Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

Conflict of Interest Statements (COIS) will now appear on PubMed Abstracts for all papers where indicated in publication.

April 20, 2017

pubmed image

New York University nutrition researcher Marion Nestle has been tracking industry-funded studies on her blog: 156 of 168 reported results that favored the funders’ interests. Annette Elizabeth Allen

This post was prompted by the following tweet:-

The link in the above tweet takes you to

Too many studies have hidden conflicts of interest. A new tool makes it easier to see them.

PubMed, the Google of scientific search, is now publishing funding information in its abstracts.

Great post by Julia Belluz @juliaoftoronto

My immediate response on Twitter

The screenshot in Julia’s post comes from….. PubMed PubMed Updates March 2017

Of the four changes mentioned, this is the most significant.

pm_update_fig1

The one example given by PubMed is from an Open Access (OA) paper indexed in PubMed Central (PMC) (additional arrow added).

PubMed COI

“PubMed will include conflict of interest statements below the abstract when these statements are supplied by the publisher”

Emphasis mine.

Generally speaking in terms of published research papers, COIs are largely hidden towards the end (if at all). They are vitally important IMO but this is the first time I’ve seen one indexed upfront in PubMed. Going back to a key point in Julia’s post:-

We strongly urge … all journals listed in PubMed to provide information about funding sources and other possible competing interests in all abstracts. To facilitate research, the “competing interest” section should be fully searchable. Thus, PubMed would advise users about the entity or entities that funded the study and whether (a) the authors reported no competing interests; (b) the authors reported the competing interests; (c) the article did not include a competing-interests disclosure statement; or (d) the journal did not provide disclosure of funding sources or the authors’ other competing interests.

pubmed pharma

SOURCE

In short my question is, will traditional/legacy/subscription based publishers make such important information freely available or remain hidden behind their paywalls ?

+++UPDATE 1+++

I asked my long term trusted contact at NCBI/NIH if they could confirm if these will appear widely or just on OA papers like the one mentioned.

They advised “I believe it’s on papers where indicated in publication”

+++UPDATE 2+++

I did a check on 22nd April to see if this change had been fully implemented. The following randomly picked papers were checked to see if COIs were mentioned in the Abstracts on PubMed. No mention made. Having read through the full texts of these, COIs appear in all of them. Clearly, still work to do for the PubMed team.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27249641
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26631378
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25246643

Extraordinary Everyday Lives #053 Open Science

April 16, 2017

ORIGINAL SOURCE c/o WAYBACK MACHINE

Update: A shorter and hopefully clearer version salvaged from Mikes analog backup recording has been posted and feds should now be getting this clearer file.

Update: Apologies for audio quality, some interference gremlins snuck in somewhere. We are looking at fixing it up somewhat and will republish the audio as soon as that’s done.

The Extraordinary Everyday Lives Show #053 Open Science
Thurs 24th July 2008

>>>>>>>>>>>> MP3 <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

This show is all about the intersection of Technology and Human desire. This year Dave and I have been focusing on deepening connections with those we subscribe to via RSS. Having a chat on a podcast is a remarkable way of doing that we have found. Agenda is loose guide only, we are very stream of consciousness, no edits, no script kinda guys.


New intro music this show. Courtesy of Graham, one of our guests. I remixed it a bit for the intro and play the full song, Wake Up Now, after the discussions.

