Search Immortality Topics:

Page 21234..1020..»


Category Archives: Human Genetic Engineering

COVID-19 origin: It looks like this virus was designed to infect humans – The New Daily

In recent weeks, there has been a radical shift in sober thinking about where the SARS-CoV-2 virus, better known as COVID 19, originated.

Early talk about an accidental leak from the Wuhan Institute of Virology where bat coronaviruses are modified to become more infectious to humans was largely written off as a conspiracy theory.

As The New Daily reported a month ago, the lab-leak theory is being investigated with vigour under the direction of United States President Joe Biden notwithstanding the limited access investigators have had to the Wuhan lab.

One of the compelling pieces of evidence being examined by members of the US Congress was done by Australian researchers who were shocked by their own findings.

Their paper, published last week, found that the coronavirus is most ideally adapted to infect human cells and not bat or pangolin cells, thought to be the likely origin culprits.

The study findings, from Flinders University and La Trobe University, also ruled out monkeys, snakes, cows, tigers, hamsters, cats, civets, horses, ferrets, mice, and dogs.

On the face of it, this stands as an intriguing challenge to the prevailing theory that SARS-CoV-2 virus originated in a bat and was then passed on to people via another, unidentified animals.

The problem is, the Australia data found that bats were a very poor fit for infection by the coronavirus, while humans were way off the top of the list.

One of the co-authors of the study is Professor Nikolai Petrovsky. He isdirector of endocrinology at Flinders Medical Centre and a professor of Medicine at Flinders University. Hes also vice-president and secretary-general of the International Immunomics Society.

Professor Petrovsky said the research, which began last year when the pandemic was taking hold, was based on the assumption that this was another natural transmission rather than an engineered one.

We were trying to find the particular species of animal in which this virus might have originated, he told The New Daily.

The world is now full of armchair virologists who understand that the spike protein (S) of the coronavirus gains entry to a human cell by binding to the cells ACE2 receptor like a key being inserted into a lock is the common metaphor.

Essentially, ACE2 acts as a cellular doorway or receptor for the SARS-CoV-2 virus.

Professor Petrovsky with La Trobe Professor David Winkler and others used genomic data from the 12 animal species to painstakingly build computer models of the key ACE2 protein receptors for each species.

These models were then used to calculate the strength of binding of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein to each species ACE2 receptor.

Surprisingly, the results showed that SARS-CoV-2 bound to ACE2 on human cells more tightly than any of the tested animal species, including bats and pangolins.

If one of the animal species tested was the origin, it would normally be expected to show the highest binding to the virus.

Said Professor Petrovsky, What shocked us, and not what we were expecting, was that humans came out at the very top.

The teams modelling shows the SARS-CoV-2 virus also bound relatively strongly to ACE2 from pangolins, a rare exotic ant-eater found in some parts of South-East Asia with occasional instances of use as food or traditional medicines.

The pangolins had the highest spike binding energy of all the animals the study looked at significantly higher than bats, monkeys and snakes.

Pangolins were an early suspect, because of a coronavirus it was carrying. But the pangolin coronavirus had less than 90 per cent genetic similarity to SARS-CoV-2.

And hence could not be its ancestor, Professor Petrovsky said.

However, the specific part of the pangolin coronavirus spike protein that binds ACE2 is almost identical to that of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein.

How to explain this incongruence? Maybe the pangolin and SARS-CoV-2 spike proteins were of evolutionary cousins.

They may have evolved similarities through a process of convergent evolution, genetic recombination between viruses, or through genetic engineering, with no current way to distinguish between these possibilities.

In other words, its a possibility that the hand of man interfered with these viruses that were adapted pangolins and humans.

Or it could be the natural world doing its creative thing.

Getting into a cell is one thing but making an effective take-over of the cell is another issue. It usually happens via a series of infections, during which the virus adapts.

Ordinarily, then, the first human infection by a virus wouldnt be a potent event.

What the researchers found in their modelling: it appears that human cells, from the beginning, were ripe for a takeover. They launched into the world, fully adapted to infect people.

