10 replies to this topic

[alc]

The new company backed by Michael Fossel is moving on. Their goal is to cure Alzheimer. It is very good that they moved into real world, so the endless discussions about telomerase can compare now against real world results. Note that CNIO is partnering with them via Maria Blasco.

 

 

http://www.telocyte.com/

 

 

[corb]

They've chosen to persue an approach that will not work as well as some proposed alternatives but being a gene therapy it can be used out of the box for every individual treated.
There's at least 2 other groups that have started up companies with similiar approaches in the works for treating neurodegenerative disease I've seen posted on this forum.

 

 

[alc]

They've chosen to persue an approach that will not work as well as some proposed alternatives but being a gene therapy it can be used out of the box for every individual treated.
There's at least 2 other groups that have started up companies with similiar approaches in the works for treating neurodegenerative disease I've seen posted on this forum.

 

"an approach that will not work" - says who? please can you present us some data to back up your claim? we are in 2015 and we need to stop these extensively long discussions with pro/con arguments, and prove things.

 

rather than just reply for the post-sake I would wait for some data to come out - and comment just after that - if they proceed with their studies, this time is FOR REAL and will save us tons of worthless discussions about telomerase if it is working/not - seems like they are going through full FDA path, so there will be no goofing around with the results - but like we saw recently, there are groups that are capable of arguing even with the results of real studies - see the glycine study for example (of course, if those studies are not rigged) - for me I careless if the rejuvenation is coming from either side, as long as it is working in REAL LIFE STUDIES and not in the theoretical approach - I'm interested in real results, not theoretical disputes and I support moderately both sides, but definitely I'm looking at REAL WORLD RESULTS/DATA - long story short: you have data to back up your claims, bring it in.

 

also, CNIO is one of their partner and I doubt that they do not know what they are doing - just look at their group on telomeres work and educate yourself before posting.

 

thanks.

[John Schloendorn]

"an approach that will not work" - says who? please can you present us some data to back up your claim?

 

No, actually, in science the null hypothesis does not need to be backed up with data.  The burden of proof is on the one making a positive claim.  (That's a productive attitude, because when operating at the frontier of human knowledge, the null hypothesis is so extremely likely to be correct)

[corb]

 

They've chosen to persue an approach that will not work as well as some proposed alternatives but being a gene therapy it can be used out of the box for every individual treated.
There's at least 2 other groups that have started up companies with similiar approaches in the works for treating neurodegenerative disease I've seen posted on this forum.

 

"an approach that will not work" - says who? please can you present us some data to back up your claim? we are in 2015 and we need to stop these extensively long discussions with pro/con arguments, and prove things.

 

There is no need to get so defensive or angry.

I was just pointing out they are amongst a quite a fast growing group of start ups wokring on aavhtert therapies - my suspicion is the decision was financial rather than scientific - I could be wrong, and 3 companies working on the same exact thing might have popped out in the span of 6 months entirely by accident. Of course that has nothing to do with the validity of the therapy, and I'm not invested in the topic to start a big debate about it. With this many companies working on the exact same thing sooner or later one will start a human trial and we'll know for certain.

 

Interestingly Telocyte are only targeting Alzheimer's the two other companies I know of are preaparing a bit boarder implementation.

[alc]

As one that I have a strong background in one of fundamental sciences, I would say that I care less about "null hypothesis" and what implies. If you want we can discuss a lot about that, but we will lose time in semantics and the "theoretical" results will not be too helpful. I would say again, in 2015 we need to slow down on tons of discussions and focus on real world results. What I care - and we should all -  are results. And I mean results that are validated in humans.

I'll wait to see what Telocytes studies will bring in, then comment. I have the same moderate/optimistic expectations with their projects, like I have with MitoSENS Mito Repair Project, which btw I already supported by donating a small sum - and I hope will go through and be successful.

[niner]

As one that I have a strong background in one of fundamental sciences, I would say that I care less about "null hypothesis" and what implies. If you want we can discuss a lot about that, but we will lose time in semantics and the "theoretical" results will not be too helpful. I would say again, in 2015 we need to slow down on tons of discussions and focus on real world results. What I care - and we should all -  are results. And I mean results that are validated in humans.

I'll wait to see what Telocytes studies will bring in, then comment. I have the same moderate/optimistic expectations with their projects, like I have with MitoSENS Mito Repair Project, which btw I already supported by donating a small sum - and I hope will go through and be successful.

 

OK, we don't need to go into anything "theoretical" or semantic.  Telocyte makes mention of impressive animal data on their web site, but they don't identify it.  Fossel seems to have made a career out of promising great things to come from the Church of Telomerase, but where's the data?  They claim that they will "cure Alzheimer's", and are looking to the (perhaps gullible) public to fund their operation.  That Maria Blasco has lent her name to their endeavor is a good sign, but her actual connection with what they're doing isn't specified.

[alc]

"but where's the data?" I cannot speak for Telocyte or Michael Fossel what data they provided to FDA, but if you want to pull some data on your own, in this arena

you can start looking here:

 

https://www.cnio.es/...ones.asp?pag=38

 

But again, like I mentioned before: let's see what they will present from their studies - they claim will go through FDA - you understand that this is getting serious and our discussions/opinions here count zero against those results validated/not by FDA?

 

So I'll wait, you guys go ahead and predict what the results are ... I'll be waiting on hard data.
 

Edited by alc, 25 September 2015 - 05:32 PM.

