on the task force from CIRM's
scientific reviewers.
Our comment? When researchers and
businesses that have millions at stake fail to show up for key
sessions that set the terms on how they can get the money, it is a
sad commentary on their professional and business acumen.
Bert Lubin, a CIRM director and
chairman of the task force, indicated he would like to have two more
meetings of the task force prior to making recommendations to a full
board workshop in January with possible final action later that
month. Lubin, CEO of Children's Hospital in Oakland, said the matter
is “really important for the credibility of our whole


On Inflammation in Mouse Longevity Mutants

Posted: October 21, 2012 at 7:47 am

Chronic inflammation is a bad thing, walking hand in hand with the frailties and degenerations of aging. Rising inflammation contributes to a very broad range of fatal age-related conditions, and the progressive decline of the immune system itself causes ever greater chronic inflammation, even as it fails to protect the body from pathogens and errant cells. Further, visceral fat tissue is a potent source of inflammation, and this is one of the mechanisms thought to link excess fat with lowered life expectancy and greater risk of age-related disease.

There is plenty in the Fight Aging! archives on the subject of inflammation and its role in aging. To pick a handful of examples:

Some of the best known genetically engineered mutant mice with extended longevity are those in which growth hormone and its receptor are suppressed. They are small, need careful husbanding because they don't generate enough body heat to survive well on their own, and live 60-70% longer than ordinary members of their species. As noted in the following review paper, reduced inflammation has some role to play in this extended healthy life span:

Growth hormone, inflammation and aging:

The last 200 years of industrial development along with the progress in medicine and in various public health measures had significant effect on human life expectancy by doubling the average longevity from 35-40 to 75-80. There is evidence that this great increase of the lifespan during industrial development is largely due to decreased exposure to chronic inflammation throughout life. There is strong evidence that exposure of an individual to past infections and the levels of chronic inflammation increase the risk of heart attack, stroke and even cancer.

Centenarians represent exceptional longevity in human populations and it is already known that many of these individuals are escaping from major common diseases such as cancer, diabetes etc. There is ongoing interest in investigating the mechanisms that allow these individuals to reach this exceptional longevity. There are several animal mutants used to study longevity with hope to determine the mechanism of extended lifespan and more importantly protection from age related diseases. In our laboratory we use animals with disruption of growth hormone (GH) signaling which greatly extend longevity.

Mutant animals characterized by extended longevity provide valuable tools to study the mechanisms of aging. Growth hormone and insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) constitute one of the well-established pathways involved in the regulation of aging and lifespan. Ames and Snell dwarf mice characterized by GH deficiency as well as growth hormone receptor/growth hormone binding protein knockout (GHRKO) mice characterized by GH resistance live significantly longer than genetically normal animals.

During normal aging of rodents and humans there is increased insulin resistance, disruption of metabolic activities and decline of the function of the immune system. All of these age related processes promote inflammatory activity, causing long term tissue damage and systemic chronic inflammation. However, studies of long living mutants and calorie restricted animals show decreased pro-inflammatory activity with increased levels of anti-inflammatory adipokines such as adiponectin. At the same time, these animals have improved insulin signaling and carbohydrate homeostasis that relate to alterations in the secretory profile of adipose tissue including increased production and release of anti-inflammatory adipokines.

This suggests that reduced inflammation promoting healthy metabolism may represent one of the major mechanisms of extended longevity in long-lived mutant mice and likely also in the human.


Spermidine Levels Measured in Centenarians

Posted: at 7:47 am

Spermidine has been noted to boost autophagy and promote greater longevity to some degree in laboratory animals. Its activities are in the process of being advanced by some researchers as candidate drug mechanisms for slowing aging. Given that, it makes sense for researchers to investigate spermidine levels in longer lived individuals to see if there is any association:

Polyamines (putrescine, spermidine and spermine) are a family of molecules deriving from ornithine, through a decarboxylation process. They are essential for cell growth and proliferation, stabilization of negative charges of DNA, RNA transcription, translation and apoptosis.

Recently, it has been demonstrated that exogenously administered spermidine promotes longevity in yeasts, flies, worms and human cultured immune cells. Here, using a cross-sectional observational study, we determined whole-blood polyamines levels from 78 sex-matched unrelated individuals divided into three age groups: group 1 (31-56 years, N=26, mean age: 44.6±6.07), group 2 (60-80 years, N=26, mean age: 68.7±6.07) and group 3 (90-106 years, N=26, mean age: 96.5±4.59).

