Fox Ridicules Obama For Saying We Should Use Less Oil

Posted by Unknown | Posted in , , , | Posted on 19:49

0

Fox News is mocking President Barack Obama for saying the U.S. must use less oil in a recent interview, suggesting it was a callous and unfounded idea. But experts across the political spectrum agree that the only way to reduce our vulnerability to gasoline price spikes is to cut our oil dependence.

On Wednesday, the president gave an interview to a local South Carolina news station. Responding to a question on high gasoline prices, President Obama said he was "proud" that oil production during his tenure has been high, but emphasized that the "overall economy [must] use less oil."Obama referenced ways that he has worked toward this goal, including implementing fuel economy standards that a group of retired military officers and business leaders called "the most important energy security accomplishment in decades," and proposing further research into alternative transportation technology.

On Thursday, Fox & Friends' Brian Kilmeade asked, "really? So I should stop driving to work, I should start jogging? I'm not really sure what that means." Steve Doocy added, "So if you want to save money, use less oil. Just stop driving. Don't go anywhere, stay in your house, watch television." At no point did the co-hosts reference the policies that Obama specifically cited so that we can move toward lower oil use economy-wide:

On Friday, Fox & Friends continued to mock Obama's proposal, suggesting it was useless:

U.S. gasoline prices are a function of the world crude oil market (and the world economy generally), and experts from across the political spectrum have acknowledged that increased drilling won't lower prices at the pump -- no matter who is in the White House. 

Furthermore, drilling has actually been on the rise recently. In the 154-year history of commercial crude oil in the U.S., production has never increased by more in one year than it did between 2011 and 2012 -- about 790,000 barrels, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Despite all this, gasoline prices have gone up. Experts say that the only way to make Americans less vulnerable to these spikes is to, as Obama said, "use less oil."


View the original article here

Fox's Huckabee Compares Insurance For Pre-Existing Conditions To Insurance For Burnt-Down House, Totalled Car

Posted by Unknown | Posted in , , , , , , , | Posted on 01:04

0

From the February 23 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends Saturday:

Previously:

Huckabee Defends Denying Insurance For Pre-Existing Conditions, Compares It To Getting Insurance For Burnt-Down House

Huckabee Defends Health-Insurance Discrimination Based On Pre-Existing Conditions


View the original article here

Franklin Center Top Donor Is Right-Wing's "Dark Money ATM"

Posted by Unknown | Posted in , , , , | Posted on 17:13

0

Nearly all of the 2011 funding for the conservative Franklin Center for Government and Public Integrity, which oversees state news sites nationwide, came from a single foundation that has distributed hundreds of millions of dollars to right-wing causes, according to a recent report of the Center for Public Integrity.

CPI detailed that the foundation, Donors Trust, provided 95 percent of the Franklin Center funding in 2011, citing Internal Revenue Service documents. The Center uses that funding to support websites and affiliates providing free statehouse reporting from a "pro-taxpayer, pro-liberty, free market perspective" to local newspapers and other media across the country.

The Center, which Media Matters highlighted in a lengthy July 2012 report, has launched more than 50 news sites covering state government in 39 states since it began in 2009 and claims to provide 10 percent of all state government news in the United States.

Since it was created in 1999, Donors Trust and its affiliated organization, Donors Capital Fund, have raised more than $500 million from various individuals and organizations, among them billionaire industrialist Charles Koch, and doled out $400 million to a constellation of right-wing causes. That includes $86 million distributed in 2011 alone.

Donors Trust gives many of its funding sources a way to hide their donations or "pass-through" money to various right-leaning organizations and media outlets, many of whom promote free-market ideas. The size and character of these donations has earned the group the moniker "the dark money ATM of the conservative movement."

The $6.3 million donation to the Franklin Center in 2011 was the second-largest gift made that year by Donors Trust. Donors Trust and Donors Capital Fund had previously given a combined contribution of $25,000 to the Franklin Center in 2010.

Major Donors Trust contributors include the Charles Koch-controlled Knowledge and Progress Fund.

Marcus Owens, the former director of the IRS Exempt Organizations Division, told CPI, "Koch is among an exclusive pool of donors who have used Donors Trust as a 'pass-through.' It obscures the source of the money. It becomes a grant from Donors Trust, not a grant from the Koch brothers."

CPI produced this graphic detailing the flow of money in recent years from Koch-backed and other right-wing foundations through Donors Trust to a variety of conservative groups.

The Franklin Center is also staffed by veterans of groups affiliated with Charles Koch and his brother, David.

Steven Greenhut, Franklin Center's vice president of journalism, was listed as a senior fellow at the Pacific Research Institute, a conservative think tank that has received significant funding from foundations headed by the Koch Brothers.

Other top Franklin Center staffers with current or past Koch ties include Erik Telford, the Franklin Center's vice president of strategic initiatives & outreach; Mary Ellen Beatty, Franklin Center director of citizen outreach; Alicia Barnaby, Coalitions Coordinator; and the Franklin Center's director of development, Matt Hauck.

The group's editors have claimed that their "professional journalism" work is walled off from the organization's more nakedly political operations that include seminars and webinars promoting conservative journalism coverage with staffers from The Daily Caller and TownHall.com. They contend their "pro-taxpayer, pro-liberty, free market perspective" doesn't compromise their accuracy or independence.

Asked about the latest funding revelations, Franklin Center's Director of Communications, Michael Moroney, sought to dispel suggestions that the Center's work is slanted, telling Media Matters in an email statement:

The Franklin Center is arguably the leader in the emerging non-profit journalism sphere and adheres to the highest degree of journalistic integrity. Even our harshest critics have found nothing wrong with our journalism, produced by a professional team of experienced, long-time newspaper reporters and editors. It's no surprise that our work has been used in hundreds of outlets across the country, including progressive-leaning outlets like The Atlantic and MSNBC.

Moroney also wrote that it was "ironic" that Media Matters would cite a report from CPI, which has received funding from a similar organization on the left, the Tides Foundation. The CPI story noted that the organization had received funding from Tides, as has Media Matters. 

Mother Jones, whose non-profit arm has also received Tides funding, reports that "Donors Trust's strategic intent is far narrower and more coherent than Tides'. The groups funded by Donors Trust more or less pursue the same agenda--eliminate regulations, kneecap unions, shrink government, and transfer more power to the private sector." 

Many journalism professionals -- even newspaper editors who reprint the work of Franklin Center affiliates in their own pages - have spoken warily of the group's ideological bent.

In Iowa, The Telegraph Herald of Dubuque -- which has been publishing articles from IowaPolitics.com, a Franklin Center site, since April 2011 -- noted reader concerns in a lengthy January 2012 column by Executive Editor Brian Cooper that stated, "we approached their content with caution."

At least two state legislative correspondent organizations, in Ohio and Idaho, have denied press credentials to Franklin Center reporters because of the organization's conflicts.

As Media Matters reported last year, the Franklin Center has its origins in the Sam Adams Alliance, a non-profit organization that promotes free-market Tea Party-style citizen activism, which "helped launch" the Franklin Center in 2009, reportedly providing the nascent organization with "seed money," according to the National Journal

The Franklin Center is not legally required to identify its donors, but disclosure forms from other large conservative grant-making organizations offered a glimpse at the Franklin Center's subsequent funding sources prior to the influx of Donors Trust funding. The Lynne and Harry Bradley Foundation, one of the largest and most influential conservative foundations, awarded the Franklin Center two grants in 2010 worth $190,500, both earmarked for "state-based reporting efforts in Wisconsin," according to disclosure forms. The Bradley Foundation is also a major Donors Trust funding source. 


