first_imgJEFF HUNTLEY Anthony Addonizio will be an important component to the Hornets’ success this year. On Sept. 15, team looks to avenge last season’s loss to Freehold Boro By Warren Rappleyea Staff Writer With 14 key veterans returning, the Holmdel High School football team will be looking to upgrade last fall’s 6-4 mark and is seeking a return trip the NJSIAA Central Jersey Group II playoffs. JEFF HUNTLEY Head Coach Joe O’Connor will be looking for his Holmdel High School football team to rely on its experience in competing against some of the top teams in the Shore this year. The Hornets’ roster is loaded with experienced seniors and untested sophomores, with a few juniors sprinkled in. The experience will help, especially on offense, where coach Joe O’Connor is switching to the multiple-I set-up to take advantage of his team’s speed and offensive line strength. A year ago Holmdel employed the wing-T. “This team is built more for the multiple-I,” O’Connor explained. “We have the speed and skill to adapt, and the team has been picking it up quickly.” The new offense will keep runners Chris Hernando and Anthony Addonizio busy. Hernando, a 5-8, 165-pound junior, is back at halfback where he ran for more than 800 yards in 1999. The versatile Addonizio, a 6-1, 215-pounder, moves to fullback full time this season after splitting his time at tight end a year ago. He put up more than 900 total yards as a sophomore. Three players, senior Dave Menges, and juniors John Guisti and Dan Principe, are competing for the quarterback job. All three saw some time behind center, but Menges played the most and appears to have the inside track, though O’Connor has not yet made a decision. “Each one brings something to the table,” O’Connor said. “We’ll have to see how things go over the next few weeks.” Wideouts Paul Hlavaty and Adam Goff, along with tight end Greg Laplante, all seniors, and possibly Guisti, comprise the receiving corps. Seniors Adam Cox (6-1, 230), Alex Wright (5-11, 210), Mike Russo (6-2, 190), Evan Sorg (6-0, 190) and John Yang (6-0, 225), and junior Chris Satienza (6-1, 240) will man the offensive line. All, except for Wright will see action on the defensive line as well, with Hlavaty also pitching in on defensive end. Like the linemen, several other Hornets will be playing on both sides of scrimmage. Addonizio, Hernando, Guisti, Laplante and Wright are the linebackers in Holmdel’s 4-3 alignment. Menges, Principe and Goff are the defensive backs. Addonizio will handle the punting, while Laura Carcich, who missed most of last season with injuries, is back to do the place-kicking. Two years ago, Carcich, then a sophomore, converted 13 of 17 PAT attempts. “With a lot of guys going both ways, the key for us will be staying healthy,” O’Connor said. “We have talent and good experience, and we’re looking forward to the start of the season.” Holmdel hosts Freehold Boro Sept. 15 at 7 p.m. in the season-opener for both teams. Last year the Hornets took a 12-0 lead into the fourth quarter against the Colonials but ended up on the short end of a 14-12 decision. “We want to get off to a good start and that means winning that first game,” O’Connor said. “Freehold Boro beat us in an exciting game, but it’s one we’d like to have back. Now we get to play them again.”last_img read more

first_img Email That summer, a bipartisan group of lawmakers introduced the “Puppers Act” in the U.S. House of Representatives, which would outlaw painful dog experiments at VA facilities. Similar language eventually made its way into a spending bill President Donald Trump signed in March requiring VA to suspend all dog research not directly approved by the agency’s secretary. (The language needs to be renewed every year, and was recently renewed for 2019.) Some studies stopped, but several continued, though it’s unclear who authorized them. VA now has 92 dogs in five studies that involve surgeries on hearts, brains, and spinal cords, which the agency says are important for learning how to treat fatal lung infections and heart disorders in veterans.In August, VA commissioned NASEM to review its entire canine research program, at a cost of $1.3 million. NASEM convened a committee of a dozen individuals, including experts in veterinary care, animal ethics, and biomedical studies involving dogs. All met yesterday in Washington, D.C., for the first time. By David GrimmDec. 10, 2018 , 5:15 PM Dog research at the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is going under the microscope. Yesterday, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) in Washington, D.C., began a formal review of studies involving nearly 100 canines at four VA facilities to determine whether the animals are being properly treated—and whether the work is necessary.If VA decides to end its dog research, it will be the first time a federal agency has stopped working on an entire species of animals since the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service effectively outlawed all biomedical research on chimpanzees in 2015, says Cindy Buckmaster, chair of the board of directors of Americans for Medical Progress, a Washington, D.C., nonprofit that promotes the need for animals in labs. “The findings from this report will impact how science is done on dogs across the country.”The NASEM review traces back to a campaign launched by the White Coat Waste Project in March 2017. The Washington, D.C.–based animal activist group used a public records request to highlight—in TV ads, on billboards, and through a massive email campaign—what it called “the mistreatment of puppies in painful heart attack studies,” including alleged botched surgeries and widespread animal abuse, at the Hunter Holmes McGuire VA Medical Center in Richmond, Virginia. (VA responded, saying the studies had been carefully vetted and complied with the U.S. Animal Welfare Act.) LARRY DOWNING/Reuters/Newscom Country * Afghanistan Aland Islands Albania Algeria Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia, Plurinational State of Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory Brunei Darussalam Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia Comoros Congo Congo, the Democratic Republic of the Cook Islands Costa Rica Cote d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Curaçao Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Falkland Islands (Malvinas) Faroe Islands Fiji Finland France French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guatemala Guernsey Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Heard Island and McDonald Islands