Polyamines total content is significantly lower in group 2 and 3 compared to group 1. Interestingly, this reduction is mainly attributable to the lower putrescine content. Group 2 displays the lowest levels of spermidine and spermine. On the other hand, [nonagenarians and] centenarians (group 3) display significant higher median relative percentage content of spermine with respect to total polyamines, compared to the other groups.

For the first time we report polyamines profiles from whole blood of healthy [nonagenarians and] centenarians, and our results confirm and extend previous findings on the role of polyamines in determining human longevity. However, although we found an important correlation between polyamines levels and age groups, further studies are warranted to fully understand the role of polyamines in determining life-span. Also, longitudinal and nutritional studies might suggest potential therapeutic approaches to sustain healthy aging and to increase human life-span.

Link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/rej.2012.1349


A Small Step Towards Tissue Engineered Kidneys

Posted: at 7:47 am

Tissue engineers have been inching closer to building a kidney from stem cells in the past couple of years. Here is a recent example of the ongoing work in this field:

Investigators can produce tissues similar to immature kidneys from simple suspensions of embryonic kidney cells, but they have been unsuccessful at growing more mature kidney tissues in the lab because the kidneys' complicated filtering units do not form without the support of blood vessels.

Now, from suspensions of single kidney cells, [researchers] have for the first time constructed "organoids" that can be integrated into a living animal and carry out kidney functions including blood filtering and molecule reabsorption. Key to their success was soaking the organoids in a solution containing molecules that promote blood vessel formation, then injecting these molecules into the recipient animals after the organoids were implanted below the kidneys. The organoids continued to mature and were viable for three to four weeks after implantation.

Link: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/10/121018184850.htm


Putting Aside What You’d Rather Do Because You’re Dying

Posted: at 7:47 am

Many dubious arguments are fielded in support of aging and involuntary death: every status quo, no matter how terrible, gathers its supporters. This is one of the deeper flaws inherent in human nature, the ability to mistake what is for the most desirable of what is possible. A hundred thousand deaths each and every day and the suffering of hundreds of millions is the proposal on the table whenever anyone suggests that human aging should continue as it is.

Massive campaigns of giving and social upheaval have been founded on the backs of a hundredth of this level of death and pain - but the world has a blindness when it comes to aging. Such is the power of the familiar and the long-standing: only heretics seek to overturn it, no matter how horrid and costly it is.

Nonetheless, this is an age of biotechnology in which aging might be conquered. There are plans and proposals, set forth in some detail, and debate over strategy in the comparatively small scientific community focused on aging research. So arguments over whether the development of means of rejuvenation should take place at all, reserved for philosophers and futurists in the past, now have concrete consequences: tens of millions of lives and untold suffering whenever progress is delayed. It should always be feared that a society will somehow turn to block or impede research into therapies for aging - worse and more outright crimes have been committed in the past by the members of so-called civilized cultures.

One of the arguments put forward in favor of a continuation of aging and mass death is that without the threat of impending personal extinction we'd collapse into stagnation and indolence. As the argument goes, only death and an explicitly limited future gives us the incentive to get anything done, and so all progress depends upon aging to death. I state the proposition crudely, but this is the essence of the thing, flowery language or no.

This is a terribly wrong way of looking at things: it denies the existence of desire independent of need. It casts us as nothing more than some form of Skinner box, unable to act on our own. This is another example of the way in which many humans find it hard to look beyond what is to see what might be: we live in a state of enforced urgency because we are all dying, because the decades of healthy life are a time of frantic preparation for the decline and sickness that comes later. It is normal, the everyday experience, for all of us to know we are chased by a ticking clock, forced to put aside the things that we would rather do in favor of the things that we must do. We cannot pause, cannot follow dreams, cannot stop to smell the roses.

Some people seem to manage these goals, but only the lucky few - and then only by twining what they would like to do with what they must do. It's hard to achieve that end, and it is really nothing more than an ugly compromise even when obtained. Yet like so much of what we are forced into by the human condition, it is celebrated. One more way in which what is triumphs over what might be in the minds of the masses.