View the original article here

Limbaugh Doubles Down, Insists He's Still "Embarrassed And Ashamed Of This Country"

Posted by Unknown | Posted in , , , , , , | Posted on 01:12

0

From the February 22 edition of Premiere Radio Networks' The Rush Limbaugh Show:

Previously:

Limbaugh: "For The First Time In My Life I Am Ashamed Of My Country"

Limbaugh On Michelle Obama: She "Is Not Proud Of Her Country Unless She's Getting What She Wants From It"

Limbaugh Again Proudly Declares He Was The "One Person" Who Said "I Hope [Obama] Fails"


View the original article here

Limbaugh Mocks Sequestration Warnings: "We Might As Well Just Start Killing Ourselves Now And Get It Over With"

Posted by Unknown | Posted in , , , , , , , | Posted on 20:17

0

From the February 22 edition of Premiere Radio Networks' The Rush Limbaugh Show:

Previously:

Limbaugh: "For The First Time In My Life I Am Ashamed Of My Country"

Limbaugh: "I Don't Know What's Going To Kill More People Now, Assault Weapons, Global Warming, Or The Sequester"

Right-Wing Media Downplay Economic Harm From Sequester Cuts


View the original article here

Media Cover Boat Disaster But Not The Supreme Court Case That Could Hand Even More Power To Corporations

Posted by Unknown | Posted in , , , , , , , | Posted on 01:17

0

News outlets have largely ignored the legal barriers that the Supreme Court has erected in between injured consumers and access to compensation - including a current case that could give big business the power to place themselves beyond the reach of federal laws by preventing consumers and small businesses from bringing class action lawsuits.

That's surprising, considering the extensive media coverage of the story of 3,000 passengers on Carnival Cruise Line's Triumph who spent five days floating in the Gulf of Mexico with no power or plumbing, and finally disembarked in Mobile, Alabama.  On February 20, attorneys for the passengers filed a class-action lawsuit against Carnival, claiming that the cruise line acted negligently by sending the Triumph to sea when they knew the ship had mechanical problems.   It was the second major crisis on a Carnival ship in a year. 

Thanks to a series of Supreme Court cases limiting class actions and upholding arbitration agreements, those passengers are facing an uphill climb with their lawsuit.  Carnival's ticket contract itself contains an arbitration clause requiring customers to waive their right to bring claims against Carnival in court.  It also includes a "class-action waiver" that states: 

This contract provides for the exclusive resolution of disputes through individual legal action on guest's own behalf instead of through any class action."

If enforced, a class-action waiver creates a David and Goliath dynamic.  As legal expert Dahlia Lithwick has explained, class actions often level the playing field between individual claimants and big defendants such as employers.  The Supreme Court has made it increasingly difficult to pursue class actions.  For example in Wal-Mart v. Dukes, the Court rejected a class-action suit brought by female Wal-Mart employees who claimed they were subjected to discrimination in pay and promotions.  The practical result:  Wal-Mart employees would have to jump over significant hurdles to pursue class action; otherwise, they are forced to go it alone against the number two corporation in the Fortune 500.  Lead plaintiff Betty Dukes explained that the Court took "an opportunity to give corporate America a huge advantage over everyday American citizens." 

These decisions, which leave plaintiffs to go it alone against corporations and waive their day in court based on agreements they didn't have an opportunity to negotiate, set the stage for an upcoming Supreme Court case that could shift the balance even further in favor of big business, allowing them to use these form agreements as an end run around federal law. 

On February 27, the Court will hear oral arguments in American Express Co v. Italian Colors Restaurant, in which it will weigh whether class-action waiver provisions in an arbitration clause are enforceable even when refusing to allow the class action to go forward would make it functionally impossible to vindicate federal statutory rights at all.   

Businesses that accept American Express charge cards must agree to a class-action waiver and waive any other means of sharing the cost of legal proceedings against the company.  American Express insists that businesses accept their unpopular credit cards if they want to accept the popular ones, which the businesses claim is a "tying arrangement"   that violates the antitrust laws.  Because pursuing antitrust claims is expensive, the cost of arbitrating an individual case would dwarf any possible recovery--meaning that if the plaintiffs cannot proceed as a class or share expenses, the antitrust claim is dead in the water.

The US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that Am Ex's arbitration agreement, which includes a class-action waiver, was unenforceable because it would prevent the merchants from effectively vindicating their federal statutory rights.   Importantly, the court noted that enforcing the waiver would prevent an antitrust claim from being litigated at all:

Amex has brought no serious challenge to the plaintiffs' demonstration that their claims cannot reasonably be pursued as individual actions, whether in federal court or in arbitration, we find ourselves in agreement with the plaintiffs' contention that enforcement of the class action waiver in the Card Acceptance Agreement "flatly ensures that no small merchant may challenge American Express's tying arrangements under the federal antitrust laws."

The bottom line is this:  if the Supreme Court reverses the Second Circuit's decision, small businesses and consumers could be forced to waive--through form contracts--longstanding statutory rights in order to do businesses with large corporations.  This gives corporations significant power to evade federal law.  As the Supreme Court explained in Reiter v. Sonotone (1979), even though the Department of Justice may also enforce antitrust laws, private litigation is important because

These private suits provide a significant supplement to the limited resources available to the Department of Justice for enforcing the antitrust laws and deterring violations. Indeed, nearly 20 times as many private antitrust actions are currently pending in the federal courts as actions filed by the Department of Justice. 

When the Court strikes down or blunts the power of duly-enacted legislation, legal commentators - conservative and progressive alike-- often invoke the term "judicial activism," charging that the Court overstepped its bounds.  But in AmEx, the Court will consider whether corporations can wield that power.  While big business and consumer groups recognize what's at stake -the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and Public Citizen both filed amicus briefs- the media apparently does not.    Even The Wall Street Journal's Law Blog's post on the Carnival Triumph debacle, while accurately noting that the cruise industry has adopted mandatory arbitration clauses, didn't note that the scope of these clauses is currently before the Court.

There are exceptions, such as conservative attorney Theodore H. Frank, whose organization, which is funded by the right-wing Donors Trust, is dedicated to limiting access to class actions. In an Investor's Business Daily op-ed, Frank attempts to turn attention away from the problem of illegal tying arrangements, pointing out that the real problem is class actions themselves.  He writes "[i]n reality, consumers would be better off if they had the right to promise that they would avoid bringing the class action in the first place."   According to Frank, lawyers who pursue class actions are interested because these cases are lucrative for them.

Former Solicitor General Paul Clement, who is representing the merchants in AmEx, doesn't see it that way.  His firm often represents big corporate clients like Exxon Mobil.  Clement, whose strong oral argument performance attacking the Affordable Care Act was the talk of the last Court term, and who is in the headlines again for defending the Defense of Marriage Act before the Court this term, is not a class-action attorney. He has made clear that the case is not about attacking arbitration provisions, but preserving the merchants' statutory rights:  "This is thus truly a case in which the alternative to litigation is not arbitration, but nothing."

Frank also claims that those who are concerned about the dangers of reversing the Second Circuit's decision are "Chicken Littles," and recasts the AmEx case as a struggle to preserve arbitration itself.  That would probably come as a surprise to the group of professional arbitrators, mediators, and arbitration professors who filed an amicus brief in support of the merchants.  They state that

[American Express's] argument that the [Federal Arbitration Act] requires enforcement of an arbitration clause even where it is undisputed that the consequence is that the resolution of the underlying claims in arbitration is impossible, if adopted, will reduce public confidence in the arbitration system and leave it a more weakened institution.

