Protein That Culls Damaged Eggs Identified, Infertility Reversed

Ramanujan, Krishna. "Protein That Culls Damaged Eggs Identified, Infertility Reversed."Cornell Chronicle. Cornell University, 11 Mar. 2014. Web. 11 Mar. 2014. <http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/2014/01/protein-discovery-may-lead-infertility-treatment>.

            The article “Protein that culls damaged eggs identified, infertility reversed” by Krishna Ramanujan, is about how a new protein was discovered by Cornell University researchers that can help post-chemotherapy patients be fertile again. The protein, kinase 2, tags damaged eggs in the ovaries with damaged DNA and destroys them during meiosis. By taking away the protein in radioactively infertile mice, the body is given more time to try and fix these damaged eggs. The paper’s senior author, John Schimenti, says “There are genes responsible for killing defective oocytes, but we didn’t know what they were. We wanted to identify this genetic quality-control mechanism.”

            The identification of this protein helps to allow chemotherapy patients to have children again. Researchers are now attempting to find ways to inhibit this protein by using known drugs. Although is has not been tested in humans, the inhibition of this protein stops cancer from preventing basic parts of life in its survivors. The identification of this protein can also possibly begin research on how the body identifies damaged cells and how it destroys them. This has the possibility to be used in cancer treatment in the future.

            Although the article is interesting and informative, the writer could have included more about the research process and how exactly researchers identified the protein. It would have been interesting to see how the researchers were able to look for this exact protein and what procedures they used. Despite this drawback, the article is still a very good read.  

"Study Gives Hope of Altering Genes to Repel H.I.V."

Grady, Denise. "Study Gives Hope of Altering Genes to Repel H.I.V." The New York Times. The New York Times, 05 Mar. 2014. Web. 05 Mar. 2014.http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/06/health/study-gives-hope-of-altering-genes-to-repel-hiv.html?ref=science

       I read the article, “Study Gives Hope of Altering Genes to Repel H.I.V.” written by Denise Grady. In the article, she discusses how the possibility of altering genes to resists the virus that cause AIDS which was previously though to be impossible, is now possible as shown by recent studies. The research was done by taking 12 people infected with H.I.V. and scientists used the technique of  “gene editing” to get rid of a protein on the patients’ immune cells that the virus must latch onto to invade the cells. The “cells were removed from the patients, treated and then dripped back into their bloodstreams through an intravenous line.” Scientists believe that if enough cells are engineered to resists the AIDS virus then this disease could be cured. Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases said that “It’s exciting, interesting, elegant science. But a lot of ‘ifs’ need to be addressed before you can say ‘Wow, this could really work.” Dr. Fauci also discusses if this is the most effective form of treatment because the “gene editing” is a very complex treatment, whereas the anti-viral pills are fairly simple. The study obtained it basis from a discovery in 1990. The discovery found that a small percentage of people are resistant to H.I.V. thanks to a lucky mutation that causes their immune cells to lack CCR5, a protein that gives the virus a foothold. In people with one copy of the mutated gene, the infection progresses more slowly than in those who have normal CCR5. People who have inherited two copies of the mutated gene, one from each parent, are highly resistant to H.I.V. and may never become infected despite repeated exposure.

            For the people that are affected by H.I.V. this research could be the different between life and death. About 1.6 million people die a year from H.I.V./ AIDS. This option may be an improvement from the anti-viral medications because they have bad side effects. The research on gene editing, while it is still in the primary stages, is something that should be considered as a long-term solution for this virus.

            This article was very well written and I enjoyed reading it. The author used specific information about the studies and how scientists are trying to find a cure for H.I.V. She also included specific quotes, which enriched the article. I am interested to see what the results of this research will be. Overall, the article taught me that the process of “gene cutting” can be used to change the genes in cells and then put them back in the body. Maybe this can be used to cure other disease in the future if it is successful.

I read the New York Times article “A Revolutionary Surgery, Now as Typical as a Sinker,” written by Mike Tierney. In this article, the author talks about how widespread “Tommy John” surgery has become. He says that it, “…now extends to pitchers at multiple levels of the game, as well as tennis players and javelin throwers, from athletes as young as 14 to those nearing retirement.” The surgery grafts a tendon from the forearm into the elbow to act as a ligament. More and more people are getting this surgery, including young athletes. While it has most definitely been beneficial for athletes, there are questions about whether or not people should get it if their ligament hasn’t been torn. Athletes seem to think that it makes their elbows stronger, but that could also be attributed to that fact that they are doing more exercises and getting physical therapy. In recent years the surgery has been advanced to involve a different way of grafting and a less invasive procedure.