Given many more healthy years of life in which to do so, we would lead quite different lives. Arguably better lives, not diverted by necessity into a long series of tasks we do not want to undertake, carried out for the sake of what will come. We could follow desire rather than need: work to achieve the aims that we want to achieve, not those forced on us. Because of aging and death, we are not free while we are alive - and in any collection of slaves there are those who fear the loss of their chains. The longer they are enslaved, the less their vision of freedom. Sadly, in the mainstream of our culture, it is those voices that speak the loudest.


More on Young Blood and Old Mice

Posted: at 7:47 am

Some of the effects of aging are driven by signaling changes in important parts of our biochemistry - such as in stem cell niches, collections of cells that provide necessary support to the stem cells that maintain and repair tissue. Niches increasingly act to suppress the stem cells they contain in response to rising levels of cellular and other damage connected to aging. The stem cells themselves also suffer damage, and this evolved response is likely a way to minimize the risk of cancer at the cost of maintaining tissues, but the declining function of the stem cells so far seems to be far more a property of signals from the niche.

In the course of investigating this and similar effects, researchers have been moving blood between young and old mice. Transfusions and joining the bloodstreams of young and old mice are a way to change the signaling environment in order to see what the effects are. The outcome is that a range of measures of aging are reversed:

Experiments on mice have shown that it is possible to rejuvenate the brains of old animals by injecting them with blood from the young. ... blood from young mice reversed some of the effects of ageing in the older mice, improving learning and memory to a level comparable with much younger animals.

[Researchers] connected the circulatory systems of an old and young mouse so that their blood could mingle. This is a well-established technique used by scientists to study the immune system called heterochronic parabiosis. When [researchers] examined the old mouse after several days, [they] found several clear signs that the ageing process had slowed down. The number of stem cells in the brain, for example, had increased. More important, [they] found a 20% increase in connections between brain cells.

One of the main things that changes with ageing are these connections, there are a lot less of them as we get older. That is thought to underlie memory impairment - if you have less connections, neurons aren't communicating, all of a sudden you have [problems] in learning and memory. ... the young blood most likely reversed ageing by topping up levels of key chemical factors that tend to decline in the blood as animals age. Reintroduce these and [all] of a sudden you have all of these plasticity and learning and memory-related genes that are coming back.

Link: http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/oct/17/young-blood-reverse-effects-ageing


CIRM addresses some tough questions. Is it all just glass towers and basic research?

Posted: at 7:46 am


At an industry conference recently I heard several new grumbles from companies about CIRM's alleged heavy bias toward funding basic, pre-clinical, embryonic stem cell-focused, academic-based research over clinical-stage, adult stem cell-focused, industry-sponsored product trials, testing, and development.

I myself have shared some concern that for an agency with a key goal of bringing new medicines to the next generation, having less than a handful of projects at the clinical stage this far into its mandate and budget was falling short well of its timeline.

I'll also admit to occasionally harboring a similar sentiment to that of former Intel CEO, Andy Grove, who is, of late, a grumpy critic of the slow pace of life science research when he said of CIRM in a great piece by Jeffrey O'Brien in Fortune Magazine, "CIRM? "There are gleaming fucking buildings everywhere. That wasn't necessary." (The great stem cell dilemma. Fortune. Sept 28, 2012)  
So...I decided to try to hit these concerns and criticisms head on with my friends at the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM).  

What follows is an online interview CellTherapyBlog.com (CTB) conducted with the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM) the week of October 15, 2012.  In the interview that follows, we were particularly interested in addressing the degree to which CIRM is focused - moving forward - on funding clinical-stage research, industry-sponsored trials, and clinical/commercial-focused product development.  

CTB: Would you please remind us of CIRM’s mandate?

CIRM: “To support and advance stem cell research and regenerative medicine under the highest ethical and medical standards for the discovery and development of cures, therapies, diagnostics and research technologies to relieve human suffering from chronic disease and injury.”

CTB: What percentage of grants or grant money distributed to-date has gone to companies?

CIRM: For-profit entities have been and currently are eligible for CIRM funding covering stages of research which range from basic biology programs (in which industry has shown little interest) through Phase II clinical trials. Of these programs, 13% have been awarded to companies thus far. Having built 12 state of the art stem cell facilities and having seeded  the field with training and other types of grants of similar purpose, CIRM is now focusing on funding translational and clinical programs.  

This is where companies' primary interests are and we expect greater company participation in our translation and clinical Request for Application. The translation and clinical awards programs provide for much larger awards as compared to the basic research and the overall amount of later stage funding is significantly larger than the earlier basic research awards. The number of awards made in the translational and clinical development funding rounds is much less than in the basic science area. 

