posted
1. I like the slow upward movement in TYRIA from the low of 0.006. (Not for short term though - it is a pain....) Reasonable earnings to where it is currently at. 2. ACTC when it is at 0.40 or below. That would mean a potential market cap of 10/15m. That gives some room for growth on positive news later... To say 25-30m market cap 3. FSMH at 0.0004 4. CHNW at 0.003 (good odds of reaching at least 0.005/.006 in the short term) 5. GLIF at 0.02 or below. Potential of 0.03/0.04 in the short term - 2/3 months..
IP: Logged |
posted
Error sparks stem cell debate confusion By MATT CRENSON, AP National Writer Fri Sep 1, 10:39 PM ET
NEW YORK - An advance in stem cell research that was intended to resolve moral differences over the promising but controversial field has ignited fresh conflict instead.
Because stem cells can turn into virtually any type of human tissue, they hold promise for treating a host of human maladies. But critics have argued that creating the cells for research is wrong because it requires the destruction of human embryos in their earliest stages.
Scientists say the field's progress is seriously hampered by federal funding restrictions that are motivated by those moral objections.
Last week, the California biotech company Advanced Cell Technology proposed a way out of the impasse. Writing in the scientific journal Nature, ACT researchers described a way to make stem cells from single cells that had been removed from embryos. Because fertility doctors routinely remove single cells from embryos for genetic testing and then successfully implant them, the technique could in theory be used to create stem cells without destroying human embryos.
An e-mail sent to reporters by Nature before the paper's online publication stated that company researchers "have been able to generate new lines of cultured embryonic stem (ES) cells while leaving the embryo intact."
In reality, however, the embryos used by the company were destroyed in the course of developing the method. The researchers removed an average of five to six cells from each embryo rather than one to improve their chances of success. Removing that many cells at such an early stage of development effectively destroys an embryo.
Within hours of the paper's release, the journal issued a pair of clarifications to the original e-mail that corrected the mistake. But several media outlets included the error in their own accounts.
The Associated Press' stories did not address the fate of the embryos, instead focusing solely on the technique.
Robert Lanza, vice president of research and scientific development at Advanced Cell Technology, said the technique is the important thing, not how it was developed.
"The concept and implications of the study remain completely unchanged," he said.
Critics of stem cell research said the company had not been sufficiently clear about how their experiments were conducted.
"I'm not saying the Nature article was false, but it certainly misled a lot of people," said Richard Doerflinger of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.
Company officials protested that the fate of embryos in their laboratory has no bearing on the scientific value of the research that comes out of it. Using the techniques they developed, they said, future researchers can create stem cells without destroying embryos.
Having such a capability could be useful because U.S. law currently bans federal funding of any research that harms human embryos. In an August 2001 decision, President Bush allowed federal funding for research on the few dozen cell lines that had been created up to that point. But researchers say they need hundreds of lines to move the science forward.
"I think the degree of protest here is the result of the importance of this breakthrough," said Ronald Green, chairman of Advanced Cell Technology's ethics advisory board and a professor of religion at Dartmouth College. "If the president were to turn around tomorrow and authorize stem cell lines produced in this way, in two years' time we could have three to four hundred stem cells lines."
Other scientists have expressed reservations about the significance of the research, saying that it needs to be confirmed through replication. Many would prefer to keep creating stem cells using the current technology, which requires the destruction of embryos about five days into development. At that stage, they constitute a ball of about 100 to 150 cells.
Clarification Issued on Stem Cell Work By NICHOLAS WADE Published: September 2, 2006
The scientific journal Nature has corrected a press release and is considering whether to add further information to an article published last week reporting that human embryonic stem cells could be generated without destroying an embryo.
The article has political consequences because destruction of embryos, which is unavoidable with present methods, is the main stated objection of many who oppose embryonic stem cell research.
The journal’s action follows numerous news reports on the article and criticism from the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, which pointed out that embryos used in the research were being destroyed, a fact made clear in the scientific paper but not the press release.
Both the journal and the principal author of the article, Dr. Robert Lanza of Advanced Cell Technology, say that the scientific report is correct and that any addition would be solely for purposes of clarification.
“We’re looking to see if the description is clear, but there is nothing wrong with the paper,” a Nature press officer, Ruth Francis, said yesterday.