With less than a week left until oral argument, AmEx is something of a sleeper case.  But that has everything to do with inadequate media coverage and nothing to do with how much is at stake.


View the original article here

NY Daily News ' Dan Friedman On Breitbart.com's False "Friends of Hamas" Story: I Would Have Googled It

Posted by Unknown | Posted in , , , , , , , , | Posted on 21:13

0

From the February 23 edition of SiriusXM's Media Matters Radio:

Previously:

Breitbart.com, "Friends Of Hamas," And Enemies Of Accountability

"Friends Of Hamas" And Why The GOP Can't Win The Internet


View the original article here

On Fox, Rudy Giuliani Justifies Possible Layoffs From Sequester -- "We Employ Way Too Many" Federal Workers

Posted by Unknown | Posted in , , , , , , , | Posted on 11:40

0

From the February 22 edition of Fox News' On the Record with Greta Van Susteren:

Previously:

The Sequester: Myths And Facts

Fox Disappears Romney's Attack On Teacher, Firefighter, And Police Hiring

On Jobs, Media Have A Choice: Cover The Costs Of Austerity, Or Follow Rush Limbaugh


View the original article here

Right-Wing Media Darling Von Spakovsky Gets Mainstream Platforms To Attack Voting Rights Act

Posted by Unknown | Posted in , , , , , , , , | Posted on 20:33

0

Conservative media's Charlotte Allen recently wrote an extensive cover piece for The Weekly Standard that relies on discredited right-wing activists Hans von Spakovsky and J. Christian Adams to attack the Department of Justice's renewed focus on properly enforcing the Voting Rights Act. But while conservative media typically advances these sources and their debunked myths, it is disturbing that mainstream coverage of the Supreme Court case of Shelby County v. Holder is relying on von Spakovsky and not disclosing his highly unreliable background.

Allen, responsible for a piece dubbed "The Stupidest Thing Anyone Has Written About Sandy Hook" by lamenting in National Review Online that no men or "huskier 12-year-old boys" were available to protect the "feminized" victims of the Newtown massacre, takes on the "politiciz[ed]" DOJ under President Obama in her story for the The Weekly Standard. In the article, Allen manages to repeat most of von Spakovsky's and Adams' stale misinformation of years past, ranging from the non-scandalous New Black Panther fiasco and non-existent Fast and Furious conspiracy, to DOJ's "belligerent stances" on enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. Allen also successfully writes over 6,500 words on the alleged "politicizing" of DOJ without divulging von Spakovsky and Adams were poster children for such conduct when they worked for the DOJ under George W. Bush, disparages U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder because his "people" are not black enough to claim civil rights history, and finally undermines her main thesis by admitting that - under any presidency - DOJ follows the policy preferences of the White House.

Ultimately, however, that Allen uses the collected works of von Spakovsky and Adams is unsurprising. What is troublesome is that mainstream outlets are also publishing the opinions of von Spakovsky and Adams as the "conservative" perspectives on Shelby without disclosing their extremist background.

For example, in the past three months, mainstream outlets such as USA Today (and other Gannett publications), National Public Radio, and the increasingly popular legal website SCOTUSblog, have quoted or given space to von Spakovsky as the conservative voice on the challenge to the constitutionality of the Voting Rights Act. None of these outlets have mentioned the extensive reporting revealing von Spakovsky's right-wing activism for photo Voter IDs, which is a redundant and unnecessary form of voter suppression trumpeted as a "solution" to virtually non-existent in-person voter impersonation.

But it is precisely this type of documented racial discrimination that the Voting Rights Act provision under review in Shelby - Section 5 - effectively curbs. More significantly, as has been pointed out repeatedly, von Spakovsky's career at the Bush II DOJ was most remarkable for his well-known hostility to civil rights precedent. Before the most recent exposé of his unreliable past by Jane Mayer in The New Yorker, legal expert Dahlia Lithwick thoroughly covered his biases against anti-discrimination law, and pointed to numerous reports on his controversial background, in Slate:

[Von Spakovsky] was one of the generals in a years-long campaign to use what we now know to be bogus claims of runaway "vote fraud" in America to suppress minority votes. Von Spakovsky was one of the people who helped melt down and then reshape the Justice Department into an instrument aimed at diminishing voter participation for partisan ends.

I won't belabor these claims here, as few of them are even disputed. Von Spakovsky's preferred method of defending himself--his recent forgetfulness notwithstanding--appears to involve scrubbing his fingerprints off the Web, fudging questions of authorship on an article that indicates his biases. But even a brief poke at his résumé shows a man who has dedicated his professional career to a single objective: turning a partisan myth about voters who cast multiple ballots under fake names (always for Democrats!) into a national snipe hunt for vote fraud.

Richard Hasen has sketched the outlines of the vote-fraud crusaders efforts here for Slate. Adam Lambert has done yeoman's work reporting on von Spakovsky here. The curious among you can check out this 2004 article by Jeffrey Toobin that highlighted a change of direction in DoJ's Voting Section and flagged von Spakovsky's early involvement with the Voting Integrity Project, where, among other things, he spoke out in defense of an effort to keep the Green Party off the Georgia ballot in 2000.

Among his numerous accomplishments at the Voting Section at DoJ, von Spakovsky can take credit for approving the Tom DeLay-sponsored midcensus redistricting in Texas--part of which was later deemed by the Supreme Court to have violated the Voting Rights Act. (To do so, von Spakovsky overrode a 73-page memo written by seven voting-rights experts finding that the DeLay scheme violated the Voting Rights Act by reducing minority voting strength in Texas.) Von Spakovsky similarly pushed for approval of Georgia's restrictive voter-ID law, again over the four-to-one objection of staff lawyers who (in a 51-page memo this time) felt the new law would disenfranchise black voters. State and federal courts later found that statute unconstitutional.

[...]

More than almost anyone else--perhaps even including Alberto Gonzales--Hans von Spakovsky represents a Justice Department turned on its head for partisan purposes. 

At the very least, all media should disclose von Spakovsky's obvious and long-standing bias and dishonesty on the very topic he is asked to weigh in on, particularly if outlets beyond the right-wing rely on his opinions. Yet the question remains why this extreme ideologue is approached by media at all if more reputable opponents of the Voting Rights Act are available. And if von Spakovsky is an example of the type of conservative willing to argue publicly for gutting a seminal law designed to protect the right to vote from racial discrimination, maybe reporters should disclose that too.

By including the discredited von Spakovsky and Adams in the dialogue - without disclosing their well-documented pasts as dubious evaluators of long-standing bipartisan civil rights law - shifts media coverage of Shelby to the far right and is not balanced reporting. What's good enough for Charlotte Allen shouldn't be good enough for USA Today and SCOTUSblog.


View the original article here

Radon Exposure in Homes Across America Still Leading to Lung Cancer

Posted by Unknown | Posted in , , , , , , , | Posted on 02:21

0

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) this week intensified its campaign to reduce exposure to radon by urging homeowners across America to test for the dangerous gas.

Exposure to radon is second only to smoking as the most common cause of lung cancer. The EPA estimates that one in 15 American homes has an elevated level of radon gas.

“Testing for radon is one of the easiest and smartest things people can do to protect their homes and families from this serious health risk,”  said Gina McCarthy, assistant administrator for the EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation, in a press release Monday. “Addressing high radon levels greatly reduces exposure.”