CIRM’s Strategic Partnership Funding Program is a cornerstone of our efforts to fund industry.   We expect to make awards through this program approximately every six months to assist companies whose financing demands is frequently at shorter intervals than academic institutions. These awards will be made following a robust peer review process ensuring that awards are made to projects that are based on sound scientific data and have a reasonable chance of success.

CTB: How many CIRM-funded projects will be in clinical trial this year?  How many anticipated to be in 2013?

CIRM: Four clinical trials that were fostered by CIRM funds are already in clinical trials for cancer and blood disorders. We expect one or more CIRM-funded projects to join that list in the next year. This includes projects that are in clinical trial already for which we have funded and are funding the follow on studies.

CTB: Is CIRM actively seeking applications for clinical-stage projects? from companies?

CIRM: Yes, we have recently held the first round of applications for our Strategic Partnership Awards that are designed specifically to attract applications from industry and include significant leveraged funding from multinational biopharmaceutical companies and/or venture capital. The first of these awards will be announced at an upcoming meeting of our governing board, the Independent Citizens Oversight Committee. Industry also accesses CIRM funding through the Disease Team awards, which include teams comprised of both academic researchers and industry as partners, consultants and advisors. 

CTB: In its funding to-date more CIRM funding has gone to pre-clinical over clinical science, embryonic over adult stem cell research, and infrastructure over labor.  Is that a fair assessment?

CIRM: No. We have awarded more basic research grants in numbers, but those grants are much smaller in dollars than those in our translational portfolio. That translational portfolio includes 75 projects that have been awarded nearly $600 million, well over half of the research dollars committed.

When CIRM funding was initiated in late 2006, there was a need to build intellectual and facility capacity because doubts about support from federal sources had limited the entry of scientists into the field and there was a need for “safe harbor facilities. “ Research into stem cells was also at an early stage and so it made sense for us to focus on the discovery phase of basic biology and pre-clinical work to enable more effective utilization of the potential that was evident.

Increasingly however we are moving towards clinical science, to enable a proper assessment of the value of cell therapies and related approaches for advancement of human medicine.

Our focus has always included all stem and progenitor cells. Pluripotential stem cells are immortal and develop into all cells of the body, so the potential is large and the available funding outside CIRM has been modest. We have concentrated on human rather than animal model cells because this is where the need has been greatest. Our goal is to fund transformational research with the highest potential benefit to patients, regardless of the stem cell type they utilize.

As for infrastructure, we spent $271 million in major facilities grants to help create new, state-of-the-art safe harbor research facilities in California which are essential for  delivering  the goals of CIRM. That investment was used to leverage almost $900 million in additional funds from private donors and institutions to help pay for those facilities. Each facility  attracted new researchers to the state,  employed local construction workers  and created expanded research facilities that will now be able to offer long-term employment for the high tech innovators in stem cell research, transformative new medicines  for intractable disease and deliver economic benefit for Californians.

CTB: Given the juxtaposition of the relative dearth of CIRM-funded clinical projects to-date and the mandate to support bringing therapies to the clinic, in the last half of its mandate does CIRM intend to emphasize funding of more clinical projects? 

CIRM: Yes, our focus in our new Strategic Plan does just that, emphasizing the increased focus on translation and clinical trials. As described above, we are investing strongly in this sector. But we firmly believe that advancement in medicine is dependent on the science that underpins the medical strategies. We will also  continue to support high quality basic science that can transform medical opportunities.  

CTB:  If so, do you anticipate more of those will involve the use of adult cells over embryonic just by virtue of the fact more of these are closer to or already in clinical testing?

CIRM: We are required by our statute to fund in those areas that are under-invested. Otherwise we are agnostic to cell type. We expect a mixture of embryonic (induced pluripotent stem cells as well when they are ready for clinical studies), fetal, adult, cancer stem and progenitor cells, as well as small molecules, biologics and other approaches, evolving from stem cell assays and research. We are most concerned with the ability to produce results for patients.

CTB: I understand CIRM has made efforts over the past couple year to ease the burden or restrictions on companies applying for funds, is that true? 

Yes, we have appointed a Vice President with business development responsibilities and are further strengthening this capacity with key staff. We are actively working with industry to develop sustainable partnerships in research, we hold webinars and face to face meetings with the FDA to better equip industry with the tools that can aid in their investigational new drug (IND) submissions . We also assist industry to better understand what they need to do to successfully apply for CIRM funding.