Open Science

Rough chronological talking points:
-mike had nothing more than a vague idea such a movement would exist prior to starting work at a University in April.
-his RSS reader provided some clues to a trail which I followed Graham Steel was one of the first to respond to my thinking out loud
-how graham and mike hooked up
-richard discovered it after posting an experiment on his labrats blog, and people got in touch.
-two sides open scientific publication & open notebook scientists
-trust and sharing of unpublished latest work
-tension between competition and openness
-openness outwards facing and inclusionary of wider community sharing of scientific data
-paradigm shift involvement with and giving something back to community
-blogging science
-use of podcasts big uptake in unis
-richard is attending a Science Blogging event at the Royal Institute in London on Saturday 30th August
www.nature.com/natureconferences/sciblog2008/index.html. One of the science communications team at USyd interviewed me (richard) this morning about this conference. Very interesting: theyre really keen on the idea here. Im also going to an Open Science meet at Southampton two days after the London meeting, organized by Cameron Neylon.
-guys will try to record and live blog the london event
-whats this about? http://blog.openwetware.org/scienceintheopen/2008/07/21/the-full-web20-experience-my-talk-tomorrow-at-iwmw-in-aberdeen/
www.viddler.com/explore/CameronNeylon/videos/1/
-discussion about how to capture the esence of a event with blogging, podcasts etc. immediacy.
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=%22open+science%22&search_type=&aq=f
-going to use one of grahams songs for intro to this show http://www.macjams.com/song/34800 Wake Up Now
http://www.music20book.com/ Gerds book
-posters in 2nd Life http://www.flickr.com/photos/mikeblogs/195285627/
-mike talks about science in the sl community. specific uses of 3d environment.what are they good for in science? rf. mike crawling thru a molecule. [dnw]
-Knol somewhere between closed and open science use? http://knol.google.com/k/knol# (A knol is an authoritative article about a specific topic.)

Graham Steel http://twitter.com/McDawg

Networking between us public, science bloggers, scientists, researchers, physicians, Journals etc.

Nature Network http://network.nature.com/profile/steelgraham
Public Library of Science (PLoS) blog http://www.plos.org/cms/blog
Open Access Directory wiki http://oad.simmons.edu/
MacJams Music Blog http://blog.macjams.com/?p=223
Personal blog http://mcblawg.blogspot.com
Do Bloggers Add a New Dimension to Conferences? http://scienceblogs.com/clock/2008/01/science_blogging_conference_vi.php


Richard Grant (twitter: rpg_twit skype: rpg7sky AIM/iChat: rpg7aim)

Nature Network http://network.nature.com/blogs/user/rpg
University of Sydney http://blogs.usyd.edu.au/labrats/ Richards open science stuff
Personal blog http://rg-d.com/BioLOG/


LINKS and Random Stuff


The Royal Institution


http://www.science.usyd.edu.au/outreach/

http://www.oar2008.qut.edu.au/ Open access & research meeting in Brisbane towards the end of September. Some impressive names.
On the subject of technology and human desire, check out this presentation from Prof David Wishart in Canada. http://www.scribd.com/word/full/2159511?access_key=key-29c44pnl25896imfykd1 I mashed it a wee bit.

This just in:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2008.05.004
Over the past few years, blogging (‘web logging’) has become a major social movement, and as such includes blogs by scientists about science. Blogs are highly idiosyncratic, personal and ephemeral means of public expression, and yet they contribute to the current practice and reputation of science as much as, if not more than, any popular scientific work or visual presentation. It is important, therefore, to understand this phenomenon.

Acknowledgements

Intro music, Wake Up Now, by steck, via macjams.com.

Image: Culture Tubes, www.flickr.com/photos/10775233@N00/107326169

3 Responses to Extraordinary Everyday Lives #053 Open Science

  1. OpenScience on latest Extraordinary podcast | Learning with the Fang Says:
    […] has already posted yesterdays chat about OpenScience for our Extraordinary Everyday Lives podcast. It was a beaut chat with Graham and […]
  2. The Podcast Network Blog » Blog Archive » TPN Week In Review: July 28 – August 4 , 2008 Says:
    […] Extraordinary Everyday Lives #053 Open Science […]
  3. Speaking of Science | Learning with the Fang Says:
    […] discussion (thanks to Graham and Richard) on my last Extraordinary everyday lives podcast (episode 53), there seems to be some interest in connecting the event in London with people in other geography […]

nature or wikipedia

January 17, 2017

Would you rather be published in logo_nature

or cited in  wikipedia_logo_detail?

Think Check Submit

September 26, 2016

thinkchecksubmit.org

Think. Check. Submit. from Think. Check. Submit. on Vimeo.

 

thinkchecksubmit

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Public Domain works by Charles Darwin are being legally sold online. Is this ethical ?

August 21, 2016

darwin manuscript

paywall

Early on Sunday morning (21st August 2016), I spotted the following (anonymized) #icanhazpdf request tweet:-

darwin tweet

After spotting this, I did indeed find that the publication of this Charles Darwin paper from 1858 is indeed sitting behind a paywall:-

darwin paywall

(Thankfully, the person who left the original #icanhazpdf request for the paper found a link to the free version).

darwin paywall1

Here’s some of the responses to my tweet:-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thankfully, a quick online search threw up a number of open access copies of this work such as here on the Darwin Online website.

