Search Results for: us stem cell

CIRM 2.0 Should Include Bridges Training Program

CIRM-2.0

The California Stem Cell Agency CIRM seems to be in budget cutting mode these days, which from a general perspective makes sense as CIRM seeks to continue operating on its remaining funding through a longer period of time as far out as to 2020. However, not all cuts are necessarily positive. For example, CIRM reportedly (note: many

CIRM 2.0 Should Include Bridges Training Program Read More »

Interview with Clinicaltrials.gov Director Deborah Zarin

clinicaltrials.gov_

This post is the first in a series about the Clinicaltrials.gov website. This piece is an interview the Director, Dr. Deborah Zarin. I want to thank her for taking the time to answer my questions. Later, I will post Part 2 in which I discuss my concerns about the trend of for-profit stem cell clinic trials

Interview with Clinicaltrials.gov Director Deborah Zarin Read More »

What do sperm have to do with brain tumors?

H3.3

Sometimes in science there are unexpected threads tying seemingly very different things together. Unraveling the knots in these threads can lead to new insights into important developmental processes and mechanisms of disease. My lab studies epigenomic and transcription factors including a molecule called histone variant H3.3 (more here on H3.3). H3.3 binds to the actual

What do sperm have to do with brain tumors? Read More »

ACT reinventing itself with new name Ocata Therapeutics

advanced-cell-technology

Here is a link to the Ocata website, marking the start of a new era for what was formerly Advanced Cell Technology or ACT. It’s been a big summer for stem cell biotech Advanced Cell Technology (ACT; stock ACTCD) as it continues what I would call a process of reinventing itself. What’s been happening? ACT recently

ACT reinventing itself with new name Ocata Therapeutics Read More »

STAP papers blistered by Nature’s own reviewers were then accepted

STAP-magic

The reviews of a STAP paper submitted to and rejected by the journal Science in 2012 were posted at Retraction Watch yesterday. They filled in some gaps in the puzzle of the series of events that led to such flawed science being published in Nature in January 2014, but the reviews also raised more questions. Today, more STAP paper

STAP papers blistered by Nature’s own reviewers were then accepted Read More »

Full Reviews of Rejected STAP Paper Point to Early Signs of Big Trouble

Before the two STAP cell papers were published in Nature in January of 2014, much of the same data was reportedly submitted as single papers to other high-profile journals including Science. In these cases, the proto-STAP papers as we might call them were rejected. But why? Until now we largely could only speculate. However, the reviews

Full Reviews of Rejected STAP Paper Point to Early Signs of Big Trouble Read More »

Could Nature’s 2-year torrent of paper retractions be a good thing?

Nature

The last two years at Nature Magazine have seen a surprising wave of paper retractions. In 2013 and now just so far in 2014, Nature has retracted a total of 14 papers. How unusual is that? Historically, Nature retracts relatively few papers, perhaps just under two per year on average. What the heck has been going on in 2013-2014? Let’s break it

Could Nature’s 2-year torrent of paper retractions be a good thing? Read More »