We have also made changes to our intellectual property regulations and loan regulations to make it even more attractive for companies  to partner with us in research.

CTB:  I have heard it said that CIRM is not interested in funding late-stage trials.  Is that outside CIRM’s mandate or is it simply a matter of not having enough money to fund a late-stage trial?

Our focus has been in moving promising research through the "Valley of Death" phase, from the lab through Phase 1 and 2 clinical trials. We are working with major industry and financial institutions to inform them of our developing portfolio with the belief that they will be interested in taking many of these products to the market place. We are probably unable to afford to do these late stage clinical trials alone and feel it is likely that commercial interests will provide the follow on funding. 

CTB: If CIRM’s $20M could be matched with another $20M to fund a late-stage trial, would that be appropriate and feasible to entertain?

CIRM: We are always interested in proposals that will enhance our mission. While this hypothetical has not been put to us we would have to assess the proposal on its merits and our available finances. 

CTB: For clinical-stage companies outside California, what legitimate ties to California can be put in place to make one eligible for CIRM funding?  Is a company required to have a Californian entity or is it enough to have collaborations with a Californian entity or key service providers located within the state such as a California-based manufacturer or clinical sites in California?  What about having some staff in California?  Other ways?

CIRM:  In our RFA’s we have provided guidance as to what entities qualify for CIRM funding.  Future requirments  are presently under review by our General Counsel. Certainly, companies will need to show genuine steps at the time of application  towards relocation of a significant component of their research activities to California in addition to establishing a California operation with California employees. CIRM funding would be largely limited to in-state  activities.

My synopsis:  

I'm willing to reserve judging CIRM's overall track record of funding of clinical-stage and industry-sponsored research based on what it has done to-date.

My assessment of CIRM's contributions to clinical-stage science and product development will be heavily weighted on what it does from this point forward.

There is a certain rationale at play here that says they had to spend the first part of the mandate building the research infrastructure and scientific underpinnings required to move successful clinical and product development forward in the last half of its mandate. It may not be a rationale you whole-heartedly endorse but it is credible and I, for one, and willing to give CIRM the benefit of the doubt on this one. 
Having said that, my expectations for CIRM in the latter part of its mandate are very high with respect to how much they are going to dedicate to clinical-stage, industry-sponsored research.  

However, CIRM cannot do this in a vacuum.  What is required is for companies to do what they can to work with CIRM.  Don't give up on them based on their past record or your past experience.  Let's work with CIRM to help them focus their resources on moving some meaningful clinical milestones forward.

I hope this interview helps clarify for readers just how CIRM views its ongoing and future participation in clinical-stage and industry-sponsored regenerative medicine research, testing, and development.

I would be happy to entertain and channel further questions anyone might have about CIRM (excluding those pertaining to specific applications or projects).

http://www.celltherapyblog.com hosted by http://www.celltherapygroup.com


The 2012 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine

Posted: at 7:46 am

The Press Release from the Nobel Assembly at Karolinska Institute


Add to digg
Add to StumbleUpon
Add to Reddit
Add to Facebook
Add to del.icio.us
Email this Article


BioTime Makes Bid for Geron’s Stem Cell Assets

Posted: at 7:46 am

Biotime, Inc., and two men who were
leading players in history of Geron Corp. today made a surprise,
public bid for the stem cell assets of their former firm.

Michael West
West photo
Tom Okarma
AP file photo
The men are Michael West and Thomas
. West founded Geron in 1990 and was its first CEO. West is
now CEO of Biotime. Okarma was CEO of Geron from 1999 to 2011.
Okarma joined Biotime on Sept. 28 to lead its acquistion efforts.
Both Geron, based in Menlo Park, Ca., and Biotime, based in Alameda,
Ca., are publicly traded.
West and Okarma sent an open letter this morning to Geron shareholders and issued a press release making
a pitch for the Geron's stem cell assets. Geron jettisoned its hESC
program nearly a year ago and closed its clinical trial program for
spinal injuries. The move shocked the California stem cell agency,
which just a few months earlier had signed an agreement to loan the
firm $25 million to help fund the clinical trial. The portion of the
loan that was distributed was repaid with interest.
At the time, Geron said it would try to
sell off the hESC program, but no buyers have surfaced publicly.
Personnel in the program have been laid off or found employment
The West-Okarma letter to shareholders
said that under the deal,