Dangerous levels of radon can occur within homes, schools and other buildings from the natural decaying of uranium in the soil and rocks beneath, seeping in through foundation cracks and causing serious health issues. The radioactive gas is both odorless and colorless, often going undetected.

There are approximately 225,000 people in the United States diagnosed annually with lung cancer, the leading cause of cancer death, according to the American Cancer Society.

Radon Threat Is Real

An estimated 80 percent of lung cancer deaths are attributed to smoking, while an exposure to radon gas and asbestos fibers rank second and third, respectively. The EPA estimates that 21,000 Americans die annually from radon-related lung cancer.

The risk from both radon and asbestos also is considerably higher for people who smoke. And studies have shown that the risk for lung cancer is higher in areas where there are natural uranium deposits, which can be almost anywhere.

Radon decays naturally into radioactive particles that can accumulate in homes and buildings, then become trapped in the lungs when they are unknowingly inhaled. They can damage lung tissues and lead to cancer. Unlike asbestos, radon is not considered dangerous outdoors, where it becomes less concentrated and dissipates quickly. It is most dangerous in the basement of homes.

The efforts by the EPA to dramatically reduce radon exposure are relatively new. The Federal Radon Action Plan was not introduced until 2011. Its goal was reducing radon risk in homes, schools and daycare facilities, along with encouraging radon-resistant new construction. It includes both new commitments for future actions, along with the current federal government actions.

In that Action Plan, the federal government hopes to provide economic incentives for businesses to test and support the risk reduction plans; build a demand for the radon services industry; and demonstrate to the public the value and feasibility of radon testing.

EPA Calling For Action

The EPA Monday used National Radon Action Month to encourage the public to take these steps:

Test: All buildings should be tested, with or without basements. Hardware and home-improvement stores offer affordable do-it-yourself test kits. The National Radon Program at Kansas State University offers discounted test kits online. Certified radon testers can be hired, too.Fix: Radon levels above 4 picoCuries per Liter (pCi/L) should be fixed by a qualified radon-reduction contractor.Save A Life: By addressing elevated levels of radon, you can prevent lung cancer while creating a healthier home and community.

The EPA has a national map on its website that details the areas where the greatest potential for radon exposure are.

The EPA was part of the World Health Organization’s (WHO) first call-to-action initiative in 2009 that brought considerable global attention to the problem of radon and lung cancer. The WHO estimated that 14 percent of the lung cancer cases worldwide were caused by radon.

A handbook was produced and designed to help countries expand or establish radon reduction programs, providing detailed recommendations and policy options. In part, it was aimed at the construction industry, helping them with ventilation and foundation tips that could prevent radon entry.

TimPovtak An award winning reporter and writer, Tim Povtak is a senior content writer for the Mesothelioma Center. He previously worked at the Orlando Sentinel and then at AOL. You can contact him directly tpovtak@asbestos.com with any story ideas or comments. Twitter Facebook Reddit Delicious Stumbleupon

View the original article here

Mesothelioma Research: Where 2012 Took Us, and What 2013 Has in Store

Posted by Unknown | Posted in , , , | Posted on 02:19

0

In a new year, it’s traditional to review recent achievements, then identify goals for the year that lies ahead.

In the December 2012 issue of the Journal of Thoracic Oncology, mesothelioma expert Anne Tsao analyzed the recent – and upcoming – directions in mesothelioma research. The article focused on three main areas of development: anti-angiogenic drugs, immunotherapy and biomarkers.

These treatments have been in development long before 2012 – but researchers did make several breakthroughs in each of the fields. Experts with the Southwest Oncology Group, the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center and similar research organizations plan to take these findings to the next level, thanks to funds from the Department of Defense and national cancer research groups.

While summarizing the year’s clinical trial activity, Dr. Jessica Donington noted an emphasis on anti-angiogenic agents, or drugs that prevent tumors from creating new blood vessels (which allows the tumor to spread from its origin). Researchers are finding great promise in these drugs for mesothelioma patients who meet a very specific set of characteristics. These trials have produced positive responses for sunitinib, bevacizumab/gemcitabine/platinum-based chemotherapy regimens, and the tumor-specific peptide known as NGR-hTNF.

Moving Forward

Researchers have already identified vorinostat as a potential treatment for mesothelioma. This lymphoma drug has produced median survival rates of up to four weeks longer than placebo drugs, but further developmental trials are currently on pause. Once researchers can provide further analysis on the biomarkers that indicate a positive response to vorinostat, they may be able to launch additional studies.

Donington also mentioned a clinical trial that is currently wrapping up at MD Anderson Cancer Center. The study is one of the first efforts to incorporate pre- and post-treatment biopsies, personalized treatment plans and a novel targeted agent.

Dr. Ibrahim discussed relevant developments in immunotherapy, many of which focused on the use of tremelimumab. This human antibody is proving especially useful in patients who do not respond to traditional chemotherapy drugs. In one study of 22 patients, tremelimumab produced two partial responses, stabilized four patients’ progression and yielded an overall survival of 17.5 months.

Moving forward

In light of the recently completed phase II immunotherapy studies, researchers hope to advance to the next stage in tremelimumab testing. If certain results are achieved, the drug may become an ideal “salvage therapy” for mesothelioma patients who do not respond to first-line treatment.

Dr. Anne Tsao concluded the article with an overview of biomarker research. In the last year, this research has included studies of genetic mutations, serum markers, blood-based markers and prognostic tumor markers. Most recently, researchers identified the biomarker, BAP1, which may contribute to patients’ genetic predisposition for non-asbestos-related mesothelioma.

Moving forward

The MD Anderson Cancer Center and the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center will soon open enrollment for a WT-1 vaccine trial. This vaccine may prompt attacks on mesothelioma cells contaning the WT-1 biomarker.

Researchers also hope to identify a more accurate prognostic biomarker for mesothelioma. While one team in Boston has identified a four-gene ration test that has decent results, they must adapt the test to account for several limitations (including the lack of real-time results).

These advancements may certainly change the way doctors currently treat mesothelioma. Each trial brings us one step closer to an effective treatment – which the mesothelioma community will pursue this year, and each year that follows, until we find a cure.

faith Faith Franz is a content writer for the Mesothelioma Center. She joined the team in January 2011 to help mesothelioma patients empower themselves through knowledge about their diagnosis. Twitter Facebook Reddit Delicious Stumbleupon

View the original article here

Ohio School Facing Serious Charges After Students Were Used to Haul Away Asbestos Materials

Posted by Unknown | Posted in , , , , , , , | Posted on 02:18

0

A group of teenage students in Northeast Ohio thought they were volunteering their weekends for a noble cause, helping renovate the old building that is expected to become their new school.

They had no idea the risks they were taking.

The Buckeye Education School, a small religious-affiliated school in Middleburg Heights, is now under criminal investigation for exposing those teenagers to a variety of asbestos materials as they helped gut the former YWCA building that was purchased recently.

Exposure to asbestos, which later was found in the pipes, insulation, duct fabric and floor tiles that they carried to a nearby dumpster, can cause a variety of respiratory problems, including asbestosis and mesothelioma cancer. No amount of asbestos exposure is considered safe.

State regulations in Ohio require certified contractors to remove asbestos when a building is being renovated, restored or even demolished. Asbestos abatement is an expensive but necessary part of the process, particularly with older structures that were built during the height of the asbestos era.

According to television station WKYC, school officials were using the school volunteers in an effort to save money. The television station aired a video of the students taking out debris as the building was being gutted. One person was using a front-end loader, and a large cloud of dust engulfed those around the dumpster. That cloud likely included deadly asbestos fibers.