[niner]

"but where's the data?" I cannot speak for Telocyte or Michael Fossel what data they provided to FDA, but if you want to pull some data on your own, in this arena

you can start looking here:

 

https://www.cnio.es/...ones.asp?pag=38

 

But again, like I mentioned before: let's see what they will present from their studies - they claim will go through FDA - you understand that this is getting serious and our discussions/opinions here count zero against those results validated/not by FDA?

 

So I'll wait, you guys go ahead and predict what the results are ... I'll be waiting on hard data.

I'm not sure it's as serious as you seem to think it is.  From the Telocyte site:

 

 

Current investors are underwriting FDA-sponsored phase 0 through phase 2 human trials of telomerase therapy as a treatment for Alzheimer’s disease. Although the current animal data is remarkable, the FDA may well require that we demonstrate additional safety trials before permitting first-in-human trials. This phase (0) typically requires that we treat animal models, such as mice or dogs, to support the ethical use of telomerase therapy in human trials. Phase 1 human trials (to look at safety parameters in humans) will follow immediately, once the FDA grants an IND permit. Phase 2 trials (to look at dosage parameters in humans) will follow thereafter. Based on current animal data, we anticipate that our human trials will be clear in demonstrating the efficacy of telomerase therapy in human volunteers. Investor money is not aimed at pure science, but aimed directly at clinical trials. Our aim is to provide the most efficient route to human trials and to the commercial use of the most effective single point of intervention in Alzheimer’s disease.

 

I'm not sure what they mean by "FDA-sponsored".  The FDA defines sponsor as "the individual or entity who has primary responsibility for and initiates the clinical investigation".  The FDA doesn't act as a sponsor as far as I know.  While Telocyte claims they have impressive animal results, it sounds from what they they say here that they intend to do such animal experimentation, which they refer to here as "phase 0" trials.  That's not the usual meaning of phase 0, which is normally early human work.  Between the things they say on their website and the background of the people involved (other than the "partners"), these guys sound like noobs.  If you want a prediction, I predict they will not try their AAV-htert therapy on humans any time soon, if for no other reason than they will fail to get the IND they'll need to proceed.  I'd love to see them succeed, and like you, I'll be waiting on the "hard data".  (BTW, biological data is rarely hard.  Biology is messy; it's not like physics or engineering.)  I'm just afraid that we may be waiting for a long time.

[alc]

 

 

I'm not sure what they mean by "FDA-sponsored".  The FDA defines sponsor as "the individual or entity who has primary responsibility for and initiates the clinical investigation".  The FDA doesn't act as a sponsor as far as I know.  While Telocyte claims they have impressive animal results, it sounds from what they they say here that they intend to do such animal experimentation, which they refer to here as "phase 0" trials.  That's not the usual meaning of phase 0, which is normally early human work.  Between the things they say on their website and the background of the people involved (other than the "partners"), these guys sound like noobs.  If you want a prediction, I predict they will not try their AAV-htert therapy on humans any time soon, if for no other reason than they will fail to get the IND they'll need to proceed.  I'd love to see them succeed, and like you, I'll be waiting on the "hard data".  (BTW, biological data is rarely hard.  Biology is messy; it's not like physics or engineering.)  I'm just afraid that we may be waiting for a long time.

 

 

You are confused, like in other of your posts.

 

Do not jump on the gun so quickly just because Micahel Fossel is not in the group that you like.

 

Here is more clarification to you:

 

http://www.michaelfo...com/blog/?p=139

 

Read the entire post, and pay attention.

 

Myself, I do not support blindly this telomere/telomerase thing, but there is a lot of data (if you really want to search and extract that information from CNIO and other serious organizations), you have to be willing to read the info UNBIASED, which might be hard for you. It is obvious that telomere/telomerase thing is not the whole story, but a very important one that offers lots of benefits.

 

You can also read a small interview with Maria Blasco, from 2011:

 

María Blasco: Keeping a cap on cancer and aging

 

http://jcb.rupress.o.../192/3/370.full

 

 

Another big challenge that you have to face in near future is George Church. As we found out, now he is supporting this approach. Probably, you will find lots of problems with George Church as well ... until he and his team will publish something convincing ... and then follow up with some studies. As typically he does it for past years. (hint: look at the recent work done by them altering 62 genes at once ...)

 

http://www.technolog...f-gene-therapy/

 

look + read + try to understand the paragraph:

 

"Church, the Harvard professor, says he thinks targeted DNA changes could in fact extend the normal human life span, which has a maximum length of about 120 years. Earlier this month, at a meeting of the National Academy of Sciences organized to weigh policy on genetic interventions, Church proposed telomerase as one bearing serious consideration. “I think we are very close. I think the world is close, so long as we don’t have a setback,” he says. “The extension of life span is quite dramatic in model organisms … it would be amazing in humans.”"

 

 

"BTW, biological data is rarely hard.  Biology is messy" - FYI: I have friends and family that work in medical and research field. Recently I talked with one of my friends that is doing stem cell for heart regeneration at one of the largest universities here in Midwest. I know some of these guys for like 15 years now, and I never heard them complaining like you. It depends what your level is, but these guys never complained that is messy. My recommendation to you is: if it is messy, challenging and doesn't make sense, change the field, go do something else. It would be more rewarding for you.

[alc]

An update to Telocyte:

 

Their Scientific Advisory Board now include Dr. Brian Kaspar
from Center for Gene Therapy, Nationwide Children's Hospital
here in Columbus, Ohio.

http://www.telocyte.com/about-us

he is behind Milo Biotech:

http://milobiotechnology.com/

and AveXis:

https://avexis.com/r...and-development

both using AAV in humans.

This indicates potential Telocyte's delivery method.