This is hot stuff but, as Professor Petrovsky makes plain: Its just one piece of evidence that has to be assessed with all the other evidence.

You never say never, said Professor Petrovsky.

But what we know is this: If you look at SARS, that only became human-adapted through a complex series of events that have been mapped starting with bats and then mutating, moving on to civets, and from civets to humans.

Over three to four months of human infection, the virus adapted and became more efficient as one would expect.

The virus is usually weak when it infects a new species until it has time to adapt and become more efficient, said Professor Petrovsky.

But this virus was extremely good at infecting humans and there wasnt a clear explanation for that. So it means theres a coincidence or it could mean there had been some intervention that helped the virus become adapted to humans.

Which is why scientists are looking at the Wuhan Institute of Virology: it houses more bat coronaviruses than anywhere else in the world, and some of the work done there involves re-engineering coronaviruses so they adapt to infecting humans more easily.

Which is another remarkable coincidence or its telling you something, said Professor Petrovsky.

Looking just at the data youd say that it looked like this virus was designed to infect humans, he said,

But of course, scientifically, you have to go back and ask how could this have happened without infecting a human before?

It is a big question and its currently an unanswered question.

The rest is here:
COVID-19 origin: It looks like this virus was designed to infect humans - The New Daily

Posted in Human Genetic Engineering | Comments Off on COVID-19 origin: It looks like this virus was designed to infect humans – The New Daily

Science, industry team up in Italy to zap virus with laser – Reuters

A rendering of an air purifier prototype developed by Italian tech company Eltech K-laser is seen in this image obtained by Reuters on June 30, 2021. Eltech K-Laser/Handout via REUTERS

ROME, July 2 (Reuters) - A United Nations-backed scientific research centre has teamed up with an Italian tech firm to explore whether laser light can be used to kill coronavirus particles suspended in the air and help keep indoor spaces safe.

The joint effort between the International Centre for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology (ICGEB) of Trieste, a city in the north of Italy, and the nearby Eltech K-Laser company, was launched last year as COVID-19 was battering the country.

They created a device that forces air through a sterilization chamber which contains a laser beam filter that pulverizes viruses and bacteria.

"I thought lasers were more for a shaman rather than a doctor but I have had to change my mind. The device proved able to kill the viruses in less than 50 milliseconds," said Serena Zacchigna, group leader for Cardiovascular Biology at the ICGEB.

Healthy indoor environments with a substantially reduced pathogen count are deemed essential for public health in the post COVID-19 crisis, a respiratory infection which has caused more than four million deaths worldwide in barely 18 months.

Zacchigna hooked up with Italian engineer Francesco Zanata, the founder of Eltech K-Laser, a firm specialised in medical lasers whose products are used by sports stars to treat muscle inflammation and fractures.

Some experts have warned against the possible pitfalls of using light-based technologies to attack the virus that causes COVID-19.

A study published by the Journal of Photochemistry & Photobiology in November 2020 highlighted concerns ranging from potential cancer risks to the cost of expensive light sources.

But Zacchigna and Zanata dismissed any health issues, saying the laser never comes into contact with human skin.

"Our device uses nature against nature. It is 100% safe for people and almost fully recyclable," Zanata told Reuters.

The technology, however, does not eliminate viruses and bacteria when they drop from the air onto surfaces or the floor. Nor can it prevent direct contagion when someone who is infected sneezes or talks loudly in the proximity of someone else.

Eltech K-Laser has received a patent from Italian authorities and is seeking to extend this globally.

The portable version of the invention is some 1.8 metres (5.9 ft) high and weighs about 25 kg (55 lb). The company said the technology can also be placed within air-conditioning units.

In the meantime, the first potential customers are lining up, including Germany's EcoCare, a service provider of testing and vaccination solutions.

"The company aims to license the technology for German and UAE markets," an EcoCare spokesperson said in an email to Reuters.