So, should works dating back to that era be out of copyright and sitting in the public domain ? YMMV it would seem.

Some tweets from Copyright Librarian Nancy Sims:-

 

 

 

 

 

 

So, after being initially surprised that this public domain work is being sold by a publisher (in this case Wiley), they are within their legal rights to do this.

Earlier this year, there was an interesting thread relating to such matters after I posted this tweet:-

This is also linked to this one:-

One person however is of the view that this is NOT legal:-

Others disagree with that view:-

Let’s see if Copyright expert Charles Oppenheim will comment:-

RESPONSE

 

 

Views of someone associated with a publisher:-

the_invisible_a @McDawg @HistGeekGirl it seems wrong in principle, even if it may technically be legal. Just shows how messed up laws are.

— Andrea Wiggins (@AndreaWiggins) August 21, 2016

(Jan Velterop implies that he is of the view that it’s legal to download this from Sci-Hub as the work itself is Public Domain)

 

Updated thoughts on live-streaming an event

July 19, 2016
This post is a re-assessment of a comment I left back in 2010 on the following blog post by Martin Fenner.
I shall leave the below intact from the original (other than some formatting). So as someone who regularly continues to follow Conferences/Events virtually, have my thoughts changed much since 2010 ? Essentially, not that much really.
Firstly, I’ve live-streamed many events since then having previously just briefly dabbled. One common misconception about live-streaming, is that if you do it, no-one will come to the event IRL. This came up in the discussion below with Mike & David. They have over two decades of first hand experience in the field. Essentially, they said “the opposite is true“.
In terms of the quality of live-streaming, this can vary massively. Some of the free applications that I used years ago either no longer exist or are now cluttered with adverts (unless you pay for a premium account). Now that there are many platforms that offer broadcasting/recording in HD, the quality of live-streaming had certainly improved, generally.
Over the last two years or so, a number of mobile APPs (e.g. Periscope, Meerkat & UStream etc.) have been released meaning that after a couple of taps, you can be live on the web. Again, the quality of these APPs can vary a lot. Archiving these recordings could be made easier (although I have limited experience in this particular area).
I still firmly believe that if you’re streaming from an event, getting a secure web connection remains important.
I also still firmly believe that post event, it’s really important to archive the recordings online ASAP before interest disappears.
Another entity to compliment live-streaming is live blogging.

 This is something I’ve dabbled with a couple of times. Firstly, briefly at Repository Fringe (Edinburgh) 2015 and also earlier for UKSG in 2014 e.g., here and here.  Being part of a team certainly helped given the size of this event.

One person I know who has much more experience than me (and most) in this is Nicola Osborne, Jisc MediaHub Manager / Digital Education Manager at EDINA. You can view her work here.

 All in all, live streaming/blogging is certainly here to stay and technology/software continues to revolutionize the possibilities for making events open to wide audiences online.
One caveat remains though. By not attending events IRL, you do miss out on face to face discussions/socializing/networking etc.

Interesting post Martin.

I’ll try to keep this as brief as possible. That wasn’t possible, so here goes.
From an general subjective Conference perspective namely focusing on the virtual attendee angle, I think one has to consider many variables such as:-

A) What subjects are you going to cover?
B) Who is your “target audience”?
C) How will you make them aware of the event?
D) Is it free or fee (#scio10 was $175 – #solo09 – £10 in person or £10 for Second Life)
E) How interactive do you wish to make it be for virtual attendees?
F) How does one tackle sessions that involve unpublished data?
etc.etc.

Now since we only appear to be able to use a max. of four url’s in the comments feed on NN at the moment, I’ll choose ’em sagaciously.
On Jan 10th, I posted this on my blog (sorry, link rot) before virtually attending last weekend’s events in North Carolina.

Based upon past experience(s), the thing that I was really looking forward to was the live-streaming/chat-room aspect of the Conference. Despite the much applauded wi-fi connection they had set up (extremely important these days and secured internet access to all present) c/o company SignalShare, it became clear fairly early on that there was -phlegm- a problem with the live-stream.

++ACTION POINT++ Must find out what went wrong so that we can learn from this for the future.