“Geron would transfer its stem cell
assets to BAC(a new subsidiary of Biotime headed by Okarma), in
exchange for which you along with the other Geron shareholders would
receive shares of BAC common stock representing approximately 21.4%
of the outstanding BAC capital stock. BioTime would contribute to BAC
the following assets in exchange for the balance of outstanding BAC
capital stock:

  • “$40 million in BioTime common
  • “Warrants to purchase BioTime
    common shares (“BioTime Warrants”);
  • “Rights to certain stem cell
    assets of BioTime, and shares of two BioTime subsidiaries engaged in
    the development of therapeutic products from stem cells.”
The letter asked Geron shareholders to
write the firm's board of directors to urge them to approve the
Geron had no immediate response to the
proposal. Asked for comment, Kevin McCormack, spokesman for the
California stem cell agency, said the deal “had nothing to do with
us.” However, in the past, CIRM has indicated that it could find a
way to transfer the loan to an entity that would continue spinal
injury clinical trial. CIRM President Alan Trounson was also involved
at one point in trying to assist in a deal.
Geron's shares rose 12 cents to $1.54
today while Biotime's shares lost four cents to $3.95.
Here are links to the two news stories
that have appeared so far on the proposed deal: Associated PressMarketwatch.


California Stem Cell Agency Boosting Disease Team Program to $543 Million

Posted: at 7:46 am

Directors of the California stem cell
agency are set to give away $20 million next Thursday and authorize
a handsome addition to their signature disease team effort, bringing
its total to $543 million.

It is all part of the $3 billion
agency's push to develop therapies prior to running out of money for
new grants in 2017.
The $20 million is expected to go to
the first two winners in the agency's new strategic partnership
program. CIRM says the effort is aimed at
creating “incentives and processes that will: (i) enhance the
likelihood that CIRM funded projects will obtain funding for Phase
III clinical trials (e.g. follow-on financing), (ii) provide a source
of co-funding in the earlier stages of clinical development, and
(iii) enable CIRM funded projects to access expertise within
pharmaceutical and large biotechnology partners in the areas of
discovery, preclinical, regulatory, clinical trial design and
manufacturing process development.”
CIRM reviewed six applications with two winning approval. The agency's governing board is expected to ratify the decision next week. None of the applicants have been identified by the agency, which routinely withholds that information prior to
board action even when applicants have identified themselves.
Addition of a new $100 million
disease team round will come on top of the second, $213 million disease
team awards approved last this summer. The first round, awarded in
2009, totaled $230 million.  The size of the new round could be altered by CIRM directors prior to approval. Also before the board is a $40 million
proposal to expand the industry-friendly strategic partnership effort
into a second round.
The thrust of the disease team effort
is to speed the process of establishing clinical trials and to finance
efforts that might founder in what the biotech industry calls a
valley of death – a high risk financial location, so to speak,
where conventional financiers fear to tread.
The new disease team round will require
“co-funding” from applicants but the agency did not specify what
it means by the term. The matter of matching funds has become an issue in awards to StemCells, Inc., of Newark, Ca., in this summer's
disease team round.
Next week's agenda additionally
contains a plan to tighten review of proposed research budgets in
grant applications, making it clear that CIRM staff will be
negotiating such matters even after the board approves grants and
So far no researchers have testified in
public on the budget plan although it could well have a significant
impact on their future efforts.
Additional matters will discussed as
well at the meeting in Burlingame, which also has a teleconference
location in La Jolla that will be open to the public. The address
and additional material can be found on the agenda.  


Los Angeles Times: StemCells, Inc., Award ‘Redolent of Cronyism’

Posted: at 7:46 am

The Los Angeles Times this
morning carried a column about the “charmed relationship” between
StemCells, Inc., its “powerful friends” and the $3 billion
California stem cell agency.