Reporting by Giselda Vagnoni; Editing by Crispian Balmer, William Maclean

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

See the article here:
Science, industry team up in Italy to zap virus with laser - Reuters

Posted in Human Genetic Engineering | Comments Off on Science, industry team up in Italy to zap virus with laser – Reuters

2 Plays From Catalyst: A Theatre Think Tank – UC Davis

The Department of Theatre and Dance and Catalyst: A Theatre Think Tank, a launching pad for new works, raise the remote curtain this week on two productions examining diverse contemporary themes.

Jonathan Luskin, whose Kill the Wabbit was workshopped at UC Davis in 2018, is back with Perfect, three interwoven stories exploring the boundless desire for flawless children and the impossibility of objectively defining what that means.

Perfect

A Bee in a Jar

Catalyst productions may contain adult situations and language.

Six actors portray 13 characters, including a cell biologist and her brilliant, wheelchair-using son who discover their research is being used to clean disabilities from the human genome; and a young couple who turn to an app to design the perfect child. They will present the play as an informal reading at 6 p.m. Wednesday (Feb. 17).

Perfectis directed by alumnaJanLee Marshall(M.F.A, dramatic art, 15) and features actor Danny Gomez, recipient of the 2020 Media Access Award, which recognizes depictions of disability that are accurate, inclusive and multifaceted. The cast also includes undergraduate students Sophie Brubaker, Cheryl Kuo, Kyle Nagasawa and Aubrey Schoeman. Undergraduate student Sam Votrian is the stage manager.

In A Bee in a Jar by Andrew Nichols, three men with very different temperaments try to figure out why they were seized a month earlier and locked together in a featureless room. The play will be performed at 6 p.m. Friday and Saturday (Feb. 19 and 20).

Nicholls is a television writer and author who has worked on The Tonight Show and numerous Nickelodeon shows. He is the author of the recently published Comedy Writer: Craft Advice From a Veteran of Sitcoms, Sketch, Animation, Late Night, Print and Stage Comedy. His play {LOVE/logic} was staged at UC Davis in 2019.

Theatre and television actor Laura Hall, who appeared on Broadway in Wonderland and in the national tour of the revival of Pippin, is the director. She has recently relocated from New York to Sacramento County.

The cast includes alumni Jordan Brownlee (B.A., cinema and digital media, 20), Nate Challis (B.A., theatre and dance, 20) and Noah VanderVeer-Harris (B.A., theatre and dance, 20), as well as undergraduate studentsErolina Kamburova andHailey Peterson. Undergraduate studentShachar-Lee Yaakobovitz is the stage manager.

As a virtual new works festival this year, Catalysts online process allows actors and creative teams to collaborate from various locations across time zones.

Broadway veteran Mindy Cooper, professor of theatre and dance, and Lisa Quoresimo (Ph.D., performance studies, 18) are co-founders of Catalyst.

The Department of Theatre and Dance is producing the 2020-21 Catalyst season with support from the Jan Shrem and Maria Manetti Shrem Museum of Art, Bike City Theatre Company, Southern Utah University and San Francisco Youth Theatre.

Follow Dateline UC Davis on Twitter.

Original post:
2 Plays From Catalyst: A Theatre Think Tank - UC Davis

Posted in Human Genetic Engineering | Comments Off on 2 Plays From Catalyst: A Theatre Think Tank – UC Davis

Viewpoint: Promoting science with ideology Pro-GMO vegans use animal rights advocacy to boost vaccine, biotech acceptance – Genetic Literacy Project

The COVID-19 pandemic has reminded us that we are part of a living, evolving ecosystem and often at its mercy. Despite all our accomplishments as a species, a virus accidentally unleashed on the world has wrought enormous destruction around the globe, the effects of which we probably will not be able to fully assess for many years. Although we cannot always anticipate the damage an infectious disease will do, our best bet at surviving the fallout is a commitment to science-based policies that fuel the development of better preventative strategies, most importantly vaccines. The same lesson extends to most environmental and public health challenges we face.