Each chunk (hourly sessions) of the event was split into five parallel sessions (Rooms A to E) and the aim was to live-stream content from all discussions in D & E. This meant that ahead of the event, virtual attendees could chose which sessions they wanted to attend. In the end alas, over the whole weekend, only about 1.5 hours worth was streamed and with very little notice.

I found this rather disappointing I have to say as discussed with Martin over the weekend (can a DM Twitter discussion be classed as a “personal communication”?) so time to follow events in other ways. I was pretty much glued to the #scio10 Twitter feed all weekend and I very much agree with AJCann’s comments above.
==
I like Martin’s Twitter suggestions !!

Richard Grant & I covered various aspects of Conference event coverage during a podcast we did with Mike Sefang & David Wallace (link rot, try here) in July 2008. (relevant section starts at 19’30”) As a result of that discussion and with the permission of NPGs Timo Hannay, Richard recorded audio of the Wrap-Up Panel: Embracing change: Taking online science into the future at Science Blogging 2008: London which was uploaded to web within a few hours. Cool….

As discussed with a few NN staffers, even though all sessions were video recorded, due to technical issues, none of the NN files ever appeared on the web. That said, Cameron Neylon recorded and from memory live-streamed (and also self archived) some of the sessions via his laptop. Also cool.

An observation from “Science Blogging 2008, North Carolina”:http://scienceblogs.com/clock/2008/01/science_blogging_conference_vi.php is as follows. Similar to what Cameron did in London, that year, a couple of individuals, Wayne Sutton and to a lessor extent, Deepak Singh, live-streamed events from their laptops. Within the space of a week (after that, little interest), their uploaded files had been viewed over 15,000 times which I think was pretty impressive. Observation from Science Online London: 2009. Video footage of 7 sessions were uploaded c/o NN’s Joanna Scott 2 weeks after the event. Total views ~ 500.

My take on this from this data is that if you are going to attract the attention of virtual attendees using video format, it needs to be instant ideally, or delayed by a day or two at the most, before interest fades. The same I guess applies to audio. As to Second Life, I personally have limited experience of this platform so am unable to comment. One for Lou & Jo to discuss as Lou has indicated earlier.

As Cameron Neylon has mentioned elsewhere on teh interwebs, as matters stand, livestreaming using a wi-fi connection is still very 50/50 in success terms. Whilst livestreaming from this years Science Online UK event shouldn’t be completely ruled out (we should at least try a secure [not wi-fi] web connection, IMO) all things considered, I have to say that I’m pretty much with Martin as per the last para of his post.

One final point. I really like the idea of Science Online 2010: London being a two day event, yay !! The meatspace socialising aspect of such events is a real draw and something that you miss by non physical presence. I can’t really add to Stephen’s comments above in this regard.

Oh waits, I still have a link final up my sleeve. Whilst I was unable to attend the pre Science Online 2009: London party in person, I did manage to fling together the following montage. Apols for re-posting here but I thought it was rather cool and in doing something like this, it gives virtual attendees a flavour of the social aspect of events, which I think is not “essential” but of general interest.

Oh bums, I appear to have have ran out of links so let’s see if I can post this without the “missing link”.

Oh sh*te, we can’t embed stuff from Vimeo here, so “el missing linky is here.”:http://vimeo.com/6306956

Essentials of Glycobiology

May 25, 2016
Originally posted on my now deceased blog on Friday, 17 October 2008

Essentials of Glycobiology – New Edition is freely available from the NLM/NCBI Bookshelf

As reported today on Open Access News (OAN):-

… Essentials of Glycobiology, the largest and most authoritative text in its field, will be freely available online beginning October 15, through collaboration between the Consortium of Glycobiology Editors, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, and the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI), a division of the National Library of Medicine (NLM) at the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Fittingly, the release of the book follows soon after the October 14th celebration of International Open Access Day, which will highlight prior successes in providing such open access to research journals. …

Here is the book. The Foreword is a great place to start of course.

OAN Comments:

* Add this to the growing list of widely-used textbooks that are available OA.
* Who’s backing this is also noteworthy. It’s not an author who negotiated the right to self-archive a copy, or an OA startup publisher; it’s a scientific press and the National Library of Medicine.
* The first edition of the book has been OA since 2003. Apparently, the impact on sales of the print copy hasn’t been overwhelmingly negative, or it seems unlikely the publisher would support OA to the new edition.