The article was written by
Pulitzer prize winner and author Michael Hiltzik, who has been
critical of the agency in the past. The piece was the first in the major
mainstream media about a $20 million award to StemCells, Inc., that was approved in September by the agency's board. The bottom line of the
article? The award was “redolent of cronyism.”
Hiltzik noted that
StemCells, Inc., now ranks as the leading corporate recipient of cash
from the agency with $40 million approved during the last few months.
But he focused primarily
on September's $20 million award, which was approved despite being
rejected twice by grant reviewers – “a particularly
impressive” performance, according to Hiltzik. It was the first
time that the board has approved an award that was rejected twice by
Hiltzik wrote,

What was the company's
secret? StemCells says it's addressing 'a serious unmet medical need'
in Alzheimer's research. But it doesn't hurt that the company also
had powerful friends going to bat for it, including two guys who were
instrumental in getting CIRM off the ground in the first place.”

The two are Robert Klein,
who led the ballot campaign that created the agency and became its
first chairman, and Irv Weissman of Stanford, who co-founded
StemCells, Inc., and sits on its board. Weissman, an internationally
known stem cell researcher, also was an important supporter of the
campaign, raising millions of dollars and appearing in TV ads. Klein,
who left the agency last year, appeared twice before the CIRM board
this summer to lobby his former colleagues on behalf of Weissman's
company. It was Klein's first appearance before the board on behalf
of a specific application.
The Times piece continued,

But private enterprise
is new territory for CIRM, which has steered almost all its grants
thus far to nonprofit institutions. Those efforts haven't been
trouble-free: With some 90% of the agency's grants having gone to
institutions with representatives on its board, the agency has long
been vulnerable to charges of conflicts of interest. The last thing
it needed was to show a similar flaw in its dealings with private
companies too.”

Hiltzik wrote,

(Weissman) has also
been a leading beneficiary of CIRM funding, listed as the principal
researcher on three grants worth a total of $24.5 million. The agency
also contributed $43.6 million toward the construction of his
institute's glittering $200-million research building on the Stanford

CIRM board approval of the
$20 million for StemCells, Inc., came on 7-5 vote that also required
the firm to prove that it had a promised $20 million in matching
funds prior to distribution of state cash.
Hiltzik continued,

The problem is that
StemCells doesn't have $20 million in spare funds. Its quarterly
 for the period ended June 30 listed about $10.4
million in liquid assets, and shows it's burning about $5 million per
quarter. Its prospects of raising significant cash from investors
are, shall we say, conjectural.

As it happens, within
days of the board's vote, the
firm downplayed
 any pledge 'to raise a specific amount of
money in a particular period of time.' The idea that CIRM 'is
requiring us to raise $20 million in matching funds' is a
'misimpression,' it said. Indeed, it suggested that it might count
its existing spending on salaries and other 'infrastructure and
overhead' as part of the match. StemCells declined my request that it
expand on its statement.

CIRM spokesman Kevin
says the agency is currently scrutinizing StemCells'
finances 'to see what it is they have and whether it meets the
requirements and expectations of the board.' The goal is to set
'terms and conditions that provide maximum protection for taxpayer
dollars.' He says, 'If we can't agree on a plan, the award will
not be funded.'"

Hiltzik wrote,

The agency shouldn't be
deciding on the spot what does or doesn't qualify as matching funds.
It should have clear guidelines in advance.

Nor should the board
overturn the judgment of its scientific review panels without
clear-cut reasons....The record suggests that the handling of the
StemCells appeal was at best haphazard and at worst redolent of


Researcher Alert: Stem Cell Agency to Take Up Grant Appeal Restrictions

Posted: at 7:46 am

The move by the $3 billion California
stem cell agency to curtail its free-wheeling grant appeal process
will undergo its first public hearing next week.