To many people, though, a vaccine isnt a biological roadblock to the spread of infectious disease, but a scheme hatched by Big Pharma and their stooges in government to control humanity. Its appropriate to maintain some skepticism of corporations and the governments that regulate them, indeed such critical thinking should be encouraged among consumers. Nevertheless, healthy skepticism and cynicism are not the same, and people must learn to distinguish the two if we are going to make progress in our never-ending battle against infectious disease and other maladies that threaten humanity.

While this sometimes seems like an impossible task to science advocates, the pro-GMO vegan community has illustrated how people with deep ideological commitments can embrace science, specifically crop biotechnology and vaccines, without compromising their personal beliefs.

If you want to convince someone to change their mind on a controversial issue, dont attack their worldview, which all but guarantees they will dismiss your arguments as a threat to their identity. This is a lesson Vegan GMO, a small community founded by friends with a passion for animal welfare, has taken to heart. Rather than attack the ideology of their target audience, the group uses their shared beliefs to encourage acceptance of crop biotechnology and vaccines in the broader vegan community.

Vegans sometimes oppose biotechnology because a particular application of the technology may be tested on animals or developed using animal products. This categorizes animals as property to be used for human benefit rather than sentient, living beingsan outlook many vegans find abhorrent.

But vegans do not just make animal-welfare arguments, they often rely on anti-GMO misinformation, like the long-debunked link between consuming GM crops and developing liver and kidney problems. Popular veganism proponents such as retired activist Gary Yourofsky have also latched onto playing God arguments based on the assumption that natural food is better food. God made a tomato perfectly when he created it. Leave it at that, he argued during a 2015 interview. Stop altering tomatoes, stop altering everything on this planet. Its fine the way it was created.

Jayson Merkley, a pro-GMO vegan and fellow at Cornell Universitys Alliance for Science, says the answer to this sort of rhetoric is simple: stop testing GM crops on animals, which is sometimes required before a new product can enter the food supply. This simple change in the GM crop approval process would discourage vegans from repeating pseudo-scientific anti-GMO arguments to defend their position on animal welfare.

Read the original here:
Viewpoint: Promoting science with ideology Pro-GMO vegans use animal rights advocacy to boost vaccine, biotech acceptance - Genetic Literacy Project

Posted in Human Genetic Engineering | Comments Off on Viewpoint: Promoting science with ideology Pro-GMO vegans use animal rights advocacy to boost vaccine, biotech acceptance – Genetic Literacy Project

Biotech fit for the Red Planet – Newswise

Newswise NASA, in collaboration with other leading space agencies, aims to send its first human missions to Mars in the early 2030s, while companies like SpaceX may do so even earlier. Astronauts on Mars will need oxygen, water, food, and other consumables. These will need to be sourced from Mars, because importing them from Earth would be impractical in the long term. InFrontiers in Microbiology, scientists show for the first time that Anabaena cyanobacteria can be grown with only local gases, water, and other nutrients and at low pressure. This makes it much easier to develop sustainable biological life support systems.

"Here we show that cyanobacteria can use gases available in the Martian atmosphere, at a low total pressure, as their source of carbon and nitrogen. Under these conditions, cyanobacteria kept their ability to grow in water containing only Mars-like dust and could still be used for feeding other microbes. This could help make long-term missions to Mars sustainable," says lead author Dr Cyprien Verseux, an astrobiologist who heads the Laboratory of Applied Space Microbiology at the Center of Applied Space Technology and Microgravity (ZARM) of the University of Bremen, Germany.

Low-pressure atmosphere

Cyanobacteria have long been targeted as candidates to drive biological life support on space missions, as all species produce oxygen through photosynthesis while some can fix atmospheric nitrogen into nutrients. A difficulty is that they cannot grow directly in the Martian atmosphere, where the total pressure is less than 1% of Earth's - 6 to 11 hPa, too low for the presence of liquid water - while the partial pressure of nitrogen gas - 0.2 to 0.3 hPa - is too low for their metabolism. But recreating an Earth-like atmosphere would be expensive: gases would need to be imported, while the culture system would need to be robust - hence, heavy to freight - to resist the pressure differences: "Think of a pressure cooker," Verseux says. So the researchers looked for a middle ground: an atmosphere close to Mars's which allows the cyanobacteria to grow well.