For about 10 years, fertility clinics have sometimes used a genetic diagnostic test in which a single cell is removed from an embryo at the eight-cell stage to be tested for abnormalities like Down syndrome. If no defect is found, the embryo with its remaining seven cells is implanted in the womb and grows to term. Babies born from seven-cell embryos seem as healthy as others born after in vitro fertilization.
Dr. Lanza noted in his article that the cell removed in this test, known as preimplantation genetic diagnosis, or P.G.D., could be used, after growing and dividing, both for testing and, with his new technique, to derive human embryonic stem cells. Since the original embryo would be unharmed, a principal objection to the research would be removed, he said.
Dr. Lanza’s article in Nature made clear that he had not saved the embryos in his own experiments, in which he used as many as eight cells from each of some 16 donated embryos. Had he taken only a single cell from each, many more embryos would have been needed. The press release issued by Nature, however, incorrectly implied that he had removed just a single cell.
After news accounts based on the press release drew criticism from the bishops conference, which opposes in vitro fertilization and human embryonic stem cell research, Nature corrected its statement to make clear that Dr. Lanza’s embryos had been destroyed. But the revised statement said other researchers, as he had noted, could use his technique to derive stem cells from cells removed in P.G.D.
Dr. Lanza said yesterday that Nature had not shown him the original press release before publication.
quote:Originally posted by doling2005: I may be crazy but I just bought it back again..for the 3rd time. Lots of news coming next week in national press..I think I'll hang unless I see it dropping suddenly....
apologize in advance if this is redundant... why are we expecting news?
-------------------- Nashoba Holba Chepulechi Adventures in microcapitalism...
IP: Logged |
Advanced Cell Technology Announces Settlement of Patent Interference Action Advanced Cell Technology, Inc. (OTCBB: ACTC) (ACT) announced today that it has settled a patent dispute involving certain nuclear transfer cloning patents and patent applications owned or licensed by the University of Massachusetts (UMass), Roslin Institute (Roslin), Geron Corporation (Nasdaq: GERN) (Geron), Start Licensing, Inc. (Start) and ACT. The dispute involved appeals to the U.S. District Court by ACT and UMass that sought to overturn rulings by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office against ACT and UMass in patent interference numbers 104,746 and 105,192.
The underlying interference proceedings centered around patent applications owned by Roslin against U.S. Patents 5,945,577 and 6,234,970 owned by UMass and exclusively licensed to ACT. The interference proceedings were initiated by Roslin's licensee, Geron. In late 2004 and again in early 2005, the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences of the U.S. Patent Office ruled in favor of Geron in both interferences. UMass and its licensee, ACT, immediately filed appeals, naming Roslin, Geron and Exeter Life Sciences (Exeter), also a Roslin licensee, as defendants. In mid-2005, Geron and Exeter established a joint venture company, Start Licensing, to manage and license intellectual property rights for animal reproductive technologies, and exclusively licensed their rights in Roslin patent applications to Start in the non-human animal field.
Under the terms of the settlement agreement, Start agreed to pay ACT an initial payment of $500,000 and milestone payments of up to $750,000. Start, Geron, Exeter and Roslin each further agreed not to sue ACT or UMass under the involved Roslin patent applications. In exchange, ACT and UMass dismissed their appeals with prejudice, transferred control of related UMass patents and patent applications to Start in the non-human animal field, and ACT paid certain legal fees. Under the terms of the settlement agreement, ACT retained its rights under the UMass patents in the human field.
"This settlement resolves the parties' various patent rights with respect to nuclear transfer cloning in the non-human field. The parties are now free to move forward with their respective business models unfettered by this patent dispute," said William M. Caldwell, CEO of ACT.
About Advanced Cell Technology
Advanced Cell Technology, Inc. is a biotechnology company engaged in the emerging field of regenerative medicine. The company operates facilities in Alameda, California and Worcester, Massachusetts. For more information about the company, please visit www.advancedcell.com.
