Tag Archives: Johns Hopkins School of Medicine

Research Matters Communications Workshop for Early-Career Scientists: October 9, 2013

Research!America’s science communications event, “Research Matters Communications Workshop: Promoting Basic Research in a New Age of Communications: Challenges and Opportunities,” was held October 9 at the Marvin Center on the campus of the George Washington University in Washington, DC.

Leo Chalupa, PhDGWU’s vice president for research, Leo Chalupa, PhD (pictured at right), opened the day with remarks that implored the nearly 100 young scientists in attendance to think about their families when they communicate.

“Act like your Aunt Harriet is in the audience,” Chalupa said; his welcoming remarks indeed laid the groundwork for the workshop, as Aunt Harriet would be referenced frequently throughout the morning.

Research!America President and CEO Mary Woolley followed with an introduction of the plenary speaker; Woolley also hit on a theme that is especially relevant this week. She recalled the story of 2000 Nobel Prize winner Paul Greengard, PhD and his sister, Chris Chase. In an op-ed in The New York Times a few days after Greengard’s win, Chase lamented that she never fully understood the research her brother had undertaken. Upon winning, however, she read news accounts that explained his work as determining how brain cells communicate; this work could one day impact Parkinson’s disease and Alzheimer’s disease.

“I’m thrilled he won,” Chase wrote, and Woolley recounted. “Now I know what he does.”

That segued into the plenary session from Christie Nicholson, a lecturer at the Alan Alda Center for Communicating Science at Stony Brook University. Nicholson (pictured below) began the session by reminding the audience that effective communication isn’t just necessary when dealing with the public; because science has become so specialized, researchers sometimes can’t understand what their own colleagues are saying.

Christie Nicholson

Nicholson explained that it’s important to tell a story. But before you can begin to craft a story, she said it’s critical to not only understand the goal you’re trying to achieve, but also to understand your audience. And to do that, one must know what the audience knows, what the audience cares about and what motivates them. Continue reading →

Advertisements

New research suggests patient’s fat cells could be used to kill brain cancer

Adipose- derived stem cells. Source: Pendleton, Li, et. al. Mesenchymal Stem Cells Derived from Adipose Tissue vs Bone Marrow:In Vitro Comparison of Their Tropism towards Gliomas.  2013. PLOSONE.

Adipose- derived stem cells. Source: Pendleton, Li, et. al. Mesenchymal Stem Cells Derived from Adipose Tissue vs Bone Marrow:In Vitro Comparison of Their Tropism towards Gliomas. 2013. PLOSONE.

Recent research from Johns Hopkins Medicine that received government support shows that stem cells isolated from a patient’s own fat may be able to deliver new treatments directly into the brain to fight an aggressive brain tumor. The work, done in the laboratory of Alfredo Quinones-Hinojosa, MD, is a proof-of-principle study that tests the ability of a particular type of stem cell, mesenchymal stem cells, to locate damaged or cancerous cells.

Cancer cells, particularly those in glioblastomas, the most common type of brain tumor, often break away from the main tumor and relocate to another area of the body.  While neurosurgeons like Quinones-Hinojosa can carefully remove these tumors, radiation and chemotherapy are often insufficient to kill these run-away cancer cells. The promising results from this basic science study suggest that in the future, mesenchymal stem cells isolated from the patient’s own fat tissue can be modified and put back into the body to seek out and destroy isolated cancer cells in the brain after surgical removal of the tumor. Continue reading →

A Weekly Advocacy Message from Mary Woolley: Inaugural topics?

Dear Research Advocate,

President Obama delivered a comprehensive plan for stemming gun violence yesterday, identifying, among other components, a renewed role for federally funded research. (Prohibitions enacted by Congress in the mid-1990s and expanded in 2011 have largely prevented federal agencies from funding firearms-related research.) An executive memorandum signed by the president on Wednesday directs CDC to conduct research on the causes of gun violence and ways to prevent it. Restrictions on research that informs federal policy are counterproductive to sound governance. With the benefit of research findings, policy makers can identify the most effective strategies for preventing firearm violence. Research!America applauds the president and joins all those who oppose restrictions on research for health. A national focus on ending gun violence will surely be a topic addressed by the president in his second inaugural address on Monday.

On the budget front, which the president will almost certainly address in his remarks, the drawn-out, kick-the-can-down-the-road approach to avoiding fiscal chaos is already taking a deep toll on our nation’s core government functions, including medical research. This message was delivered loud and clear this week in Forbes, in a piece called “Congress is Killing Medical Research” by Dr. Steven Salzberg of Johns Hopkins School of Medicine. Share this terrific editorial with your networks, and make sure your elected officials have read it too! You can use our web tool to find contact information for your federal representatives. The damage of the current fiscal situation was also called out in an article by Richard Craver in the Winston-Salem Journal, describing how Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center is being hit with a “triple whammy.”

In an interview with Politico, Dr. Francis Collins, director of the NIH, said sequestration would deal a “profound and devastating blow” to medical research. In 2011, the NIH budget was reduced by 1.5% and has continued to lose ground to inflation, which has eroded the agency’s ability to support lifesaving research by 20% since 2003. Dr. Collins also highlighted shrinking grant success rates; now just 1 in 6 applications are funded. This has a terribly demoralizing effect on young researchers and patients alike. Email your representatives now, and urge them to end sequestration once and for all.

Will the president use the platform of the inaugural address to underscore the importance of health and medical research? From preventing gun violence to ending the costly scourge of Alzheimer’s and so many other ailments, there are profoundly important reasons to assign a top priority to solutions research can and will identify, given adequate support. Advocates for research look to the president to take a leadership role; so does the American public, 72% of whom want biomedical and health research to be a priority for the president and for the new Congress in its first 100 days.

Sincerely,

Mary Woolley