To find suitable atmospheric conditions, Verseux et al. developed a bioreactor called Atmos (for "Atmosphere Tester for Mars-bound Organic Systems"), in which cyanobacteria can be grown in artificial atmospheres at low pressure. Any input must come from the Red Planet itself: apart from nitrogen and carbon dioxide, gases abundant in the Martian atmosphere, and water which could be mined from ice, nutrients should come from "regolith", the dust covering Earth-like planets and moons. Martian regolith has been shown to be rich in nutrients such as phosphorus, sulphur, and calcium.

Anabaena: versatile cyanobacteria grown on Mars-like dust

Atmos has nine 1 L vessels made of glass and steel, each of which is sterile, heated, pressure-controlled, and digitally monitored, while the cultures inside are continuously stirred. The authors chose a strain of nitrogen-fixing cyanobacteria called Anabaena sp. PCC 7938, because preliminary tests showed that it would be particularly good at using Martian resources and helping to grow other organisms. Closely related species have been shown to be edible, suitable for genetic engineering, and able to form specialized dormant cells to survive harsh conditions.

Verseux and his colleagues first grew Anabaena for 10 days under a mixture of 96% nitrogen and 4% carbon dioxide at a pressure of 100 hPa - ten times lower than on Earth. The cyanobacteria grew as well as under ambient air. Then they tested the combination of the modified atmosphere with regolith. Because no regolith has ever been brought from Mars, they used a substrate developed by the University of Central Florida (called "Mars Global Simulant") instead to create a growth medium. As controls, Anabaena were grown in standard medium, either at ambient air or under the same low-pressure artificial atmosphere.

The cyanobacteria grew well under all conditions, including in regolith under the nitrogen- and carbon dioxide-rich mixture at low pressure. As expected, they grew faster on standard medium optimized for cyanobacteria than on Mars Global Simulant, under either atmosphere. But this is still a major success: while standard medium would need to be imported from Earth, regolith is ubiquitous on Mars. "We want to use as nutrients resources available on Mars, and only those," says Verseux.

Dried Anabaena biomass was ground, suspended in sterile water, filtered, and successfully used as a substrate for growing of E. coli bacteria, proving that sugars, amino acids, and other nutrients can be extracted from them to feed other bacteria, which are less hardy but tried-and-tested tools for biotechnology. For example, E. coli could be engineered more easily than Anabaena to produce some food products and medicines on Mars that Anabaena cannot.

The researchers conclude that nitrogen-fixing, oxygen-producing cyanobacteria can be efficiently grown on Mars at low pressure under controlled conditions, with exclusively local ingredients.

Further refinements in the pipeline

These results are an important advance. But the authors caution that further studies are necessary: "We want to go from this proof-of-concept to a system that can be used on Mars efficiently," Verseux says. They suggest fine-tuning the combination of pressure, carbon dioxide, and nitrogen optimal for growth, while testing other genera of cyanobacteria, perhaps genetically tailored for space missions. A cultivation system for Mars also needs to be designed:

"Our bioreactor, Atmos, is not the cultivation system we would use on Mars: it is meant to test, on Earth, the conditions we would provide there. But our results will help guide the design of a Martian cultivation system. For example, the lower pressure means that we can develop a more lightweight structure that is more easily freighted, as it won't have to withstand great differences between inside and outside," concludes Verseux.

###

The project was funded by the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation.

Read the original here:
Biotech fit for the Red Planet - Newswise

Posted in Human Genetic Engineering | Comments Off on Biotech fit for the Red Planet – Newswise

Outlook on the CRISPR Gene Editing Global Market to 2030 – Analysis and Forecasts – Yahoo Finance

Dublin, Feb. 08, 2021 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- The "Global CRISPR Gene Editing Market: Focus on Products, Applications, End Users, Country Data (16 Countries), and Competitive Landscape - Analysis and Forecast, 2020-2030" report has been added to ResearchAndMarkets.com's offering.