Holy See (Vatican City State) Honduras Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Republic of Iraq Ireland Isle of Man Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jersey Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Korea, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Republic of Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Lao People’s Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libyan Arab Jamahiriya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macao Macedonia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Moldova, Republic of Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island Norway Oman Pakistan Palestine Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Poland Portugal Qatar Reunion Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saint Barthélemy Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Martin (French part) Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Sint Maarten (Dutch part) Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands South Sudan Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard and Jan Mayen Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania, United Republic of Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of Vietnam Virgin Islands, British Wallis and Futuna Western Sahara Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe Dog research at U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs gets formal reviewcenter_img Click to view the privacy policy. Required fields are indicated by an asterisk (*) Department of Veterans Affairs A study dog plays ball with researchers at the Hunter Holmes McGuire VA Medical Center in Richmond. Michael Fallon, VA’s chief veterinary medical officer, spoke early in the session. “The VA doesn’t want a media debate based on emotional arguments—we want a scientific debate,” he said. “Shutting down this research would deny veterans important cures.”Fallon noted that VA spent just $100,000 on its canine research projects in 2018, a tiny fraction of its $720 million research budget. (Mice and rats make up 99% of the animals used in VA’s research, he said.) He also noted that from August 2017 through August 2018, the agency euthanized 65 dogs as part of its research, compared with the nearly 800,000 dogs U.S. shelters killed over a comparable period of time.Soon after, Joan Richardson, VA’s assistant chief veterinary medical officer, detailed the extensive review and oversight process that goes into the agency’s dog studies. She also walked the committee step-by-step through a dog pacemaker study, showing a video of a dog running on a treadmill and a photo of it playing fetch with researchers in a lab. She said VA’s dogs were well cared for and were only used when absolutely necessary—in this case because their heart anatomy is more similar to a human’s than almost any other research animal.During a public comment session that followed, representatives from pro-research organizations such as the American Physiological Society in Rockville, Maryland, extolled the need for dogs in finding disease cures. “There is an ethical cost to not selecting the best [animal] model,” said Alice Raanan, the group’s director of government relations.VA has credited its dog research with the development of liver transplants, hip replacements, and other treatments. But Nina Wertan, a program manager at The Humane Society of the United States in Washington, D.C., noted during the comment session that many of these developments were decades old. “Historic use is not justification for continued use.”Buckmaster is happy the NASEM review is taking place. “There hasn’t been a lot of nuance in this debate,” she says. “It’s important that the public understands exactly what goes into these studies—and why they are needed.”Justin Goodman, White Coat Waste’s vice president of advocacy and public policy, questions the need for the review in the first place. “The VA doesn’t need to spend a million dollars to realize the abject failure of its dog testing program,” he says. Goodman says scientists made similar arguments in favor of chimpanzee research until a NASEM report found that most research on the animals was unnecessary, which eventually led to the end of all invasive chimp research in the United States.Goodman is hoping the new report will lead to the same conclusion for dogs. “Any acknowledgement by [NASEM] that unnecessary dog testing is happening will raise questions about the need for these studies across government.” That could include dog studies at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Department of Defense, he says, and funding for these studies by the National Institutes of Health. (The U.S. Food and Drug Administration, meanwhile, announced last month that it is taking steps to eliminate the use of dogs in some of its studies.)“It’s likely that other organizations will pay some attention to our findings,” says Rhonda Cornum, chair of the NASEM committee.In the meantime, Goodman says White Coat Waste is working with congressional representatives to reintroduce the Puppers Act early next year, which would permanently end most of the current dog research at VA. Even if it passes, however, Cornum says her committee will continue its review. “I’ll keep working until someone tells me to stop.” Sign up for our daily newsletter Get more great content like this delivered right to you! Countrylast_img read more

first_img ‘Landmark study’ shows brain cells revamp their DNA, perhaps sparking Alzheimer’s disease Brains without (left) and with (right) Alzheimer’s disease By Mitch LeslieNov. 