The proposals will mean that scientists
whose applications are rejected by reviewers will have fewer avenues
to pursue to overturn those decisions. The changes could take effect
as early as next year.
The move comes in the wake of a record
number of appeals this summer that left the board complaining about
“arm-twisting,” lobbying and “emotionally charged presentations.”
Among other things, the new "guidelines" attempt to define
criteria for re-review – “additional analysis” – of
applications involved in appeals, also called “extraordinary
petitions.” The plan states that re-review should occur only in
the case of a material dispute of fact or material new information.
(See the end of this item for agency's proposed definitions.)
In addition to alterations in the
appeal process, the CIRM directors' Application Review Task Force
will take up questions involving “ex parte communications.” The
agenda for the Oct. 24 meeting did not contain any additional
information on the issue but it likely deals with lobbying efforts on
grants outside of public meetings of the agency. We understand that
such efforts surfaced last summer involving the $$214 million disease
team round and Robert Klein, the former chairman of the stem cell
Klein appeared twice publicly before
the board on one, $20 million application by StemCells, Inc., the
first time a former governing board member has publicly lobbied his former
colleagues on an application. The application was rejected twice by reviewers – once
on the initial review and again later on a re-review – but it was
ultimately approved by directors in September on a 7-5 vote.
The board has long been troubled with
its appeal process but last summer's events brought the matter to a
new head. The issue is difficult to deal with because state law
allows anyone to address the CIRM governing board on any subject when
it meets. That includes applicants who can ask the board to approve
grants for any reason whatsoever, not withstanding CIRM rules. The board can also approve a grant
for virtually any reason although it has generally relied on
scientific scores from reviewers.
The proposals to restrict appeals are
designed to make it clear to scientists whose applications are
rejected by reviewers that the board is not going to look with favor
on those who depart from the normal appeals procedure.
While the board almost never has
overturned a positive decision by reviewers, in nearly every round it  approves some applications that have been rejected by reviewers. That has
occurred as the result of appeals and as the result of motions by
board members that did not result from public appeals.
Ten of the 29 board members are classified as patient advocates and often feel they must advance the cause of the
diseases that they have been involved with. Sometimes that means
seeking approval of applications with low scientific scores.
Here is how agency proposes to define
“material dispute of fact:”

“A material dispute of fact should
meet five criteria:(1) An applicant disputes the accuracy of a
statement in the review summary;(2) the disputed fact was significant
in the scoring or recommendation of the GWG(grant review group); (3) the dispute pertains
to an objectively verifiable fact, rather than a matter of scientific
judgment or opinion;(4) the discrepancy was not addressed through the
Supplemental Information Process and cannot be resolved at the
meeting at which the application is being considered; and
(5) resolution of the dispute could affect the outcome of the board’s
funding decision."

Here is how the agency proposes to
define “material new information:”

“New information should: (1)be
verifiable through external sources; (2) have arisen since the
Grants Working Group(grant review group) meeting at which the application
was considered; (3) respond directly to a specific criticism or
question identified in the Grants Working Group’s review; and (4)
be submitted as part of an extraordinary petition filed five business
days before the board meeting at which the application is
being considered."

Next week's hearing is scheduled for
Children's Hospital in Oakland with a teleconference location at UC
. Addresses can be found on the agenda.


Star Nutrition's Incrediwear Line Now Features TEC-3 Arm and Calf Sleeves

Posted: October 17, 2012 at 2:27 pm

CHICO, CA--(Marketwire - Oct 17, 2012) - Star Nutrition, Inc. ( PINKSHEETS : STAU ), a California-based diversified health and wellness industry firm, has announced the release of the latest addition to its popular Incrediwear line: The TEC-3 arm and calf sleeves. Engineered from an Italian 3-D weaving machine and utilizing Carbonized Charcoal Anion Technology, the 360-thread count TEC-3 is designed to increase circulation to the arms and calves, while decreasing fatigue, swelling and recovery time.

"The TEC-3 is already loved by many championship athletes around the world," said Star Nutrition CEO Jackson Corley. "They are using the sleeve because it helps them train harder and longer, as well as recover faster from their workouts. The TEC-3 is also our thinnest sleeve available so it allows for a premium release of negative ions and maximum benefit to the athlete. We're excited to bring this product to market to help all athletes unlock their true potential."

Among the athletes currently using the TEC-3 are Morrocan runner Aissa Dghougi, MMA professional trainer Kevin Kearns, championship snowboarder Terje Haakonsen, professional rock climber Ivan Greene, four-time Olympic Judo competitor and bronze medalist Mike Swain, 2012 U.S. Judo Olympic bronze medalist Marti Malloy and 8th-degree Karate black belt Pat Haley.

Benefits of the TEC-3 include:

About Star Nutrition, Inc. California-based Star Nutrition is a publicly traded company ( PINKSHEETS : STAU ) that prides itself on providing innovative, over-the-counter health care products. The company's products include Incredisocks, Rx Diabetic socks and Incredibraces. Its mission is to focus on producing products that will enhance the lives and wellness of its customers.

For more information visit http://www.StarNutrition.com or http://www.BuyIncrediwear.com.

Join the Incrediwear community at Facebook.com/Incrediwear and @Incrediwear.

Visit link:
Star Nutrition's Incrediwear Line Now Features TEC-3 Arm and Calf Sleeves

Next Posts »

Page 11234..10..»