The global CRISPR gene editing market was valued at $846.2 million in 2019 and is expected to reach $10,825.1 million by 2030, registering a CAGR of 26.86% during the forecast.

The development of genome engineering with potential applications proved to reflect a remarkable impact on the future of the healthcare and life science industry. The high efficiency of the CRISPR-Cas9 system has been demonstrated in various studies for genome editing, which resulted in significant investments within the field of genome engineering. However, there are several limitations, which need consideration before clinical applications. Further, many researchers are working on the limitations of CRISPR gene editing technology for better results. The potential of CRISPR gene editing to alter the human genome and modify the disease conditions is incredible but exists with ethical and social concerns.

The growth is attributed to the increasing demand in the food industry for better products with improved quality and nutrient enrichment and the pharmaceutical industry for targeted treatment for various diseases. Further, the continued significant investments by healthcare companies to meet the industry demand and growing prominence for the gene therapy procedures with less turnaround time are the prominent factors propelling the growth of the global CRISPR gene editing market.

Research organizations, pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries, and institutes are looking for more efficient genome editing technologies to increase the specificity and cost-effectiveness, also to reduce turnaround time and human errors. Further, the evolution of genome editing technologies has enabled wide range of applications in various fields, such as industrial biotech and agricultural research. These advanced methods are simple, super-efficient, cost-effective, provide multiplexing, and high throughput capabilities. The increase in the geriatric population and increasing number of cancer cases, and genetic disorders across the globe are expected to translate into significantly higher demand for CRISPR gene editing market.

Story continues

Furthermore, the companies are investing huge amounts in the research and development of CRISPR gene editing products, and gene therapies. The clinical trial landscape of various genetic and chronic diseases has been on the rise in recent years, and this will fuel the CRISPR gene editing market in the future.

Within the research report, the market is segmented based on product type, application, end-user, and region. Each of these segments covers the snapshot of the market over the projected years, the inclination of the market revenue, underlying patterns, and trends by using analytics on the primary and secondary data obtained.

Key Companies Profiled

Abcam, Inc., Applied StemCell, Inc., Agilent Technologies, Inc., Cellecta, Inc., CRISPR Therapeutics AG, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Inc., GeneCopoeia, Inc., GeneScript Biotech Corporation, Horizon Discovery Group PLC, Integrated DNA Technologies, Inc., Merck KGaA, New England Biolabs, Inc., Origene Technologies, Inc., Rockland Immunochemicals, Inc., Synthego Corporation, System Biosciences LLC, ToolGen, Inc., Takara Bio

Key Questions Answered in this Report:

What is CRISPR gene editing?

What is the timeline for the development of CRISPR technology?

How did the CRISPR gene editing market evolve, and what is its scope in the future?

What are the major market drivers, restraints, and opportunities in the global CRISPR gene editing market?

What are the key developmental strategies that are being implemented by the key players to sustain this market?

What is the patent landscape of this market? What will be the impact of patent expiry on this market?

What is the impact of COVID-19 on this market?

What are the guidelines implemented by different government bodies to regulate the approval of CRISPR products/therapies?

How is CRISPR gene editing being utilized for the development of therapeutics?

How will the investments by public and private companies and government organizations affect the global CRISPR gene editing market?

What was the market size of the leading segments and sub-segments of the global CRISPR gene editing market in 2019?

How will the industry evolve during the forecast period 2020-2030?

What will be the growth rate of the CRISPR gene editing market during the forecast period?

How will each of the segments of the global CRISPR gene editing market grow during the forecast period, and what will be the revenue generated by each of the segments by the end of 2030?

Which product segment and application segment are expected to register the highest CAGR for the global CRISPR gene editing market?

What are the major benefits of the implementation of CRISPR gene editing in different field of applications including biomedical research, agricultural research, industrial research, gene therapy, drug discovery, and diagnostics?

What is the market size of the CRISPR gene editing market in different countries of the world?

Which geographical region is expected to contribute to the highest sales of CRISPR gene editing market?

What are the reimbursement scenario and regulatory structure for the CRISPR gene editing market in different regions?