21, 2018 , 1:20 PM Email Country * Afghanistan Aland Islands Albania Algeria Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia, Plurinational State of Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory Brunei Darussalam Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia Comoros Congo Congo, the Democratic Republic of the Cook Islands Costa Rica Cote d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Curaçao Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Falkland Islands (Malvinas) Faroe Islands Fiji Finland France French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guatemala Guernsey Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Heard Island and McDonald Islands Holy See (Vatican City State) Honduras Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Republic of Iraq Ireland Isle of Man Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jersey Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Korea, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Republic of Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Lao People’s Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libyan Arab Jamahiriya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macao Macedonia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Moldova, Republic of Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island Norway Oman Pakistan Palestine Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Poland Portugal Qatar Reunion Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saint Barthélemy Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Martin (French part) Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Sint Maarten (Dutch part) Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands South Sudan Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard and Jan Mayen Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania, United Republic of Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of Vietnam Virgin Islands, British Wallis and Futuna Western Sahara Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe Robert Friedland/Science Source center_img Click to view the privacy policy. Required fields are indicated by an asterisk (*) Sign up for our daily newsletter Get more great content like this delivered right to you! Country Unlike most cells in our bodies, the neurons in our brain can scramble their genes, scientists have discovered. This genome tampering may expand the brain’s protein repertoire, but it may also promote Alzheimer’s disease, their study suggests.“It’s potentially one of the biggest discoveries in molecular biology in years,” says Geoffrey Faulkner, a molecular biologist at the University of Queensland in Brisbane, Australia, who wasn’t connected to the research. “It is a landmark study,” agrees clinical neurologist Christos Proukakis of University College London.Scientists first discovered that certain cells could shuffle and edit DNA in the 1970s. Some immune cells snip out sections of genes that code for proteins that detect or fight pathogens and splice the remaining pieces together to create new varieties. Our B cells, for example, can potentially spawn about 1 quadrillion types of antibodies, enough to fend off an enormous range of bacteria, viruses, and other attackers. Scientists have seen hints that such genomic reshuffling—known as somatic recombination—happens in our brain. Neurons there often differ dramatically from one another. They often have more DNA or different genetic sequences than the cells around them.To look for definitive evidence of somatic recombination in the brain, neuroscientist Jerold Chun of the Sanford Burnham Prebys Medical Discovery Institute in San Diego, California, and colleagues analyzed neurons from the donated brains of six healthy elderly people and seven patients who had the noninherited form of Alzheimer’s disease, which accounts for most cases. The researchers tested whether the cells harbored different versions of the gene for the amyloid precursor protein (APP), the source of the plaques in the brains of people with Alzheimer’s disease. APP’s gene was a good candidate to examine, the researchers thought, because one of their previous studies suggested neurons from patients with Alzheimer’s disease can harbor extra copies of the gene, an increase that could arise from somatic recombination.The scientists’ new analysis, reported online today in Nature, shows the neurons seem to carry not one or two variants of the APP gene, but thousands. Some changes involved switching single nucleotide bases, the DNA subunits that make up the genetic code. In some cases, the APP gene variants had jettisoned chunks of DNA, and the remaining sections had knitted together. Chun and his colleagues also discovered that neurons from the patients with Alzheimer’s disease contained about six times as many varieties of the APP gene as did the cells from the healthy people. Among the alterations in the neurons of the people who had Alzheimer’s disease were 11 mutations that occur in the rare inherited forms of the illness. Neurons from the subjects who died without the disease didn’t have these mutations.“Rather than having one constant blueprint that stays with us throughout life, neurons have the ability to change that blueprint,” Chun proposes. That capability may benefit neurons by enabling them to generate a medley of APP versions that enhance learning, memory, or other brain functions. On the other hand, somatic recombination may promote Alzheimer’s disease in some people by producing harmful versions of the protein or by damaging brain cells in other ways, the scientists conclude.Where do all these gene variants come from? Chun and his team think gene reshuffling depends on an enzyme called reverse transcriptase that makes DNA copies of RNA molecules. A new variant could arise when a neuron produces an RNA copy of the APP gene—this step is part of the cell’s normal procedure to produce proteins. However, reverse transcriptase may then recopy the RNA molecule to make a DNA duplicate of the APP gene that slips back into the genome. But because reverse transcriptase is “a sloppy copier,” Chun says, this new version may not match the original gene, and it may code for a different variant of APP. Drugs that block reverse transcriptase are part of the standard treatment cocktail for HIV infection, and they might also work against Alzheimer’s disease, Chun suggests.Some scientists want more evidence that this enzyme has a role. “Although it looks like reverse transcriptase is involved, there’s a lot of work to do to establish that it is,” says virologist John Coffin of Tufts University in Boston, who wasn’t connected to the study. And virologist Steven Wolinsky of Northwestern University’s Feinberg School of Medicine in Chicago, Illinois, cautions that treating Alzheimer’s patients with drugs that inhibit reverse transcriptase would be premature. “We just don’t have the data yet” to support their use.Chun and his colleagues did not detect signs of somatic recombination in cells from other organs or in a different gene that’s active in the brain. However, Faulkner thinks the process could be revising other genes as well. “You could be looking at an entirely new mechanism for generating diversity in the brain.”Faulkner and Proukakis emphasize that other groups need to replicate the work to confirm this unexpected finding. But if somatic recombination occurs in neurons, Proukakis says, it could also be involved in other brain diseases, such as Parkinson’s disease.last_img read more