            There is no doubt that the operation is effective, but should this many people be getting it? The author said, “…baseball patients were amazed to learn that the condition was not caused by an improper pitching style. ‘Really, really good technique increases it the most,’ he said, adding that as players got bigger and stronger, the need for surgery would only increase.” What does this say about our society? We are driving people, even kids, to compete in sports that are rapidly breaking down their bodies and destroying their elbows. It is only through the discoveries of modern medicine that these people can move their elbows without severe pain. There is so much pressure on athletes to be successful that they are ruining their bodies. The question should not be “What can we do to cut down the recovery time of the procedure?” but “What can we do to stop the harm done on our bodies in sports?”

            I thought that the author did a good job writing a readable article, but I think that he touched on too many topics and didn’t go in depth enough on any of them. I would like to know more details about what the surgery involves, and what it is about the sports these athletes play that causes the injuries. It would have been a better article if the author had talked more about the controversy of the operation, because I believe that there is more to it than what he mentioned.

Tierney, Mike. "A Revolutionary Surgery, Now as Typical as a Sinker." The New York       Times. The New York Times, 07 Mar. 2014. Web. 09 Mar. 2014.     <http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/08/sports/baseball/how-tommy-john-surgery-   has-evolved-since-frank-jobe.html?ref=science&_r=0>.

   I read Early Treatment is Found to Treat HIV in a 2^nd Baby, by Donald G. McNeil Jr. This article was about how the second baby was successfully treated for HIV by injecting antiviral medication for the first 48 hours of life. This was similar to the first “Mississippi Baby” who was said to go from positive to negative testing. The long Island baby, the second HIV cured child, is allowing for a larger clinical study of 60 babies. If successful, this could mean that all 250,000 babies born with HIV could be cured right away. However, it is an integral part of the trial that these babies are still HIV free by the age of two, and eventually through childhood, before scientists can even consider spreading this treatment throughout the world. A University of California, San Francisco scientist agrees that this second baby seems to have been cured, which can potentially lead to a changed future.

            This article is really important because it gives us a sense that we are nearing the day HIV becomes a curable disease. Although this article states that this is only the second baby to have been cured, we have a sense of hope that research will allow for first more babies to be born cured of HIV and eventually adults can be cured. Scientific research has come far since HIV/AIDS were discovered. Now there are preventable measures one can take, as long as medication to prevent the spread of HIV into the AIDS virus. This is a very important article for the fascinating world of science.

            I thought the author wrote this article very well. It was difficult at first to understand this cure, however, I think I did grasp a majority. For a person who is not in the field to understand that much, it is because of a well-spoken author. I thought the author could have improved his use of scientific terminology. Although he did explain some, there was clearly a lack of explanation elsewhere. I found that there were a few things I had to Google in order to me to fully understand what he was saying.

Mcneil, Donald G. "Early Treatment Is Found to Clear H.I.V. in a 2nd Baby." The New York Times. The New York Times, 05 Mar. 2014. Web. 06 Mar. 2014. <http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/06/health/second-success-raises-hope-for-a-way-to-rid-babies-of-hiv.html?ref=science&_r=0>.

“Early Treatment Is Found to Clear H.I.V. in a 2nd Baby”

This article exposes two newborn babies who were treated for H.I.V. within 30 hours of being born and have showed signs that they do not contain the virus after months of treatment. Last year, scientists made a stunning announcement that a baby born with H.I.V. had apparently been cured through intense treatment directly after birth. After this case was made public, there was a great deal of skepticism. Although there has not been an actual trial to prove that scientists have found a cure for babies, this child is now 3 years old and is still virus-free. Also, there was a woman in California who had advanced AIDS and she gave birth to a baby girl who also carried this infection. However, four hours after this baby was born, she was immediately put on three different drugs at the high doses usually used for treatment of the virus. Although this baby is also free of AIDS, doctors still claim that it is incorrect to describe the baby as “cured” because she is still on drugs. But because the most sensitive blood tests can find no virus capable of replicating, she describes the baby as “having sero-reverted to H.I.V.-negative.” Scientists are still continuing to test infected babies, and their next plan is to figure out when it is safe to stop giving the patients their treatment. I found this article to be very eye opening. After visiting Kenya two years ago, I became well aware of this topic because infectious diseases are very prevalent in Africa. At the time there had not been any public breakthroughs in regards to cures, so it was a very depressing thing to learn about. However, after reading this article, I can see that we are moving in the right direction. The H.I.V. virus is very dangerous and if we can focus on preventing it from spreading to babies, we will see a huge decline in the numbers of those who are infected. Although this article was interesting and informative, it was broken up in such a way that made it difficult to fully understand after reading it one time through. It kept going back and forth between the two babies that were treated for H.I.V. and the work that researchers will do in order to move forward with this process. The writing didn’t really flow, so I had to keep going back and re-read the information again and again. posted for P. Marshall