What are the key strategies incorporated by the players of global CRISPR gene editing market to sustain the competition and retain their supremacy?

Key Topics Covered:

1 Technology Definition

2 Research Scope

3 Research Methodology

4 Market Overview4.1 Introduction4.2 CRISPR Gene Editing Market Approach4.3 Milestones in CRISPR Gene Editing4.4 CRISPR Gene Editing: Delivery Systems4.5 CRISPR Technology: A Potential Tool for Gene Editing4.6 CRISPR Gene Editing Current Scenario4.7 CRISPR Gene Editing Market: Future Potential Application Areas

5 Global CRISPR Gene Editing Market, $Million, 2020-20305.1 Pipeline Analysis5.2 CRISPR Gene Editing Market and Growth Potential, 2020-20305.3 Impact of COVID-19 on CRISPR Gene Editing Market5.3.1 Impact of COVID-19 on Global CRISPR Gene Editing Market Growth Rate5.3.1. Impact on CRISPR Gene Editing Companies5.3.2 Clinical Trial Disruptions and Resumptions5.3.3 Application of CRISPR Gene Editing in COVID-19

6 Market Dynamics6.1 Impact Analysis6.2 Market Drivers6.2.1 Prevalence of Genetic Disorders and Use of Genome Editing6.2.2 Government and Private Funding6.2.3 Technology Advancement in CRISPR Gene Editing6.3 Market Restraints6.3.1 CRISPR Gene Editing: Off Target Effects and Delivery6.3.2 Ethical Concerns and Implications With Respect to Human Genome Editing6.4 Market Opportunities6.4.1 Expanding Gene and Cell Therapy Area6.4.2 CRISPR Gene Editing Scope in Agriculture

7 Industry Insights7.1 Introduction7.2 Funding Scenario7.3 Regulatory Scenario of CRISPR Gene Editing Market7.4 Pricing of CRISPR Gene Editing7.5 Reimbursement of CRISPR Gene Editing7.5.1 CRISPR Gene Editing: Insurance Coverage in the U.S.

8 CRISPR Gene Editing Patent Landscape8.1 Overview8.2 CRISPR Gene Editing Market Patent Landscape: By Application8.3 CRISPR Gene Editing Market Patent Landscape: By Region8.4 CRISPR Gene Editing Market Patent Landscape: By Year

9 Global CRISPR Gene Editing Market (by Product Type), $Million9.1 Overview9.2 CRISPR Products9.2.1 Kits and Enzymes9.2.1.1 Vector-Based Cas99.2.1.2 DNA-Free Cas99.2.2 Libraries9.2.3 Design Tools9.2.4 Antibodies9.2.5 Other Products9.3 CRISPR Services9.3.1 gRNA Design and Vector Construction9.3.2 Cell Line and Engineering9.3.3 Screening Services9.3.4 Other Services

10 CRISPR Gene Editing Market (by Application), $Million10.1 Overview10.2 Agriculture10.3 Biomedical10.3.1 Gene Therapy10.3.2 Drug Discovery10.3.3 Diagnostics10.4 Industrial10.5 Other Applications

11 Global CRISPR Gene Editing Market (by End User)11.1 Academic Institutions and Research Centers11.2 Biotechnology Companies11.3 Contract Research Organizations (CROs)11.4 Pharmaceutical and Biopharmaceutical Companies

12 Global CRISPR Gene Editing Market (by Region)12.1 Introduction12.2 North America12.3 Europe12.4 Asia-Pacific12.5 Latin America

13 Competitive Landscape13.1 Key Developments and Strategies13.1.1 Overview13.1.1.1 Regulatory and Legal Developments13.1.1.2 Synergistic Activities13.1.1.3 M&A Activities13.1.1.4 Funding Activities13.2 Market Share Analysis13.3 Growth Share Analysis