The video was taken by a neighbor of the former YWCA, which was purchased last summer with the intention of school expansion, according to the television station.

The Ohio Environmental Protection Agency began investigating the school last month. According to the report, regulators found three dumpsters filled with debris hauled from the building, most containing asbestos materials. Most of the inside walls and ceilings from the building had been torn out.

“The entire site was contaminated with asbestos and the people who were doing it were all children,” Darren Clink, the neighbor who shot the video, told WKYC.  Clink said he is a licensed contractor who works in the asbestos-abatement field. “The kids were loaded with it.”

The Buckeye Education School is part of Sterling Education, which operates 35 religious-based schools across the country. Bruce Carmichael of Sterling told the television station recently that the school now has hired a certified asbestos abatement contractor. He would not comment when asked about the students previously doing the work.

Warning signs have been posted recently on the building of dangerous conditions.

Health inspectors in Ohio are recommending the students, and anyone else who was involved, to inform their family doctors, who can conduct respiratory testing and give them chest X-rays to help predict possible problems in the future.

One problem with asbestos inhalation is that it can take decades before problems become apparent. The microscopic asbestos fibers can get lodged in the lining around the lung and cause scaring that could lead to mesothelioma.

TimPovtak An award winning reporter and writer, Tim Povtak is a senior content writer for the Mesothelioma Center. He previously worked at the Orlando Sentinel and then at AOL. You can contact him directly tpovtak@asbestos.com with any story ideas or comments. Twitter Facebook Reddit Delicious Stumbleupon

View the original article here

Chemotherapy Drug Alimta was Sparked by the Wings of a Butterfly

Posted by Unknown | Posted in , , , , | Posted on 02:16

0

Princeton University chemistry professor Edward Taylor went looking for the molecular secret to the intriguing pigmentation found on the wings of a butterfly.

He found Alimta, the most successful chemotherapy drug today for mesothelioma cancer, taking a winding, decades-long path that would change dramatically the lives of thousands worldwide.

“I never had any intention of making or finding a drug that could be useful against mesothelioma,” Taylor told Asbestos.com from his office at Princeton. “You don’t expect, in this kind of chemistry, to do something like that. It’s unrealistic, and on the pompous side, too. I still can’t say if it was brilliant insight, or just fumbling into something.”

Taylor, now 89 and Professor of Organic Chemistry Emeritus at Princeton, will be honored in April by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) for his 60 years of laboratory work that led to pemetrexed, which the Eli Lilly Company marketed as Alimta.

“When you think about where we started, it’s almost shocking,” he said. “We were out in left field. I’m sure there were people wondering, ‘Who is this nutty guy at Princeton working on pigment in butterfly wings?’ But I’m thrilled at how it turned out.”

The FDA approved Alimta in 2004, giving new hope to mesothelioma patients who are seeing their lives extended by this treatment option, which often is used in conjunction with cisplatin or carboplatin, the more generic cancer drugs.

The clinical trials for pemetrexed that began in the ’90s were so promising, and so welcomed by the mesothelioma community, that the FDA approved an early, compassionate-use program.

Alimta later was approved by the FDA for the treatment of advanced nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer. Alimta has shown unprecedented activity against a variety of solid tumors, and is used today in more than 100 countries, effecting more than a million cancer patients, going well beyond mesothelioma.

The success of the drug has produced royalties for Princeton that paid for the state-of-the-art, 263,000-square-foot chemistry laboratory that opened in 2010 and is second to none in America.

Taylor will be receiving the NAS Award for Chemistry in Service to Society, yet another acknowledgment of how monumental his findings were. He previously was inducted into the Medicinal Chemistry Hall of Fame in 2010 and the New Jersey Inventors Hall of Fame. He also received the Heroes of Chemistry Award from the American Chemical Society.

Even more touching to him, though, are the unexpected letters and emails of thanks from patients who learn of Taylor’s original findings in the laboratory and his contribution to the cause of cancer research.

“It’s always wonderful to get those letters, and I’m thrilled by them, no question about it,” he said. “But at the same time, it’s totally unexpected. It usually doesn’t happen in this job, where you actually help affect the lives of so many people.”

Even today, Taylor sounds humbled by his work, crediting a unique and long-running collaboration with Eli Lilly for turning his laboratory findings into a life-extending treatment plan for cancer patients.

“It was a great example of what can happen when academia and industry comes together, which just doesn’t happen enough today. We had the chemical expertise, and Lilly had everything else we needed,” Taylor said. “Without Lilly, this compound we came upon would still be sitting in a bottle on a shelf in my office. I can’t tell you how many objectives have been reached in academic research that never are carried further because the lack of a collaborator.”

The relationship between Taylor and Alimta actually started in the late 1940s during his doctoral thesis at Cornell when he was researching the molecular composition of those butterfly wings, luring him into the field of heterocyclic chemistry and the complex ring systems within it.

He joined the Princeton staff in 1954, but he didn’t focus on cancer chemotherapy until the mid-70s, always retaining his original fascination with certain molecular structures and folate-dependent enzymes.

Eventually, he created a compound in the lab which blossomed into one of the most active anti-tumor agents ever uncovered, awakening a once ordinary relationship with Lilly. It was Lilly, through extensive testing, that showed convincingly the compound killed tumor cells by blocking biosynthesis within cells.

“It was like getting a bear by the tail,” Taylor said. “Suddenly, this became extraordinarily exciting. All these years, I kept getting diverted because you never knew if anything would come from it. But now we knew something was happening. It was totally unexpected.”

Taylor believes the future of cancer research – and the next big breakthrough – is dependent upon the right kind of collaboration and a coming together of many diverse fields that produce totally new concepts.

“It’s not an area that lacks investigation, but someone has to put it all together, a kind of mental synthesis, maybe in a way that’s never been investigated before, perhaps from an area we haven’t even dreamed of yet,” he said. “You never know where it will come from. I didn’t know my idea was any good, at first. I was looking at the pigment in butterfly wings.”

Edward Taylor, interview Jan. 17, 2013TimPovtak An award winning reporter and writer, Tim Povtak is a senior content writer for the Mesothelioma Center. He previously worked at the Orlando Sentinel and then at AOL. You can contact him directly tpovtak@asbestos.com with any story ideas or comments. Twitter Facebook Reddit Delicious Stumbleupon

View the original article here

Mesothelioma Cancer Patients Hurt by Court Ruling Against Medicinal Marijuana

Posted by Unknown | Posted in , , , , , , , | Posted on 02:14

0

Mesothelioma cancer patients utilizing marijuana for medicinal purposes were dealt a setback earlier this month when a federal appeals court in Washington D.C. ruled in favor of the government’s long-standing classification of cannabis as a top-tier, dangerous drug.

The ruling dismissed a challenge to the Drug Enforcement Agency’s refusal to reclassify marijuana and loosen the restrictions that mostly prohibit the production, sale and use of it.

Many cancer patients have been using marijuana to combat the nausea and appetite loss that typically comes with chemotherapy treatments – and to help with pain management –, but the appeals court still sided with the DEA, making it much more difficult to obtain legally.

Although voters or legislators in 18 states have enacted laws in recent years making medicinal marijuana legal (under strict controls) – and two states have legalized it for recreational use – the federal designation remains unchanged after the court ruling.

The DEA, under the Controlled Substance Act of 1970, still classifies marijuana as a Schedule 1 drug, with no accepted medical uses, placing it alongside heroin and LSD.