My Comments:

Glycobiology is a most fascinating area that continues to gather interest over time.
I applaud all involved for contributing to and publishing this work to the widest audience on the planet.

Press Release: Novel publishing approach puts textbook in more hands

1 comment:

Anonymous said…

Good fill someone in on and this fill someone in on helped me alot in my college assignement. Thanks you seeking your information.

Glycobiology – update

May 25, 2016

Originally posted on my now deceased blog on Saturday, 12 January 2008

Now that I’m blogging more often, I wish to expand further on one aspect of Glycobiology – 21st Century Style which I posted on this blog mid December.

Pentosan Polysulphate (or PPS for short)

PPS was something that I became interested in late 2002. As a result, this led me to become interested in the field of Glycobiology and making contact with at least two dozen leading Glycobiologists from around the world.

Since social networking is all the rage these days, I am currently co-admin of two Glycobiology related online groups, one on Facebook, the other, on Nature Network.

PPS may be a merely a drop in the Glycomics ocean, but it is the substance that I have the greatest knowledge and first hand experience of.

Since my email records only go back to Feb 2006 (I had to change computers and lost a lot of older emails), I cannot recall specifically when contact was made with a Linda Curreri based in Dunedin, New Zealand but it would have been during 2003. We still keep in touch.

Linda maintained a very well referenced and detailed website dedicated to Pentose Sugar. Linda like myself is a layperson but her general research knowledge was and remains sublime. A decision was taken last year by Linda to no longer maintain the site but I offered to come to the rescue if required.

A few months before then however, I had discovered the brilliant WayBackMachine c/o Archive.org

We then knew that despite the site being archived, it would be (and is) preserved perfectly as it was on the web.

I therefore for the first time am providing a link to archived website PENTOSE SUGAR

Further preservation was done in the form of book “Pentosan polysulphate : a medicine made from beech bark” by Linda Curreri early 2007. ISBN 9780473119720 (pbk.) : $12.00

—-

At the time of writing, there are 731 Papers about Pentosan archived in PubMed. Importantly however, only 98 are readable (open access) at full article level. That’s not a lot really.

When one considers the clinical usages and research areas of PPS, I find it quite staggering that so little research has been published thus far.

Let’s take arthritis for example. PubMed throws up over 175,000 Papers. When we add Pentosan to the search mix, the number falls to 32, and down further to only three at full article level.

For a condition that afflicts millions of patients, pretty much to date, only the non-human variety are allowed to receive PPS treatment.

But wait !!. Check out the ARTHOPHARM website in Australia and this page.

Go back, check and FULLY read through archived website PENTOSE SUGAR

Being a layperson and patient advocate with no loyalty to anyone other than patients, no patents pending (or ever likely) and no conflicts of interest to declare, I simply wrote this blog to place information in the public domain.

I will end with a Legal Precedent from 2002 and it’s wide ramifications. The following text is from the Pentose Sugar website.

“Law. Pentosan Polysulphate is not and cannot be patented. This places it in the public domain. However PPS is only available under patented trade names which appear on its packaging. This is a complete nonsense, because the brand name is not pentosan polusulphate and it is the trade name which is being marketed. The brand patenting merely protects the commercial property of the manufacturer. If a pharmaceutical company does not ‘develop’ PPS for specific indications and patent their brand name(s) this unique medicine does not become available as a treatment option. In effect legislation made up by law maker’s is blocking pentosan polysulphate’s availability for sick human’s. PPS is however readily available for scientific research.

In the London High Court in December 2002
, Dame Elizabeth Butler-Sloss ruled in favour of two teenagers with advanced vCJD to have pentosan polysulphate to treat this prion disease. The case had absolutely nothing to do with any patented brand name; it was about the right of two dying people to have a medicine that could save their lives .The medicine was the unpatented pentosan polysulphate. Dame Elizabeth’s decision set a precedent and it would seem that the legal constraints which surround this pentose medicine, though firmly in place are flimsy and could in fact be nul and void.