“Study Gives Hope of Altering Genes to Repel H.I.V.”

“Study Gives Hope of Altering Genes to Repel H.I.V.”

            A pilot study was performed which found that immune cells could be altered to possibly cure patients with H.I.V., and that this treatment is not harmful to the patients.  A certain mutated gene for CCR₅ has been known to cause the H.I.V. virus to disappear, and according to Dr. Carl June, expert in AIDS at the University of Pennsylvania, “gene editing may offer another way to achieve the same result.”  Gene editing is a treatment that can zero in on a particular gene of interest and disable it, which could be revolutionary for treating diseases such as H.I.V.  The goal of gene editing regarding H.I.V. is that “if enough cells could be engineered to repel the virus, patients might no longer need antiviral drugs, and might in effect be cured.”  In this study, 12 H.I.V. patients had a certain protein removed from their immune cells that the virus must latch onto to invade the cells.  In order to do this, the cells had to be removed from the patients, treated and then dripped back into their bloodstreams through an intravenous line.  The cells in theory would then replicate with this “mutation” and ultimately beat out the virus.

            For people infected with H.I.V., this new treatment brings much hope.  Other treatments for the virus are antiviral drugs, but patients dislike the side effects, and lifelong treatment using these drugs can cost $1 million in the United States.  Gene editing is worth considering because it is much cheaper and more effective treatment.  I think that this new treatment is a revolutionary medical achievement and could really change the way that H.I.V. affects a population.  Many lives have the potential to be saved with this treatment.

            Overall, I really enjoyed reading this article, and I thought that it presented a good explanation of the study and why it should be considered.  The article included quotes from doctors expressing their views on the new treatment and provided facts and evidence of the treatment’s success.  I will be very interested to see if this new treatment takes off, because I think that it could really change the medical world significantly.

Grady, Denise. "Study Gives Hope of Altering Genes to Repel H.I.V." The New York Times. The New York Times, 05 Mar. 2014. Web. 05 Mar. 2014.

“Early Treatment is Found to Clear H.I.V. in a 2nd Baby,”

Citation: McNeil, Donald G., Jr. "Early Treatment Is Found to Clear H.I.V. in a 2nd Baby." New York Times 5 Mar. 2014. Print.

  In the New York Times article, “Early Treatment is Found to Clear H.I.V. in a 2nd Baby,” by Donald G. McNeil Jr., the news from an AIDS conference is announced that a second baby that was born with H.I.V. was cured. In 2013, there was once similar case in while after thirty hours of aggressive drug treatment, the baby was cured. Now that a second child is believed to be completely cured, a clinical trial will begin that examines sixty infected babies after their immediate 48 hours on the drugs to see if a new protocol should be put in place for children born with this infection. As the executive director of the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases Dr. Anthony S. Fauci said, “this could lead to major changes, for two reasons…Both for the welfare of the child, and because it is a huge proof of concept that you can cure someone if you can treat them early enough.” The first cured child is now three years old and from Mississippi and the second from California who is nine months old both continue to test negative for H.I.V., and although doctors cannot technically call them cured because they are both still taking the drugs, any trace of the illness are gone. 

The topic of H.I.V. has been prevalent in the world since its outbreak in 1980s and the disease has been known to not have any viable cure. The possibility of a cure for children born with H.I.V. could change the impact of the disease and end the cycle of the infection. Although it will take a few years for scientists to be 100% sure of the drugs’ success, just the chance of changing the lives of some victims is outstanding. 

           I thought that this article was written very well and relevant. It was presented in a way that even someone who has not been following the H.I.V. discussion could understand. McNeil gave background on both of the children whom have been “cured” and with that information the reader was able to feel more connected to the topic. The possibility of finding a cure for newborns with the horrible infection of H.I.V. would be revolutionary and I can only hope that future trials have similar success.