“To establish accepted medical use, the effectiveness of a drug must be established in well-controlled, well-designed, well-conducted and well-documented scientific studies with a large number of patients. To date, such studies have not been performed,” the DEA stated in defense of its decision, which was used in the appeals court opinion.

Americans for Safe Access, a marijuana advocacy group, and several disabled American veterans, brought the case in October 2012 before a three-judge panel.  The DEA has rejected a similar petition in 2011.

More than 200 published studies were cited by Americans for Safe Access – including one by the Institute of Medicine (IOM), a governmental health advisor – to demonstrate the medical efficacy of marijuana, but the overall reasoning was rejected by the court.

“The IOM report does indeed suggest that marijuana might have medicinal benefits. However, the DEA fairly construed this report as calling for ‘more and better studies to determine potential medical applications of marijuana,’ and not as sufficient proof of medical efficacy itself,” the court opinion read.

The Americans for Safe Access has organized a conference called Bridging the Gap between Public and Policy, for Washington, D.C. on Feb. 25. It will include a Congressional lobbying effort that day.

The chief counsel for the ASA already has said it will seek another hearing before the full, nine-person appeals court, and a possible appeal to the United States Supreme Court on the matter.

“We’re disappointed, but not surprised,” Steph Sherer, ASA executive director, told the Los Angeles Times of the recent ruling. Sherer told the Times that more than one million patients have used marijuana for medicinal purposes.

The use of medicinal marijuana in Western countries can be traced back to the 19th century when it was used to relieve inflammation and pain. It was shown to help with convulsions and spasms, providing quick relief for a number of symptoms associated with physical ailments.

Mesothelioma patients in states where it is legal for medicinal purposes must have a prescription from a physician and a registration card to use the plant. The laws vary from state to state.

Although smoking marijuana provides the quickest relief from pain, patients already with lung problems can consume it through the digestive process by eating it in baked goods. Drug companies also have developed synthetic versions that can be taken in pill form.

Patients in various trials have reported its usefulness in improving sleep quality and increasing appetite, which are common problems with cancer patients. It also has helped with nausea, pain and anxiety relief. Additionally, it has shown to have fewer lasting side effects compared to many opiates that are prescribed to cancer patients by doctors.

TimPovtak An award winning reporter and writer, Tim Povtak is a senior content writer for the Mesothelioma Center. He previously worked at the Orlando Sentinel and then at AOL. You can contact him directly tpovtak@asbestos.com with any story ideas or comments. Twitter Facebook Reddit Delicious Stumbleupon

View the original article here

Mesothelioma Cancer Patients Hurt by Court Ruling Against Medicinal Marijuana

Posted by Unknown | Posted in , , , , , , , | Posted on 02:13

0

Mesothelioma cancer patients utilizing marijuana for medicinal purposes were dealt a setback earlier this month when a federal appeals court in Washington D.C. ruled in favor of the government’s long-standing classification of cannabis as a top-tier, dangerous drug.

The ruling dismissed a challenge to the Drug Enforcement Agency’s refusal to reclassify marijuana and loosen the restrictions that mostly prohibit the production, sale and use of it.

Many cancer patients have been using marijuana to combat the nausea and appetite loss that typically comes with chemotherapy treatments – and to help with pain management –, but the appeals court still sided with the DEA, making it much more difficult to obtain legally.

Although voters or legislators in 18 states have enacted laws in recent years making medicinal marijuana legal (under strict controls) – and two states have legalized it for recreational use – the federal designation remains unchanged after the court ruling.

The DEA, under the Controlled Substance Act of 1970, still classifies marijuana as a Schedule 1 drug, with no accepted medical uses, placing it alongside heroin and LSD.

“To establish accepted medical use, the effectiveness of a drug must be established in well-controlled, well-designed, well-conducted and well-documented scientific studies with a large number of patients. To date, such studies have not been performed,” the DEA stated in defense of its decision, which was used in the appeals court opinion.

Americans for Safe Access, a marijuana advocacy group, and several disabled American veterans, brought the case in October 2012 before a three-judge panel.  The DEA has rejected a similar petition in 2011.

More than 200 published studies were cited by Americans for Safe Access – including one by the Institute of Medicine (IOM), a governmental health advisor – to demonstrate the medical efficacy of marijuana, but the overall reasoning was rejected by the court.

“The IOM report does indeed suggest that marijuana might have medicinal benefits. However, the DEA fairly construed this report as calling for ‘more and better studies to determine potential medical applications of marijuana,’ and not as sufficient proof of medical efficacy itself,” the court opinion read.

The Americans for Safe Access has organized a conference called Bridging the Gap between Public and Policy, for Washington, D.C. on Feb. 25. It will include a Congressional lobbying effort that day.

The chief counsel for the ASA already has said it will seek another hearing before the full, nine-person appeals court, and a possible appeal to the United States Supreme Court on the matter.

“We’re disappointed, but not surprised,” Steph Sherer, ASA executive director, told the Los Angeles Times of the recent ruling. Sherer told the Times that more than one million patients have used marijuana for medicinal purposes.

The use of medicinal marijuana in Western countries can be traced back to the 19th century when it was used to relieve inflammation and pain. It was shown to help with convulsions and spasms, providing quick relief for a number of symptoms associated with physical ailments.

Mesothelioma patients in states where it is legal for medicinal purposes must have a prescription from a physician and a registration card to use the plant. The laws vary from state to state.

Although smoking marijuana provides the quickest relief from pain, patients already with lung problems can consume it through the digestive process by eating it in baked goods. Drug companies also have developed synthetic versions that can be taken in pill form.

Patients in various trials have reported its usefulness in improving sleep quality and increasing appetite, which are common problems with cancer patients. It also has helped with nausea, pain and anxiety relief. Additionally, it has shown to have fewer lasting side effects compared to many opiates that are prescribed to cancer patients by doctors.

TimPovtak An award winning reporter and writer, Tim Povtak is a senior content writer for the Mesothelioma Center. He previously worked at the Orlando Sentinel and then at AOL. You can contact him directly tpovtak@asbestos.com with any story ideas or comments. Twitter Facebook Reddit Delicious Stumbleupon

View the original article here

Study Revisits Health Risk of Chrysotile: Why Is This Still a Debate in 2013?

Posted by Unknown | Posted in , , , , , | Posted on 02:11

0

This month’s issue of Critical Reviews in Toxicology features an article titled, “Health Risk of Chrysotile Revisited.”

Asbestos use in general is heavily controversial, but no singular aspect has been as hotly debated as the safety of chrysotile – or the lack thereof. Even now, more than 40 years after Denmark enacted the world’s first ban on asbestos products, we’re still discussing whether or not we can “safely” utilize chrysotile fibers.

A few organizations insist that chrysotile isn’t dangerous to human health. Some agencies maintain that it is hazardous, but on a less serious level than amphibole asbestos. Still others hold fast to the belief that all forms of asbestos are equally dangerous and should be banned across the board.

Naturally, the organizations most excited to debate it are those with links to the chrysotile industry.

This particular study was authored by Dr. D. M. Bernstein, a Swiss “consultant in toxicology.” Bernstein has repeatedly accepted funding from the Quebec Chrysotile Institute to publish studies that downplay the risks of the fibers.

This article was no exception.

Bernstein’s article provides an overview of recent research before reiterating the current generally accepted conclusion. “There is evidence that heavy and prolonged exposure to chrysotile can produce lung cancer,” he writes, “[but] low exposures to chrysotile do not present a detectable risk to health.”