It could also be argued that due to the unique status of pentose sugar in human physiology that it is an absolute right of humans to source and assimilate pentose sugar whether it is a food sweetener or a medicine that has been compounded by a chemist, and neither medical specialists, government officials, man made laws or scientists and pharmaceutical companies ( both of which appear to claim the unpatented generic medicine PPS) have any right to prevent them. Whether by collusion or not, this is indeed happening….globally.

Scientists will always continue research even though principles have been proven, it is what they do, but this should not be used as an excuse to prevent pentosan polysulphate’s use in humans, because science has already proven the safety and worth of this medicine to the human organism.”

http://www.getgooglesearch.com/htmlcodes/search.html

5 comments:

Francis said…

Is the archived version of the pentosesugar website no longer available?
Also, I tried looking out for the book itself, but the only website reference for it doesn’t have any copies. Any working links would be appreciated. I dont mind paying directly to the author herself

Thank you,
Francis

McDawg said…

@ Francis. This link should work for the archived pentosesugar website:- http://web.archive.org/web/20041205094941/www.pentosesugar.com/toc.html

Shall email you the authors contact details.

Francis said…

Hey McDawg,

The webarchive is perfect. I haven’t received the author’s details though.
PS. I would like to know more about your expertise on Pentosan.

Thanks,
Francis

McDawg said…

@Francis.

If you would kindly drop me an email (steelgraham AT hotmail DOT com), I’ll see if I can assist you.

Kind regards,

Graham

McDawg said…

@ Francis. I tried to email you the information you were looking for but there is no email address in your profile. Overnight, I received the following message from Linda Curreri which she asked me to post on my blog.

HELLO FRANCIS,

TO PURCHASE A COPY OF THE BOOK PENTOSE SUGAR, A MEDICINE MADE FROM BEECH BARK, PLEASE EMAIL ME AT

lcurreri@xtra.co.nz

KIND REGARDS,

LINDA CURRERI [AUTHOR]

Glycobiology – 21st Century Style

May 25, 2016

Originally posted on my now deceased blog on Monday, 10 December 2007

Glycobiology – 21st Century Style


Glycobiology 21st Century Style

 

I’ve been thinking about an ‘appropriate’ image for this for quite some time, so here we go. All that I added was ’21st Century Style’.

SOURCE (C)

Follows some thoughts I had last year.

If accepted for publication, my co-authors and I will deliver something of substance in the New Year.

Complex sugar chains and glycosaminoglycan (GAG) side chains
make up an integral part of our mind and body.

It was an Albrecht Kossel who was awarded a Nobel back in 1910 as the first to recognize that nucleic acids contained a carbohydrate. Due to its 5 carbon molecular structure, he called it pentose “the stuff of genes”.

During the first half of the last Century, the chemical and biological structures of carbohydrates were very much a point of focus. Whilst this was to become an integral part of modern day molecular biology, at the time, they were not forerunners unlike other major classes of molecules. Largely, this was due to their (very) complex structures, difficulty in understanding their sequence(s), and the fact that their biosynthesis could not be directly predicted from the DNA template.

53 years ago Nature magazine published a scientific Paper by Maurice Wilkins and his two colleagues at King’s College, London, called “Molecular Structure of Deoxypentose Nucleic Acids” Wilkins M.H.F., A.R. Stokes A.R. & Wilson, H.R. Nature 171, 738-740 (1953)

Something called heparin was “discovered” by a second-year student at John Hopkins University in 1916. By the 1930’s, heparin came into use namely as an anti-coagulant. Essentially, this was made using animal ‘by products’ such as pig, dog and later, bovine gut material. By the early 1940’s, “purified” heparin was available for clinical and experimental use.

Post WW2, Germany was unable to import heparin and there was also a shortage of many basic resources such as sugar. A novel method of deriving synthesized heparin type substances led to the development of sulphanated pentose sugar made essentially from the bark of beechwood trees. The most commonly used term these days for this particular (Polyanion) substance is Pentosan Polysulphate or PPS. Its most common broad (oral) usage commenced in the 1960’s and continues in many countries (namely USA and mainland EU) in relation to the management of the common bladder complaint, internal cystitis (IC). SP54 (the purest form of PPS known continues to be manufactured by a small family run German company, Bene. Here is a page from the Bene website that lists it’s currently known broad usages.