Statements in this news release regarding future financial and operating results, future growth in research and development programs, potential applications of our technology, opportunities for the company and any other statements about the future expectations, beliefs, goals, plans, or prospects expressed by management constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Any statements that are not statements of historical fact (including statements containing the words "will," "believes," "plans," "anticipates," "expects," "estimates," and similar expressions) should also be considered to be forward-looking statements. There are a number of important factors that could cause actual results or events to differ materially from those indicated by such forward- looking statements, including: limited operating history, need for future capital, risks inherent in the development and commercialization of potential products, protection of our intellectual property, and economic conditions generally. Additional information on potential factors that could affect our results and other risks and uncertainties are detailed from time to time in the company's periodic reports including the quarterly report on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2006.
Forward-looking statements are based on the beliefs, opinions, and expectations of the company's management at the time they are made, and the company does not assume any obligation to update its forward-looking statements if those beliefs, opinions, expectations, or other circumstances should change.
The Investor Relations Group Investor Relations: James Carbonara Media Relations: Bill Douglass 212-825-3210
Source: Business Wire (September 6, 2006 - 7:04 AM EST)
-------------------- ......in Psychiatry circles it's known as a "warning sign"
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Livinonklendathu: September 6, 2006 - 7:04 AM EST
ACTC 0.60 -0.11
Under the terms of the settlement agreement, Start agreed to pay ACT an initial payment of $500,000 and milestone payments of up to $750,000. Start, Geron, Exeter and Roslin each further agreed not to sue ACT or UMass under the involved Roslin patent applications.
Source: Business Wire (September 6, 2006 - 7:04 AM EST)
ACTC -- Advanced Cell Technology, Inc. Com ($0.001)
COMPANY NEWS AND PRESS RELEASES FROM OTHER SOURCES:
Advanced Cell Technology's Dr. Robert Lanza Testifies Before U.S. Senate Subcommittee; Testimony Discusses How Company's Technique for Human Stem Cell Development May Advance Support for Stem Cell Research
WORCESTER, Mass., Sep 06, 2006 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- Advanced Cell Technology, Inc. (OTCBB:ACTC) today announced that Robert Lanza, M.D., Advanced Cell Technology's Vice President of Medical and Stem Cell Development, testified today before the Senate Labor, Health & Human Services and Education Appropriations Subcommittee. Dr. Lanza's testimony focused on support for wider availability of human embryonic stem cells for basic medical research. Dr. Lanza is the principle author of a paper published online (ahead of print) on August 23 in the peer-reviewed journal Nature, which described a technique for developing human embryonic stem cells with a single-cell biopsy technique called Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis (PGD). This technique is not harmful to embryos. "Our hope is that the new method we described in Nature can be used to increase the number of cell lines that qualify for federal funding within the framework of existing U.S. laws and regulations," Dr. Lanza said.
William Caldwell, Advanced Cell Technology's Chief Executive Officer commented, "We believe our technology offers a significant forward step in the field of regenerative medicine and adds to the array of available technologies. Since Dr. Lanza testified here last year, we have progressed from applying the single-cell derivation technique from the mouse to the human. In that year alone, a million people died from diseases that could that could potentially be treated--and possibly cured--using future stem cell therapies. We urge wider availability of cell lines for medical research."
About Advanced Cell Technology
Advanced Cell Technology, Inc. is a biotechnology company engaged in the emerging field of regenerative medicine. The company operates facilities in Alameda, California and Worcester, Massachusetts. For more information about the company, please visit www.advancedcell.com.
Statements in this news release regarding future financial and operating results, future growth in research and development programs, potential applications of our technology, opportunities for the company and any other statements about the future expectations, beliefs, goals, plans, or prospects expressed by management constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Any statements that are not statements of historical fact (including statements containing the words "will," "believes," "plans," "anticipates," "expects," "estimates," and similar expressions) should also be considered to be forward-looking statements. There are a number of important factors that could cause actual results or events to differ materially from those indicated by such forward- looking statements, including: limited operating history, need for future capital, risks inherent in the development and commercialization of potential products, protection of our intellectual property, and economic conditions generally. Additional information on potential factors that could affect our results and other risks and uncertainties are detailed from time to time in the company's periodic reports including the quarterly report on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2006.
Forward-looking statements are based on the beliefs, opinions, and expectations of the company's management at the time they are made, and the company does not assume any obligation to update its forward-looking statements if those beliefs, opinions, expectations, or other circumstances should change.
SOURCE: Advanced Cell Technology, Inc.
-------------------- ......in Psychiatry circles it's known as a "warning sign"
IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