The study began by discussing the unique ways that the different forms of asbestos break down once they are inside the body. Bernstein maintains that amphibole fibers maintain their original structure, while chrysotile fibers break down into smaller particles that are not as likely to trigger cancerous developments.

He also referenced  studies that illustrated the body’s ability to rid itself of chrysotile asbestos. The toxicity studies he chose demonstrated that when the lungs were not overloaded, the body was able to clear out the longest fibers (those over 20 micrometers in length) with relative ease. The research he cited also indicated that unlike amphibole asbestos, chrysotile fibers did not progress to the pleural cavity (where mesothelioma most commonly develops).

While it’s important to keep the spotlight on asbestos-related research, Bernstein’s article didn’t present any new information on the health risk of using chrysotile. In fact, it went against the widely accepted concept that any exposure to any form of asbestos can pose a health hazard.

Even if Bernstein’s skewed research was accurate in the sense that lower exposures are less dangerous, that doesn’t mean that it’s safe, either.

This makes health officials wonder: in 2013, why are we still having this discussion?

The International Labor Organization, National Cancer Institute, World Health Organization and World Trade Organization have all confirmed that chrysotile is indeed different from amphibole forms of asbestos like crocidolite in its chemical structure, but that it is still a serious carcinogen.

The asbestos industry will always use their influence (and funds) to produce studies in favor of ongoing chrysotile use. And so far, it’s working:  The Chrysotile Institute estimates that the United States consumes around 13,000 metric tons of chrysotile per year. That figure doesn’t even include the chrysotile-laden cement pipes and sheets that we import.

It’s hard to wrap your mind around this use in light of the easily available – and often highly sophisticated – alternatives.

Companies have access to ceramic foam, plastic flour and specialized forms of polyurethane foam that provide many of the same benefits of asbestos without the health hazards. True, they are more expensive, and choosing them over asbestos would cut down on profit margins. But even if there’s the slightest chance that chrysotile can cause cancer, shouldn’t that be enough to stop the arguments and start promoting alternatives?

Bernstein, D., Dunnigan, J., Hesterberg, T., Brown, R., Velasco, J. A., Barrera, R., Hoskins, J., & Gibbs, A. (2013). Health risk of chrysotile revisited. Critical Reviews in Toxicology; 43 (2). Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23346982 Smith, A. H., & Wright, C. C. (1996). Chrysotile asbestos is the main cause of pleural mesothelioma. American Journal of Industrial Medicine; 30 (3). Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8876792faith Faith Franz is a content writer for the Mesothelioma Center. She joined the team in January 2011 to help mesothelioma patients empower themselves through knowledge about their diagnosis. Twitter Facebook Reddit Delicious Stumbleupon

View the original article here

Latest Experimental Cancer Treatment Drug Reolysin Causing Stir in Financial Markets

Posted by Unknown | Posted in , , , , , , , | Posted on 02:10

0

It’s easy to get excited about an experimental new cancer drug that delivers tumor shrinkage for 95 percent of the patients who tried it.

It may take many years for a pharmaceutical company to bring a new drug to market, but the financial markets respond quickly to clinical trials that produce those kind of results.

Oncolytics Biotech Inc., a small publicly traded company based in Calgary, Canada, has seen a dramatic surge in value and stock price since releasing results of recent clinical trials involving its lead product Reolysin, which has been especially effective in killing cancer cells.

It could be especially promising for patients with lung cancer and even pleural mesothelioma, the cancer involving the thin membrane surrounding the lungs. Mesothelioma is caused by exposure to asbestos.

Reolysin is based upon a common, and otherwise harmless virus, but it shows powerful and uncommon results when altered and used intravenously in conjunction with chemotherapy.

“Reolysin works freakishly well in combination with typical first-line and second-line chemotherapeutic products,” Oncolytics CEO Brad Thompson told The Canadian Blueprint. “Most good science is found by accident.”

Thompson believes that Reolysin could revolutionize the way many cancers are treated. The latest phase II trial, whose results were released last week, involved squamous cell carcinoma of the lung and the chemotherapy regimen of carboplatin and paclitaxel.

Positive results involving Reolysin and colorectal cancer were presented in January at the ASCO Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium in San Francisco. In December 2012, the company released results from a phase III study of patients with head and neck cancers. And in October, it completed enrollment in another phase II trial involving pancreatic cancer.

It has shown effectiveness with a broad range of cancers, which could make it particularly valuable. Oncolytics has no drugs on the market yet, but its stock price has more than doubled in the last three months, an indication that big investors believe in the potential of Reolysin.

“Based on these (latest) findings, we intend to continue to look at Reolysin as a treatment for cancers of the lung and cancers that metastasize to the lung,” Thompson said. “It’s exciting to have 95 percent of patients in this study exhibit tumor shrinkage, and these results further suggest that Reolysin may have potential in pre-surgical settings.”

Reolysin is based around the Respiratory Enteric Orphan Virus (reovirus), which is relatively harmless and produces few symptoms. Most people are exposed to it as children. And while the body’s own immune system can stop the Reolysin from replicating in healthy cells, it can be designed to infect and destroy cancer cells with specific mutations.

The latest study included 20 patients, and 19 of them exhibited overall tumor shrinkage. An earlier study showed an overall progression-free survival of 7.4 months. One of the biggest benefits of Reolysin is the lack of side effects, especially compared to other cancer therapies.

The concept of using a virus to help kill cancer cells is not new. Viruses can be engineered to selectively infect and reproduce in tumor cells, effectively killing cancer cells. Viruses are playing a big role in novel gene therapy.

Scientists at the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota, in collaboration with the National Cancer Institute, are studying a genetically altered measles virus to test its effectiveness against pleural mesothelioma.

Oncolytics Biotech has been focusing on the development of viruses as potential treatment options for a broad range of cancers. Reolysin is its lead product.

TimPovtak An award winning reporter and writer, Tim Povtak is a senior content writer for the Mesothelioma Center. He previously worked at the Orlando Sentinel and then at AOL. You can contact him directly tpovtak@asbestos.com with any story ideas or comments. Twitter Facebook Reddit Delicious Stumbleupon

View the original article here

World Cancer Day Brings Global Perspective to Fight against Mesothelioma

Posted by Unknown | Posted in , , , , , , , | Posted on 02:08

0

The Mesothelioma Center at Asbestos.com is among the many organizations today that are observing World Cancer Day 2013, demonstrating the growing importance of advocacy in a global fight against this dreaded disease.

Today’s World Cancer Day is an initiative of the Union for International Cancer Control (UICC), which announced Monday its latest goal of preventing 1.5 million deaths annually from the disease.

The UICC, which is based in Geneva, Switzerland, estimates that 7.6 million people worldwide die each year from cancer. It also believes that one-third of those deaths are preventable.

Although a recent report by the American Cancer Society detailed a slow but steady decline in cancer rates in the United States, the UICC believes that current rates on a global scale will double within the next 20 to 40 years without the proper measures in place.

“There is need for a global commitment to help drive advancements in policy and encourage implementation of comprehensive cancer control plans,” said Christopher Wild, M.D., director of the International Agency for Research on Cancer. “We have a collective responsibility to support low and middle income countries that are tackling a cancer epidemic with insufficient resources.”

Asbestos-related diseases, which kill an estimated 100,000 people each year, are expected to increase in many of those still-developing countries. Among the diseases are mesothelioma, a slow-developing cancer that attacks the lining around the lungs and other vital organs.

Asbestos, a naturally occurring mineral, has been banned in more than 50 countries, but its use has increased in others because of its versatility, affordability and heat-resistant qualities that still make it desirable for commercial use.