Around the same time, Germany, Japan and the (former) Soviet Union also focused on Xylitol which is a five-carbon sugar alcohol, a natural carbohydrate which occurs freely in certain plant parts (for example, in fruits, and also in products made of them) and in the metabolism of humans. Xylitol has been known to organic chemistry at least from the 1890’s.

Where there is deficiency or excess of (Proteoglycans) PG’s this can play a lead role in the pathogenesis of a substantial range of common and rare conditions ranging from arthritis, diabetes, cancer, HIV/Aids through to protein folding neuro degenerative conditions such as Alzheimer’s disease (AD).

Semi synthesized HSPG’s (Heparan Sulphate Proteoglycans) over the last few years in particular are now referred to as Glycans. There are 14 Glycans in the family including Glypicans.

In 2005, Nature published a seminal Paper by Professor’s Fuster and Esko (5) entitled “The Sweet and Sour of Cancer: Glycans as Novel Therapeutic Targets” which reported on several significant developments.

In this Paper, Fuster and Esko et al demonstrated the potential use of Glycans in the treatment of many types of cancer/tumor and concluded the Paper with a “(this) might represent the ‘tip of an iceberg’ of therapeutic potential that awaits future discovery” type ending.

Have matters progressed since then?

Glycans have now been brought into real time Clinical usage, namely as surrogate markers in the treatment of a number of cancers.

How far are we from human trials of Glycan use for the likes of HIV, Cancers and Alzheimer’s disease?

Book, ‘Essentials of Glycobiology’ is available online and can be (Open Source)accessed via this book is currently being revised with an updated version was released this year via TA.

The Journal of Glycobiology published its first online Journal in September 1990.

Whilst there has been an increasing wider focus of attention in the Glycobiology field over the last few years in particular, some of the core principles from a cellular level stretch back over a Century.

In Australia and (limited extent) New Zealand in particular, Glycans continue to be used safely and successfully in the treatment of the arthritic joints (osteoarthritis) in both animal and man (1).

The latest reported commentary (2) from the most recent Global Conference on AD in Madrid is highly suggestive that diabetes, whilst certainly not the cause, has a degree of interlinkage with a number of neurodegenerative diseases.

With regards to Alzheimer’s (Amyloidosis generally) despite a substantial number of Peer reviewed published Papers showing Glycan promise in vitro and in vivo, there has been little/no interest from the Pharma Industry.

To sense the ‘sweet flavour’ of the future of Glycobiology in the 21st Century, the word Glycomics comes to mind (3,4).

Are such Generic based approaches deemed as potentially large threats to large Pharma?

(1) PMID:12014849PubMed http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=12014849&itool=iconabstr&query_hl=5&itool=pubmed_docsum
(2) http://www.wilmingtonstar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060722/NEWS/607220330/-1/State
(3) http://www.functionalglycomics.org/static/consortium/main.shtml
(4) http://glycomics.scripps.edu/pub/NatMethodsEditorial2005.pdf
(5) PMID: 16069816 [PubMed – indexed for MEDLINE]http://www.nature.com/nrc/journal/v5/n7/abs/nrc1649.html

1 comment:

Anonymous said…

Good brief and this post helped me alot in my college assignement. Say thank you you on your information.

Interview: “Open Views” featuring McDawg aka Steck

March 16, 2016

Sunday, 13 July 2008 (Originally posted on my now deceased blog)

sundar steck

BACKSTORY

12th October 2007, Prof Peter Suber and I & were interviewed on the same afternoon, back to back by Sundar Raman as part of the ongoing series called “Open Views”.

Peter’s can be found here.

Having previously released a snippet and patiently waiting for a landing space over at KRUU.fm, I decided to edit and self archive a copy of my own, now here.

Steel, Graham (2014): My first interview about open access from ~2007.. figshare.

https://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.1053210.v2

Retrieved: 23 01, Mar 16, 2016 (GMT)

Intended Intro music

White Lies by *Catch* by Steck
Genre: Pop (mainstream)

Intended Outro music

Wake Up Now – remastered by Tobin Mueller
Genre: Pop (mainstream)

Above image is mash up of this image from KRUU.fm.

CCBY1

The interview was a joint creation of McDawg and host from KRUU.fm.
Labels: graham steel, KRUU.fm, open access, open views, peter suber, sundar raman