14 Company Profiles14.1 Overview14.2 Abcam, Inc.14.2.1 Company Overview14.2.2 Role of Abcam, Inc. in the Global CRISPR Gene Editing Market14.2.3 Financials14.2.4 SWOT Analysis14.3 Applied StemCell, Inc.14.3.1 Company Overview14.3.2 Role of Applied StemCell, Inc. in the Global CRISPR Gene Editing Market14.3.3 SWOT Analysis14.4 Agilent Technologies, Inc.14.4.1 Company Overview14.4.2 Role of Agilent Technologies, Inc. in the Global CRISPR Gene Editing Market14.4.3 Financials14.4.4 R&D Expenditure, 2017-201914.4.5 SWOT Analysis14.5 Cellecta, Inc.14.5.1 Company Overview14.5.2 Role of Cellecta, Inc. in the Global CRISPR Gene Editing Market14.5.3 SWOT Analysis14.6 CRISPR Therapeutics AG14.6.1 Company Overview14.6.2 Role of CRISPR Therapeutics AG in the Global CRISPR Gene Editing Market14.6.3 Financials14.6.4 R&D Expenditure, 2017-201914.6.5 SWOT Analysis14.7 Thermo Fisher Scientific, Inc. INC14.7.1 Company Overview14.7.2 Role of Thermo Fisher Scientific, Inc. in the Global CRISPR Gene Editing Market14.7.3 Financials14.7.4 R&D Expenditure, 2017-201914.7.5 SWOT Analysis14.8 GeneCopoeia, Inc.14.8.1 Company Overview14.8.2 Role of GeneCopoeia, Inc. in the Global CRISPR Gene Editing Market14.8.3 SWOT Analysis14.9 GeneScript Biotech Corporation14.9.1 Company Overview14.9.2 Role of GenScript Biotech in the Global CRISPR Gene Editing Market14.9.3 Financials14.9.4 SWOT Analysis14.1 Horizon Discovery Group PLC14.10.1 Company Overview14.10.2 Role of Horizon Discovery Group PLC in the Global CRISPR Gene Editing Market14.10.3 Financials14.10.4 SWOT Analysis14.11 Integrated DNA Technologies, Inc.14.11.1 Company Overview14.11.2 Role of Integrated DNA Technologies, Inc. in the Global CRISPR Gene Editing Market14.11.3 SWOT Analysis14.12 Merck KGaA14.12.1 Company Overview14.12.2 Role of Merck KGaA in the Global CRISPR Gene Editing Market14.12.3 Financials14.12.4 SWOT Analysis14.13 New England Biolabs, Inc.14.13.1 Company Overview14.13.2 Role of Integrated DNA Technologies, Inc. in the Global CRISPR Gene Editing Market14.13.3 SWOT Analysis14.14 Origene Technologies, Inc.14.14.1 Company Overview14.14.2 Role of Origene Technologies, Inc. in the Global CRISPR Gene Editing Market14.14.3 SWOT Analysis14.15 Rockland Immunochemicals, Inc.14.15.1 Company Overview14.15.2 Role of Rockland Immunochemicals, Inc. in the Global CRISPR Gene Editing Market14.15.3 SWOT Analysis14.16 Synthego Corporation14.16.1 Company Overview14.16.2 Role of Synthego Corporation in the Global CRISPR Gene Editing Market14.16.3 SWOT Analysis14.17 System Biosciences LLC14.17.1 Company Overview14.17.2 Role of System Biosciences LLC in the Global CRISPR Gene Editing Market14.17.3 SWOT Analysis14.18 ToolGen, Inc.14.18.1 Company Overview14.18.2 Role of ToolGen, Inc. in the Global CRISPR Gene Editing Market14.18.3 SWOT Analysis14.19 Takara Bio14.19.1 Company Overview14.19.2 Role of Takara Bio in the Global CRISPR Gene Editing Market14.19.3 Financials14.19.4 SWOT Analysis

For more information about this report visit https://www.researchandmarkets.com/r/c7om7t

Go here to see the original:
Outlook on the CRISPR Gene Editing Global Market to 2030 - Analysis and Forecasts - Yahoo Finance

Posted in Human Genetic Engineering | Comments Off on Outlook on the CRISPR Gene Editing Global Market to 2030 – Analysis and Forecasts – Yahoo Finance