The UICC considers asbestos as one of its top cancer-causing, workplace hazards. And one of its goals of World Cancer Day is the continued emphasis on raising awareness toward preventable cancers like mesothelioma and the dangers from asbestos fibers.

There were 442 World Cancer Day Events scheduled globally for Feb. 4 and registered with the UICC, which includes 156 countries and many of the major cancer societies, research institutes and patient groups.

Various communities held events both big and small, including informational campaigns, seminars, film screenings and educational meetings involving simple things like healthier eating and trying to stop smoking.

In the United States, there were events scheduled from coast to coast. One of the most visible was in New York City, where the landmark Empire State Building was decorated and lit in blue and orange lights, reflecting the colors of the UICC.

As part of World Cancer Day, the UICC also adopted the World Health Organization’s (WHO)  “25 by 25? campaign. The goal is for a 25 percent reduction of premature cancer deaths by the year 2025. Based upon the projection of 6 million preventable cancer deaths that year, the UICC set its goal on that 1.5 million figure.

“This World Cancer Day, its members and partners urge everyone from individuals to governments to take a stand against damaging myths on cancers,” said UICC CEO Cary Adams. “By truly understanding this deadly disease, governments can develop appropriate strategies to reduce premature deaths.”

Adams pointed to four major myths (and truths behind them) that have held back the reduction of cancer:

Myth 1: Cancer is just a health issue. Truth: Cancer has wide-reaching, economic, social and human-rights implications.Myth 2: Cancer is a disease of the wealthy, elderly and developed countries. Truth: Cancer is a global epidemic, affecting everyone regardless of socio-economic standing, and with still-developing countries carrying a disproportionate burden.Myth 3: Cancer is a death sentence. Truth: Many cancers now can be cured and others can be treated effectively, allowing people to extend their lives significantly.Myth 4: Cancer is inevitable. Truth: At least 30 percent of cancers can be prevented with the right strategies and the current knowledge.TimPovtak An award winning reporter and writer, Tim Povtak is a senior content writer for the Mesothelioma Center. He previously worked at the Orlando Sentinel and then at AOL. You can contact him directly tpovtak@asbestos.com with any story ideas or comments. Twitter Facebook Reddit Delicious Stumbleupon

View the original article here

Could Fowlpox Vaccination Be Next Big Mesothelioma Treatment?

Posted by Unknown | Posted in , , , , | Posted on 02:07

0

Deepak Chopra, one of the world’s most acclaimed holistic physicians, once told followers: “Instead of thinking outside the box, get rid of it.”

Several mesothelioma therapies currently under investigation fall outside the box of conventional treatments. Cancer stem cell research, biomarker research and developments in gene therapy are inspiring an ever-increasing range of options beyond surgery, chemotherapy and radiation therapy.

But while those treatments fall outside the box, a new treatment destroys its boundaries.

The therapy? A fowlpox vaccination.

Yes, that fowlpox vaccination – the shot that farmers traditionally give chickens and turkeys to prevent viral outbreaks of contagious lesions.

Recently, researchers have found a way to take the vaccine from the farmyard to the cancer center – and with surprisingly encouraging results.

Pox viruses are considered some of the most ideal agents for targeted cancer treatment. The viruses are considered safe to modify into a vaccine that help the body’s own immune system kill off cancer cells.

The fowlpox virus is especially easy to modify. Lab workers can design it to enter healthy cells and deposit a set of specific proteins that can trigger an immune response.

Once inside the body, the vaccine may also generate additional white blood cells that can continue carrying out the mission.

This concept lies at the heart of a new study, conducted by researchers at the University of Hawaii.

The study, which will appear in a future issue of the International Journal of Cancer, tested a fowlpox vaccination that was adapted to contain the protein known as survivin.

Survivin is “a protein … that makes cancer cells resistant to chemotherapy,” the study’s lead researcher, Pietro Bertino, told Asbestos.com. The protein also regulates programmed cell death, a process known as apoptosis.

“My hypothesis was that, by survivin inhibition, all mechanisms that force the cancer cell to stay alive during chemotherapy could be turned off,” Bertino explained.

After he realized this protein could potentially play a major role in mesothelioma treatment, he had to find a way to get it into the body. An immunotherapy approach turned out to be the key. This is where the fowlpox vaccine comes in handy – it was the perfect vehicle to deliver the survivin to the tumors.

Bertino’s research team injected mice with malignant mesothelioma cells. They then provided a dose of the survivin-laced fowlpox vaccine. Some mice received the vaccine under the skin, while others received it directly into the peritoneum.

Both delivery methods produced a “significant immune response.” This response correlated with delayed tumor growth and improved overall survival. Better yet, none of the mice developed potentially serious side effects – like autoimmune conditions or infertility – after treatment.

Bertino’s team is now considering future directions for the vaccine.

“The fowlpox vaccine is our first attempt to induce an immune response against mesothelioma cells that can be used for both therapeutic and preventive purposes. We recently started collaborating with EpiVax … [and together] we identified a list of very immunogenic survivin peptides that should generate high responses in human subjects.”

When fully developed, this vaccine may have a distinct edge over other therapies.

“Successful immunotherapies have the advantage [of inducing] an immune response … that may persist years after vaccination. Chemotherapy, on the other hand, has an affect limited to a few days,” Bertino explained.

Because chemotherapy offers such a short response, patients have to participate in several cycles of the treatment.

“Repeating chemotherapy cycles usually induces high toxicity,” Bertino adds. The fowlpox vaccine could help patients avoid those serious side effects, which often include severe nausea and hair loss.

Certain vaccines also show more promising results than chemotherapy drugs, which rarely put mesothelioma into remission.

“With immunotherapy, our group induced complete tumor regression in animal models of mesothelioma. We never achieved a similar result in studies with chemotherapy.”

Since it is still in its animal testing phase, the fowlpox vaccine still has a long way to go before it is approved for human use. But Bertino feels that the promising results from his study can justify future clinical trials in due time.

As research teams continue to take the fowlpox vaccine to the next level, other vaccination options are already available through clinical trials.

In 2010, researchers tested a vaccine made from a patient’s own immune cells and tumor antigens. The trial – the first human trial of its kind – found that the vaccine could help “jump-start” the immune system’s response to the tumors.

Early last year, a UK-based research group announced another vaccination trial, this time for the TroVax® shot. Once the study officially begins, the researchers will see if this virus-based vaccine can stimulate the immune system to attack cancerous cells.

Our clinical trial database can help interested patients find a vaccine trial near them. For more updates on the fowlpox vaccine – including notifications when it advances to human studies – be sure to check back for future news posts.

Bertino, P. (4 February 2013.) Pietro Bertino, PhD., email interview with Asbestos.com. Bertino, P., Panigada, M., Soprana, E., Bianchi, V., Bertilaccio, S., Sanvito, F., … & Carbone, M. (2013). Fowlpox-based survivin vaccination for malignant mesothelioma therapy. International Journal of Cancer. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ijc.28048/abstract American Thoracic Society. Possible vaccine for mesothelioma proven safe. (4 March 2010). Retrieved from http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2010-03/ats-pvf030210.php National Institutes of Health: A phase II trial to assess TroVax® plus chemotherapy in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma (SKOPOS). (30 March 2012). Retrieved from http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01569919faith Faith Franz is a content writer for the Mesothelioma Center. She joined the team in January 2011 to help mesothelioma patients empower themselves through knowledge about their diagnosis. Twitter Facebook Reddit Delicious Stumbleupon

View the original article here